Loading...
Planning Commission Agenda 09-05-2017 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION th Tuesday, September 5, 2017 - 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners: John Alstad, Brad Fyle, Sam Murdoff, Marc Simpson, Katie Peterson Council Liaison: Charlotte Gabler Staff: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), Jacob Thunander, John Rued 1. General Business A. Call to Order B. Consideration of approving minutes st a. Special Meeting Minutes August 1, 2017 st b. Regular Meeting Minutes August 1, 2017 C. Citizen Comments D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda 2. Public Hearings A. Public Hearing Consideration of a request for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Plat for Carlisle Village 6th Addition for single family lots in an R-2 (Single Family and Two Family Residential) District Applicant: Paxmar, LLC B. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for amendment to the Monticello Comprehensive Plan for the Downtown Small Area Study Applicant: City of Monticello 3. Regular Agenda A. Consideration of the Housing Market Report 2017 B. Consideration to call for a public hearing on Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 4, Section 13 Telecommunication Towers and Antennas as related to Small Cell and Wireless Telecommunication standards C. Consideration of the Community Development Directors Report 4. Added Items 5. Adjournment MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION st Tuesday, August 1, 2017 - 5:00 p.m. Monticello Community Center Commissioners Present: Brad Fyle, Sam Murdoff, Marc Simpson Council Liaison Present: Charlotte Gabler Staff Present: Angela Schumann 1. Call to Order Brad Fyle called the Special Meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 5:00 p.m. 2. Interview of Planning Commissioner Candidates The Planning Commission interviewed three candidates individually. The interviews were in as followed: Julie Jelen, Gayle Borchert, and Katie Peterson. Each applicant was asked a series of questions and responded appropriately. The Planning Commission reviewed the responses of each applicant and decided they would make a recommendation at the regular Planning Commission meeting at 6 p.m. 3. Adjourn Brad Fyle adjourned the meeting at 6:51 p.m. Recorder: Jacob Thunander ____ Approved: September 5, 2017 Attest: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director 1 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION st Tuesday, August 1, 2017 - 6:00 p.m. Mississippi Room, Monticello Community Center Commissioners Present: John Alstad, Brad Fyle, Sam Murdoff, Marc Simpson Council Liaison Present: Charlotte Gabler Staff Present: Angela Schumann, Steve Grittman (NAC), John Rued 1. General Business A. Call to Order Brad Fyle called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. B. Consideration of approving minutes th a. Special/Joint Meeting Minutes July 11, 2017 MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL/JOINT TH MEETING MINUTES FROM JULY 11, 2017. SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. th b. Regular Meeting Minutes July 11, 2017 MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REGULAR TH MEETING MINUTES FROM JULY 11, 2017. SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. C. Citizen Comments None. D. Consideration of adding items to the agenda Marc Simpson requested the addition of a topic at the end of the agenda. 2. Public Hearings A. Continued Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for amendment to the Monticello Comprehensive Plan for the Downtown Small Area Study Applicant: City of Monticello Angela Schumann stated at the last regular meeting, the Planning Commission was asked to review the draft downtown Small Area Study. In addition, a joint workshop with the EDA and Planning Commission was held to discuss the plan. Schumann recommended tabling action on the study and continuing the public hearing to the September, 2017 regular Planning Commission meeting. The consultant is working on a revised plan to address items presented at previous th meetings. The EDA would be presented the revised plan at their August 9 meeting. 1 SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO TABLE ACTION ON THE REQUEST FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ADOPTION OF THE DOWNTOWN SMALL AREA STUDY AND RELATED AMENDMENTS TH AND CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE SEPTEMBER 5, 2017 MEETING. MARC SIMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. B. Public Hearing Consideration of a request for Rezoning Planned Unit Development, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Plat for Autumn Ridge Villas for detached single family lots in an R-3 (Medium Density Residential) District at Autumn Ridge 3rd Addition Applicant: SW Wold Construction/Ocello, LLC Steve Grittman explained that a Planned Unit Development (PUD) was originally approved in the early 2000s. He said that the project was platted to include attached townhome units with the streets and utilities built out on the entire site. The site to the east of the developed townhomes has sat vacant for several years. The applicants proposed forty-one detached townhomes (instead of completing the original seventy-nine approved attached townhomes) for the remainder of the PUD area. Grittman explained that a separate association would exist if development of the detached townhomes occurred. Grittman explained that a Concept Stage PUD review took place and the applicant revised their Development Stage PUD plans to reflect some of the comments. Grittman stated that discussion at the concept stage review included staying clear of setback areas. The applicant indicated they revised the porches to meet the setback requirements and to slide the units back to include at twenty-five foot driveway for each unit. Grittman reviewed the Exhibit Z comments presented in the staff report with the recommendation of staff approval. Brad Fyle asked if an association could block off a road to prevent people from accessing either development area. Grittman responded that a cross easement condition would require both associations to allow access to the other. Sam Murdoff asked for clarification on comment seven of Exhibit Z. Grittman stated that the building separation is about twenty-six feet at its closest point, which is why additional conifer trees are requested to be planted in this area to add privacy and separation. Fyle asked for clarification on the amenities that would be included in the association. Grittman stated that would be determined by the association documents, but noted that the building exterior would be the responsibility of the homeowner. 2 Charlotte Gabler asked how many styles of each kind of townhome were proposed. Grittman understood that there would be no walkouts. Gabler asked about concerns for traffic along Edmondson Avenue and School Boulevard. Grittman responded that the density would be less than what was originally on roadways. Murdoff asked for further clarity on the separation. Grittman stated that most are proposed at ten foot side yard separation and that recommendation was the minimum separation suggested from the Building Official. Murdoff asked what the separation was for Sunset Ponds, Grittman stated that many of the buildings are spaced at twelve feet from each other. Brad Fyle opened the Public Hearing and welcomed the applicant to speak first. Scott Wold, SW Construction stated that he had no concerns with the conditions from Exhibit Z. Gabler asked about the style of homes. Wold explained that ten of the units (25%) would have full basements and that the others would be constructed to have a crawl space. Angela Schumann added public comment that the City received from Kent Kjellberg of Kjellberg Manufactured Home Park, who indicated no concerns with the development. th On July 27, the Parks Commission reviewed the plat for park dedication and did not have concerns with the proposal in terms of park dedication requirements in recognition of existing pathways and proposed pathway connection. Brad Fyle closed the public hearing. Marc Simpson asked for information about phasing. Wold explained their goal would be to complete the project within 24 months depending on the economy. Murdoff reiterated concerns with the spacing between the homes. Wold explained the project was designed with all the utilities built around the rear of the homes and no access would be required between the buildings. Decision 1. Rezoning to PUD MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-019, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF REZONING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM R-3, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, BASED ON THE FINDINGS NOTED IN THE RESOLUTION. BRAD FYLE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 3-1 WITH SAM MURDOFF VOTING OPPOSITION. 3 Decision 2. Preliminary Plat MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-020, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR AUTUMN RIDGE VILLAS, BASED ON THE FINDINGS NOTED IN THE RESOLUTION. BRAD FYLE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 3-1 WITH SAM MURDOFF VOTING IN OPPOSITION. Decision 3. Development Stage PUD MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-019, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BASED ON THE FINDINGS NOTED IN THE RESOLUTION. BRAD FYLE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 3-1 WITH SAM MURDOFF VOTING IN OPPOSITION. EXHIBIT Z Rezoning to PUD, Development Stage PUD, and Preliminary Plat for Autumn Ridge Villas rd Legal Description (lengthy): parts of Autumn Ridge 3 Addition 1. A pathway connection is provided from the internal portion of the project to Edmonson Avenue NE as directed by City staff. 2. future maintenance as needed. 3. landscaping maintenance and any other improvements in the common areas of the project. 4. The applicant will provide verification of a mutual cross-access agreement between the original Autumn Ridge project and the proposed replat area. 5. All driveways shall be at least 25 feet in depth from face of garage to street curb. 6. Side building separations shall be no less than 10 feet. 7. Landscaping plans shall be revised to add typical shrub and ornamental plantings for each unit, as well as additional conifer tree planting in those rear yard areas where buildings are separated by less than 40 feet. 8. s report, dated July 26th, 2017, are met. 9. The applicant enter into a development agreement as a condition of Final Plat and Final PUD approval. 4 10. association for the Autumn Ridge development. 11. Compliance with the comments of other staff and Planning Commission. C. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for amendment to official Monticello Zoning Map for rezoning from A-O (Agriculture Open Space) District to R-1 (Single Family Residence) District and Preliminary Plat for rd Featherstone 3 Addition for detached single family lots Applicant: Graser, Horst Steve Grittman stated that this project was started in the early 2000s under the prior R-1 zoning code. It included over two hundred acres of development land with a variety of land uses. The applicant proposes to extend Ebersole Avenue to th 85 Street NE and to plat twenty-four new single family lots. The remainder of Outlot A would be undeveloped and placed under a new Outlot. Grittman explained that the reason a preliminary plat was necessary was due to the time lapse, with the prior preliminary plat expiring. Brad Fyle asked if there were reasons why open land is zoned A-O (Agricultural Open Space). Grittman stated when land is annexed, the A-O zoning district is applied until a final plat for development is approved, at which time rezoning occurs. As future phases are developed at Featherstone, rezoning will also need to occur. Grittman stated under the original plan, a park system was designed to incorporate stormwater management and open space requirements. No additional park dedication is proposed with this phase of the plat. The park dedication concept requirement would be written in the Development Agreement for future phases. It was noted that all of the proposed lots met the R-1 zoning requirements. Grittman presented the recommended conditions identified in Exhibit Z of the staff report. Fyle asked about street stubbing. He also asked how much space would exist between the development and Fallon Avenue. Grittman estimated a quarter to a half mile. Brad Fyle opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to answer Planning Commissioner questions. Horst Graser, Gold Nugget Development, provided history of the planned unit development. Graser then discussed the proposed twenty-four lot development and agreed to the stipulations outlined in the Staff Report. He stated that the homes would be built out within two years by Novak-Fleck Homes and Progressive Homes, with an average cost of the homes ranging from $250,000 to 5 $300,000. Most of the homes would be two story with basement, split entry, multifamily/multilevel, or rambler construction. Graser stated that they are not asking for anything new from the original approval. Fyle asked that the Exhibit Z items were acceptable. Graser confirmed. Hearing no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Angela Schumann stated that the President of Manufactured Home Park submitted written comment that there was no objection to the proposed development. The Parks Commission also reviewed the preliminary plat and noted no new park dedication would be required for this phase. The Parks Commission mentioned the Capital Improvement Plan includes development for a play area in the Featherstone neighborhood. They would like to move forward with the park that was proposed in the original approval and recognized comment number five in Exhibit Z. Decision 1. Preliminary Plat SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-021, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR RD FEATHERSTONE 3 ADDITION, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN EXHIBIT Z OF THE STAFF REPORT, AND BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. MARC SIMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. Decision 2. Rezoning. SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-022 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REZONING FROM A-O, AGRICULTURAL OPEN SPACE TO R-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT RD FOR THE 24 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS TO BE PLATTED AS FEATHERSTONE 3 ADDITION, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION. MARC SIMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. EXHIBIT Z rd Preliminary Plat for Featherstone 3 Addition PID 155-180-000010 nd Outlot A, Featherstone 2 Addition 1. Lots 6, 7, and 8, Block 2, are re-notated to indicate actual lot width per Zoning Ordinance definition. thth 2. Street extensions for 87 Street NE and 86 Street NE are constructed to their full extent in the plat. 6 3.Easement notations are corrected to be consistent with City standards. 4. Street and lot designs for future extension, shown in dashed lines, are not included in the rd 3 Addition plat. 5. Park Dedication requirements for the full Featherstone project are reiterated, and if necessary, re-calculated and included in the updated Development Agreements and recorded against the current and future phases. 6. 7. Compliance with other staff comments as submitted. D. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for amendment to official Monticello Zoning Map for rezoning from B-4 (Regional Business) to B-3 (Highway Business) District and text amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Section 5.2 Use-Specific Standards Applicant: Ryan Buffalo Land Company, LLC. Steve Grittman stated that two zoning amendments were proposed including a rezoning and text amendment to Section 5.2 Use-Specific Standards. Steve Grittman explained that the Zoning Ordinance contains a table for building to lot ratio for vehicle sales and rental. Grittman explained that this section of the code was created during a time when pressure for car dealerships along I-94 and Chelsea Road existed. City staff were concerned with the previous language of the code that would allow developers to purchase large areas of commercial land for car dealership vehicle storage areas, which would result in little tax collection and employment. The applicants have suggested that the industry has changed significantly and larger buildings were no longer constructed for these types of dealerships. The applicants have submitted details from their architect with examples of the size of recently completed dealership buildings. Staff developed an alternative table for the Planning Commission to consider that . The applicant stated that they would meet these requirements for their proposed development. Grittman expressed that the City should review the proposed amendment to ensure that the zoning amendment would continue to meet economic development policies. Grittman explained the bulk of the property along Chelsea Road to the southeast is zoned B-3 and that the proposed rezoning would be consistent with the area. Brad Fyle stated that a few months ago a parcel was rezoned in that area. Grittman responded that the parcel to the west was recently rezoned to industrial. The rezoning originally included both the applicants parcel and the parcel to the 7 west, however thisproperty owner withdrew the original request to rezone to industrial. The subject parcel is approximately nineteen acres total, with the east ten acres being proposed to be used for a vehicle dealership. The ten acres would require a phased Conditional Use Permit for development of vehicle sales and service use. Fyle asked for reassurance on an appropriate building to lot ratio. Grittman provided reference to the current Camping World and Quarry Church buildings. Sam Murdoff asked what other uses are available in the B-3 zone. Grittman responded many of the auto related uses, lodging, and restaurant are allowed in a B-3 zone. Murdoff asked if these other uses have a different building to lot ratio. Grittman responded that vehicle uses are the only type of use that the ratio applies to. Fyle asked for clarification on the site relative to the proposal versus total land area. Grittman responded that the parcel is a total of nineteen acres, with the applicant purchasing the easterly ten acres. They would initially develop five acres with a building of 20,000 to 25,000 square feet. Then they would develop the second, five acres with another dealership. They would meet the threshold with both of these projects. Brad Fyle opened the Public Hearing and invited the applicant to speak first. Wayne Elam, Commercial Realty Solutions, stated he was speaking on behalf of the applicant Bob Ryan. Elam stated that the applicant has two dealerships in Buffalo and would like to expand to Monticello. Elam stated the recent trend for smaller car dealerships of around 20,000 to 23,000 square feet buildings. Elam also stated the ten acres has entered into a purchase agreement and that the intent was to plat the property into two five acre parcels with a minimum of a 20,000 square foot building on each parcel. Hearing no further comments, Fyle closed the Public Hearing. Marc Simpson asked how large the Cornerstone Chevrolet building is. Grittman responded that it is a little over 50,000 square feet. Charlotte Gabler asked if the parcel was B-3 before. Grittman responded that it was originally industrial zoning and then converted to B-4. Sam Murdoff asked what other properties were zoned B-3 on Chelsea Road. Grittman responded that all of the properties to the north of the parcel to Highway 25 are zoned B-3. Decision 1. Rezoning from B-4 to B-3 SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-024 RECOMMENDING ADOPTING ORDINANCE NO. 6XX, REZONING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM B-4, REGIONAL BUSINESS TO B-3, 8 HIGHWAY BUSINESS. JOHN ALSTAD SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. Decision 2. Zoning Text Amendment to Table 5-3 SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-025 RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE ZONING AMENDMENT ORDINANCE NO. 6XX, AMENDING THE BUILDING SIZE RATIO FOR VEHICLE SALES/RENTAL USES. JOHN ALSTAD SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. E. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Conditional Use Permit for Micro-Brewery/Taproom in CCD (Central Community District) Applicant: Burt, Bill and Penny Steve Grittman explained that the applicant planned on occupying the west portion of the building to establish a micro-brewery and taproom. Grittman explained that the Zoning Ordinance was amended to accommodate micro- breweries and taprooms in a variety of zoning districts, including the Central Community District (CCD). Grittman explained that parking was the primary concern for the proposed site, however the code does not have specific parking requirements for uses such as bars and taprooms. A maximum capacity of fifteen parking spots could be accommodated on the site. Grittman further explained that the code explains that the CCD acknowledges a significant amount of parking in the downtown area could be accommodated by public parking lots or on street parking. A parking agreement could be assigned which would reduce the parking requirement to sixty percent of the code. There would also be the option to pay into a public parking lot fund if the applicant could not provide sufficient onsite parking. Grittman explained that one way of determining parking is to count the number of seats in the establishment. The applicant proposes having forty-seven seats with bar seating as a seating capacity. A common application of the requirement is one parking space per three seats. With this application, the site would only be a few parking stalls short. Staff believed with the public parking lot and their hours (typically alternate to the surrounding businesses), along with the noted cross easement, parking for the proposed use could be accommodated. Grittman reviewed the comments found in the staff report under Exhibit Z and recommended approval. Brad Fyle asked what other neighboring businesses were doing for parking. Grittman stated that the public parking is not rented or leased to a specific business in the downtown. Fyle stated that many of the businesses have any privately owned parking and that the public parking lots were never filled. 9 Sam Murdoff asked if any of the other businesses on the block have paid into the public parking fund. Grittman declined. Murdoff questioned how they could have one business pay into the parking fund, while the others have not. Grittman reiterated that the reduced parking supply is built into the code, with an acknowledgement of dropping the parking to nothing, if there was enough public parking. Fyle explained that he was not seeing conflict as some parking was available on site. Charlotte Gabler asked if shared agreements could be in place with neighboring businesses if parking would spill onto their sites. Gabler asked about parking for special events such as Taste of Monticello. Angela Schumann responded that the City has as special events permit that would applicable. Schumann also mentioned that many discussions revolving around parking have been explained in the Small Area Study. One of the main suggestions from the consultants of the plan would be to create a new parking policy. Gabler asked if an Exhibit Z comment was in place for the public parking lot. Grittman stated that the parking lot was to be used by the public for any reason and was not included in Exhibit Z. Marc Simpson asked whose parking (private or public) was in front of the office. Brad Fyle opened the Public Hearing and asked the applicant to answer questions first. Bill and Penny Burt, Rustech Brewing introduced themselves. Fyle asked if there would be any concerns with noise or smell. Bill Burt stated that the brewing equipment would be quiet and everything would be vented through the top of the system. Burt stated that the smell would be similar to a bread house. John Alstad asked for a comparison of their proposal to other neighboring breweries. Burt explained that their system would be a five barrel system, where Simpson asked if they could expand their operations. Burt explained they could expand height wise to a ten to fifteen barrel system. He added that the first year would be growler and keg sales with canning in the second year. Murdoff asked for the type of traffic that would come for deliveries. Burt explained that deliveries would arrive by pickup truck. Gabler asked if the applicant was interested in outdoor seating. Burt stated that the public has been asking for outdoor seating, but with the current parking issues, it 10 wasnot being considered. Burt explained interest in the possibility of having rooftop seating. Wayne Elam, Commercial Realty Solutions, stated that he wanted to be sure that the applicants did not have to come back for approval for wholesale distribution as identified in Exhibit Z. Fyle asked for clarification on wholesale distribution. Burt stated that wholesale distribution would be for canning purposes and shipping sales. Grittman asked the applicant what type of vehicle they would use for distributing. Burt replied a van would be used and he would self-distribute. Grittman mentioned no concerns this proposal. Hearing no further comments, Fyle closed the public hearing. Fyle commented that he would like to see a reduction in the amount of required parking for possible, future outdoor seating. Gabler asked if outdoor seating would need to be an Exhibit Z condition. Grittman stated he believed they would have to amend their Conditional Use Permit at a future date. MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-023, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A BREWERY/TAPROOM, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT Z WITH THE REVISIONS TO ALLOW WHOLESALE DISTRIBUTION AND PARKING. SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. EXHIBIT Z Conditional Use Permit for Rustech Brewery/Taproom 213 Pine Street Lots 4 and 5, Block 35, Original Plat of Monticello 1. The applicant completes all licensing applications necessary as specified in the City Code and Zoning Ordinance. 2. The applicant sells only the products of the brewery produced on-site. 3. Deliveries are only by passenger vehicle or light truck, and do not utilize the public right- of-way. 4. The addition of brewery capacity beyond the current size would require an amendment to the CUP. 5. The addition of packaging facilities for wholesale distribution is included in the CUP, subject to passenger or cargo van distribution and canning equipment and process as 11 described at the Planning Commission Meeting on August 1, 2017.(revised from the Staff Report) 6. The applicant complies with the requirements of Section 5.2.F(24) of the Zoning Ordinance, as referenced in the staff report. 7. The parking area along the west side of the building is re-striped to provide 4 parallel spaces adjacent to the public parking lot, retaining a drive aisle between this parking and the west building wall. 8. The City Council approves the parking calculation supporting a net requirement for 15 parking spaces for the subject property. 9. The property owner agrees to accommodate public access to the parking spaces along the south and west side of the property in order to comply with the 60% parking supply standard for CCD land uses. No further parking accommodations would be necessary to support this use in its proposed configuration. 10. 11. Compliance with the comments of other staff and Planning Commission. F. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request to amend the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 4, Section 8 for regulations on driveway width for residentially zoned parcels Applicant: City of Monticello Angela Schumann explained that the item was brought to the Planning Commission as recommended by the City Council to allow additional width of driveways for residential properties specifically single family parcels. Concerns were brought forward to the City Council by residents in the Groveland neighborhood. Schumann explained at present, the Zoning Ordinance requires the maximum driveway width at the curb and property line be twenty-four feet in width. The width is applicable for all zones including: residential, commercial, and industrial. Schumann stated that the twenty-four foot width originated to accommodate two stall garage designs. Larger driveway widths are being asked by residents, more than likely to accommodate three stall garages. Schumann stated that many of the three stall garages maintain the twenty-four foot width at the curb and property line and widen up to the garage. Schumann provided examples of the purposes for the boulevard which includes snow storage, public utilities, green space, and planting of the two required boulevard trees. 12 Schumann stated the current twenty-fourfoot width is flexible to accommodate a number of single family lot configurations. twenty-four feet at the property line and curb. Sam Murdoff asked for the typical distance from the property line to the curb. Schumann explained that it varied, but generally was ten to fifteen feet. Brad Fyle explained that he was open to the idea of a larger driveway width because it takes vehicles off of the streets and better accommodates the three stall garages. Schumann explained the challenges with allowing a thirty foot driveway (especially on cul-de-sac lots) with maintaining drainage swales and having enough planting room for two trees. Gabler asked if by changing the driveway widths, the side setbacks would need to also be changed. Schumann did not believe so. Schumann reiterated concerns with drainage and utility easements. Schumann also discussed the ability to have impervious surface beside garages up to three feet to the property lines. Schumann also added by having additional driveway widths, on-street parking would be reduced. Brad Fyle opened the public hearing. Hearing no comments, the public hearing was closed. Schumann noted that parking could not occur from fifteen feet from the curb. John Rued explained that he was looking for consistency and concerns with enforcement of the fifteen foot setback. Sam Murdoff asked if any of the decisions would make enforcement easier or harder. Schumann responded that in the staff report it says that the City is working on being more proactive rather than having to enforce. Fyle asked if Alternative Two of the staff report could have a maximum width at the house. Schumann responded that discussion about a maximum width was held, but the issue was with extra space. Schumann also added that discussion about having a maximum impervious requirement for residential. Gabler asked if a workshop meeting should be held to visualize the possible changes. Schumann stated that the board could table action. SAM MURDOFF MOVED TO RECOMMEND AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL WIDTH BETWEEN THE DRIVEWAY AND CURB FOR SINGLE-FAMILY 13 PROPERTIES IN THE R-1, R-2 AND R-A ZONING DISTRICTS, AT A E PROPERTY LINE, MAI MAXIMUM WIDTH AT THE CURB LINE. MARC SIMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. G. Tabled - Consideration of a Rezoning to Planned Unit Development District, and Development Stage Planned Unit Development for Self-Storage Facility in a B-3 (Highway Business) District. Applicant: KB Properties, LLC Angela Schumann stated that the Planning Commission tabled action and closed the public hearing at the past meeting. The Planning Commission asked the applicant to come back with additional information and/or revisions on the elevations and building materials. There was also discussions about the proposed fence and the timing of the fenceline. Keith Burnham, the applicant, stated that gable ends of the buildings were proposed along Chelsea Road to have stucco/EFIS building materials. The gable ends along Chelsea Road were also changed to have a Dutch hip. Burnham stated he had spoken to the neighbors for their input. He also stated the building proposed along Innsbrook Drive was changed to EFIS with building variations. A bump in was proposed along this building to place a sign in that space. A sign on Building #1 also was proposed for having a sign with wall lighting or landscaping lighting proposed. Cupolas were also proposed to break up the buildings and included a Dutch hip on the kiosk entry to Building #1. Burnham proposed enhancing the fence with columns on the corners and every hundred feet on Chelsea Road. He asked to be able to complete the fence by September 15, 2018. He stated due to the weather the landscaping and fencing would not be feasible this year. Burnham added that he did not see the reason for eliminating the existing driveway that has been there for years. He stated it could be used for construction access and emergency access. Burnham also discussed having a fire department accessible area in the fence a near the fire hydrant. Marc Simpson asked for more information on fire safety. Burnham stated that the Fire Department would have the ability to disconnect the gates. He also added that each hydrant along Chelsea Road would have a slit in the fence except for the northwest corner. He stated that the Fire Department would have the right to entry, but it was the understanding that they would cut the fence if necessary. Fyle stated that a lock box might be easier. Simpson asked how customers would enter with the kiosk. Burnham stated that it would likely be with a code. Simpson asked the applicant to check with the fence company to see what would be most feasible for access for the fire department. 14 Burnham added that to maintain the twenty-fourfoot drive lanes as indicated in the Exhibit Z comments that he would propose moving the fenceline along the northwest side of the site and the removal a few of the shrub plantings. Schumann reviewed the revised Exhibit Z comments per discussion at the meeting. Decision 1: Consideration of a Rezoning from B-3, Highway Business, to Planned Unit Development (PUD) District, and Development Stage PUD approval, to accommodate the construction of a self-storage project and associated site improvements. MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-018 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REZONING FROM B-3, HIGHWAY BUSINESS, TO PUD DISTRICT, TOGETHER WITH A DEVELOPMENT STAGE PUD APPROVAL, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN SAID RESOLUTION, AND CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN EXHIBIT Z WITH ST ADDITIONS PER THE AUGUST 1 PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION. JOHN ALSTAD SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. EXHIBIT Z Rezoning to Planned Unit Development And PUD Development Stage Site Plan Review Lot 11, Block 4, Groveland 1. Redesign of the site plan to accommodate 24 feet of width for all drive aisles. 2. Provision for pavement markings and bollards in the center aisle area to ensure protection of building corners due to the curved aisle design. 3. Alter rock mulch in planting areas along the Chelsea Road pathway to an irregular material of larger size to avoid spread of the material onto the pathway. 4. Verify transition grading between future and current phase improvements. 5. No outdoor storage will be permitted in the project. 6. No use of the future phase areas until such phase is developed in accordance with the approved site plan. 7. Provide signage plans in compliance with the Sign Ordinance requirements by separate permit. 8. Compliance with comments from the City Engineer in the Engine 5th, 2017. 9. Developer shall enter into a development agreement related to the proposed improvements. 15 10. Other comments of the Planning Commission and Staff provided at the Public Hearing. a. A schedule which would accommodate grading for all phases b. The utilities, including concrete curb and gutter, shall be completed for Phases 1 and 2 with the first phase of development. st c. The fence as proposed at the August 1, 2017 Planning Commission meeting, including monument columns every 100 feet along Chelsea, shall be installed by September 15th, 2018, with the first portion of the fence to be constructed to correspond with Phase 1 as shown in the plans. d. Building elevations and materials for buildings facing Chelsea Road and Innsbrook Drive shall be as shown in the Planning Commission packet of August st 1, 2017. e. A signage plan which would accommodate either a monument in conformance with City Code requirements or wall signage in conformance with City Code requirements with the notation that the City does not allow pack lighting. f. The landscaping plan shall be revised to illustrate the proposed fence and include th a timeline of landscaping for Phase 1 in spring 2018 and September 15, 2018 for the balance of the development. g. of the Fire Department as related to the northerly access. 3. Regular Agenda 1. Consideration of a report on purchase agreement for 220 West Broadway Street for consistency with Monticello Comprehensive Plan Angela Schumann stated that the Planning Commission was asked to make a finding that the purchase of 220 West Broadway was consistent with the comprehensive plan and the draft downtown Small Area Study. The EDA proposed the purchase of this property to provide access to internal parking lots, access to additional greenspace, and additional parking lots. Marc Simpson asked if a business was located at the site. Schumann responded that it is a vacant parcel. MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO FIND THAT THE PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN LAND BY THE CITY OF MONTICELLO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR DOWNTOWN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF MONTICELLO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. A. Consideration of Recommendation for Appointment of Planning Commissioner Brad Fyle stated that a Special Meeting was held prior to the Regular Meeting and that three applicants applied and interviewed for the position. 16 MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPOINTMENT OF KATIE PETERSON TO FILL OUT THE REMAINDER OF A THREE-YEAR TERM ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION. BRAD FYLE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED 3-1 WITH SAM MURDOFF VOTING IN OPPOSITION. B. Consideration of the Community Development Directors Report Angela Schumann provided the Community Development 4. Added Items Marc Simpson asked for information about Integrated Recycling Technologies (IRT). Schumann responded that the property on the east side was acquired by another company. The Conditional Use Permit that was in effect for that property ran with the land and that the property owner and the former property owner were working on the specified improvements. Simpson asked if IRT would maintain the business at the other parcel. Schumann responded with uncertainty. 5. Adjournment MARC SIMPSON MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:06 P.M. SAM MURDOFF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED, 4-0. Recorder: Jacob Thunander ____ Approved: September 5, 2017 Attest: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director 17 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/2017 2A.Public Hearing –Consideration of a request for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development, Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Plat for Carlisle Village 6th Addition for single family lots in an R-2 (Single Family and Two Family Residential) District Applicant: Paxmar, LLC(NAC) nd Property:Legal:Carlisle Village 2Addition, Outlot C,and Lots 1-5,Block 1;Lots 1-3,Block 2; Lots 1-4,Block 3; andLots 1-5, Block 5. Address: 56xx Gateway Circle and Bakken Street Planning Case Number:2017-012 A.REFERENCE & BACKGROUND Request(s):Development Stage PUD Amendment and Preliminary Plat to convert 17 attached townhouse lots into 14 detached townhouse lots. Deadline for Decision:October 14,2017 Land Use Designation:Places to Live Zoning Designation:R-2, Single and Two Family Residential The purpose of the "R-2" single and two-family residential district is to provide for low to moderate density one and two-unit dwellings and directly related complementary uses. Overlays/Environmental Regulations Applicable:NA Current Site Use:Vacant Surrounding Land Uses: North: R-1, Single Family East:Vacant/Rural South:R-A, Single Family (Carlisle Village) West:T-N, Single Family (Carlisle Village) Project Description:The development site includes previously platted lands which were originally planned to be developed as attached townhouse units. Much of the original townhome area was never final plattedinto lots and 1 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/2017 blocks and remains an outlot. On the 25 attached townhouse lots that were final platted, only 8 units were constructed. The applicant seeks to convert the remaining 17 platted attached lots to accommodate single family detached townhouse lots, including replatting a portion of the outlots that were set aside as common area. The applicant is not proposing development for the remainder of the unplatted area at nd this time (Carlisle Village 2Addition Outlot A). ANALYSIS Planned Unit Development.The Planning Commission and City Council met for a Concept Review of the proposal earlier this summer. The primary comments from that review consisted of some concern over the transition between the T-N Single Family neighborhood to the west, and more particularly, the compatibility with the 8 units of attached townhouses built as a part of the initial phase of development in the nd 2Addition. As a part of the PUD Concept Review, the following items were highlighted for discussion. Staff has added comments related to each item: a.Note that the conversion of the lots of Blocks 3 and 5 sit within the underlying common property belonging to the existing Villas on Gateway Homeowners Association rather than Paxmar/Carlisle Village, LLC, requiring cooperation in subsequent applications, and eventual inclusion of any changed units into the Association, since the driveways to each unit lie within common property. At this stage, the Association is not participating in the request for Concept review. The applicant suggests that they are open to either joining the current association, or creating a new separate association for the detached portion of the project. The Plat appears to be drawn with an expectation that the existing attached and proposed detached units would be joined, since the Outlots surrounding the attached units remain unsubdivided. If the applicants proposed to establish a separate association, the common area outlots should be separated, with the relevant portions conveyed from the Villas on Gateway association to the new development, since the common areas would need to be controlled by separate ownership and management.The existing association would participate in that process for subdivision. b.Change in land use from attached to detached units. Most of the comments at the Concept Review meeting suggested a willingness to accept the change in unit style. The Carlisle Village project was originally 2 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/2017 designed to accommodate a mix of unit styles –large lot single family, smaller lot single family(now the T-N zoning area), and attached townhouse units. The applicant suggest that the attached units are not an attractive product, and have proposed an alternative detached townhouse design, further diversifying the residential mix. The proposed detached units are less dense than the attached townhouses, but more dense than the adjoining T-N neighborhood. The T-N area consists generally of lot sizes of 6,600 square feet and 55 foot lot widths, with 6 foot side setbacks. Front setbacks are in the range of 20 to 25 feet from the lot line, approximately 35 to 40 feet from the curb. The proposed detached units would sit on parcels of approximately 2,500 square feet, but with common area that results in an average density of one unit per 5,800 square feet. The applicant is proposing side building separation of 10 feet (5 foot setbacks from the new lot lines)and 20 foot setbacks to the property line, resulting in about 35 feet from the curb line of the public street. Staff would recommend that 6 foot side yards, and 25 foot front yards to the face of the garage be required to accommodate typical side- yard drainage and utility easements between buildings, and avoid vehicles parked in driveways from extending into the public right of way. c.Acceptability of mixing existing attached units with new, architecturally distinct detached units side by side. The applicants suggest that the detached units will employ a higher level of architectural finish and be more marketable that the existing attached units. However, the City has expressed a concern that the existing units not be isolated as an incompatible use. Efforts to integrate this portion of the project may include similar front building detailing, including similar siding, garage door, and wainscot brick colors, as well as the tapered post supports used in the attached unit architecture. By integrating these details into the units adjoining the attached buildings, the introduction of the detached units would be more compatible.The applicants should also detail corner-lot unit styles. d.Issues related to development of the remainder of the originally planned project in a consistent manner. The applicant has not indicated how the remainder of the unplatted area would be developed, other than to suggest that market conditions will play a part in any proposal brought forward to the City. It may be assumed that compatibility and integration of the existing developments will play a part in the City’s review of those areas. e.Reduction in overall density from17 units to 14units over an area of approximately 2acres of buildable area excluding right of way. 3 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/2017 No concerns related to density were raised. The resulting density would decrease from the approved 9 units per net acre to about 7.5 units per net acre. f.Occupancy of the lots by smaller single family detached units, generally narrower than commonly available on wider lots, with the majority of the building front occupied by garage.This note relates to how these detached units may compare to those in the area along Gateway Drive –originally zoned as “R-2A” under the previous zoning ordinance. This note would also relate to how the detached units compare to the previously approved and developed attached units. The T-N neighborhood includes buildings ofapproximately 43 feet in width, with (mostly) 2-car garage door fronts. The existing attached townhouses are approximately 26 feet in width, also with 2-car garage fronts. The proposed detached townhouse units are also mostly 26 feet in width, with 2-car garages, although the applicants show an optional 3-car garage model on two of the lots. g.Architectural compatibility of the proposed units with the intent of the PUD, and of the Carlisle Village concept as a “step-up” residential neighborhood. As noted, the applicants contend that the proposed detached units are of greater marketability and value that the attached model. As noted above, efforts to integrate the attached and detached neighboring buildings would facilitate an appropriate transition.Revised drawings which detail this adjustment is a condition of approval moving forward to final stage consideration. h.Small individual lots relying on common maintenance for driveways and access to the public street (Gateway Circle for 11of the units, Bakken Street for 3 units). The proposed detached units are proposed tohave common maintenance on driveways and landscaping, but would rely on private maintenance of side yards and exterior building materials (attached units share exterior building maintenance as a common expense, and have no interior side yards). Again, the applicant needs to clearly detail and define association relationships and regulation with their future application. i.Address Engineering concerns including: 1.Water service disconnections will be required if existing water services are not utilized. 2.Wetland Conservation Act documentation for a no loss determination has been approved for the created wetlands on the site. 4 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/2017 3.Review of stormwater management requirements will be evaluated with the plan submittal to determine if the existing pond adjacent to the development meets City and MPCA’s current requirements. The City Engineer has provided PUD and Plat comments in a separate letter dated August 25, 2017. These comments are incorporated by reference. j.Other issues raised by staff or city officials. In addition to the comments above, staff notes that the applicant has provided a landscaping plan which provides only common area tree planting, a total of 19 overstory deciduous trees, and 10 evergreen trees –a total of 29 trees for the proposed 14 units. However, no private site landscaping is included with the proposal. For townhouse units, individual building and/or site landscaping should be included for review. By contrast, the T-N district single family homes have extensive front yard landscaping requirements. Acknowledging the smaller front yards, the applicants must nonetheless include individual unit landscaping as a component of an attractive “step-up” development. Preliminary Plat. The proposed plat, as noted above, replats the various attached townhouse parcels (along with a portion of an outlot) into detached townhouse parcels, reducing overall density from 17 units to 14 units.The applicants do not th proposeto impact the outlots for 13 of the 14 units. The 14unit, fronting on Bakken Street, would be taken from the existing Outlot C, reducing the overall common area in that location. As noted earlier, the proposed configuration raises concerns related to association relationship. If the applicants propose to create a separate association (whichmay be important since the two-unit styles have separate association responsibilities), the applicants should work with the Villas on Gateway association to replat Outlots D andB to convey the common area around the existing attached units to the newunits. In the alternative, the applicants should show –as a part of their applications for final plat and final PUD, that they have signed an agreement to merge the existing association with the new developmentand provide for management detail in association documents. In addition, the plat should include drainage and utility easements between buildings of at least 6 feet on either side of each lot line. This may impact the replatting of the underlying and/or surrounding outlots, or an adjustment in the units or lot configurations. 5 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/2017 B.ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Decision 1: Consideration of Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for PUD and Development Stage PUD approval: 1.Motion toadoptResolutionNo. PC-2017-026, recommending approval of the amendment to CUP for PUD Development Stage for Carlisle Village, converting 17 attached townhouse lots to 14 detached townhouse lots, subject to the conditions identified in Exhibit Z. 2.Motion to deny adoption of Resolution No. PC-2017-026, based on findings to be identified at the public hearing. 3.Motion to table action on the resolution, pending submission of additional materials. Decision 2: Consideration of Preliminary Plat approval: 1.Motion to adopt Resolution No. PC-2017-027, recommending approval of the th Preliminary Plat for Carlisle Village 6Addition, subject to the conditions identified in Exhibit Z. 2.Motion to deny adoption of Resolution No. PC-2017-027, based on findings to be identified at the public hearing. 3.Motion to table action on the resolution, pending submission of additional materials. C.STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the amendment and plat, with the items noted in Exhibit Z of this report. As discussed, the introduction of the detached townhouse unit style is not out of character with the Carlisle Village PUD concept, which calls for a variety of housing styles. However, there are details to address to meet the intent of the district, and to acknowledge the existing development, into which the new units should be integrated. Issues related to architecture, building separation, landscaping, and engineering are important to ensure a reasonable transition in this area, particularly given the existence of the few attached units built as a part of the original project. D.SUPPORTING DATA A.Resolution PC-2017-026, Development Stage PUD B.Resolution PC-2017-027, Preliminary Plat C.Site Aerial 6 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/2017 D.Applicant Narrative E.Plan Set, including: a.Cover Sheet b.Existing Conditions c.Preliminary Plat & Site Plan d.Grading Plan e.Utility Service Plan f.Details g.Landscape Plan F.Elevations G.City Engineer’s Letter, dated August 28, 2017 Z. Conditions of Approval 7 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/2017 EXHIBIT Z th Carlisle Village 6Addition PUD Amendment/Development Stage PUD And Preliminary Plat nd Carlisle Village 2Addition, OutlotC, and Lots 1-5, Block 1; Lots 1-3, Block 2; Lots 1-4, Block 3; and Lots 1-5, Block 5. 1.The Plat should be redesigned to separate the common area outlots between the existing attached and proposed detached units to allow separation of the associations, if necessary -this condition would impactOutlot B and Outlot D; or the applicant mustprovide documentationrelating to inclusion of the proposed units intothe current association.The applicants must show –either by design and conveyance of land to a new association which they control, or by formal agreement between the current association and the new plat –that the applicant’s new units will have access rights acrossthe common area of the outlots to the public street.Either alternative must be completed as a part of the application for Final Plat and Final PUDand to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. 2.The detached units should be designed to meet 6 foot side yard setbacks and 25 foot front yard setbacks to accommodate standard internal lot line easements and parking use of the front driveway areas. 3.The units adjacent to the existing attached buildings should be designed for submittal of Final Stage PUD documents to incorporate similar materials and colors, including siding, brick, and post design as noted. The unit designs, and designs that are similar in size and façade detail to those proposed shall be the exclusive architecture used in the project, unless an appropriate amendment or adjustment is proposed and approved per the requirements of the PUD zoning regulations. 4.Prepare final Homeowners Association documents meeting the intent of the City and satisfying any concerns of the City Attorney relating to common maintenance and enforcement.As noted in item 1, above, the documents should reflect the clear right of the units proposed by the applicant to cross the common area to the public street. 5.Enforcement of Homeowners Association maintenance requirements shall not be enforced by the City of Monticello, but documents may not be amended without City approval via PUD Amendment until the Association has been turned over to individual homeowners from the control of the developer. 6.Add landscape plantings, including shrubs and perennials, to the private lot improvements for each detached unit, as illustrated in the accompanying building illustrations. 7.The plat lies along Jason Avenue, CSAH 18, and requires the review of Wright County for comment. 8 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/2017 8.Comply with the requirements of the City Engineer’s letter of August 25, 2017. 9.Comments of other City staff or those of the Planning Commission. 9 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-026 RECOMMENDINGAPPROVAL OF AMENDMEN TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR th CARLISLE VILLAGE 6ADDITION WHEREAS, the applicant owns property along Gateway Circle and Bakken Street, nd portions of Carlisle Village 2Addition; and WHEREAS,the applicant has submitted a request to plat said property into fourteen single family parcels, and outlots to contain common property improvements, and develop it as an “detached townhome” project under a PUD; and WHEREAS, the site is guided for residential uses under the label “Places to Live” in the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed PUD, along with the companion Plat, are consistent with the long-term use and development of the property for industrial uses; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 5th, 2017 on the application and the applicant and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff report, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendationof approval: 1.The Plat provides an appropriate means of furthering the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the site by putting the existing and proposed improvements and parcels to residential uses. 2. The proposed improvements on the site under thePreliminary Plat are consistent with the needs of the development in this location as a medium density residential area. 3.The improvements will have expected impacts on public services, including sewer, water, stormwater treatment, and traffic which have been planned to serve the property for the development as proposed. 4.. The PUD flexibility for the project, including parcels without public street frontage, are consistent with the intent of the City’s economic development objectives, as well as with the intent of the PUD zoning regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota,that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the 1 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-026 Monticello City Council approves the Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Development Stage PUD,subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z as follows: 1.The Plat should be redesigned to separate the common area outlots between the existing attached and proposed detached units to allow separation of the associations, if necessary -this condition would impact Outlot B and Outlot D; or the applicant must provide documentation relating to inclusion of the proposed units intothe current association.The applicants must show –either by design and conveyance of land to a new association which they control, or by formal agreement between the current association and the new plat –that the applicant’s new units will have access rights across the common area of the outlots to the public street.Either alternative must be completed as a part of the application for Final Plat and Final PUDand to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. 2.The detached units should be designed to meet 6 foot side yard setbacks and 25 foot front yard setbacks to accommodate standard internal lot line easements and parking use of the front driveway areas. 3.The units adjacent to the existing attached buildings should be designed for submittal of Final Stage PUD documents to incorporate similar materials and colors, including siding, brick, and post design as noted. The unit designs, and designs that are similar in size and façade detail to those proposed shall be the exclusive architecture used in the project, unless an appropriate amendment or adjustment is proposed andapproved per the requirements of the PUD zoning regulations. 4.Prepare final Homeowners Association documents meeting the intent of the City and satisfying any concerns of the City Attorney relating to common maintenance and enforcement. As noted in item 1, above, the documents should reflect the clear right of the units proposed by the applicant to cross the common area to the public street. 5.Enforcement of Homeowners Association maintenance requirements shall not be enforced by the City of Monticello, but documents may not be amended without City approval via PUD Amendment until the Association has been turned over to individual homeowners from the control of the developer. 6.Add landscape plantings, including shrubs and perennials, to the private lot improvements for each detached unit, as illustrated in the accompanying building illustrations. 7.The plat lies along Jason Avenue, CSAH 18, and requires the review of Wright County for comment. 2 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-026 8.Comply with the requirements of the City Engineer’s letter of August 25, 2017. 9.Comments of other City staff or those of the Planning Commission. ADOPTEDthis5thday of September, 2017,by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION By: _______________________________ Brad Fyle, Chair ATTEST: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director 3 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-027 RECOMMENDINGAPPROVAL OF APRELIMINARY PLAT th FORCARLISLE VILLAGE 6ADDITION WHEREAS, the applicant owns property along Gateway Circle and Bakken Avenue, nd portions of Carlisle Village 2Addition; and WHEREAS,the applicant has submitted a request toplat said propertyinto fourteen single family parcels, and outlots to contain common property improvements, and develop it as an “detached townhome” projectunder a PUD; and WHEREAS, thesite is guided for residentialuses underthe label “Places to Live” in the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed PUD, along with the companion Plat,are consistent with the long-term use and development of the property for industrialuses; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 5th, 2017 on the application and the applicant and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff report, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following Findings of Fact in relation to the recommendation of approval: 1.The Platprovidesan appropriate means of furthering the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the siteby putting the existing and proposed improvements and parcels to residentialuses. 2.Theproposedimprovements onthe siteunder the Preliminary Platare consistent with the needs of the developmentin this locationas a medium density residential area. 3.The improvements will haveexpected impacts on public services, including sewer, water, stormwater treatment, and trafficwhich have been planned to serve the property for the development as proposed. 4..The PUD flexibility for the project, including parcels without public street frontage, are consistent with the intent of the City’s economic development objectives, as well as with the intent of the PUD zoning regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota,that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the 1 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-027 th Monticello City Council approves the Preliminary Plat for Carlisle Village 6Addition, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit Z of the staff report as follows: 1.The Plat should be redesigned to separate the common area outlots between the existing attached and proposed detached units to allow separation of the associations, if necessary -this condition would impact Outlot B and Outlot D; or the applicant must provide documentation relating to inclusion of the proposed units intothe current association.The applicants must show –either by design and conveyance of land to a new association which they control, or by formal agreement between the current association and the new plat –that the applicant’s new units will have access rights across the common area of the outlots to the public street. Either alternative must be completed as a part of the application for Final Plat and Final PUD and to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. 2.The detached units should be designed to meet 6 foot side yard setbacks and 25 foot front yard setbacks to accommodate standard internal lot line easements and parking use of the front driveway areas. 3.The units adjacent to the existing attached buildings should be designed for submittal of Final Stage PUD documents to incorporate similar materials and colors, including siding, brick, and post design as noted. The unit designs, and designs that are similar in size and façade detail to those proposed shall be the exclusive architecture used in the project, unless an appropriate amendment or adjustment is proposed and approved per the requirements of the PUD zoning regulations. 4.Prepare final Homeowners Association documents meeting the intent of the City and satisfying any concerns of the City Attorney relating to common maintenance and enforcement. As noted in item 1,above, the documents should reflect the clear right of the units proposed by the applicant to cross the common area to the public street. 5.Enforcement of Homeowners Association maintenance requirements shall not be enforced by the City of Monticello, butdocuments may not be amended without City approval via PUD Amendment until the Association has been turned over to individual homeowners from the control of the developer. 6.Add landscape plantings, including shrubs and perennials, to the private lot improvements for each detached unit, as illustrated in the accompanying building illustrations. 7.The plat lies along Jason Avenue, CSAH 18, and requires the review of Wright County for comment. 2 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-027 8.Comply with the requirements of the City Engineer’s letter of August 25, 2017. 9.Comments of other City staff or those of the Planning Commission. ADOPTEDthis5th day of September, 2017,by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION By: _______________________________ Brad Fyle, Chair ATTEST: ____________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director 3 PAMAR© X 8/1/2017 Ms. Angela Schuman Community Development Director City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 Re: PUD Concept/Amendment Carlisle Village 6thAddition Dear Ms.Schuman, Council, Commissioner and consulting staff: Thisnarrative provides a summary of the proposed scope for Lots 1-5, Block 1; Lots 1-3, Block 2; Lots nd 1-4, Block 3; Lots 1-5 Block 5; and Outlot C of Carlisle Village 2Addition.The objective of the amendment is to make 17 attached townhomesplatted lots into 14 detached townhome lots.This would decrease Density by 2 units/acre. Changes to be made: Lots 1-5, Block 1; Lots 1-3, Block 2; and Outlot C would be re-platted to detached Townhome lots, adding 2 driveway accesses to Bakken Street and a utility connection. Lots 1-4, Block 3 would be re-platted to 3 detached Townhome lots, adding 1 driveway access to Bakken Street Lots 1-5, Block 5 would be re-platted to 4 detached Townhome lots Minimum Setbacks: Front Setback-20’ Side Setback-5’/5’ (10’ between buildings) *note that these are the minimum and many distances will be greater The Lots are NOTcurrently part of the Villas at Gateway HOA and the 10 year period to add additional real estate has expired.We are open to joining the existing HOA if the legal means of joining can be accomplished or starting a new HOA. Regardless of which HOA optiongoes forward, the new units would provide the following: Lawn maintenance Snow removal Lawn irrigation ARC control Ability to correct exterior blights or non-conformance 3495 Northdale Blvd. NW, Suite 210 Coon Rapids, MN 55448 (763)753-6176 PAMAR© X Several utility connections would need to be utilized for irrigation or capped/abandoned We are currently aware of a master irrigation system serving the existing units in the Villas HOA. This would need to be mapped/located and some easements given. The front facades of the proposed homes would far exceed the existing unit standards. Brick, Stone, Shangles, Accent Trim, shutters, etc. will be utilized to promote varied and aesthetically pleasing front elevations. Paxmar purchased the property from Central Bank in 2011. The property had stalled out and the original developer gaveit back to the bank.The intent of the amendmentis to replace a less marketable attached product with an in demand detached style townhome.Construction would begin on the homes within 90 days of all entitlements being in place and all units could be full constructed by the end of 2018.Paxmar understandsthe financial requirements and sureties required by the platting/development process.. nd The adjacent partially developed property, Outlot A Carlisle Village 2Addition, would be developed in a substantially similar way, if this proposal is approved. In summation, this amendment would do several things: Decrease Density Complete a stalled-out project Increase exterior front elevations standards Increase revenue from property taxes Increase value of surrounding properties The attached units are already approved and could be built immediately but we feel our proposal is a better use for the surrounding neighborhood and community at large Respectfully, Alan Roessler Paxmar 3495 Northdale Blvd. NW, Suite 210 Coon Rapids, MN 55448 (763)753-6176 7699 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (952) 937-5150(952) 937-5822(888) 937-5150 e e e r n F l o xl ho a T PF 7699 Anagram DriveEden Prairie, MN 55344 (952) 937-5150(952) 937-5822(888) 937-5150 e e e r n F l ox l h ao PFT 7699 Anagram DriveEden Prairie, MN 55344 (952) 937-5150(952) 937-5822(888) 937-5150 e e e r n F l ox l h ao PFT 7699 Anagram DriveEden Prairie, MN 55344 (952) 937-5150(952) 937-5822(888) 937-5150 e e e r n F l ox l h ao PFT 7699 Anagram DriveEden Prairie, MN 55344 (952) 937-5150(952) 937-5822(888) 937-5150 e e e r n F l ox l h ao PFT 7699 Anagram DriveEden Prairie, MN 55344 (952) 937-5150(952) 937-5822(888) 937-5150 e e e r n F l ox l h ao PFT 7699 Anagram DriveEden Prairie, MN 55344 (952) 937-5150(952) 937-5822(888) 937-5150 e e e r n F l ox l h ao PFT Building a legacy ǤƚǒƩ legacy. 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 August 25, 2017 Ms. Angela Schumann Community Development Director City of Monticello 505 Walnut Street, Suite 1 Monticello, MN 55362 th Re: Carlisle Village 6 Addition PUD Plan Review City Project No. 2017-012 WSB Project No. 010663-000 Dear Ms. Schumann: We have reviewed the concept plan received on August 8, 2017 as prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. and offer the following comments. 1. There are four sanitary sewer and water services proposed to be abandoned. The sewer services can be left as is assuming they are plugged. The water services to be abandoned shall consist of the following work: Close the corporation connection at the mainline watermain in the street Remove the standpipe in the boulevard and install a copper plug The limits of the street removal and replacement shall be verified in the field 2. The City utility superintendent has marked all the existing sewer and water services. The applicant shall verify that the plans reflect the marked locations. 3. The existing and proposed water service depths shall be measured in the field to ensure a minimum 7.5 feet of cover. Insulation should be installed if the existing services do not have a minimum 7.5 feet of cover. 4. A utility excavation permit must be obtained from the Public Works department prior to commencement of utility connections. 5. Provide drainage swales, where applicable, around the buildings to meet the minimum 2% grades and label the grades on the grading plan as such. 6. Identify the lowest opening elevation for each building if different than the ground grade elevation noted. Verify that the each buildings lowest opening elevation is a minimum 1-foot below the EOF. Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com K:\\010663-000\\Admin\\Docs\\LTR-a-schumann-Carlisle 6th PUD 082517.docx August 24, 2017 Page 2 7. Show the proposed drainage and utility easements on the preliminary plat more clearly. 8. We would consider the proposed development part of a Common Plan of Development per MPCA requirements. Since the proposed development is adding than 1 acre of new impervious surface, volume control (infiltration) will not be required. A SWPPP shall be provided with the final stage documents. 9. It is recommended that the applicant coordinate with the private utility companies serving the development to identify if there are impacts or relocations needed to these facilities. 10. The applicant should demonstrate how all utility services, public and private (i.e. gas, phone, electric), will serve each home given the limited space between each proposed home. This may be an issue if the utilities will extend along the side yard. Adequate space should be provided to repair these services if there ever is a need. Please have the applicant provide a written response addressing the comments above. Final PUD plans will need to be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to building permit approval. Please give me a call at 763-271-3236 if you have any questions or comments regarding this letter. Thank you. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Shibani K. Bisson, PE City Engineer cc: Steve Grittman, NAC Enclosure skb K:\\010663-000\\Admin\\Docs\\LTR-a-schumann-Carlisle 6th PUD 082517.docx Planning CommissionAgenda:9/05/17 2B.Continued Public Hearing -Consideration of a request for amendment to the Monticello Comprehensive Plan for the Downtown Small Area Plan. Applicant: City of Monticello(AS) A.REFERENCEAND BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission is asked to review for recommendation the Downtown Small Area Plan and corresponding amendments to the Monticello Comprehensive Plan, which if adopted, will become the guide plan for the Monticello’s Downtown. In 2010, the City of Monticello completed a guide to redeveloping downtown called the “Embracing Downtown Plan”. The plan considered land use, transportation and market realities for the area considered to be “Downtown Monticello”, or the “CCD” as designated by the Monticello Zoning Ordinance. Since the adoption of the Embracing Downtown Plan, changes in the retail marketplace, as well as an understanding of more recent investments in downtown and the challenges present in implementing the Embracing Downtown Plan, have impacted the desire and ability to implement the Embracing Downtown Planas it was originally intended. Therefore, the City of Monticello Economic Development Authority (EDA) authorized an update to the Embracing Downtown Plan, focusing on the core downtown area. The study goals included: Development of a revised land use plan for the core area of the downtown which presents a greater likelihood for realization. Examination of current market conditionsimpacting the feasibility of realization of goals for downtown. Celebrate, strengthen and leverage the authenticity of Downton Monticello, its unique position in the region, and its existing amenities. Encourage investment with a plan that focuses on practical solutions and existing market potential. The Monticello EDA funded the study, selecting the Cuningham Groupand Tangible Solutions as the consulting group to prepare the plan. Work onthe plan began in early 2017, and the plan has evolvedover the last seven (7) months with significant public engagement through the guidance of a project steering committee and public feedback via open meetings and comment/feedback opportunities. In addition, ajoint workshop involving the EDA, City Council, Planning Commission and Parks Commissionwas held in late May and an additional follow-up joint workshop of the EDA and Planning Commission was also held on July 12, 2017 further addressing public concerns and comments, as well as theultimate feasibility of the Plan. The Cuningham Group has since made additional changes to the Plan to address the concerns expressed at the workshopand through public comment received. While the focus of the plan is on thecore blocks of the downtown, the final draft plan provides a landuse, transportation and parks and open space framework for the full downtownor “CCD”area. The DowntownSmall Area Study therefore serves as an update to the 2010 Embracing Downtown Plan. In terms of the comprehensive plan adoption framework proposed, the Downtown Small Area Plan itself will become an appendix document to the Comprehensive Plan,including its reports on Market Context and Retail Vitality. Goal, policy and recommendation statements from the document are proposed for incorporation into the text of the Comprehensive Plan’s Chapter 3 –Land Useand Chapter 4 –Economic Development for the Downtown.While the Downtown Small Area Plan will replace the Embracing Downtown Plan as an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan, similar to the 1997 Downtown Plan, the Embracing Downtown Plan serves as a guidepost reference in time for the downtown and continues to be referenced in the Comprehensive Plan. At this time, staff is asking the Planning Commissionto consider formal recommendation for adoption of the Downtown Small Area Planas an amendment to the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. th The Monticello Economic Development Authority reviewed the plan on August 9, 2017 and recommended its adoption and accepted the workproduct represented by the plan. The EDA did recommend some minor modifications to the draft presented at that time. The EDA’s recommended changes, including an adjustment in the text of the document “encourage” rather than “require” throughout, have been made and are incorporated into the version presented to the Planning Commission. Andrew Dresdner, Cuningham Group, will be in attendance at the meeting topresent the plan in summary format to the Planning Commission. B.ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1.Motion to recommend the Adoption of the City of Monticello Downtown Small Area Plan to the City Council as presented, based on findings in Resolution PC- 2017-028. 2.Motion to recommend Adoption of the City of Monticello Downtown Small Area Plan to the City Council, with modifications identified by the Planning Commission, based on findings in Resolution PC-2017-028. 3.Motion to table consideration of Adoption of the City of Monticello Downtown Small Area Plan for more research/community feedback. 4.Motion of other. 2 C.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the Downtown Small Area Plan. Staff believes that the plan meets the vision and goals for a successful framework supporting the redevelopment and repositioning of the downtown core area. The Plan provides a vision and implementation strategy for Downtown which includes both public and private investments scalable in small, medium and large projects, which can be accomplished in increments over time. It also reinforces the vision for additional housing in the downtown core and provides a land use framework for dense retail, entertainment and personal service uses.The Plan contains strategies to enhance the core as a vibrant, walkable districtthat is intended for use by many.It also suggests enhanced parks, public space, pathway and signage improvements for ease of wayfinding. The Plan supports building on existing assets through reinvestment while distinguishing itself from the previous Embracing Downtown Plan (2010) which sought to create a more suburban style, automobile dependentdevelopment patternin the core area. D. SUPPORTING DATA: A.Resolution PC-2017-028 B.Draft Downtown Small Area Plan, dated August 24th, 2017, including 1. Plan Document 2. Market Context 3. Retail Vitality C. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments 1. Chapter 3 –Land Use 2. Chapter 4 –Economic Development D. Comprehensive Plan -Current, Excerpts 1. Chapter 3 –Land Use 2. Chapter 4 –Economic Development 3 CITY OF MONTICELLO WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017-028 RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OFTHE CITY OF MONTICELLO DOWNTOWN SMALL AREA PLAN AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF MONTICELLO WHEREAS, the City of Monticello has, in 2008, adopted a Comprehensive Plan guiding the growth, development, land use, and infrastructure planning for the City; and WHEREAS, said Comprehensive Plan provides for the development and redevelopment of the downtown as a part of suchguidance; and WHEREAS, the City last completed a specific planning effort for its core downtown area in 1997and 2011; and WHEREAS, the City has found that a revised and detailed plan for its downtown would be consistent with both City objectives and the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, as part of updated planning efforts for the downtown, the City engaged the services of Tangible Solutionsto complete a market analysis of downtown; and WHEREAS, as part of updated planning efforts for the downtown, the City engaged the services of Cuningham Group to analyze land use and design opportunities in downtown, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello has reviewed the proposed plan for Downtown, the “City of Monticello DowntownSmall Area Plan”, in joint workshops st with the City Council, Parks Commission and Economic Development Authority on May 31, 2017 and with the Economic Development Authority on July 12th, 2017; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello has held a public hearing on th September 5, 2017 to consider the Downtown Small Area Plan and members of the public were provided the opportunity to present information to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all of the comments and the staff report and exhibits, which are incorporated by reference into the resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello makes the following additional Findings of Fact in relation to the need for adoption of an updated downtown plan: 1.The 2017Downtown Small Area Plan recognizes downtown as a unique commercial district that is the heart of the community and part of Monticello's heritage and identity, and provides a guide for development, redevelopment, and revitalization in downtown Monticello. 2.The Downtown Small Area Plan update was accomplished through engagement and public participationby City, downtown landowners, business owners, citizens, stakeholders, and policy makers. 3.The Downtown Small Area Plan seeks to retain Broadway as Monticello’s Main Street, supporting existing businesses, improving connections to and relationship with the River, and creating new downtown housing opportunities along Walnut and Cedar Streets for existing and new Monticello residents. 4.The Downtown Small Area Plan envisions a downtown that serves many purposes for many people–including dining, recreation, celebrating, gathering, shopping and living. 5.The updated plan includes an implementation section to further assist in achieving the vision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota: Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §462.355, the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello recommends that the Monticello City Council adopt the amendment to Chapter 3 and Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Plan, including the following: 1.The document entitled "City of Monticello Downtown Small Area Plan”, dated August 24th, 2017, along with recommendations specified, and with the “Market Context” and “Retail Vitality” studies, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A". 2.The amendments entitled "Chapter 3 -Land Use" for the existing Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B". 3.The amendments entitled “Chapter 4 –Economic Development” for the existing Comprehensive Plan Chapter 4, which is attached hereto and incorporated as Exhibit “C”. ADOPTEDthis 5th day of September, 2017, by the Planning Commission of the City of Monticello, Minnesota. CITY OF MONTICELLO By: _______________________________ Brad Fyle, Chair ATTEST: __________________________________________ Angela Schumann, Community Development Director EXHIBIT "A" Attach Final Downtown Small Area Plan (refer to file records for full copy) EXHIBIT "B" Attach Final Comprehensive Plan Amendment Text Chapter 3 –Land Use EXHIBIT "B" Attach Final Comprehensive Plan Amendment Text Chapter 4–Economic Development Qsfqbsfe!gps;!Uif!Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Qsfqbsfe!cz;Dvojohibn!Hspvq!Bsdijufduvsf-!Jod/ Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Npoujdfmmp-!NO Bvhvtu!35-!3128!!!!!Qsfqbsfe!gps;!Uif!Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Qsfqbsfe!cz;Dvojohibn!Hspvq!Bsdijufduvsf-!Jod/ 234679:! 48 212327!!!!!!!!3137393:42 25263435 253333 !23 ! ! ! ! ! Cbdlhspvoe!boe!Qvsqptf!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt!Gsbnfxpslt!Efnphsbqijdt!Nbslfu!boe!Efwfmpqnfou!Dpoufyu!!Sfubjm!Wjubmjuz!Qiztjdbm!Bobmztjt!Qvcmjd!Qspdftt!Qspkfdu!Hpbmt!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt;!Xbmovu!boe!Dfebs!Tusffu! !!!!!!29Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt;!!!Qjof!Tusffu!!Gsbnfxpslt;!Qvsqptf!Gsbnfxpslt;!Mboe!Vtf!boe!Efwfmpqnfou!38Gsbnfxpslt;!Djsdvmbujpo!boe!Bddftt!Gsbnfxpslt;!Qbslt!boe!Pqfo!Tqbdft!Jnqmfnfoubujpo! Ubcmf!pg!Dpoufout Fyfdvujwf!TvnnbszCbdlhspvoeHpbmt!boe!PckfdujwftDibsbdufs!Bsfbt!!!!!!!!!!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt;!Qvsqptf!!!!!!!!!!!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt;!Sjwfsgspou!!!!!!!!!!!!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt;!Cspbexbz!Cmpdl!63! bo!45!!!!!!!!!!!!Cmpdl!45!!!!!!!!!!!Cmpdl!63!GsbnfxpsltJnqmfnfoubujpo Cjmm!Efnfvmft-!QsftjefouCjmm!Ubqqfs-!Wjdf!QsftjefouTufwf!Kpiotpo-!UsfbtvsfsKjn!Ebwjetpo-!Dpvodjm!SfqsftfoubujwfMmpze!Ijmhbsu-!Dpvodjm!SfqsftfoubujwfUsbdz!Ijo{Kpo!NpsqifxDibsmpuuf!HbcmfsKjn!EbwjetpoUs bdz!Ijo{Tufwf!KpiotpoNbsd!TjnqtpoEpo!SpcfsutMbssz!OpmboNbsdz!BoefstpoUpn!Uvsofs!Kpio!boe!Mvdz!Nvssbz! Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou!BvuipsjuzTuffsjoh!Dpnnjuuff Dpvodjm!Mjbjtpo* ) ! !sfz!)Wjdf! Csjbo!Tuvnqg-!Nbzps!Kjn!EbwjetpoCjmm!GbjsDibsmpuuf!Hbcmfs!Mmpze!IjmhbsuCsbe!Gzmf-!DibjsKpio!BmtubeNbsd!TjnqtpoMvdbt!XzoofDibsmpuuf!Hbcmfs!Dvojohibn!HspvqUbohjcmf!dpotvmujoh!Tfswjdft Kbdl!HsfhpsDibjs*Mbssz!Opmbo!)Dibjs*Ujn!TubmqftCsjbo!TupmmCjmm!Gbjs-!Dpvodjm!Mjbjtpo !Bdlopxmfehfnfout Djuz!DpvodjmQmboojoh!Dpnnjttjpo Dpotvmubou!Ufbn Qbslt!Dpnnjttjpo !Fyfdvujwf!Tvnnbsz 2 boe!qvcmjd! qsjwbuf! Cfdpnf!b!Sjwfs!Upxo opuf;!uijt!jmmvtusbujpo!efqjdut!ofx!efwfpqnfou!po!cpui!qspqfsujft/!!Uif!qmbo!epft!opu!dpnqfm!qsjwbuf!qspqfsuz!pxofst!up!dibohf!bozuijoh!sfhbsejoh!ipx!uifz!vtf!uifjs!mboe/!!Sbuifs-!uif!Qmbo!jt!b!hvjef !gps!dibohf!jg!uif!qspqfsuz!pxofs!dipptft!up!ep!tp/!!Qmfbtf!tff!qbhf```gps!bo!jmmvtusbujpo!pg!uif!Nbtufs!Qmbo!bt!ju!bqqmjft!up!qvcmjdmz!ifme!qspqfsujft!pomz/!!Uif!Djuz!xjmm!foefbwps!up!xpsl!xjui!fyjt ujoh!cvtjoftt!xip!xjti!up!sfnbjo-!sfwjubmj{f!boe!fyqboe!jo!uif!epxoupxo/ !}!Fyfdvujwf!Tvnnbsz Jowftunfout Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo z b x e b p s C u f f s u T ! f o j Q Cspbexbz u T ! u v o m b X Tijgu!uif!Dfoufs!pg!Upxo!up!Xbmovu!boe! Jnqspwf!Qjof!Tusffu!gps!Bmm!Vtfst!Fodpvsbhf!Tnbmm!boe!Nfejvn!Tdbmfe! !Cbdlhspvoe!boe!QvsqptfHpbmt 3 D B !}!Fyfdvujwf!Tvnnbsz E C D C E Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo BD !Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt Fyjtujoh!CvjmejohtOfx!Cvjmejoht u f f s u T ! s f w u jT ! s b S e f D z b x e b p s C u f f s u T ! f o j Q u T ! u v o m b X u f f s u T ! e s 4 u f f s u T ! i u 5 !f!Qmbo!bcpwf!eftdsjcft!b!qpufoujbm!mpoh!ufsn!cvjme!pvu!pg!uif!dpsf!cmpdlt!pg!Epxoupxo! Epxoupxo!jt!Gps!Fwfszpof Jmmvtusbujwf!Nbtufs!Qmbo Npoujdfmmp/ 4 !}!Fyfdvujwf!Tvnnbsz Jnnfejbuf!Ofyu!Tufqt!boe!JnqmfnfoubujpoIpx!jt!Uijt!Qmbo!Sfmbufe!up!uif!Fncsbdjoh!Epxoupxo!Qmbo!boe!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo@! Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Pqfo!Tqbdf!boe!QbsltBddftt!boe!DjsdvmbujpoEfwfmpqnfou!boe!mboe!Vtf !Gsbnfxpslt beejujpobm!sfdpnfoebujpot!bsf!jodmvefe!jo!uif!Gsbnfxpjslt!Tfdujpo!qbhft!36.43 !Cbdlhspvoe 6 !jt! !f!jogpsnbujpo!po!uijt! qbhf!jt!tvnnbsj{fe!gspn!uif!dpnqbojpo!epdvnfout!.!Efnphsbqijdt!boe!Nbslfu!Dpoufyu!boe!Sfubjm!Wjubmjuz!Tuvez!dpoevdufe!cz!Ubohjcmf!sfqpsu!boe!dbo!cf!epxompbefe!po.mjof!bu!```````````/!! npcjmf!ipnf!boe!puifsbqbsunfou!)?!21!vojut*bqbsunfou!)=!21!vojut*upxoipvtf0dpoepnjojvntjohmf!gbnjmz!ipnf !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt !vfodfe! Njooftpub Xsjhiu!Dpvouz Tbvl!Sbqjet !bmp Tu/!Njdibfm Putfhp Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Fml!Sjwfs 6-3:5 Npoujdfmmp !fst!npsf!upxoipnft-!bqbsunfout-!boe!npcjmf! 91&71&51& 31& 211& 2-276 Njooftpub Xsjhiu!Dpvouz Tbvl!Sbqjet 5-397 !bmp Tu/!Njdibfm Putfhp Fml!Sjwfs Fnqmpznfou!boe!Dpnnvujoh!Evf!up!Npoujdfmmp‘t!mpdbujpo!sfmbujwf!up!uif!mbshfs!djujft!pg!Tu/!Dmpve!boe!uif!Uxjo!Djujft-!ju‘t!opu!tvsqsjtjoh!uibu!nboz!sftjefout!pg!Npoujdfmmp!xpsl!pvutjef!uif!djuz/!Pg!u if!7-56:!fnqmpzfe!sftjefout!pg!Npoujdfmmp-!93&!xpsl!pvutjef!pg!Npoujdfmmp/ Npoujdfmmp Ipvtjoh!Dibsbdufsjtujdt Npoujdfmmp!ibt!b!npsf!ejwfstf!sbohf!pg!ipvtjoh!pqujpot!uifo!nboz!dpnqbsjtpo!djujft/!Kvtu!65&!pg!ipnft!uibo!puifs!djujft!jo!Xsjhiu!Dpvouz/!!Ofwfsuifmftt-!uifsf!jt!b!dvmuvsf!pg! ipnfpxofstijq/!!Bspvoe!81&!pg!Npoujdfmmp!ipvtfipmet!pxo!uifjs!ipnf b!ijhi!sbuf!dpotjefsjoh!uif!ejwfstjuz!pg!ipvtjoh!uzqft/!!cz!uif!hsfbufs!uibo!bwfsbhf!ovncfs!pg!pxofs.pddvqjfe!npcjmf!ipnft!boe!upxoipnft!jo!Npoujdfmmp/!! 91&71&51&31& 211& Njooftpub Xsjhiu!Dpvouz Tbvl!Sbqjet !bmp Tu/!Njdibfm Putfhp !jt!jt!bcpwf!uif!tubuf!bwfsbhf-! Fml!Sjwfs Npoujdfmmp Nfejbo!Ipvtfipme!Jodpnf;Bddpsejoh!up!uif!VT!Dfotvt!Cvsfbv-!uif!nfejbo!ipvtfipme!jodpnf!jo!Npoujdfmmp!xiptf!nfejbo!jodpnf!jt!%72-5:3/ %91-111%71-111%51-111%31-111 %211-111 Njooftpub !dbou! Xsjhiu!Dpvouz Tbvl!Sbqjet !bmp Tu/!Njdibfm Putfhp Fml!Sjwfs Npoujdfmmp Qpqvmbujpo!Hspxui;!hspxui!pwfs!uif!qbtu!!zfbst-!buusbdujoh!ofx!ipvtfipmet!fwfo!uispvhi!uif!dpvstf!pg!uif!sfdfou!fdpopnjd!sfdfttjpo/!! 91&51& 231& Efnphsbqijdt Jouspevdujpo!Efnphsbqijdt 7 !jt! !f!jogpsnbujpo!po!uijt! qbhf!jt!tvnnbsj{fe!gspn!uif!dpnqbojpo!epdvnfout!.!Efnphsbqijdt!boe!Nbslfu!Dpoufyu!boe!Sfubjm!Wjubmjuz!Tuvez!dpoevdufe!cz!Ubohjcmf!sfqpsu!boe!dbo!cf!epxompbefe!po.mjof!bu!```````````/!! !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt 2::2.31113112.3128 2:75!.!2:912:92.2::1 Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Bqbsunfou!Dpotusvdujpo B!nbq!pg!nvmujgbnjmz!bqbsunfou!cvjmejoht!cz!bhf!tipxt!uibu!nboz!fyjtujoh!bqbsunfou!cvjmejoht!xfsf!cvjmu!jo!uif!2:91t/!!Npoujdfmmp!Dspttjoht!jt!uif!pomz!efwfmpqnfou!uibu!ibt!pdd vssfe!jo!uif!efdbef!pg!uif!3121t/ 31233124312531263127 8&7& 6& 5& 31233124312531263127 %2/21 %2/11 %/:1 !Nbslfu!boe!Efwfmpqnfou!Dpoufyu!Nbslfu!boe!Efwfmpqnfou!Dpoufyu Sftjefoujbm!Nbslfu Sftjefoujbm!Nbslfu!Dpoufyu 8 !jt! !f!jogpsnbujpo!po!uijt! qbhf!jt!tvnnbsj{fe!gspn!uif!dpnqbojpo!epdvnfout!.!Efnphsbqijdt!boe!Nbslfu!Dpoufyu!boe!Sfubjm!Wjubmjuz!Tuvez!dpoevdufe!cz!Ubohjcmf!sfqpsu!boe!dbo!cf!epxompbefe!po.mjof!bu!```````````/!! !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo 31233124312531263127 9&7& 5& 21& 3& JODMVEF!SFUBJM!DPOUFYU!NBQ 31233124312531263127 %27%25%23 %21 %9 !Nbslfu!boe!Efwfmpqnfou!Dpoufyu Sfubjm!Nbslfu!Dpoufyu 9 jtpo-!XJ!)Tubuf!Tusffu*!eNbejtpo-!XJ!)Tubuf!Tusffu*!Nb !bmp!)Ejwjtjpo!!0!2tu!Bwf*!!bmp!)Ejwjtjpo!!0!2tu!Bwf*!Cv *Fml!Sjwfs!Nbjo!Tusffu*Fml!Sjwfs!Nbjo!Tusffu !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt *zxbep!)!CspbmmNpoujdfmmp!)!Cspbexbz*!Npoujdf *z!Bsfbep!)TuvmmpoujdfNpoujdfmmp!)Tuvez!Bsfb*N 9977 553311 Cvtjoftt!Efotjuz Cvtjoftt!efotjuz!jt!uif!dpodfousbujpo!pg!cvtjofttft!jo!bo!bsfb/!!Xifo!cvtjofttft!bsf!dpodfousbufe!ju!jt!fbtjfs!up!xbml!bnpoh!uifn!boe!up!wjtju!tfwfsbm!evsjoh!pof!usjq/!Ijhifs!efotjuz !pg!cvtjofttft!bmtp!dsfbuft!b!wjcsbou!fowjsponfou!uibu!dbo!gffm!cvtz!boe!bdujwf!xjui!tjhot-!tupsfgspou!ejtqmbzt!boe!pvuepps!tfbujoh/! 23232121 Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Nbejtpo-!XJ!)Tubuf!Tusffu*! !bmp!)Ejwjtjpo!!0!2tu!Bwf*! Fml!Sjwfs!Nbjo!Tusffu* Npoujdfmmp!)!Cspbexbz*! Opo!.!dpousjcvujohOpo!.!sfubjm!eftujobujpogppe!boe!cfwfsbhfofjhicpsippe!hppet!boe!tfswjdfthfofsbm!nfsdiboejtf-!bqqbsfm!boe!bddfttpsjft Npoujdfmmp!)Tuvez!Bsfb* 91&71&51& 31& 211& Sfubjm!Wjubmjuz Obujpobm!Sfubjm!Usfoet!boe!Dpoufyu!Sfubjm!Wjubmjuz!Bttfttnfou!boe!Tusbufhjft : !f! !fsf!bsf! !f!hspxui!pg! !!d!bmpohtjef!uif!tjefxbml-! !f!mpdbm!spbe!ofuxpsl!!f!qfeftusjbo!fyqfsjfodf! Mpdbm!Spbet sftfncmft!uif!psjhjobm!qmbo!pg!uif!Djuz!.!xjui!trvbsf!cmpdlt!boe!b!efotf!ofuxpsl!pg!tusffut/!!Pwfs!ujnf-!uif!joufhsjuz!pg!uif!hsje!ibt!cffo!tmjhiumz!fspefe!xjui!tvqfscmpdlt!boe!tusffu!dmp tjoht!uibu!sftqpoe!up!ijhi!wpmvnf!bsufsjbmt/!!Sfhjpobm!Spbet Pwfs!ujnf-!Qjof!Tusffu!boe!Cspbexbz!ibwf!cfdpnf!uiftf!spbet!ibwf!dpoofdufe!uif!Djuz!up!uif!Sfhjpo-!cvu!uifz!ibwf!bmtp!ibe!nbkps!jnqbdut!po !mpdbm!dpoofdujwjuz!boe!mboe!vtf/!!Qfeftusjbo!Fowjsponfou bu!tusffu!mfwfm!jt!b!lfz!efufsnjobou!up!dsfbujoh!b!ejbhsbn!bcpwf!joejdbuft!uif!rvbmjuz!pg!uif!fowjsponfou!bmpoh!fbdi!cmpdl!gbdf!gspn!nboz!gbd upst!uibu!nblf!vq!uif!pwfsbmm!fyqfsjfodf!jodmvejoh!uif!dpoejujpo!pg!uif!tjefxbml-!boe!uif!mfwfm!pg!bdujwjuz!ps!dpngpsu!uif!bekbdfou!qspqfsuz!qspwjeft!gps!uif!qfeftusjbo/!!DpngpsubcmfPLQpps !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Ipvtjoh Dpnnfsdjbm Cmpdl!64 Cmpdl!45 u f f s Cmpdl!63 u Cmpdl!44 T ! f o j Q Fnqmpznfou Cmpdl!46 u f f s u Cmpdl!43 Cmpdl!62 T ! f o j Q u f f s Cmpdl!47 u T ! u v o m b X Cmpdl!42 Dpnnvojuz!boe!Qvcmjd Fyjtujoh!Dpoejujpot!)qvcmjdmz!pxofe!qspqfsujft!jo!cmvf*Fyjtujoh!Dpoejujpot;!Cvjmejoht!cz!vtf Njoofbqpmjt !xbt!tfuumfe!bu!uijt!mpdbujpo! !uif!Njttjttjqqj!Sjwfs!cfuxffo! Npoujdfmmp !f!psjhjobm!qmbu!pg!Npoujdfmmp!dpotjtufe!pg!b!trvbsf!)441‘y! !Qiztjdbm!Bobmztjt Npoujdfmmp!jo!uif!Sfhjpo Npoujdfmmp!)Žmjuumf!ijmm*!tjut!poTbjou!Dmpve!boe!Njoofbqpmjt/!!Jucfdbvtf!uif!sjwfs!jt!sfmbujwfmz!tibmmpx!boe!dbmn!boe!ju!nbef!gps!bo!fbtz!sjwfs!dspttjoh/! Jut!dpoofdujpo!up!uif!sfhjpo!dibohfe!esbnbujdbmmz!xifo!J.:5!xbt!dpnqmfufe!jo!````!/!!Xjui!uxp!fyjut!boe!bo!jnqspwfe!csjehf!bdsptt!uif!Njttjttjqqj!Sjwfs-!Npoujdfmmp!ibt!cfdpnf!b!dspttspbet!dpnnvojuz/! !Psjhjobm!Qmbu!pg!Npoujdfmmp 441‘*!bmjhofe!up!uif!sjwfs/!!Hfofsbmmz!uif!77‘!mput!gbdfe!opsui!boe!tpvui/!Cspbexbz!xbt!ejtujohvjtife!gspn!puifs!tusffut!xjui!b!obsspxfs!mpu!ejnfotjpo!.!bddpnnpebujoh!nfs dboujmf!boe!nbjo!tusffu!cvjmejoht/! Tbjou!Dmpve 21 !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt !f!Qjof!Tusffu!Cspbexbz!joufstfdujpo!f!bqqfbsbodf!pg!Epxoupxo!vqpo!bssjwjoh! gspn!uif!opsui/!Wbdbou!mput!boe!mbshf!qbsljoh!bsfbt/Bqqfbsbodf!pg!cmjhiufe!cvjmejoht!boe!ejtjowftunfou!po!Cspbexbz!fbtu!pg!Qjof!Tusffu/!! !jt!jodmvefe;! !!!! Xfblofttft Evsjoh!uif!qvcmjd!qspdftt!qbsujdjqbout!xfsf!btlfe!up!qmbdf!sfe!eput!po!uif!bsfbt!pg!Epxoupxo!uibu!uifz!effnfe!xfsf!uif!Žxfblftu/!!¼¼¼¼ Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo !jt!jodmvefe;! !f!Dpnnvojuz!Dfoufs!boe!Mjcsbsz!f!Sjwfsgspou!Qbslt Cspbexbz !!! Tusfohuit Evsjoh!uif!qvcmjd!qspdftt!qbsujdjqbout!xfsf!btlfe!up!qmbdf!hsffo!eput!po!uif!bsfbt!pg!Epxoupxo!uibu!uifz!effnfe!xfsf!uif!¼¼¼ !Qvcmjd!Qspdftt !Hpbmt!boe!Pckfdujwft 2323 !}!Hpbmt!boe!Pckfdujwft Fohbhf!boe!mpwf!uif!sjwfsgspou/!!Hp!cfzpoe!uif!Txbo/ Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Mput!pg!Tnbmm!Jowftunfout-!b!gfx!nfejvn!poft!boe!kvtu!pof!ps!uxp!cjh!poft/ Jnqspwf!uif!Qjof!Tusffu!Fyqfsjfodf!gps!Fwfszpof/ z b x e b p s C u f f s u T ! f o j Q u T ! u v o m b X !Qspkfdu!Hpbmt Tijgu!uif!Dfoufs!boe!Epvcmf!Epxo!po!Cspbexbz/ !Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt 25 !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Ipx!epft!uif!Qmbo!Cbmbodf!Gmfyjcjmjuz!xjui!Qsfejdubcjmjuz D B E C D C E BD Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt;!Qvsqptf 26 Fodpvsbhf!ofx!ipvtjoh!tvsspvoejoh!uif!sjwfsgspou!qbslt!po!wbdbou!boe!voefsvujmj{fe!qbsdfmtNbjoubjo!boe!jnqspwf!uif!joufstfdujpo!bu!Sjwfs!Tusffu!boe!Qjof!Tusffu/Jnqspwf!uif!voefsqbtt!pg!Qjof!Tusffu!bu !uif!Sjwfs/Dpotjefs!b!tfbtpobm!csjehf!up!uif!jtmboe!up!qspwjef!beejujpobm!sfdsfbujpobm!bdujwjuz!up!fbtu!boe!xftu!Csjehf!qbsl!!!!!! FG HI !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt Sjwfs!TuCmpdl!63Cspbexbz Sfeftjho!Sjwfsgspou!qbslt!up!jodmvef!npsf!bdujwf!fwfout!boe!qsphsbnnjoh!jo!Xftu!Csjehf!Qbsl!)bnqijuifbufs-!xbufs!gfbuvsf-!dpodfttjpot*!boe!qbttjwf!vtft!jo!fbtu!csjehf!qbsl/Bee!qbsljoh!boe!tjefxbmlt!u p!Sjwfs!TusffuSfdpoofdu!Xbmovu!Tusffu!up!Sjwfs!Tusffu!xjui!b!eftjho!uibu!bmmpxt!Xbmovu!Tusffu!up!cf!vtfe!gps!fwfout!boe!qbsl!fyqbotjpo/Xpsl!xjui!uif!qsjwbuf!tfdups!up!dsfbuf!b!tjhobuvsf!efwfmpqnfou!p o!Cmpdl!63-!xjui!nbslfu!sbuf!ipvtjoh!boe!b!sftubvsbou!uibu!pwfsmpplt!uif!Qbsl CD BE Qsfdfefou!Jnbhft! Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Csjehf!Qbsl !spvhi!Cmpdl!63!boe!Xftu!Csjehf!Qbsl! F u fyjtujoh T ! s f w j S D E u v o m b X E C B E E G B D Qfstqfdujwf!gspn!Xbmovu!tusffu-!mppljoh!bdsptt!b!sfeftjhofe!Xftu!Csjehf!Qbsl u T ! s b e f D z b x e b p s u C T ! s f w j S ! u u T ! f f o j f Q s u T ! i! uu f 5 f s u T ! u T ! ue v s o m b4 X !f!boe!sfdpnfoebujpot!hvjefmjoft!po!uijt!qbhf! Sjwfsgspou!Dibsbdufs!Bsfb;!!qfsubjo!up!uif!bsfb!dpmpsfe!po!uijt!ejbhsbn! Sjwfsgspou Qjof!!Tusffu Qjof!!Tusffu 27 C !fyjcmf!joufsjpst!tp!b! E !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt Ofx!efwfmpqnfou!uibu!sfqmjdbuft!uif!tupsfgspou!tdbmf!dvssfoumz!qsftfou!po!Cspbexbz/!Ofx!nbjo!tusffu!tdbmf!dbo!cf!bddpnqmjtife!jo!mbshfs!cvjmejoht/Gbdbef!jnqspwfnfou!qsphsbnt!uibu!jnqspwf!tjhobhf-!bxo joht-!boe!hfofsbm!bqqfbsbodf!pg!fyjtujoh!tupsfgspout D F E C Xbmovu!Tusffu Xbmovu!Tusffu F Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo B z b x e b p s !fs!sftqjuf!gspn!Cspbexbz!boe!qfeftusjbo! C Npejgz!tusjqjoh!boe!nfejbo!po!Cspbexbz!dsfbuf!b!tbgfs!qfeftusjbo!fowjsponfou/!Tnbmm!qpdlfu!qbslt!po!wbdbou!qspqfsujft!uibu!dpoofdujpot!up!qbsljoh!jo!uif!njeemf!pg!uif!cmpdlDvsc!fyufotjpot!bu!Xbmovu!b oe!Cspbexbz!up!qspwjef!tqbdf!gps!mboetdbqjoh-!tfbujoh-!boe!hbuifsjoh CD B Mpdvtu!TusffuMpdvtu!Tusffu 86!Gffu74!Gffu FyjtujohQspqptfe !hvsbujpot!po! E Qfeftusjbo!Dspttjoh!xjeui!Bdsptt!CspbexbzFbtu.cpvoe!Mfgu!Uvso!Mbof!Tubdljoh!Dbqbdjuz!9!Dbst32!Dbst Qspqptfe!Mbof!Cspbexbz! Fyjtujoh!Dpoejujpot!po!Cspbexbz C Qfstqfdujwf!po!Cspbexbz-!mppljoh!xftu!xjui!b!qpdlfu!qbsl!bdsptt!uif!tusffu u T ! s b e f D z b x e b p s u C T ! s f w j S ! u u T ! f f o j f Q s u T ! i! uu f 5 f s u T ! u T ! ue v s o m b4 X !f!boe!sfdpnfoebujpot!hvjefmjoft!po!uijt!qbhf! !Cspbexbz Cspbexbz!!Dibsbdufs!Bsfb;!!qfsubjo!up!uif!bsfb!dpmpsfe!po!uijt!ejbhsbn! 28 !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt Nbttjoh!boe!PsjfoubujpoCvjmejoh!Vtf!boe!Mpdbujpo Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Qvcmjd!Sfbmn Gbdbef!boe!Gspoubhf Tvhhftufe!Sfefwfmpqnfou!Hvjefmjoft !Cspbexbz!Eftjho!Hvjefmjoft Qsfdfefou!Jnbhft! 29 Qspqptfe!Qbsbmfmm!Qbsljoh!Tfdujpo!pg!Xbmovu!boe!Dfebs!Tusffu Po.tusffu!qbsljoh!jt!jnqpsubou!uispvhipvu!Epxoupxo/!!Qbsbmfmm!qbsljoh!xjmm!opu!sfrvjsf!bo!fbtfnfou!boe!jt!eftjsfbcmf!jo!gspou!pg!sftjefouj bm!cvjmejoht/!!Ejbhpobm!qbsljoh!sfrvjsft!bo!fbtfnfou!boe!zjfmet!61&!npsf!qbsljoh!tqbdft/! 9‘ !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt 23‘ usbdlt Cspbexbz4se!Tusffu5ui!Tusffu6ui!Tusffu8ui!Tusffu Sjwfs!Tusffu Cjlf 35‘ Cjlf 91‘!SPX QQ 9‘9‘ 23‘ xjui!qbsljoh!)tff!tfdujpo!bcpwf*!)fyjtujoh* 9‘ Dpowfsujcmf!Tusffu!Qbsbmfmm!ps!Ejbhpobm!QbsljohEjbhpobm!Qbsljoh Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Xbmovu!Tusffu!Qspnfobef!up!uif!Sjwfs D C F Fodpvsbhf!ofx!ipvtjoh!up!gbdf!Xbmovu!boe!Dfebs!Tusffu-!xjui!nvmujqmf!eppst!gbdjoh!uif!tusffu/!Mpdbuf!bmm!qbsljoh!upxbset!uif!njeemf!pg!uif!cmpdl-!bddfttfe!wjb!b!sfbs!mbof!tibsfe!xjui!puifs!qspqfsujft !po!uif!cmpdl/Fodpvsbhf!tnbmm!boe!nfejvn!tdbmfe!sftjefoujbm!cvjmejoht!)4.6!tupsjft-!205!up!203!cmpdl*!uibu!qsjpsjuj{f!qfeftusjbo!tdbmf!boe!xbmlbcjmjuz/! F D E u f f s u T ! u v o m b X B !Qsjnbsz!Sfdpnnfoebujpot !mm!wbdbou!mput!boe!sfefwfmpq!voefsvujmj{fe! E Dsfbuf!b!qfeftusjbo!qspnfobef!up!uif!Sjwfsgspou!xjui!xjef!dpoujovpvt!tjefxbmlt!boe!xfmm!nbslfe!dspttxbmltqbsdfmt!xjui!ipvtjoh!jo!tnbmm!bqbsunfout!ps!upxoipvtft/!Tnbmm!tfswjdf!ps!qspevdujpo!vtft!bsf!q fsnjuufe!xjuijo!uiftf!boe!fyjtujoh!cvjmejoht/! Qfstqfdujwf!bmpoh!Xbmovu!Tusffu-!mppljoh!opsui!upxbset!uif!Sjwfs/!! BC u T ! s b e f D u T ! f o j Q u T ! s f w j z S ! b u xf f e s b u u T !p T u ! s v o i m C b u ! X 5 u f f s u T ! e s 4 !f!boe!sfdpnnfoebujpot!hvjefmjoft!po!uijt!qbhf! !Xbmovu!Tusffu!boe!Dfebs!Tusffu Xbmovu!boe!Dfebs!Tusffut!Dibsbdufs!Bsfb;!!qfsubjo!up!uif!bsfb!dpmpsfe!po!uijt!ejbhsbn! 2: !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt Nbttjoh!boe!Psjfoubujpo Cvjmejoh!Vtf!boe!Mpdbujpo Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Gbdbef!boe!GspoubhfQvcmjd!Sfbmn Qsfdfefou!Jnbhft! !Xbmovu!Tusffu!boe!Dfebs!Tusffu!Hvjefmjoft 31 !fsjoh! 26‘ !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt Sfevdf!uif!jnqbdu!pg!qbsljoh!up!qfeftusjbot!qbsljoh!gspn!uif!tjefxbml!xjui!b!mpx!gfodf!boe!tusffutdbqjoh/!!Sfevdf!ejsfdu!qspqfsuz!bddftt!up!Qjof!Tusffu!boe!fodpvsbhf!qspqfsuz!bddftt!gspn!tjef!tusffut !xjui!uispvhi!cmpdl!fbtfnfout/ F E 81!‘ 211‘! SPX 26‘ Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo !!d!tjhobmt!bu!5ui!Tusffu/ Xpsl!xjui!NoEPU!up!nbjoubjo!b!6!mbof!tfdujpo)3!uispvhi!mboft!cpui!ejsfdujpot!xjui!b!dfoufs!uvsojoh!mbof*-!ep!opu!jodsfbtf!tqffetXpsl!xjui!NOEpu!up!jnqspwf!qfeftusjbo!dspttjoht!xifsfwfs!qpttjcmf-!qsfg fsbcmz!xjui!Fodpvsbhf!sfefwfmpqnfou!po!uif!dpsofst!pg!cmpdlt-!xjui!fousbodft!gbdjoh!uif!tusffu-!boe!tibsfe!qbsljoh!jo!uif!njeemf!pg!uif!cmpdl/ BCD Qspqptfe!Tfdujpo!pg!Qjof!Tusffu B E u f f s u T ! f o j Q C D F Qfstqfdujwf!bmpoh!Qjof!Tusffu-!mppljoh!opsui!upxbset!uif!Sjwfs/!! u T ! s b e f D u T ! f o j Q u T ! s f w j z S b x e b u T !p u s v o m C b X ! u f ! f u s f u f T !s u i uT ! 5 e s 4 !f!boe!sfdpnfoebujpot!hvjefmjoft!po!uijt!qbhf! !Qjof!Tusffu Qjof!Tusffu!Dibsbdufs!Bsfb;!!qfsubjo!up!uif!bsfb!dpmpsfe!po!uijt!ejbhsbn! 32 !}!Dibsbdufs!Bsfbt Nbttjoh!boe!PsjfoubujpoCvjmejoh!Vtf!boe!Mpdbujpo Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Gbdbef!boe!GspoubhfQvcmjd!Sfbmn Qjof!Tusffu!Hvjefmjoft Qsfdfefou!Jnbhft! Cmpdlt!63!boe!45 34 !}!Cmpdlt!63!boe!45 !f!uxp!jmmvtusbujpot!bcpwf!tipx!qpufoujbm!pqujpot!gps!!f!upq!jmmvtusbujpo!tipxt!b!efwfmpqnfou!qbuufso!uibu! Pqujpot efwfmpqnfou!po!Cmpdl!45!.!cpui!beifsjoh!up!uif!hvjefmjoft/!!bttvnft!uif!qspqfsuz!po!Dfebs!Tusffu!sfnbjot/!! Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo u f f s u T ! s b e f D F ! u f f s u T ! z b x e b p s C F ! u f f s u T ! i u 5 u f f s u Tvsgbdf!QbsljohBddftt!Xbz T ! f o j Q Qbsljoh!'!Tfswjdjoh Qsjnbsz!bddftt!up!nje!cmpdl!qbsljoh!tipvme!pddvs!gspn!Dfebs!Tusffu!boe!5ui!Tusffu/!! !f! u f f s u T ! s b e f D F ! u u f f uG f. 6 f 2 ; f f y s b G N u.! ! u 1f T f !G 2. ;6 ! z; yo j b N b x N ! ! e u f b f p G . s 6 ! C ; u o!of!uif!qfsjnfufs!pg! j f f N G . 6 2 ; F u! y f u f b G . f 6 2 ; N f y! b! s u N !u f T f ! G u . i f f 6 G u ! . 6; ! ;5 o o j j N N u f f s u T ! Cvjmejoh!TfucbdlXfmm!Tfucbdl f o j Q Tfucbdlt-!Qpdlfu!Qbslt!'!Pqfo!Tqbdf uif!cmpdl!xjui!b!gspou!gbdbef!{pof!cfuxffo!uxp!xfmmt!po!tjuf!ibwf!61‘!tfucbdlt!boe!tipv!me!cf!jodpsqpsbufe!joup!dpvsuzbset!ps!qbsljoh!bsfbt/! u f f s u T ! s b e f D F ! u f f s u T ! z b x e b p s C F ! u f f s u T ! i u 5 !f!sfnbjoefs!pg!uif!cmpdl!jt! u f f s u T !Bdujwf!GspoubhfGmfyjcmf!Gspoubhf!)fjuifs!Bdujwf!ps!Sftjefoujbm* f o j Q !fyjcmf/ Gspoubhf!Boe!Hspvoe!Gmpps!Vtft Bdujwf!)sfubjm*!vtft!bsf!fodpvsbhfe!bu!Qjof!Tusffu!boe!Cspbexbz/!!Sftjefoujbm!gspoubhft!bsf!fodpvsbhfe!po!Dfebs!Sftjefoujbm!GspoubhfBdujwf!Gspoubhf u T ! s b e f u T D ! s b e f D z b z b x e x b e p b s p C s u C T ! s f u w T ! j f ! o j S u Q f f s u T ! i u u 5 T ! u !e T ! u u s v f o 4 m b f Xs u T ! e s 4 u T ! f o j Q Cmpdl!45!Cmpdl!45!)qvcmjd!pxofstijq!jo!cmvf* 35 !f!cpuupn! !}!Cmpdlt!63!boe!45 !f!uxp!jmmvtusbujpot!bcpwf!tipx!qpufoujbm!pqujpot!gps!!f!upq!jmmvtusbujpo!tipxt!ofx!efwfmpqnfou!po!Cspbexbz-!!f!jnbhf!up!uif!mfgu!tipxt!uif!bqqspbdi!.!xjui!foibodfe! Pqujpot efwfmpqnfou!po!Cmpdl!63!.!cpui!beifsjoh!up!uif!hvjefmjoft/!!bsujdvmbufe!bu!b!Nbjo!Tusffu!tdbmf-!xjui!b!dpsofs!qmb{b!boe!b!jmmvtusbujpo!tipxt!b!tjohmf!dpsofs!efwfmpqnfou!po!Cspbexbz-!xjui!b!qp dlfu!qbsl/!!!!Bqqspbdijoh!Epxoupxo!gspn!uif!Csjehf Cmpdl!63!jt!uif!Hbufxbz!Cmpdl!up!Epxoupxo!gspn!uif!Csjehf/!!Ju!jt!jnqpsubou!up!dsfbuf!bo!fbtz!xbz!gps!wjtjupst!up!bddftt!nje.cmpdl!qbsljoh!bt!uifz!b qqspbdi!epxoupxo/!!mboetdbqjoh-!b!uvso!mbof-!boe!dmfbs!tjhobhf!up!ejsfdu!esjwfst!up!!!qbsljoh!nje.cmpdl/ u f f s u T ! f o j Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Q X ! u f f s u T ! s f w j S X ! u f f s u T ! z b x e b u f p f s s u T ! ! C u v o m b X Tvsgbdf!QbsljohBddftt!Xbz Qbsljoh!'!Tfswjdjoh Bddftt!up!nje!cmpdl!qbsljoh!jt!fodpvsbhfe!po!Qjof!Tusffu!boe!Xbmovu!Tu/!Qbsljoh!tipvme!ibwf!njojnbm!fyqptvsf!up!Cspbexbz-!Sjwfs!ps!Xbmovu!Tu!cvu!tipvme!cf!mbshf!fopvhi!up!sfqmbdf! uif!fyjtujoh!qvcmjd!qbsljoh!mpu!po!uif!cmpdl!boe!tipvme!cf!fyqboebcmf!jg!uif!tpvui!tjef!pg!uif!cmpdl!sfefwfmpqt/!Dbsfgvm!dpotjefsbujpo!tipvme!cf!hjwfo!up!wjtjcjmjuz!boe!bddftt!up!qbsljoh!gspn!Qjof!Tu !tjodf!uibu!xjmm!cf!uif!qsjnbsz!bddftt!bt!uif!tjuf!xjmm!cf!bqqspbdife!gspn!uif!Csjehf/!Fyusb!tjhobhf!ps!b!uvsojoh!mbof!nbz!cf!sfrvjsfe/!! u f f s u T ! f u o f j f Q G . 1 3 ! ; y b N ! ! ‘ u 1 f 7 f G . X 1 !2 u! ; u o f j N f f G f . s 1 u 2 ; T ! y s b ‘ f 1 N w! 4 ! j u S f u f f G . f G 1 ! . ; 1 o!of!uif!qfsjnfufs! j 2 X ; ! y N u b f N f ! !s ! !u ! ! ! T ! ! uu !!d!wpmvnft!boe!bddftt/! f z ff G . f 1 b 2 ; G y . b x N 6 ! !! u ;e f f G o . b j 1 u! ; f o p f j N s N s u T ! ! C u v o m b X Cvjmejoh!TfucbdlQpdlfu!Qbsl!'!Pqfo!Tqbdf Tfucbdlt-!Qpdlfu!Qbslt!'!Pqfo!Tqbdf pg!uif!Cmpdl/!Njops!tfucbdlt!)6‘.21‘*!gps!pwfsiboht-!tfbujoh-!boe!ejtqmbz!pg!hppet!jt!qfsnjuufe!po!Cspbexbz!boe!Xbmovu/!B!npsf!hfofspvt!tfucbdl!jt!qfsnjuufe!po!Buu bdife!dpsofs!qmb{bt!bsf!fodpvsbhfe!po!uif!opsuixftu!dpsofs!pg!uif!cmpdl!boe!qfsnjuufe!po!uif!opsuifbtu!boe!tpvuifbtu!dpsofst/!! u f f s u T ! f o j Q X ! u f f s u T ! !f!sfnbjoefs! s f w j S X ! u f f s u T ! z !fyjcmf!.!ju!dbo!ibwf!fjuifs! b x e b u f p f s s u T ! ! C u v o m b X Bdujwf!GspoubhfGmfyjcmf!Gspoubhf!)fjuifs!Bdujwf!ps!Sftjefoujbm* Gspoubhf!Boe!Hspvoe!Gmpps!Vtft Bdujwf!gspoubhft!)ijhi!usbotqbsfodz*!boe!vtft!)sfubjm!boe!sftubvsbout*!tipvme!cf!mpdbufe!po!Cspbexbz-!Xbmovu-!boe!uif!sftjefoujbm!ps!bdujwf!gspoubhft/!! u u T f ! s f b s e u f T ! D f o j Q z b u x f e b f s p u s T C! s u f T ! w s j f S u w T ! j f ! o j S u Q f f s u T ! i u 5 z u ! T !b u u v f o m x b f Xs e u b T ! p s e s C 4 u f f s u T ! u v o m b X Cmpdl!63 Cmpdl!63!)Qvcmjd!pxofstijq!jo!cmvf* !Gsbnfxpslt 37 !}!Gsbnfxpslt Sfdpnnfoebujpot Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Hfofsbm!Bqqspbdi! !Gsbnfxpslt;!Mboe!Vtf!boe!Efwfmpqnfou Efwfmpqnfou!qbuufsot!uibu!tvqqpsu!tpdjbm!joufsbdujpo-!mpdbm!dibsbdufs-!boe!b!dpnqbdu!dpoofdufe!boe!xbmlbcmf!fowjsponfou/! u f f s u T ! s fz wb Dpsf!Tuvez!Bsfb j x S e b p s C u f f s u T ! u ef f s s u T 4! s b e f D u f f s u T ! u v o m b X u f f s u T ! i u 5 Dfousbm!Dpnnvojuz!Ejtusjdu!)DDE* Sfrvjsfe!Sfubjm!GspoubhfTnbmm!Sfubjm!PqqpsuvojujftDpnnfsdjbmNjyfe.VtfNvmuj.Gbnjmz!IpvtjohQvcmjdFnqmpznfou!Qbsl0PqfoTqbdf0Dfnfufsz !Gsbnfxpslt;!Qvsqptf 38 !}!Gsbnfxpslt Sfdpnnfoebujpot Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Jmmvtusbujwf!Nbtufs!Qmbo;!Fbtu!boe!Xftu!Csjehf!Qbsl Hfofsbm!Bqqspbdi u f f s Qjdojd!Bsfb uQmbzhspvoe T Tmfeejoh!Ijmm ! Qbsl!Gbdjmjujft! s Xbufs!Gfbuvsf BnqijuifbufsQbsl!Pwfsmppl f Qvcmjd!Hbsefot w Tfbtpobm!Csjehf j S m p p i d T ! f m e e j N ! p U Qbsl 5ui!Tusffu! z b u f x f e s b u Tp ! s s C f w j u S f f s u T ! e s 4u f Qbsl f s u Fbtu!Csjehf! T ! i u 5 Qbsl Xftu!Csjehf! ! u f f s u T l ! s u b o u Q f p f fmz-!tbgf!boe!qmfbtbou!up!cf!jo/! s s u G T ! s b e f D u f f s u T ! f o j Q Dfnfufsz u f f s u T ! u t u zv f d f b ps Mu T ! u x v eo m b b X p s C m p p i d T ! z s b Qfeftusjbo!Qspnfobef!up!Sjwfs Jnqspwfe!Qfeftusjbo!boe!Cjdzdmf!Dspttjoh u Dpnnvojuz!QbsltOfjhicpsippe!!QbsltQpdlfu!QbsltTfbtpobm!CsjehfDpowfsujcmf!Tusffut!Qspqptfe!Cjuvnjopvt!Usbjm!DpoofdujpotFyjtujoh!Cjuvnjopvt!UsjbmNSU!Usbjm o f n f m F ! p U !Gsbnfxpslt;!Qbslt!boe!Pqfo!Tqbdft Qbslt-!Qmb{bt-!boe!Tjefxbmlt!uibu!bsf!mjw 39 !}!Gsbnfxpslt Sfdpnnfoebujpot Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Hfofsbm!Bqqspbdi! z b x e b p s C u f f s u T ! s f w j s u f f s u T ! u e f s f 4 s u T ! i u 5 Cspbexbz!Tusffu!)DTBI!86*Qfeftusjbo!Qspnfobef!up!SjwfsBee!Tjefxbmlt!up!Dpnqmfuf!Hsje u f f s u T ! s b e f D u f f s u T ! s b e f D u f f u s f fu s u T T ! ! s b i e fu D 8 u f f s u T ! u v o m b X Qjof!Tusffu!)NO!36* Joufstubuf!:5 !fyjcmf!tusffut!uibu!gbwpst!uif!offet!pg!sftjefout-!cvtjofttft-!boe! h o j l s b Q ! f d b !!d!Dbmnjoh g s v Jnqspwfe!Qfeftusjbo!DspttjohTjhobmj{fe!JoufstfdujpoBddftt!XbzT !Gsbnfxpslt;!Djsdvmbujpo!boe!Bddftt wjtjupst/! 3: !vduvbujpot!jo! !f!usbejujpobm!!jt!epft!opu!bddpvou! Tibsfe!Qbsljoh!jo!b!Epxoupxo bqqspbdi!up!qbsljoh!jt!up!qspwjef!eftjhobufe!tvqqmz!gps!fbdi!vtf!cbtfe!po!uif!ijhiftu!qbsljoh!efnboe!gps!uibu!vtf/!!efnboe!cz!ujnf!pg!tbz-!sftvmujoh!jo!qbsljoh!cfjoh!pwfs cvjmu/!!Bduvbm!qbsljoh!efnboe!dibohft!cz!vtf!cz!uif!ujnf!pg!ebz-!sftvmujoh!jo!b!qfbl!uibu!jt!nvdi!mpxfs!uibo!b!usbejujpobm!bqqspbdife!xpvme!qsfejdu/!! !}!Gsbnfxpslt !obm!eftujobujpo!dibohft/!!Xf! !!df sftubvsbou sftjefoujbm Qbsljoh!Fyqfdubujpot!Dibohf!bt!Cspbexbz!Dibohft Bt!Cspbexbz!boe!uif!Sjwfsgspou!usbotjujpo!gspn!tfswjdf!boe!dpowfojfodf!sfubjm!up!fyqfsjfodf!cbtfe!sfubjm!)gppe*!boe!fwfout-!dvtupnfst!fyqfdubujpot!gps! uif!ejtubodf!cfuxffo!uifjs!qbsljoh!tqbdf!)jg!bssjwjoh!cz!fyqfdu!up!qbsl!b!cmpdl!bxbz!gspn!b!qmbdf!uibu!xf!nbz!tqfoe!b!gfx!ipvst!bu/!! b!gfx!ipvst uif!Sjwfsgspou ejojoh!boe!vojrvf! Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo t o mvdlz fyqfsjfodft!po!Cspbexbz!boe! p j u vovtvbmmz! b u d $!pg!tqbdft f q y f ! f m c b o p t b f mfohui!pg!wjtju s fwfojohfwfojoh ! g p ! sftjefoujbm f o p gsvtusbufe sftjefoujbm{ sftjefoujbm po!Qjof!Tusffu b!gfx! dpowfojfodf!tipqqjoh! njovuft bgufsoppobgufsoppo b!gfx!gffu ujnf!pg!ebzujnf!pg!ebz cmpdlt b!gfx! !!df sftubvsbou npsojohnpsojoh ejtubodf!cfuxffo!qbsljoh!tqbdf!boe!eftujobujpo !Gsbnfxpslt;!Qbsljoh Hfofsbm!Bqqspbdi 41 !}!Gsbnfxpslt Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Lfz!Qsjodjqmft!gps!Ofx!Qbsljoh!Tvqqmz Qbsljoh!Sfdpnnfoebujpot 42 ,241!tqd,224!tqd ,251!tqd !}!Gsbnfxpslt TG :9-311! Qbsljoh!Tvqqmz644!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz613!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz594!tqd Opo!Sftjefoujbm!TGŽTubdlfe!Efnboe4:3!tqdOpo!Sftjefoujbm!TG:3-611!TGŽTubdlfe!Efnboe483!tqdOpo!Sftjefoujbm!TG:3-611!TGŽTubdlfe!Efnboe481!tqd UPUBMUPUBMUPUBM Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo ,4!tqd .35!tqd ,:5!tqd,:5!tqd,21!tqd ,59!tqd Qbsljoh!Tvqqmz26:!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz295!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz295!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz211!tqd Qbsljoh!Tvqqmz223!TqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz273!Tqd Opo!Sftjefoujbm!TG33-611ŽTubdlfe!Efnboe:1tqdOpo!Sftjefoujbm!TG33-611ŽTubdlfe!Efnboe:1tqdOpo!Sftjefoujbm!TG33-611ŽTubdlfe!Efnboe:1tqd Opo!Sftjefoujbm!TG4:-311TGŽTubdlfe!Efnboe267tqd Opo!Sftjefoujbm!TG45-111ŽTubdlfe!Efnboe247!tqdOpo!Sftjefoujbm!TG39-611!TGŽTubdlfe!Efnboe225!tdq 464646 63 6363 cmpdlcmpdlcmpdlcmpdl cmpdlcmpdl Qjof Qjof Qjof 6346 6346 6346 Xbmovu Xbmovu Xbmovu 4se 4se Sjwfs 4se Sjwfs Sjwfs Cspbexbz Cspbexbz Cspbexbz 62 62 62 47 47 47 Mpdvtu Mpdvtu Mpdvtu 624762476247 cmpdlcmpdlcmpdlcmpdlcmpdlcmpdl 79!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz57!tqdŽTubdlfe!Efnboe96!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz57!tqdŽTubdlfe!Efnboe96!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz77!tqdŽTubdlfe!Efnboe 22-611Opo!Sftjefoujbm!TG36-111Opo!Sftjefoujbm!TG22-611Opo!Sftjefoujbm!TG36-111Opo!Sftjefoujbm!TG27-611Opo!Sftjefoujbm!TG36-111Opo!Sftjefoujbm!TG 232!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz211!tqdŽTubdlfe!Efnboe232!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz211!tqdŽTubdlfe!Efnboe247!tqdQbsljoh!Tvqqmz211!tqdŽTubdlfe!Efnboe ,34!tqd,32!tqd,4:!tqd,32!tqd,2:!tqd,47!tqd !jt!jt!hsfbufs!uibo!uif! !jt!bmmpxt!uif!njeemf!pg! qvcmjdqsjwbuf opuf;!Žtubdlfe!qbsljoh!efnboe!bttvnft!dvssfou!Npoujdfmmp!epxoupxo!tuboebse!pg!3/9!tqd!0!2111!TGopuf;!fyjtujoh!opo!sftjefoujbm!TG!boe!jut!bttpdjbufe!efnboe!jodmveft!bqqspyjnbufmz!26-111!TG!pg!cvjmejo h!uibu!jt!dvssfoumz!wbdbouopuf;!bttvnft!bmm!ofx!sftjefoujbm!qbsljoh!uif!cmpdl!up!cf!vtfe!gps!qvcmjd!qbsljoh/opuf;!b!dpnqmfuf!qbsljoh!bobmztjt!xjmm!jodpsqpsbuf!vujmj{bujpo!ebub!bt!xfmm!bt!vtfs!hspvq!j oufswjfxt!up!efufsnjof!uif!nptu!bddvsbuf!qpttjcmf!bobmztjt!pg!qbsljoh/! Tvqqmz!boe!ŽTubdlfe!ps!ŽVotibsfe!Efnboe!Bobmztjt 43 !}!Gsbnfxpslt !oejoh!xjmm!nblf!ju!fbtjfs!gps! !oejoh !oejoh!bsf!b!tnbmm!cvu!jnqpsubou!bqbsu! pg!uif!qbsljoh!qspdftt!boe!pwfsbmm!epxoupxo!fyqfsjfodf/!!wjtjupst!up!dpnf!up!epxoupxo!boe!ju!qsftfout!b!dpiftjwf!boe!dppsejobufe!jnbhf/!!! Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Lbmbnb{pp-!NJMpwfmboe-!DP !u!gspn! 251! Hspdfsz !hvsbujpot/!! 6161 81 251! TipqLp 35354141 39 !fs!po.tusffu!qbsljoh-!qbsljoh!cfijoe! 36 51 211 61 !!d!po!cpui!tjeft!g!uif!tusffu/!!!! cvjmejoht-!boe!mbshfs!mput!po!uif!fehf!pg!uif!epxoupxo/!!Tpnf!pg!uif!qbsljoh!jt!efejdbufe!up!b!tjohmf!vtf-!tvdi!bt!b!hspdfsz!tupsf-!ipxfwfs!nptu!pg!ju!jt!tibsfe!cfuxffo!bmm!vtfst!epxoupxo/Nbjo!Tusffu !jt!sfjogpsdfe!xjui!b!cvjmejoh!qbuufso!uibu!bmjhot!xjui!uif!cbdl!pg!uif!tjefxbml/!!Cz!fodmptjoh!uif!tusffu!xjui! !f!bssbohfnfou!pg!cvjmejoht-!pqfo!tqbdft-!boe!qbsljoh! !! Ivudijotpo-!NONbjo!Tusffut!Jo!Njooftpub jnqbdut!xifuifs!ps!opu!b!Nbjo!Tusffu!nbjoubjot!jut!ivnbo!tdbmf!boe!qfeftusjbo!dibsbdufs/!!Jo!uif!uisff!djujft!jmmvtusbufe!bcpwf;¼¼ 211!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 276 Dpcpsot 24 23 91 59 38 2931 216 7 41!!!!!!!! 3131 91 39 45 :6 93 31 Mblfwjfx!Nbmm 21! 25 :4 !bmp-!NO Ibtujoht-!NO Jnqmfnfoubujpo 45 !}!Jnqmfnfoubujpo UPNPSSPX Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Dbubmzujd!Efwfmpqnfou!Qspkfdut Sfubjm!Wjubmjuz Dbubmzujd!Qspkfdut Qpmjdjft!boe!Qsphsbnt Qiztjdbm!Jnqspwfnfout UPEBZ Jnqmfnfoubujpo!Tusbufhz Qvcmjd!Sfbmn!Jnqspwfnfout Jouspevdujpo Bepqujpo!boe!Joufhsbujpo!joup!Djuz!Qpmjdjft!boe!Qsphsbnt 46 G F J !}!Jnqmfnfoubujpo B H D C E I Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!Epxoupxo!Tnbmm!Bsfb!Qmbo Ofbs!boe!Nje!Ufsn!Qspkfdut!po!Djuz!pxofe!Qspqfsujft!B/!Opsui!Ibmg!pg!Cmpdl!63C/!Tpvui!Ibmg!pg!Cmpdl!!2D/!Pqfo!vq!Xbmovu!Tusffu-!jnqspwf!Cspbexbz!DspttjohE/!Ipvtjoh!boe!qvcmjd!qbsljoh!po!cmpdl!46F/!Cm pdl!45!EfwfmpqnfouG/!Ipvtjoh!po!Cmpdl!64H/!Sfeftjho!pg!Qjof!Tusffu!xjui!Dpvouz!boe!NOEPUI/!Ipvtjoh!po!Cmpdl!28J/!Sfeftjho!pg!Sjwfsgspou!Qbslt Sfubjm!Wjubmjuz!Tusbufhjft u f f s u T ! s f w j S z b x e b p s u T ! C s b e f D 2 u f f s u 3 T ! f o j Q 4 u T ! u v o m b X u f f s u T ! e s 4 !sff!Dbubmzujd!Qspkfdut!jo!Epxoupxo! DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Market and Development Context April 2017 )­³±®£´¢³¨®­ The purpose of this report is to describe the Monticello. It provides visibility to the historic market and development context that shapes the downtown area. But it bisects the downtown growth and development of with road widths and traffic volumes that make it downtown district. It provides an overview of the difficult to cross. demographic and economic base of Monticello. It storefront district on looks at market trends and how they could predict Broadway Street complements the more modern future development demands for the downtown destination retail areas closer to Interstate 94. district for retail and residential development. It looks at where development opportunities may be Monticello is a center of growth, and a local located within downtown Monticello. And it service center, for the surrounding areas. In documents feedback of the development recent years, growth has largely community about downtown Monticello as a come in the form of single family homes and setting for new development. apartment development at the edges of the City, and in surrounding areas, as well as retail Monticello is a river town, which offers a development oriented to Interstate 94. This is strategically located crossing of the Mississippi true, even as developable land exists in the heart River. The traffic that crosses the river on State of the downtown area. Highway 25 both benefits and burdens the City of DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ - ±ª¤³  ­£ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ #®­³¤·³ Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 2 $¤¬®¦± ¯§¨¢² Monticello has experienced significant growth Household Composition over the past fifteen years, attracting new households even through the course of the recent 100% economic recession. 90% 80% 70% Population growth (2000-2015) 60% 140% 50% 120% 40% 100% 30% 20% 80% 10% 60% 0% 40% 20% 0% Roommates Living alone Other family Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates Married-couple without children Married-couple with children Population and Household Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates Characteristics The average household size in Monticello is a little Comparison cities vary widely in the types of smaller than most of the comparison cities, but households they support. Monticello has a slightly slightly larger than the average for the state. higher number of family households than the average for the state. Of 4,838 total households in Average household size Monticello, family households comprise 69% of 3.5 total households. This compares with 65% in 3 Minnesota. Broken down further, 31% of all 2.5 households are married couples with children 2 1.5 under 18, 20% married couples without children 1 under 18, and 18% other family compositions. 0.5 0 Of the nonfamily households, Monticello has a higher rate of individuals living alone as compared with most of its comparison cities. Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ - ±ª¤³  ­£ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ #®­³¤·³ Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 3 aźƓƚƩźƷǤ ƦƚƦǒƌğƷźƚƓ͵ Monticello has a larger Educational Attainment minority population than the comparison cities. 100% However, the minority populations of all of the 90% comparison cities are significantly lower than the 80% minority share of population in Minnesota as a 70% whole. 9% of Monticello 60% non-white, compared to 18% in the state of 50% Minnesota. 40% 30% Monticello has a significant Latino population 20% compared to the comparison cities, comprising 6% 10% 0% Minority Race/Ethnicity 20% Less than high school graduate 18% High school graduate (includes equivalency) 16% Some college, no degree College degree 14% Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates 12% 10% CźƓğƓĭźğƌ ĭŷğƩğĭƷĻƩźƭƷźĭƭ ğƓķ ĻƒƦƌƚǤƒĻƓƷ͵ According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the median 8% household income in Monticello is $70,254. This is 6% above the state average, whose median household income is $61,492. 4% 2% Median household income 0% $100,000 $90,000 $80,000 $70,000 $60,000 Two or more races $50,000 Some other race alone $40,000 Hispanic or Latino $30,000 Asian alone $20,000 $10,000 Black or African American alone $0 Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates 9ķǒĭğƷźƚƓ \[ĻǝĻƌ͵ The education level of Monticello residents is similar to education levels Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates for Wright County and State of Minnesota. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ - ±ª¤³  ­£ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ #®­³¤·³ Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 4 Housing units by type cities of St. Cloud and the Twin Cities, it is unsurprising that many residents of Monticello 100% work outside the city. Of the 6,459 employed 90% residents of Monticello, 82% work outside of 80% Monticello. 70% 60% Monticello should not be considered a bedroom 50% community though. It offers roughly 5,400 jobs, 40% and provides employment to around 4,300 people 30% who live outside the city. 20% 10% 0% Mobile home and other Apartment buildings, 10+ units Apartment buildings, 2 - 9 units Townhomes and condominiums Single family homes Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates Source: US Census, OnTheMap ĻƓǒƩĻ ΛƚǞƓĻƩƭŷźƦΉƩĻƓƷğƌ ƭƷğƷǒƭΜ͵ In light of larger diversity of housing types, one Housing Characteristics might expect a residential market dominated by rental housing. But the share of owner occupied ǤƦĻƭ ƚŅ ŷƚǒƭźƓŭ͵ Monticello has a more diverse housing is 70%, which is right in the middle of the range of housing options then its comparison range of comparison cities. This indicates that the g units are great majority of single family homes and town single-family homes. homes are owner occupied. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ - ±ª¤³  ­£ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ #®­³¤·³ Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 5 IƚƒĻ ǝğƌǒĻ͵ Homes in Monticello are slightly Housing tenure by unit more modest in value, in comparison to most of 100%the comparison cities, and the statewide average. 90% 80% 70% Median Household Value 60% $250,000 50% 40% 30% $200,000 20% 10% $150,000 0% $100,000 $50,000 Renter-occupied housing units: Owner-occupied housing units:$0 Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates Source: 2015 ACS 5-Year Estimates DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ - ±ª¤³  ­£ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ #®­³¤·³ Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 6 $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ - ±ª¤³ /µ¤±µ¨¤¶ 1980s. The newest, Monticello Crossings, is the only apartment development built since the Great Recession. Residential Market Context Monticello Crossings is a 210 unit apartment The housing market in Monticello has followed building on the east side of Monticello, just south the growth of the population of Monticello. Of of Interstate 94. It offers market rate apartments particular note for the downtown study area is the that are rented at around $2 per square foot, multifamily housing market, which will be the which is well above the rents that are charged in focus of this section of the report. any apartment buildings in Monticello. And it has Average rents per square foot have seen a steady rented up at a rate that met the projections of the increase in the last five years. Vacancy rates have developer. The success of this development also steadily gone down, on average. These demonstrates that there is a market demand for indicators reflect a high demand for multifamily apartments in Monticello, some of which could be housing, and they are consistent with market captured in downtown Monticello. trends of the state of Minnesota. Average Multifamily Rent (psf) Source: Costar Vacancy rate, multifamily units Source: Costar 5ĻǝĻƌƚƦƒĻƓƷ ƚƦƦƚƩƷǒƓźƷǤ ğƓğƌǤƭźƭ͵ There are a number of areas in downtown Monticello that are good potential locations for new development. Source: Costar The map below shows apartment developments, as catalogued by Costar. The oldest was built in 1964. Many were built in the DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ - ±ª¤³  ­£ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ #®­³¤·³ Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 7 Properties are more likely to be of interest to These people have deep experience in real estate developers if they are: and development. They know Monticello, or cities like Monticello. And they offered a range of Note fully developed currently insights and perceptions relative to the prospect Have relatively low value of attracting new development to downtown Are publicly owned Monticello. The map below is colored according to the value The interviewees appreciated that there is a of properties per square foot, as estimated by the cluster of features in downtown Monticello that City Assessor. Since darker colors indicate higher would be attractive to new development. value properties, lighter colored properties may The nearness of the Mississippi River, and elicit more interest by developers. Publicly adjacent parks owned properties are outlined in blue. The walkable core of storefront buildings Development Opportunity Analysis Map d library Vacant land (much of it currently as parking lots) But they also noted impediments to development, such as: The condition of the storefront buildings The parking lots that dominate the landscape in certain areas The lack of recent development, which represents an absence of market indicators for how a new development would perform The need for land assembly in most development opportunity areas Interviewees noted that development is occurring in the downtown areas of cities like Monticello. And the overall sentiment was that downtown Monticello could capture a share of the housing Source: City of Monticello Property Records growth that is occurring in the city. However, development in this environment is more 5ĻǝĻƌƚƦĻƩ źƓƦǒƷ͵ Five developers and real estate complex. Land values are higher. And professionals were interviewed as part of this development faces greater uncertainties than a study. They were: similar development of an undeveloped area at the edge of town. For that reason, development Bill Gorton, Keller William Commercial in downtown Monticello is likely to require an Midwest active public private partnership. Bill Beard, The Beard Group Steve Dunbar, Dunbar Development and Development is most likely to occur when: Ivy Property a) a site can be assembled in single Andy Martin, IRET ownership, Matt Goldstein, Schuett Companies b) A plan for downtown is adopted, and follow-up actions are taken to DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ - ±ª¤³  ­£ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ #®­³¤·³ Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 8 demonstrate a commitment to plan e) There is an understanding that a objectives reasonable level of public financial support will be required, especially for c) Actions are taken to improve building the first development initiatives conditions and retail vitality on Broadway Street If these conditions are present, there is likely to be interest on the part of the development d) City and public support for development community, in doing high quality development in at a reasonable density is present. downtown Monticello that meets the goals of the community. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ - ±ª¤³  ­£ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ #®­³¤·³ Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 9 The yellow bars of the Retail Absorption and Retail Market Context Deliveries chart indicate a high level of retail Much of the newer retail development in absorption over the last five years. In other Monticello has been highway oriented retail, near words, existing retail space has been filling up. Interstate 94. There has been little new retail That trend, along with additional population development in the downtown study area. growth, may have provided the basis for the development of new retail space in 2013, 2015, Retail rents have seen some fluctuations in recent and 2016as represented by the blue bars in of years, but today remain stable. Vacancy rates the chart. have seen a very significant decrease, associated with the recovering and growing economy. Retail Absorption and Deliveries Average Retail Rents (per square foot) Source: Costar Source: Costar DĻƚŭƩğƦŷźĭ ĭƚƓƷĻǣƷ͵ situated in a regional context, competing against the shopping areas in other nearby cities. One way of understanding that context is looking at Retail Vacancy Rate the locations of shopping centers in the surrounding area. The following chart shows shopping centers in the area around Monticello, by type of shopping center. The larger types of shopping centers are illustrated with larger circles on the map. Source: Costar DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ - ±ª¤³  ­£ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ #®­³¤·³ Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 10 Retail Context Map Source: Costar, Tangible Consulting Services Retail stores in downtown Monticello compete to older buildings are part of the historic legacy of some degree with the highway oriented retail Monticello, and make good spaces for retail stores that are near Interstate 94, and with the entrepreneurs and local businesses. retail areas in nearby communities. But they also Because they are a slightly different animal than offer something that is distinct from those retail the highway oriented retail in Monticello, there is areasa different retail landscape which sets an opportunity to capitalize on this unique them apart and makes them unique. Their character to improve the customer traffic, retail sidewalk facing storefronts, and density of mix, and vibrancy of the area. offerings, makes them pedestrian oriented. The DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ - ±ª¤³  ­£ $¤µ¤«®¯¬¤­³ #®­³¤·³ Tangible Consulting Services | April, 2017 11 DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN Background Report: Retail Vitality April 2017 Introduction This report considers and assesses the vitality of offered on postcards that asked about desirable . This report futures, and from a questionnaire about focuses on the traditional storefront district, the strengths and primary walkable retail area downtown. This area weaknesses. We also benefitted from a steering is centered on the intersection of Broadway Street committee survey specifically focused on retail and Walnut Street. It encompasses the area in vitality. pink in the map at rightspecifically, the two blocks of Broadway Street between Pine Street and Locust Street, and the two blocks of Walnut Street between River Street and 3rd Street. Downtown Monticello is a desirable place for people to spend time. It offers a traditional compact storefront district, just a block from the Mississippi River and park, and lively community center and library. Today while some attractive and successful businesses are located in downtown , it projects the air of a place that once was a spirited center of Monticello but is now tired and unsure of its identity. As es for shopping, dining out and recreating are shifting, Monticello has an opportunity to draw on the inherent distinctiveness of its downtown to shape a future that will position it as a local and regional destination. {ƚǒƩĭĻƭ ƚŅ źƓŅƚƩƒğƷźƚƓ͵ We draw on three sources of information for this report: public input, market context, and our own observations. We reviewed the responses from public input DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ April, 2017 2 Downtown Monticello Overview National Retail Trends and Context Monticello has a traditional downtown area, with storefronts that face the street. It is walkable, and The retail landscape is changing rapidly. is just a block or two from the Mississippi River. Department stores are closing. Discount retail stores are increasing. As lives get busier, people In the past it was the heart of the C do more shopping online, and when they actually commercial activity. As in many small towns go out to shop people want an experience throughout Minnesota and the USA, it has been about more than just purchasing a product. impacted by the development of competing commercial areas. But traditional, These areas, near storefront-style retail Interstate 94 and Survey Responses areas still have along Pine Street/Hwy something to offer. Downtown Monticello Assets 25, are the result of The small spaces they highway development, offer are ideal for local Strong local businesses population growth in businesses and start- Some of the traditional unique downtown car-oriented ups. They offer a place retail area is intact neighborhoods, and for businesses that Library and community center the changing can afford the rents requirements of Walkability of Broadway and Walnut in newer retail national retailers, Proximity of Mississippi River which are not fill the large spaces in Available sites for new housing supported by the auto-oriented strip small buildings areas. Furthermore, downtown. This has led to less investment in people still shop. People want to try things out, or downtown Monticello, and a languishing of some see and hold items, before they purchase them. of the properties, as well as a muddled and Physical stores are social places where customers uncertain identity. interact with others. People want to go out to businesses where they see people enjoying This ambiguous identity was reflected in the themselves, and where they can run into friends responses to a survey question about downtown and neighbors, while drinking, dining, working Monticello. When asked to outline downtown on out, or purchasing daily items close to home. a map, Monticello residents identified a variety of different areas. All included the Broadway and The opportunity for downtown Monticello is to Walnut intersection, but some included: provide people with an experience. A future downtown Monticello may provide a place where Just the buildings that front on Broadway many more people are shopping, eating, sitting by Street between Pine and Locust Streets the Mississippi River, walking, biking and The four blocks that abut Broadway and socializing. In the context of this new national Walnut Streets retail reality, downtown Monticello has the bones The four blocks that abut Broadway and Pine to be a destination retail area. Streets A six-block area between Locust Street and Cedar Street Some included the Mississippi River in downtown, but no one included the library and community DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ April, 2017 3 centerdespite noting that these destinations are The blocks along Pine Street/Hwy 25which is fronted with auto-oriented retail stores. primary reasons for many to go downtown. This background report is focused on the retail standable that downtown Monticello is district that is centered on Broadway and Walnut not easily identified. It is comprised of a number Streets, of distinct areas: because The riverfront Public Input the center of and River Street Downtown Monticello Barriers which face the pedestrian Mississippi oriented, Not enough retail businesses River storefront- Need more restaurants and coffee shops to The storefront style retail compliment retail businesses style retail area area. Such centered on Not enough housing nearby more residents means areas have Broadway and larger customer base different Walnut Streets Environment needs to be and feel safer for requirements The blocks pedestrians and benefit along Walnut from different Street that policies and connect the Broadway Street corridor to the activities than more modern, mall-oriented retail. heavily used library and community center, and Nearby areas can complement and support the Cargill plant, which is downtown DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ April, 2017 4 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ !²²¤²²¬¤­³ In assessing conditions in pedestrian oriented Business Establishments Per 500 re feet of the area. 12 The business mix, and the number (or density) of 10 retail stores, are helpful ways of looking at what 8 the retail district offers, in terms of shopping, 6 dining, or other attractions. 4 Another set of measures is focused on the 2 character of the area, and the degree to which its 0 elements offer an attractive and comfortable environment for people to come to. The following elements are considered below, because they are known to be critical factors in building the character of pedestrian oriented retail areas: Walkability Sense of Safety Source: Tangible Consulting Services Visual Identity and Branding Business mix refers to the assortment of Public Realm Conditions businesses and business types that make up a Business Conditions retail district. Business Density and Mix Business density refers to the concentration of businesses in the area. When businesses are concentrated (i.e. there are more businesses per block, for example), it is easier to walk among them and to visit several during one trip. Higher density of businesses also creates a vibrant environment that can feel busy and active with signs, storefront displays, and perhaps outdoor seating. It is an environment that is scaled to people walking by rather than driving by. The two blocks of Broadway Street have a high density of businesses. It is a concentrated retail area. Source: Tangible Consulting Services The mix matters because businesses perform different roles in a district. Some draw nearby residents on a regular basis. Others serve as destinations and attract people from the region as well as the local area. Some businesses generate DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ April, 2017 5 a lot of foot traffic. Others have no walk-up garden, furniture, grocery store, brand clothing customers at all. store, sporting goods. Neighborhood Goods and Services refers to retailers that offer goods and services that serve a more local market: dry Business Mix in Storefront Districts cleaner, pharmacy, convenient grocery store. 100% Food and Beverage refers to restaurants, coffee 90% shops, bars and nightclubs. Non-Retail 80% Destination refers to businesses that do not sell 70% goods but generate walk-in traffic, such as 60% studios, or cultural institutions. Non-Contributing 50% refers to ground floor offices that generate little 40% to no walk-up traffic. 30% Storefront districts can have different flavors. 20% Some offer more restaurants and entertainment 10% than shopping. Shopping areas can serve as 0% destinations, or cater to local needs. They can offer hĬƭĻƩǝğƷźƚƓƭ͵ Monticello has a good mix of businesses both in the broader study area as well as in the two block area of Broadway. And the establishments are highly concentrated. There Non-Contributing are fewer general merchandise and apparel establishments than in Elk River and Buffalo, and Non-Retail Destinaton more establishments providing neighborhood Food and Beverage goods and services. Food and beverage Neighborhood Good's and Services businesses make up a large part of successful General Merchandise, Apparel, Accessories retail districts today, and Monticello has a much lower percentage of them than the comparison Source: Tangible Consulting Services areas. In the chart above, we compare Monticello (both the study area and the two blocks of storefront Feedback from the public input made very clear businesses on Broadway the desire for more food Street) with the and beverage Public Input storefront-style retail establishments. On a Business Mix areas in Elk River and five point scale, with 1 Buffaloas well as in What do people want downtown? Madison, Wisconsin, , survey respondents gave the More restaurants recent retail inventory. downtown business mix Local café mostly . The categories are Ice cream significant. General /ŷğƌƌĻƓŭĻƭ͵ It is Pottery shop Merchandise, Apparel, advantageous for a retail Wine bar Accessories refers to district to have some Indoor archery club retail businesses that destination retail Health and wellness shop serve a broader market businesses (General Local music at restaurants area: big box discount Merchandise, Apparel, stores, home and Accessories) because DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ April, 2017 6 they bring non-local people to the area. In /ŷğƌƌĻƓŭĻƭ͵ A lot of automobile traffic passes addition, restaurants, coffee shops, ice cream through downtown. At certain times of the day shops are critical elements of a retail district the traffic backs up on Broadway Street. This because they offer shoppers a second (or third) volume of traffic makes some pedestrians feel place to stop, or as destinations which draw unsafe. There are also a few gaps between patrons to the area, who secondarily may browse buildings which detract from the continuity of the in neighboring shops. Downtown Monticello has is the district. few of these types of establishments. hƦƦƚƩƷǒƓźƷźĻƭ͵ hƦƦƚƩƷǒƓźƷźĻƭ͵ The density of businesses on perfect for walking. There are sidewalks, Broadway Street is high, making it a fine-grained storefronts that line the sidewalks and places to storefront district. It is a unique walkable retail go. There is adequate parking, both on street and area that has the elements from which a strong off, so that people can park and walk to a destination retail area can grow. Improving the destination easily. More visual interest and business mix by attracting new businesses, activation would enrich the environment and particularly more food and beverage make it more comfortable for pedestrians on the establishments or destination retailers, could be street. Activation could mean adding cafes or an important revitalization strategy. And restaurants with sidewalk seating, or introducing maintaining the density of buildings along pop-up retail business. It could also mean turning Broadway will be critical to maintaining its gaps between buildings into places of activity. identity. They could be used as connections to the rear parking areas, or enhanced with seating or a parklet. Walkability Attention should also be Public Input hĬƭĻƩǝğƷźƚƓƭ͵ paid to maintaining the Walkability and Sense of Safety Broadway and Walnut density of storefronts, Streets are highly and avoiding any Create walking tour map walkable. On Broadway, reduction. Add flower boxes to keep bike lanes the buildings extend to safe the sidewalk and have Sense of Safety few gaps between them, creating a fine-grained retail storefront hĬƭĻƩǝğƷźƚƓƭ͵ Perceptions of personal safety environment. And many of the buildings have seem to be good, but safety from traffic is a large windows that front the street, which draw significant issue. Survey respondents split their eyes into the store and enhance the ease of . walking by. Corner properties at Broadway and Traffic Flow Walnut draw people around the corner. The . The traffic properties at Broadway and Pine anchor that signals at Broadway and Pine, and the stop signs intersection less well. on Walnut at Broadway, are helpful. But they are Walkability was valued by those who responded not sufficient to address the problems. to our Retail Vitality Survey. It was identified as /ŷğƌƌĻƓŭĻƭ͵ There is a tension between moving an important element of what people want along the traffic that builds up on Broadway at downtown. It was rated fair to good by certain times of the day and keeping that traffic respondents, being scored 3 or 4 (out of 5) by moving at speeds that create a comfortable most survey respondents. One respondent pedestrian environment, and ensuring that traffic suggested creating a walking tour map for stops for pedestrians. Turn lanes help move downtown. traffic but they can make the street harder to DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ April, 2017 7 cross and the sidewalks feel narrower. In Downtown Monticello has building and addition, Pine Street, a state highway, carries streetscaping elements that could be leveraged to 35,000 cars per day over the Mississippi River build the visual branding of the areamost (MNDOT, 2014) and through Monticellos notably the streetscaping that was installed in the downtown. Pine Street brings people to early 2000s. But there is little sign of additional downtown, yet it is a challenge to create a coordination related to district identity. In our to the survey, six lane intersection of Broadway and Pine. . hƦƦƚƩƷǒƓźƷźĻƭ͵ layout is inherently pedestrian oriented. Sidewalk widths are /ŷğƌƌĻƓŭĻƭ͵ While downtown Monticello has a adequate for making pedestrians feel safe. The fine-grained retail character, and is a unique brick cross-walks at Broadway and Walnut help feature in Monticello and the surrounding area, it notify drivers that there are pedestrians in the does not impart the sense of a unified place, as area. The median on Broadway could be opposed to a collection of individual commercial enhanced at the intersection with Walnut and the buildings. Most buildings are from a similar era, sidewalk corners could be bumped out to make but they are quite varied in style and materials. crossing safer. Balancing traffic and pedestrian This means other elements must be employed to needs is difficult and ongoing, but all measures create that sense of place, to visually pull the area should aim at shoring up the retail vitality of the together. Unifying elements could include downtown area. building elements such as awnings, planters, or exterior lighting. It could also build on some collective themes related to color, texture, or art. Visual Identity and Branding hƦƦƚƩƷǒƓźƷźĻƭ͵ Monticello has a starting point on hĬƭĻƩǝğƷźƚƓƭ͵ Many successful retail streets have Broadway Street, in the fine grain density of its a recognizable visual character that is memorable storefronts. That and vivid. Various patterns in the physical brand and the core of what makes it unique and environment can contribute to this character, desirable. While buildings may be of different including: styles and materials, this variety also offers Building architecture Public Input interest and authenticity. and materials There are some gaps in Identity and Branding The historical era of these storefront construction buildings, and the Improve the lighting The scale of buildings condition of some of the Add flowers buildings makes them Create a park-like setting vulnerable to a density, of renovation or storefronts redevelopment that might interrupt this fine Streetscaping elements grain. It would be important to establish Building accessories, such as signage, awnings development guidelines for infill buildings, so that or exterior lighting the unique character of the district is preserved. Marketing and branding efforts can build on these ağƩƉĻƷźƓŭ͵ Marketing activities are extremely physical characteristics, building the retail important in building the brand identity and customer base of storefront commercial areas. customers. This can encompass a broad range of activities and events. The Monticello Chamber of DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ April, 2017 8 Commerce plays a lead role in current marketing the attractiveness of the area. It also initiatives, and is well positioned to lead demonstrates a public commitment to the area, additional efforts and activities. that could leverage additional private and business investment. There is also an opportunity to claim the areas Public Realm Conditions: between buildings for hĬƭĻƩǝğƷźƚƓƭ͵ It is public space, either in evident that attention connecting the Public Input has been paid to the businesses to the parking Public Realm Conditions streetscape along at rear, or for public Broadway. The trees, elements that invite Add benches, trees, more flowers pedestrian-scaled human activity, such as Create walking routes through the ornamental street lights, seating areas and plazas. area and sidewalk bump-outs These spaces could be Identify connections to the river with ornamental enhanced with public art, fencingthese are Mark historic sites and they could host features that invite events or activities. people to walk, linger, and look in store windows. On the flip side, the Business and Building streetscaping appears a little dated, and would benefit from a fresh round of upgrades. Conditions: Respondents to the Retail Vitality Survey rated the hĬƭĻƩǝğƷźƚƓƭ͵ Building conditions in downtown , giving it retail areas have a significant impact on how the . area is perceived. The buildings in downtown d element. Monticello vary greatly in style, size and condition. They rated downtown lower for , There are one and two story buildings intermixed. with most scoring it a 2 or a 3. Most have large picture windows on the first /ŷğƌƌĻƓŭĻƭ͵ Improving the public realm takes floor, though a few do not. Some second story resources. And it takes energy to create the facades have windows facing the street, while common vision for a new look. others are blank walls. Some appear in good There are competing priorities for sidewalk area condition. Others do not. along Broadway Street. At this point in time, Treatments of windows, signage and displays sidewalks are sufficiently wide to support varies greatly as well. Most survey respondents pedestrian movement in a vibrant commercial scored a 3 of 5. area. But if the road were to be widened to ease /ŷğƌƌĻƓŭĻƭ͵ With traffic congestion, building styles so varied, sidewalks would be Public Input the condition of buildings narrowed, to the Building Conditions becomes even more detriment of the important in unifying the commercial district. Revitalize downtown buildings district. It is also hƦƦƚƩƷǒƓźƷźĻƭ͵ It is necessary to attend to Use wood and metal clear that the deferred maintenance, Keep up buildings community values the and renovation where public areas along possible in order to Broadway. Updating preserve the fine-grained pattern of buildings and and enhancing its streetscaping would improve DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ April, 2017 9 storefronts. But we know that the collective hƦƦƚƩƷǒƓźƷźĻƭ͵ Downtown Monticello has a investment needed in the buildings on Broadway variety of businesses, and almost all storefronts Street may be quite significant. are full and activate the street. There are some minor improvements that would go a long way In buildings that are occupied and cash-flowing for for example some basic guidelines for what signs the property owner, it can be difficult to justify should look like. Programs to improve the quality tackling these improvements on a strictly market of storefront displays might also be a relatively basis. Moreover, the expectations established by low-cost way to build the attractiveness of the the previous planning process has led to street and draw people into the businesses. disinvestment, because it proposed the eventual demolition of the storefront district. It will take some effort to build or restore a collective intent among property and business owners to reinvest in their buildings. And some outside financial incentives will probably also be needed to advance this goal. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ April, 2017 10 Recommendations Downtown Monticello has the potential to be a Consider organizational growth to sharpen the focus on the Broadway Walnut areaeither commercial and activity destination for the City of within existing organizations, or in a new one. Monticello and surrounding areas. The small area The organizational focus should be on plan will offer a range of strategies to that end. A promoting the area as a whole, and identify focus on retail vitality should be seen as a very things all businesses can do together to make important component of the overall revitalization the area a destination and generate interest initiative. While some retail vitality activities and programs can be costly, many are notespecially Activate sidewalks and plaza areas as much as possible, through outdoor seating, engaging when compared with the cost of attracting large public spaces, events, and so forthso that the new development, or taking significant action to vibrancy of the area is visible to passersby. calm traffic behavior on the major thoroughfares that cross through the City. .ǒƭźƓĻƭƭ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ ğƓķ 5ĻǝĻƌƚƦƒĻƓƷ The following strategies are suggested as priorities Consider the establishment of a program that for increasing the retail vitality of downtown supports architectural assessment of buildings, Monticello, and enhancing its destination quality. and offers financial support for rehabilitation investments that stabilize and enhance existing 5ƚǞƓƷƚǞƓ 9ƓǝźƩƚƓƒĻƓƷ buildings Make it easier and more inviting to walk to the Consider the establishment of a façade downtown core by improving connections improvement programs that offers financial between the downtown core and the support for investments that improve the visual community center and library to the south, and appearance of buildings and district identity the parks and river to the north, so that visitors Consider offering support for merchandising, to any part of downtown find it easy to get to with the goals of improving the attractiveness the Broadway storefront district. of window displays and store interiors Improve the pedestrian environment by adding Address the quality of the store mix through stop signs and crosswalks at Broadway and initiating a retail recruitment program for the Walnut; making it more comfortable to cross district, which would identify and attract key Pine Street at the Broadway intersection; and retailers that will be complementary to the modernize and beautify streetscape existing stores treatments. Increase housing in the downtown area. 5źƭƷƩźĭƷ LķĻƓƷźƷǤ Growth in the number of people living in and around downtown will support neighborhood- downtown as the Broadway Walnut area, and scale retail (retail follows rooftops); and, a name it range of household types will contribute to greater diversity of retail stores as well as Consider the development of some visual dining establishments themes for the district that will contribute to a sense of identity as buildings are improved and enhanced. Commit to the fine-grained character of the storefronts along Broadway and around the corner on Walnut. Establish appropriate design guidelines for the area, prevent interruption of this character, fill in gaps, and attend to building disrepair to prevent demolition. DOWNTOWN MONTICELLO SMALL AREA PLAN " ¢ª¦±®´­£ 2¤¯®±³Ȁ 2¤³ ¨« 6¨³ «¨³¸ April, 2017 11 Land Use The future vision for Monticello provides the foundation for the Comprehensive Chapter Contents Plan (the vision statement appears in Chapter 1). The Land Use Plan, in turn, provides the framework for how land will be used to help achieve the future Future Growth..............................3-2 vision for Monticello. The Land Use Plan seeks to reinforce desirable land use Growth Policies....................3-2 patterns, identify places where change is needed and guide the form and location Land Use Plan Map.......................3-3 of future growth. Land Use Categories....................3-3 The Land Use Plan for Monticello was shaped by a variety of factors, Places to Live.......................3-5 including: Places to Work...................3-11 Places to Shop....................3-13 Community input gathered through public workshops and Task Force Downtown..........................3-13 discussions. Mixed Use..........................3-15 The existing built and natural environment in Monticello. Places to Recreate..............3-15 Places for Community........3-15 The vision for Monticello’s future. Urban Reserve....................3-16 Factors described in the Community Context chapter of the Plan. Interchange Planning Area 3-16 Private Infrastructure.........3-16 Systems plans for transportation, sanitary sewer and water supply. Greenway...........................3-16 This represents a departure in form from the 1996 Comprehensive Plan. The 1996 Focus Areas...............................3-17 Plan included the land use plan as part of a broader Development Framework Northwest Monticello........3-17 section. The 1996 Plan described Monticello’s land use plan by general district of Downtown Focus Area......3-20 the community as a means of attending to the unique issues in each district. The South Central Focus Area .3-23 East Focus Area.................3-23 2008 Update of the Comprehensive Plan establishes a separate land use chapter consisting of the following components: The Embracing Downtown Plan A section on Future Growth describes the implications of future was adopted by City Council resolution 2012-011 on January 9, resident growth and the amount of growth anticipated by the Plan. 2012 and is incorporated herein as The Land Use Plan Map(see Figure 3-2) shows the land uses assigned an appendix of the Comprehensive to each parcel of land. Plan. Land UseCategories further explain the Land Use Plan by describing the land uses depicted in the Map. This section includes land use policies describe the objectives that Monticello seeks to achieve The Downtown Small Area Plan through the implementation of the Land Use Plan and the supporting was adopted by City Council resolution 2017-0XX on September elements of the Comprehensive Plan. th 25, 2017 and is incorporated herein as an appendix of the Comprehensive Plan. of manufacturing, processing, warehousing, distribution and related businesses. 5. Places to Work may include non-industrial businesses that provide necessary support to the underlying development objectives of this land use. Examples of supporting land uses include lodging, office supplies and repair services. Additional public objectives and strategies for Places to Work can be found in the Economic Development chapter. Places to Shop The Comprehensive Plan describes issues, plans and policies related to the Downtown in several sections of the Plan. Places to Shop designate locations that are or can be These policies help to create sustainable locations for developed with businesses involved with the sale of Places to Shop in a manner that enhances Monticello. goods and services. Places to Shop may include offices for service businesses. Places to Shop guides land uses Downtown that are both local and regional in nature. The Embracing Downtown Plan was adopted by City Policies -Places to Shop Council resolution 2012-011 on January 9, 2012 and In guiding land uses for Places to Shop, the is herein incorporated as an appendix of the Comprehensive Plan seeks to: Comprehensive Plan.The City embarked on an update to the Downtown Plan in 2017 and the 1.The Comprehensive Plan seeks to attract and retain Downtown Small Area Plan was adopted by City businesses that provide goods and services needed th Council resolution 2017-0XX on September 25, by Monticello residents. 2017 and is herein incorporated as an appendix of 2.The Comprehensive Plan seeks to capture the the Comprehensive Plan. opportunity for commercial development that serves a broader region. Places to Shop with a Downtown is a unique commercial district that is part of regional orientation should be located where the Monticello’s heritage and identity. It is, however, no traffic does not disadvantage travel within longer possible for Downtown to be Monticello’s Monticello. central business district. The mass of current and future commercial development south of Interstate 94 along 3.Commercial development will be used to expand and diversify the local property tax base and as an TH 25 and in east Monticello along interstate 94 have element of a diverse supply of local jobs. replaced the downtown area as primary shopping districts. The future success of downtown requires it to 4.Places to Shop will be located on property with be a place unlike any other in Monticello. access to the street capacity needed to support traffic from these businesses. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to achieve the 5.Each parcel should supply an adequate supplyof Vision,Guiding Principlesand Goals described in parking that makes it convenient to obtain the the EmbracingDowntown Small Area Plan. Downtown goods and services. is intended to be a mix of inter-related and mutually 6.Building materials, facades and signage should supportive land uses. Businesses involved with the sale combine with public improvements to create an of goods and services should be the focus of Downtown attractive setting. land use. Residential development facilitates reinvestment and places potential customers in the 7.Site design must give consideration to defining edges and providing buffering or separation Downtown area. Civic uses draw in people from across between the commercial parcel and adjacent the community. residential uses. During the planning process, the potential for allowing Encourage Small and Medium Scaled commercial activity to extend easterly out of the Investments Downtown along Broadway was discussed. The Become a River Town Comprehensive Plan consciously defines Cedar Street as the eastern edge of Downtown for two basic reasons: (1)Downtown should be successful and sustainable Policies/Guiding Principles –Downtown before new areas of competition are created; and 1.Downtown is a special and unique part of (2)The Comprehensive Plan seeks to maintain and Monticello. It merits particular attention in the enhance the integrity of residential neighborhoods Comprehensive Plan and in future efforts to east of Downtown. achieve community plans and objectives. 2.Downtown is intended to be an inter-connected and More than any other land use category, Downtown has supportive collection of land uses. The primary strong connections to other parts of the Comprehensive function of Downtown is as a commercial district. Plan. Therefore,the City has adopted OtherLland uses should support and enhance the the Embracing Downtown Small AreaPlan as its overall objectives for Downtown. guiding planning document for the Downtown. The 3.The City will build on coreassets of greater following parts of the Comprehensive Plan also address Downtown Monticello as identified in community desires and plans for the Downtown area: the EmbracingDowntown Small AreaPlan. These assets include the preponderance of civic The Land Use chapter contains a specific activity, proximity to the river, a grid of streets focus area on Downtown. The focus area and small blocks, and a varied building stock – contains a more detailed discussion of the both old and new. issues facing the Downtown and potential public actions needed to address these issues. 4.A shared vision among property owners, business The operation of the street system is a critical owners and the City is the foundation for effective factor for the future of Downtown. The team work and long term success. Transportation chapter of the Comprehensive 5.A shared understanding of realistic market potential Plan and the Transportation chapterFramework is the foundation for design and generation of a of the EmbracingDowntown Small AreaPlan healthy businessmixof land uses. This includes influence the ability of residents to travel to both residential and non-residential land uses. Downtown and the options for mitigating the Housing in the core blocks is encouraged to be impacts of traffic on Highway 25 and other medium density (apartments or townhouses) and Downtown streets. to face the perimeter of the blocks and be The Parks chapter of the Comprehensive Plan pedestrian friendly, either with street level and the Parks & Open Space Framework of commercial uses or with doors, stoops, porches, the Downtown Small Area Planprovidesfor plazas, or other featuresthat face the sidewalk.. parks in the Downtown and the trail systems that allow people to reach Downtown on foot 6.A safe, attractive human scale environment and or bicycle. entrepreneurial businesses that actively emphasize The Economic Development chapter of the personal customer service will differentiate Comprehensive Plan and the Financial Downtown from other shopping districts. Implementation chapterguide of 7.Property values can be enhanced if property the Embracing Downtown Small AreaPlan owners and the City share a vision for Downtown lay the foundation for public actions and and actively seek to cultivate a safe, appealing investments that will be needed to achieve the environment and attractive businessmixof inter- desired outcomes. related uses. 8.Housing in the Downtown can facilitate Goals –Downtown necessary redevelopment and bring potential Improve Pine Street for all users. customers directly into the area. Housing may be Shift the center of Downtown to Broadway and freestanding or in shared buildings with street Walnut Streets level commercial uses. 9.Downtown is the civic center of Monticello. To the at the scale of both the block and the building. degree possible, unique public facilities (such as the Blocks should reflect the historic fabric of the City Community Center, the Library and the Post Office) and buildings should present a pedestrian friendly should be located in the Downtown area as a means façade to the sidewalk. to bring people into the Downtown. 12.Downtown should have an adequate supply of free 10.Downtown should emphasize connections with parking for customers distributed throughout the the Mississippi River that are accessible by the area.The Downtown should be well connected so public.It is especially important to design customers are comfortable walking 1-2 blocks Broadway so it is easy and safe to cross as a from their car to their destination. pedestrian or cyclist –with an emphasis on 13.The City and business community must work Walnut and Cedar Street. actively with MnDOT and Wright County to ensure safe local access to business districtsthe 11.Downtown should be a pedestrian-oriented place downtown. in a manner that cannot be matched by other commercial districts.Pedestrian scale is achieved 3-14 | Land Use City of Monticello character and site design should be compatible All of these policies work together to attract people to with the adjacent residential neighborhoods. Downtown and to enhance the potential for a successful businessDowntownenvironment. 3.All non-residential development will be oriented to Broadway Street and not to 3rd Street or River Amendment to Comprehensive Plan/1997 Downtown Street. Revitalization Plan 4.Commercial development compatible with the Resolution 2010-049, adopted 7/12/10: Downtown should be encouraged to locate there. At the intersection of Broadway and Pine Streets, 5.More intense housing and commercial uses may be parking lots may be constructed only when all of the allowed if directly related to the hospital. following conditions exist: Places to Recreate Applicable traffic safety and access Places to Recreate consist of public parks and private requirements limit the ability to comply with building location standards of this Plan.recreation facilities. The land uses are essential elements At least fifty (50) percent of either the of the quality of life in Monticello. The Parks and Trails Broadway or Pine Street frontage is occupied chapter of the Comprehensive Plan describes the current by a building (non-parking area). park and trail system and the future plan to maintain and An alternative vertical element is located at enhance this system. the street corner. This element must be determined by City Officials to establish an The Comprehensive Plan is only one aspect of managing architecturally compatible corner presence. the land use for public parks and private recreation Such elements may include, but not be limited facilities. The City’s zoning regulations place these to public art, interpretive signage, locations into a zoning district. Often, the purpose of the architectural business signs, and zoning district is to guide private development, such as architecturally appropriate lighting. housing. Under current State Law, zoning regulations “trump” the Land Use Plan and govern the use of land. Mixed Use With the potential for the redevelopment of golf courses, The Mixed Use is a transition area between the it is important the Comprehensive Plan and other land Downtown and the hospital campus. It has been created use controls work in concert to achieve the desired in recognition of the unique nature of this area. The area outcomes. serves two functions. It is the edge between long-term The City’s plans and policies for parks, trails and open residential neighborhoods and a major transportation space can be found in the Parks chapter of the corridor (Broadway Street). It is also a link between the Comprehensive Plan Downtown, the hospital campus and the east interchange retail area. Places for Community The primary goal of this land use is to preserve and Places for Community consist of public and semipublic enhance housing in this part of Monticello. Any non- land uses. Public uses include all governmental residential development should be designed to facilities (city, county, state and federal) and schools. minimize the impacts on and conflicts with adjacent This category also applies to churches, cemeteries, neighborhoods. hospitals, and other institutional uses. Policies -Mixed Use It is important to note that these land uses relate only to 1.Development should not have direct access to existing land uses. The Comprehensive Plan does not Broadway street. Access should come from side guide the location of new churches, schools, public street. buildings and other institutional land uses. Places for 2.Non-residential development should be limited to small retail, service and office businesses. The scale, 2008 Comprehensive Plan ~ Updated 2014Land Use | 3-15 Traffic volumes on Highway 25 will continue The Comprehensive Plan shows the area as Places to to increase. Greater volumes and congestion Recreate based on the continued use as a golf course. This act as an impediment for people living south designation does not preclude a future proposal and of I-94 coming to Downtown. Comprehensive Plan amendment for residential There is no controlled intersection on development. It is likely, however, that this scale of new Highway 25 between Broadway and 7th development will require the access provided by a new Street. The lack of a controlled intersection highway interchange. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to combined with traffic volumes make fill in other development areas and make effective use of pedestrian connections between Downtown other infrastructure investments before extending utilities and residential areas to the east very difficult. for redevelopment of the golf course. “Big box” and retail development continue to occur in other parts of Monticello. These Downtown Focus Area businesses directly compete with the Downtown and attract smaller businesses (that The Embracing Downtown Plan was adopted by City might otherwise consider a Downtown location) Council resolution 2012-011 on January 9, 2012 and to adjacent parcels. is herein incorporated as an appendix of the Comprehensive Plan. Downtown Goals Given current plans and conditions, the Embracing Downtown Monticello needs special attention in the Downtown Plan and the Comprehensive Plan Comprehensive Plan. Following the 2008 recommends the following goals for Downtown. Comprehensive Plan update, the community undertook Concepts for Downtown redevelopment should a separate downtown planning process. This process provide solutions to problems and issues identified in resulted in the Embracing Downtown Plan. This Plan the research and analysis of Downtown conditions that emphasizes the importance that the community places on are directed by the stated goals for Land Use, Downtown. The 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Transportation and Design and Image. The preferred relies on the Embracing Downtown Plan as a guide for solutions should be those that best meet these goals. public and private actions in the Downtown area.In 2017, recognizing the changes in the retail Land Use marketplace, and more specifically market changes Diversify land use in the Downtown; and investments in the Downtown, the City engaged supplement retail and service uses with other the community in a planning effort for the core blocks activities that generate traffic. of the Downtown. On September 25th, 2017, the City Encourage redevelopment of old and obsolete adopted a Downtown Small Area Plan, which provides structures; encourage consolidation of small guidance for the downtown, including the core blocks parcels with multiple ownerships. and extending to include the full Downtown Central Balance parking and land use to ensure Community District (CCD). The Plan emphasizes the availability of adequate parking at all times. importance that the community places on Downtown. Encourage mixed use but do not make it a The 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update relies on the requirement or prerequisite for development or redevelopment. Downtown Small Area Plan as a guide for public and Discourage residential as a free-standing land private actions in the Downtown area. use within the core downtown area. Revitalizing and sustaining Downtown Monticello Establish physical connections between the requires a collaborative effort of the City, businesses, core Downtown area and the riverfront and property owners and other stakeholders. Planning for park. the future of the Downtown must recognize the Encourage land uses that serve as evening and weekend attractions to the Downtown area. practical realities facing commercial development in Expand facilities and parking adjacent to Downtown: West Bridge Park to help create an anchor The configuration and traffic volumes of attraction at thenorth end of Walnut Street. Highway 25 significantly reduce Create a Center to Downtown that is active opportunities for direct access from the throughout the day and into the evening – Highway to adjacent properties. year-round. The Walnut / Broadway Maintain the River Street / Pine Street signal Intersection should become the heart of this as the formal entrance to Downtown and an area. important pedestrian connection across Pine Street. Improve connections to the River by locating uses that benefit from open spaces and Add a traffic signal at 4th and Pine to help activities associated with the River. balance the grid and turning movements at the Pine / Broadway Intersection. Improve the entry experience from the north. Modify Walnut / Broadway and Cedar / Maintain a shopfront District along Walnut Broadway intersection to prioritize Broadway, west of Pine Street comprised of pedestrian crossings and access to the river. traditional main street (mercantile) buildings that have retail/restaurant space on the Narrow the travel lanes on Walnut Street, add ground floor and housing or offices above. parking where possible and ensure continuous safe and pleasant sidewalks. Create a development pattern on Pine Street that benefits from high visibility and regional Add sidewalks at the perimeter of blocks access.where they are not currently present. Infill Walnut Street and Cedar Street with Discourage direct property access to Pine Street; favoring the side streets wherever mid-scale housing (2-4 stories) that creates possible with through-block lanes or an effective transition between the in-town easements. neighborhoods and the Downtown. Allow direct property access to Block 52 from (INSERT LAND USE FRAMEWORK MAP) Pine Street in order to reduce volumes at the Pine / Broadway intersection. Transportation Consider traffic calming at River Street and Acknowledge that Highway 25 will be limited Locust (or Linn) toprevent excessive speeds - in terms of providing direct property access. similar to River Street and Cedar Street as an Develop circulation patterns that utilize local example. streets for individual site access. Recognize Highway 25 as a barrier between the Open Space & Parks east and west parts of the historic Downtown core areas extending to either side of the Highway 25 Redesign East and West Bridge park to corridor. include an amphitheater, water feature, Consider developing in districts to reduce the riverfront access, picnicking, and additional needor desire to cross Highway 25 between space for passive park use. 7th street and the river crossing. Improve Front Street Park to include Strengthen pedestrian ties throughout improved boat landing and space for nature Downtown including connections to other oriented programming. parts of the City to the south, west, and east. Downplay Highway 25 as a corridor for Connect the two Bridge Parks with Front pedestrian movement. Street Park with improved pathways and Improve pedestrian connections between trails. Design all three parks as a single park Broadway Street and the riverfront Park area to with multiple uses. allow the park to serve as an attraction that Provide access to the islands with a seasonal brings people into the downtown area. bridge Improve access to the Mississippi River to Create small pocket parks mid-block on expand on recreational opportunities. Broadway to offer plazas that connect to Explore creation of a fourth signalized parking lots in the middle of the block. intersection on Highway 25 between 7th Street and Broadway Street to improve access to areas Redesign Walnut Street between River Street with development and redevelopment potential and Broadway as a special street that can be on either side of the Highway 25 corridor. Connect Walnut Street to River Street closed and used for festivals and events throughout the year. Consider all sidewalks for opportunities to enhance greenery and public art. Emphasize Walnut Street, River Street and Broadway as the main pedestrian corridors in Downtown. Use public art throughout the parks and corridors to distinguish Downtown as a place of cultural expression and celebration. Work closely with local businesses, residents (new and existing) to ensure local parks and open spaces are appropriately designed and programmed for their varied needs. Create north / south bike access to the river along Walnut and Cedar through a complete streets policy. Encourage bicycle crossing of Pine Street at 4th, River and 7th Street. Maintain sidewalks and paths along TH25. The Comprehensive Plan seeks to enhance the existing commercial core along Broadway by building strong connections with the riverfront and the civic/retail district on the south end of Walnut Street. Downtown Design and Image Encourage design standards that elevate the quality of Downtown development without creating unduehardships for property and building owners. Acknowledge that the historic “Main Street” buildings and developments along Broadway Street are functionally obsolete for many tenants and users in today’s automobile and convenience-driven marketplace. The public realm of streets, boulevards and sidewalks represents the best opportunity to create an interim image for downtown as it redevelops. The Highway 25 and Broadway corridors should The current end of Walnut Streetis a barrier to improving connections between Downtown and the be softened with streetscape and landscape riverfront. features to offset the effects of high traffic New buildings in the Highway 25 and volumes, and to help establish an identity for the Broadway corridors should be located to allow Central Community District (CCD). for eventual widening of the corridor right-of- Development should orient toward the way and roadway. intersection of Highway 25 with Broadway to To the extent possible, buildings should take advantage of high traffic volumes in the occupy street frontages and should front on Highway 25 corridor. public sidewalks with connections to a New development in the Highway 25 corridor continuous “Downtown” sidewalk pedestrian should be scaled to allow visibility to system. development up to a block or more away from Highway 25. 3-22 | Land UseCity of Monticello A key to development in this focus area is the Proposed uses should have adequate parking construction of the Fallon Avenue bridge. The bridge (private or public) within easy and convenient leads to the reconstruction of Fallon Avenue and the walking distance. related expansion of municipal sanitary sewer and The Downtown plan should provide strategically located public gathering spaces water systems. Future development will be limited to bring people together to experience a sense without additional utility capacity. of community that is associated with East Focus Area downtown. The Downtown Small Area Plan provides The Comprehensive Plan places greater priority on guidance for thecore blocks of the growth to the west and south. Development should be downtown. Where the Downtown Small Area directed to areas that most effectively achieve the Plan does not provide specific design objectives of this Plan. guidance, the City’s zoning ordinance will Several factors could cause the City to encourage future guide design and image. residential development in the East Focus Area: Increased overall housing demand that exceeds the capacity to support growth in South Central Focus Area other areas. Continued residential growth to the south is an Traffic congestion on Highway 25 that increases important element of the Comprehensive Plan. This theneed to channel use to the east interchange. growth achieves several objectives: The need to solve stormwaterand drainage management issues (Ditch 33) in this area. It helps to facilitate the expansion of the Solving drainage issues allows eastward sanitarysewer system in conjunction with the expansion along County Road 18. reconstruction of Fallon Avenue. This sanitary Future growth in the east should continue to fill sewer capacity is needed to support future in the development area within the Orderly industrial growth area along Highway 25. Annexation Area on the east side of Monticello. These areas encourage growth in areas that The natural features in these areas allow for could use the new eastern interchange with I- higher amenity neighborhoods. This growth can 94 rather than Highway 25. occur with new collector/arterial street These areas provide appropriate locations for corridors. continued growth in entry-level single family homes and medium density housing types. These Places to Live are important elements of maintaining an adequately diverse housing stock. Orderly expansion to the south moves development towards area of higher natural amenity. Areas along the southern edge of the Orderly Annexation Area provide another location for potential “move up” housing. Figure 4-4: Distribution of 2011 Taxes Payable The chart in Figure 4-2 shows how legislative changes have reduced the tax base created by commercial- will be needed to achieve community objectives for industrial development. This chart is based on the tax All Other capacity value for $3,000,000 of Taxable Market Value. 1,614,256 8% The legislative changes in the rates used to set tax Commercial/Industrial capacity mean that this property produced 56% less tax 4,787,530 24% base in 2012 than in 1997. Public Utility 9,707,817 50% This trend takes on additional meaning when compared to other classifications of property. Figure 4-3 compares the tax capacity value for the primary forms of development in Monticello. The valuations in this chart are based on assumptions about the Residential Homestead density of development and estimated market value of 3,470,090 18% new development. Changes in these assumptions will alter the results. This chart clearly illustrates the current reality for economic development strategies. All forms of Downtown. This intervention may include: development contribute tax base to the community. It Public improvements to provide services or to is risky placing too much weight on one type of enhance the Downtown environment. development for tax base growth. In addition, cities do Provision of adequate parking supply. not control the critical elements of the taxsystem. Acquisition of land. Changes in the system lead to unanticipated results at Preparation of sites for development. the local level. Removal of other physical and economic barriers to achieve community objectives. Tax base growth has implications that are unique to Monticello. The chart in Figure 4-4 shows the These actions may require the use of tax increment distribution of taxes payable in 2011. Utilities, likely financing, taxabatement, or other finance tools largely Xcel Energy,contributes about one-third of available to the City. the City’s taxes, while both commercial/industrial and residential uses contribute 28% each. In 2011, the City of Monticello conducted a retail market study for Downtown Monticello. The retail market study report,part of a larger study, Embracing Downtown Enhancing Downtown Monticello,has been incorporated in the Comprehensive Plan as an appendix andserves as a resource for Maintaining a successful Downtown is an important economic context within the downtown. In 2017, the element of the economic development plan for City of Monticello conducted an updated Retail Vitality Monticello. Downtown is a key business district Study, part of the Downtown Small Area Plan, that providing goods, services, and jobs for the community. provides additional updated resource information for Downtown is unlike any other business district because downtown economic context.for the implementation of of its unique role in Monticello’s identity and heritage. the Comprehensive Plan. The study included many The Land Use chapter describes plans, policies, and components including an identification and analysis of strategies related to Downtown Monticello. Downtown existing businesses, evaluation of shopping areas that are is part of the Economic Development chapter because of competition forDowntown, a survey of customers, the likelihood that city actions and investments delineation of the trade area, and the establishment of market demand for various businesses. Some findings of the 2011 retail market study report, of the Embracing Downtown Monticelloincluded: CentraCare Health System, with 25 beds and Downtown Monticello enjoys a strategic 600 employees has established Monticello as location between the Mississippi River and I- a regional medical center. 94. This focuses traffic on TH-25 resulting in Increased residential development stimulates traffic counts higher in Downtown than south increased commercial development. The of I-94 recent economic conditions have slowed Due to physical barriers created by the residential development, thus resulting in MississippiRiver and I-94, about one-third of reduced tenant demand for retail space. Downtown and secondary trade area shoppers Additional retail space in Downtown Monticello must pass through Downtown Monticello to can be supported by the trade area population. A reach the shopping areas south of I-94. range of store types can be consideredincluding Downtown has the largest concentration of shopping goods, convenience goods, and food shopping goods stores and restaurants. establishments. Downtown’s existing wide Downtown’s trade area population was variety of services limits potential future estimated at 93,500 in 2010 and is projected opportunities. However, market research to have an annual growth rate of 2.2%. indicates that Monticello could support Monticello’s large anchor stores (Cub Foods, additional medical practices. SuperTarget, Walmart, and Home Depot) create a secondary trade area. The population of the combined Downtown and secondary trade areas was 127,190 in 2010. Figure 4-5: Embracing Downtown Monticello Primary and Secondary Trade Areas Mboe!Vtf 3 Uif!gvuvsf!wjtjpo!gps!Npoujdfmmp!qspwjeft!uif!gpvoebujpo!gps!uif! Dibqufs!Dpoufout Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo-!jo!uvso-!qspwjeft!uif!gsbnfxpsl!gps!ipx!mboe!xjmm!cf!vtfe! Gvuvsf!Hspxui!////////////////////////////4.3 Hspxui!Qpmjdjft!////////////////////////4.3 up!sfjogpsdf!eftjsbcmf!mboe!vtf!qbuufsot-!jefoujgz!qmbdft!xifsf!dibohf!jt! Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!Nbq!////////////////////4.4 offefe!boe!hvjef!uif!gpsn!boe!mpdbujpo!pg!gvuvsf!hspxui/ Mboe!Vtf!Dbufhpsjft!/////////////////4.4 Qmbdft!up!Mjwf!/////////////////////////////4.6 jodmvejoh; Qmbdft!up!Xpsl!///////////////////////4.22 Qmbdft!up!Tipq!////////////////////////4.24 !Dpnnvojuz!joqvu!hbuifsfe!uispvhi!qvcmjd!xpsltipqt!boe!Ubtl!Gpsdf! Epxoupxo!//////////////////////////////4.24 ejtdvttjpot/ Njyfe!Vtf!///////////////////////////////4.26 ! Qmbdft!up!Sfdsfbuf!/////////////////4.26 Qmbdft!gps!Dpnnvojuz!//////////4.26 ! Vscbo!Sftfswf!///////////////////////4.27 !Gbdupst!eftdsjcfe!jo!uif!Dpnnvojuz!Dpoufyu!dibqufs!pg!uif!Qmbo/ Joufsdibohf!Qmboojoh!Bsfb!/4.27 Qsjwbuf!Jogsbtusvduvsf!///////////4.27 !Tztufnt!qmbot!gps!usbotqpsubujpo-!tbojubsz!tfxfs!boe!xbufs!tvqqmz/ Hsffoxbz!!///////////////////////////////4.27 Gpdvt!Bsfbt!//////////////////////////////4.28 Opsuixftu!Npoujdfmmp!//////////4.28 Gsbnfxpsl!tfdujpo/!!Uif!2::7!Qmbo!eftdsjcfe!Npoujdfmmp“t!mboe!vtf! Epxoupxo!Gpdvt!Bsfb!////////4.31 qmbo!cz!hfofsbm!ejtusjdu!pg!uif!dpnnvojuz!bt!b!nfbot!pg!buufoejoh!up!uif! Tpvui!Dfousbm!Gpdvt!Bsfb!///4.34 Fbtu!Gpdvt!Bsfb!/////////////////////4.34 Qmbo!ftubcmjtift!b!tfqbsbuf!mboe!vtf!dibqufs!dpotjtujoh!pg!uif!gpmmpxjoh! Fncsbdjoh!Epxoupxo!Qmbo! dpnqpofout; xbt!bepqufe!cz!Djuz!Dpvodjm! sftpmvujpo!3123.122!po!Kbovbsz!:-! !B!tfdujpo!po!Gvuvsf!Hspxui!eftdsjcft!uif!jnqmjdbujpot!pg!gvuvsf! 3123!boe!jt!jodpsqpsbufe!ifsfjo!bt! sftjefou!hspxui!boe!uif!bnpvou!pg!hspxui!boujdjqbufe!cz!uif!Qmbo/ bo!bqqfoejy!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf! !Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!Nbq!)tff!Gjhvsf!4.3*!tipxt!uif!mboe!vtft!bttjhofe! Qmbo/! up!fbdi!qbsdfm!pg!mboe/ !Mboe!Vtf!Dbufhpsjft!gvsuifs!fyqmbjo!uif!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!cz!eftdsjcjoh! qpmjdjft!eftdsjcf!uif!pckfdujwft!uibu!Npoujdfmmp!tfflt!up!bdijfwf! uispvhi!uif!jnqmfnfoubujpo!pg!uif!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!boe!uif!tvqqpsujoh! fmfnfout!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/ !Gpdvt!Bsfbt!qspwjef!b!npsf!efubjmfe!ejtdvttjpo!pg!dibsbdufsjtujdt-! hpbmt!boe!qpmjdjft!gps!lfz!bsfbt!pg!uif!dpnnvojuz/ 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!QmboMboe!Vtf!!}!!4.2 Gvuvsf!Hspxui Gjhvsf!4.2;!Hspxui!Usfoet!boe!Qspkfdujpot Jo!mppljoh!up!uif!gvuvsf-!Npoujdfmmp!nvtu!opu!kvtu! dpotjefs!uif!rvbmjujft!pg!uif!gvuvsf!dpnnvojuz-!cvu!bmtp! 411 uif!obuvsf!pg!hspxui/!!Bttvnqujpot!bcpvu!uif!bnpvou! 367 353 361 boe!qbdf!pg!gvuvsf!hspxui!bsf!jnqpsubou!qbsut!pg!uif! 33: 334 319 gpvoebujpo!gps!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/!!Hspxui!ibt! 311 tfwfsbm!jnqpsubou!jnqmjdbujpot!gps!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf! 278 261261261261261261261 Bduvbm Qmbo;261 241 Qspkfdufe 221 :1 !Hspxui!qspkfdujpot!bsf!vtfe!up!qmbo!gps!uif!dbqbdjuz! 211 88 81 pg!nvojdjqbm!vujmjuz!tztufnt/ 61 61 41 41 !Hspxui!qspkfdujpot!bsf!vtfe!up!dsfbuf!boe!nbobhf! 1 13579135791 11111222223 11 111111111 33333333333 !Uif!tdippm!tztufn!vtft!hspxui!qspkfdujpot!up! gpsfdbtu!fospmmnfout!boe!up!qmbo!gps!qsphsbnt!boe! gbdjmjujft/ 4.2!!tipxt!uif!qspkfdujpo!pg!gvuvsf!sftjefoujbm!hspxui! !Nbslfu!tuvejft!vtf!hspxui!qspkfdujpot!up!bobmz{f! bttvnfe!jo!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/!! uif!qpufoujbm!gps!mpdbujoh!ps!fyqboejoh!cvtjofttft! jo!Npoujdfmmp/ ! pg!mboe!offefe!up!tvqqpsu!uijt!efwfmpqnfou/ gbmmt!cfmpx!uif!33:!vojut0zfbs!bwfsbhf!gps!3112!uispvhi! !Hspxui!beet!usjqt!up!uif!mpdbm!tusffu!tztufn/ !Bttvnqujpot!bcpvu!hspxui!jogmvfodf!uif! gbdupst/!!Npoujdfmmp!xjmm!sfnbjo!b!eftjsbcmf!qmbdf!up! qpmjdjft!boe!bdujpot!offefe!up!jnqmfnfou!uif! mjwf-!buusbdujoh!cpui!cvjmefst!boe!sftjefout/!!Ipvtjoh! Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/!! nbslfu!dpoejujpot!xjmm!jnqspwf!gspn!uif!xfblofttft! fyqfsjfodfe!jo!3117!boe!3118/!!!B!dpncjobujpo! Gps!uiftf!sfbtpot-!ju!jt!fttfoujbm!uibu!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf! pg!nbslfu!dpoejujpot-!mpdbm!qpmjdz!pckfdujwft-!boe! Qmbo!tubuf!bttvnqujpot!pg!uif!obuvsf!pg!gvuvsf!hspxui/!!B! dibohjoh!efnphsbqijdt!nbz!sfevdf!uif!qpufoujbm!gps! dibmmfohf!jo!gpsfdbtujoh!gvuvsf!sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou! bdijfwjoh!boe!tvtubjojoh!ijhifs!sbuft!pg!sftjefoujbm! dpouspm-!uif!gbdupst!uibu!efufsnjof!xifsf!qfpqmf!mjwf/!! bdijfwjoh!uif!pckfdujwft!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo-!jo! qbsujdvmbs!tffljoh!npsf!npwf!vq!ipvtjoh-!xjmm!sftvmu! !Rvbmjuz!pg!mjgf/ jo!mftt!efwfmpqnfou!uibo!jo!qsfwjpvt!zfbst/!!!! !Bddftt!up!fnqmpznfou/ Hspxui!Qpmjdjft !Bwbjmbcjmjuz!pg!eftjsfe!ipvtjoh!boe!ofjhicpsippe! pqujpot/2/! usfoet!boe!vqebuf!hspxui!qspkfdujpot!up!tfswf!bt!b! ! cbtjt!gps!qvcmjd!boe!qsjwbuf!qmboojoh/ !Dpnqfujujpo!gspn!puifs!qmbdft!jo!uif!sfhjpo/ 3/!Pwfs!uif!mjgf!pg!uijt!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo-!hspxui! xjmm!pddvs!xjuijo!uif!cpvoebsjft!pg!uif!dvssfou! Hjwfo!uiftf!vodfsubjoujft-!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo! nvojdjqbm!cpvoebsjft!boe!uif!Psefsmz!Boofybujpo! tfflt!b!cbmbodf!cfuxffo!pqujnjtn!boe!qsvefodf/!! Bsfb/ 4/!Gvuvsf!efwfmpqnfou!tipvme!cf!hvjefe!up!mpdbujpot! cbmbodjoh!gpsdf!mjft!xjui!uif!jnqmjdbujpot!pg!bttvnjoh! uibu!vujmj{f!fyjtujoh!jogsbtusvduvsf!boe!mpdbujpot! 4.3!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp uibu!gbdjmjubuf!uif!dpotusvdujpo!pg!tusffu!boe!bo!fggfdujwf!mboe!vtf!nbobhfnfou!uppm!sfrvjsft!b! vujmjuz!tztufnt!uibu!nffu!uif!pckfdujwft!pg!uif! Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/ b!dpnnpo!voefstuboejoh!pg!uif!cbtjd!dibsbdufsjtujdt! pg!fbdi!dbufhpsz!vtfe!jo!uif!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo/ 5/!Uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!epft!opu!boujdjqbuf! bdujpo!cz!Npoujdfmmp!up!boofy!ps!fyufoe!vujmjuz! tztufnt!!up!qspqfsuz!jnnfejbufmz!opsui!pg!uif! mboe!vtf;!sftjefoujbm-!dpnnfsdjbm!boe!joevtusjbm/!! Njttjttjqqj!Sjwfs/!!Efwfmpqnfou!jo!uijt!bsfb!xjmm! Fbdi!pg!uiftf!dbufhpsjft!jt!gvsuifs!ejwjefe!joup! tvcdbufhpsjft!uibu!ejtujohvjti!cfuxffo!uif!dibsbdufs-! jo!uif!Epxoupxo!bsfb*!boe!diboofm!jowftunfou! bxbz!gspn!puifs!qbsut!pg!uif!Djuz-!ftqfdjbmmz!uif! mpdbujpot/ Epxoupxo/ Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!Nbq qsjwbuf!efwfmpqnfou;!Qmbdft!up!Mjwf-!Qmbdft!up!Tipq-! eftjsfe!mboe!vtf!gps!bmm!qspqfsuz!jo!Npoujdfmmp!boe!uif! po!uif!gpmmpxjoh!sbujpobmf; jo!uijt!nbq!cvjmet!po!uif!qsfwjpvt!dpnnvojuz!qmboojoh! ! jo!Npoujdfmmp/!!! qbuufso!pg!efwfmpqnfou!boe!uif!qmbo!gps!gvuvsf! hspxui/ !Bmuipvhi!sftjefoujbm!mboe!vtft!wbsz!cz!uzqf!boe! Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!tfflt!up; efotjuz-!uifz!tibsf!nboz!qvcmjd!pckfdujwft/ !Uijt!bqqspbdi!nblft!b!npsf!foevsjoh! !Pshboj{f!uif!dpnnvojuz!jo!b!tvtubjobcmf! nboofs/ gps!uif!bqqspqsjbuf!mboe!vtf!xjuipvu!uif!offe! ! up!qsfejdu!gvuvsf!dpnnvojuz!offet!boe!nbslfu! gpsdft/ fyqbotjpo!pg!uiftf!tztufnt/ ! !Qspwjef!uif!dbqbdjuz!gps!uif!uzqf!pg!hspxui!eftjsfe! qfsgpsnbodf!tuboebset!boe!qvcmjd!bdujpot!up! cz!uif!dpnnvojuz/ qspwjef!b!npsf!efubjmfe!hvjef!gps!mboe!vtf!boe! efwfmpqnfou/!!Uijt!bqqspbdi!dpowfzt!npsf! Qmboojoh!Dpnnjttjpo/ Vtf!dibqufs!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!xpsl!xjui!uijt! nbq!up!fyqmbjo!uif!joufou!boe!pckfdujwft!gps!gvuvsf!mboe! Spmf!pg!\[pojoh!Sfhvmbujpot vtf/!!Gvsuifs-!uijt!nbq!mbzt!uif!gpvoebujpo!gps!mboe!vtf! dpouspmt!uibu!bsf!vtfe!cz!uif!Djuz!up!jnqmfnfou!uif! \[pojoh!sfhvmbujpot!qmbz!b!dsjujdbm!spmf!jo!jnqmfnfoujoh!mboe!vtf!qmbot!jo! Npoujdfmmp/!!Tubuf!Mbx!hjwft!{pojoh!sfhvmbujpot!qsjpsjuz!pwfs!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf! Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/ \[pojoh!sfhvmbujpot!bsf!qbsujdvmbsmz!jnqpsubou!jo!uif!bqqmjdbujpo!pg!uif!mboe! Mboe!Vtf!Dbufhpsjft vtf!dbufhpsjft!jo!uif!Npoujdfmmp!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/!!Uif!”qmbdft!up•!mboe! \[pojoh!sfhvmbujpot!)boe!puifs!mboe!vtf!dpouspmt*!xjmm!cf!vtfe!up!efufsnjof!uif! up!hvjef!mboe!vtf!jo!Npoujdfmmp/!!Pof!fmfnfou!njttjoh! bqqspqsjbuf!mpdbujpo!gps!fbdi!gpsn!pg!efwfmpqnfou!boe!puifs!sfhvmbujpot!po! gspn!uif!2::7!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!xbt!b!eftdsjqujpo! uif!vtf!pg!mboe-!dpotjtufou!xjui!qpmjdjft!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/ pg!uif!mboe!vtf!dbufhpsjft!tipxo!jo!uif!Mboe!Vtf! 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.4 Gjhvsf!4.3;!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!Nbq 4.5!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Gjhvsf!4.4;!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!.!Qmbdft!up!Mjwf Xifo!tpnfpof!tbzt!”ipvtf•!uif!nptu!dpnnpo!jnbhf! vtfe!jo!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!jo!hsfbufs!efubjm/ Qmbdft!up!Mjwf pof!sfmbujpotijq!cfuxffo!ipvtf!boe!qbsdfm!pg!mboe!.!uif! rvbmjuz!qmbdft!gps!qfpqmf!up!mjwf!jo!Npoujdfmmp!)tff!Gjhvsf! ipvtjoh!jt!eftjhofe!gps!pddvqbodz!cz!b!tjohmf!gbnjmz! vq!fydmvtjwfmz!pg!tjohmf!gbnjmz!efubdife!ipnft/!! pg!ipvtjoh!dipjdft-!xijmf!qsftfswjoh!boe!foibodjoh!uif! Uif!qsjnbsz!wbsjbcmft!cfdpnf!uif!eftjho!pg!uif! rvbmjuz!pg!ofjhicpsippet/!!Bmuipvhi!b!tjohmf!mboe!vtf! tvcejwjtjpo-!uif!tj{f!pg!uif!mpu!boe!uif!tj{f!boe!tuzmf!pg! dbufhpsz-!Qmbdft!up!Mjwf!epft!opu!tvhhftu!ipvtjoh!jt!b! uif!exfmmjoh/!!Nboz!pmefs!ofjhicpsippet!jo!Npoujdfmmp! ipnphfopvt!dpnnpejuz!ps!uibu!boz!uzqf!pg!ipvtjoh!jt! )opsui!pg!Joufstubuf!:5*!xfsf!cvjmu!po!b!usbejujpobm!hsje! eftjsbcmf!ps!bmmpxfe!jo!boz!mpdbujpo/!! tusffu!tztufn/!!Pwfs!uif!qbtu!uijsuz!zfbst-!efwfmpqnfou! qbuufsot!ibwf!npwfe!up!b!ofx!tvcvscbo!dvswjmjofbs! 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.6 qbuufso-!dibsbdufsj{fe!cz!dvswjmjofbs!tusffu!mbzpvu!xjui!ps!njyfe!vtft-!po!mput!bcmf!up!bddpnnpebuf!mbshfs! uif!vtf!pg!dvm.ef.tbdt/ tjujoh!gbdupst!gps!ijhi!efotjuz!sftjefoujbm!vtft!xjmm! B!wbsjfuz!pg!gbdupst-!jodmvejoh!dpotvnfs!qsfgfsfodf! qsjpsjuj{f!bddftt!up!tfswjdft!boe!bnfojujft!jodmvejoh! boe!ipvtjoh!dptu-!ibwf!jodsfbtfe!uif!dpotusvdujpo! qvcmjd!vujmjujft-!qbslt-!usbjmt!boe!pqfo!tqbdf-!boe! pg!buubdife!ipvtjoh!jo!sfdfou!zfbst/!!Evqmfyft-!uxjo! dpnnfsdjbm!boe0ps!nfejdbm!tfswjdft/!Ju!xjmm!cf! ipnft-!rvbet!boe!upxoipnft!bsf!dpnnpo!fybnqmft! jnqpsubou-!xifo!dpotjefsjoh!qpufoujbm!eftjhobujpo! pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!tuzmf/!!Bmuipvhi!uif!tqfdjgjd!gpsn! pg!ijhi!efotjuz!ipvtjoh!efwfmpqnfou-!uibu!uif!qbsdfmt! dibohft-!uifsf!bsf!tfwfsbm!dpnnpo!dibsbdufsjtujdt/!! Fbdi!ipvtjoh!voju!jt!eftjhofe!gps!pddvqbodz!cz!b!tjohmf! tvdi!efwfmpqnfou!dbo!cf!bddpnnpebufe!jo!bddpsebodf! xjui!uif!qpmjdjft!jo!uijt!Qmbo/! fbdi!puifs!jo!b!ipsj{poubm!psjfoubujpo/!! Xijmf!uiftf!dpnnfout!boe!uif!dpnnfout!jo!uif!{pojoh! Qmbdft!up!Mjwf!xjmm!jodmvef!tpnf!ofjhicpsippet! psejobodf!bsf!joufoefe!up!cf!jotusvdujwf!uifz!bsf!opu! eftjhofe!up!pggfs!b!njyuvsf!pg!ipvtjoh!uzqft!boe! ofdfttbsjmz!uif!pomz!gbdupst!uibu!njhiu!dpnf!joup!qmbz! efotjujft/!!Njyfe!sftjefoujbm!ofjhicpsippet!dsfbuf!b! qbuufso!uibu!dpncjoft!tjohmf.gbnjmz!efubdife!ipvtjoh! xjui!b!njyuvsf!pg!buubdife!ipvtjoh!uzqft/!Vtjoh! Qpmjdjft!—!Qmbdft!up!Mjwf hppe!eftjho!boe!qmboojoh-!uiftf!njyfe!sftjefoujbm! ofjhicpsippet!dbo!bdijfwf!b!ijhifs!efotjuz!xjuipvu! pckfdujwft!gps!sftjefoujbm!mboe!vtf!jo!Npoujdfmmp; dpnqspnjtjoh!uif!pwfsbmm!joufhsjuz!pg!uif!mpx.efotjuz! 2/! sftjefoujbm!qbuufso/! pg!b!qfstpo“t!mjgf.dzdmf!)tff!cfmpx*/! Uijt!joufhsbujpo!tusfohuifot!ofjhicpsippet!cz! 3/!Tvqqpsu!efwfmpqnfou!jo!bsfbt!uibu!cftu!nbudift!uif! pwfsbmm!pckfdujwft!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/!! jt!qpttjcmf!cz!upebz“t!svmft!boe!sfhvmbujpot/!Ju!bmtp!bwpjet! 4/!Efwfmpq!rvbmjuz!ofjhicpsippet!uibu!dsfbuf!b! mbshf!boe!tfqbsbuf!dpodfousbujpot!pg!buubdife!ipvtjoh/!! tfotf!pg!dpoofdujpo!up!uif!dpnnvojuz!boe!jotqjsf! Ju!foibodft!pqqpsuvojujft!up!pshboj{f!efwfmpqnfou!jo! tvtubjofe!jowftunfou/!!Uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf! b!nboofs!uibu!qsftfswft!obuvsbm!gfbuvsft/ Qmbo!tfflt!up!nbjoubjo!uif!rvbmjuz!boe!joufhsjuz! pg!fyjtujoh!ofjhicpsippet!cz!fodpvsbhjoh!uif! B!dpnqmfuf!ipvtjoh!tupdl!jodmveft!ijhifs!efotjuz! nbjoufobodf!pg!qspqfsuz!boe!sfjowftunfou!joup! sftjefoujbm!bsfbt!uibu!dpotjtu!pg!nvmuj.gbnjmz!ipvtjoh! uif!fyjtujoh!ipvtjoh!tupdl/!!Dibohft!jo!ipvtjoh! uzqft!tvdi!bt!bqbsunfout!boe!dpoepnjojvnt/!Jo!uif! uzqf!tipvme!cf!bmmpxfe!pomz!up!gbdjmjubuf!ofdfttbsz! ofbs!ufsn-!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!epft!opu!boujdjqbuf! sfefwfmpqnfou/ fyqboejoh!uif!fyjtujoh!tvqqmz!pg!ijhifs!efotjuz!ipvtjoh/!! 5/!Dsfbuf!ofjhicpsippet!uibu!bmmpx!sftjefout!up! Ju!jt!mjlfmz!uibu!Npoujdfmmp!xjmm!offe!beejujpobm!ijhifs! nbjoubjo!b!dpoofdujpo!up!uif!obuvsbm!fowjsponfou! efotjuz!ipvtjoh!up; boe!pqfo!tqbdft/ !Qspwjef!ipvtjoh!tvjufe!up!uif!offet!pg!bo!bhjoh! 6/!Tffl!rvbmjuz!pwfs!rvboujuz!jo!sftjefoujbm!hspxui/!! qpqvmbujpo/ Bdijfwjoh!uif!pckfdujwft!gps!rvbmjuz!ipvtjoh!boe! !Gbdjmjubuf!sfefwfmpqnfou!jo!uif!Epxoupxo!ps!jo! ofjhicpsippet!nbz!sfevdf!uif!pwfsbmm!sbuf!pg! puifs!bqqspqsjbuf!mpdbujpot!pg!uif!dpnnvojuz/ hspxui/!! !Qspwjef!ipvtjoh!offefe!up!buusbdu!uif!xpsl!gpsdf! 7/!Sftfswf!bsfbt!xjui!ijhi!bnfojujft!gps!”npwf!vq•! sfrvjsfe!up!bdijfwf!fdpopnjd!efwfmpqnfou!hpbmt! pg!uif!Djuz/ bnfojujft!nbz!jodmvef!gpsftufe!bsfbt-!xfumboe! dpnqmfyft-!bekbdfodz!up!qbslt!boe!hsffoxbzt/ Ijhifs!efotjuz!sftjefoujbm!mboe!vtft!tipvme!cf!mpdbufe!! Tpnf!pg!uif!Djuz“t!qpmjdz!pckfdujwft!sfrvjsf!gvsuifs! boe!eftjhofe!up!cf!dpnqbujcmf!xjui!ofbscz!sftjefoujbm! fyqmbobujpo/ 4.7!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Mjgf!Dzdmf!Ipvtjoh Npoujdfmmp“t!ipvtjoh!tupdl!wbsjft!cz!uzqf-!bhf-!tuzmf! Gjhvsf!4.5;!Mjgf!Dzdmf!pg!Ipvtjoh!Tvqqmz Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!eftdsjcft!uif!dibsbdufsjtujdt!pg! uif!ipvtjoh!tupdl!cbtfe!po!uif!3111!Dfotvt!boe!sfdfou! cvjmejoh!qfsnju!usfoet/ Uif!dpodfqu!pg!mjgf!dzdmf!ipvtjoh!sfdphoj{ft!uibu! ipvtjoh!offet!dibohf!pwfs!uif!dpvstf!pg!b!qfstpo“t!mjgf! )tff!Gjhvsf!4.5*/!!Zpvoh!bevmut!nbz!opu!ibwf!uif!jodpnf! tfhnfou!pg!uif!qpqvmbujpo!pgufo!tfflt!sfoubm!ipvtjoh/!! pg!ipvtjoh!bt!gbnjmz!tj{f!boe!jodpnf!dibohft!pwfs!ujnf/!! Xjui!bhjoh-!qfpqmf!nbz!eftjsf!tnbmmfs!ipnft!xjui! mftt!nbjoufobodf/!!Fwfouvbmmz-!uif!fmefsmz!usbotjujpo! up!ipvtjoh!bttpdjbufe!xjui!pqujpot!gps!ejsfdu!dbsf/!!Bt! opufe!jo!uif!Wjtjpo!Tubufnfou-!Npoujdfmmp“t!qpqvmbujpo! boe!tfflt!up!dsfbuf!b!cbmbodfe!ipvtjoh!tvqqmz!uibu! fodpvsbhft!qfpqmf!up!npwf!up!boe!tubz!jo!Npoujdfmmp/!! gpsdft!hvjefe!cz!uijt!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo/!!Bdujpot!cz!uif! Djuz!nbz!cf!offefe!up!qspnpuf!uif!dsfbujpo!pg!ipvtjoh! jo!voefstfswfe!tfhnfout!pg!uif!nbslfu/ Ofjhicpsippe!Eftjho ipvtjoh!tupdl!cz!qspwjejoh!npsf!”npwf!vq•!ipvtjoh/!! Jo!uijt!dpoufyu-!uif!ufsn!”npwf!vq•!ipvtjoh!sfgfst!up! mbshfs!ipnft!xjui!npsf!bnfojujft!jo!tusvduvsf!boe! tjohmf.gbnjmz!efubdife!ps!mpx!efotjuz/!!Buubdife!gpsnt! pg!ipvtjoh!xjui!nfejvn!ps!ijhi!efotjujft!nbz!nffu! uif!pckfdujwft!gps!npwf!vq!ipvtjoh!jo!uif!bqqspqsjbuf! mpdbujpot/!!Jo!uijt!xbz-!uif!pckfdujwft!gps!npwf!vq! ipvtjoh!boe!mjgf!dzdmf!ipvtjoh!bsf!dpnqbujcmf!boe! tvqqpsujwf/ Xijmf!fwfsz!dpnnvojuz!xbout!b!ijhi!rvbmjuz!ipvtjoh! tupdl-!uijt!jttvf!ibt!qbsujdvmbs!jnqpsubodf!jo!Npoujdfmmp/!! Ju!jt!b!lfz!up!sfubjojoh!qpqvmbujpo/!!Xjuipvu!b!cspbefs! 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.8 wbsjfuz!pg!ipvtjoh!pqujpot-!gbnjmjft!nbz!fodpvsbhfe!up! Gjhvsf!4.6;!Sfmbujpotijq!Cfuxffo!Efwfmpqnfou!boe! mfbwf!Npoujdfmmp!up!nffu!uifjs!offe!gps!b!mbshfs!ipnf/! Obuvsbm!Gfbuvsft!.!Qbslxbz Ju!jt!b!gbdups!jo!fdpopnjd!efwfmpqnfou/!!Pof!gbdfu!pg! buusbdujoh!boe!sfubjojoh!qspgfttjpobm!kpct!jt!up!qspwjef! eftjsbcmf!ipvtjoh!bmufsobujwft/ Ju!nvtu!cf!sfdphoj{fe!uibu!dsfbujoh!npwf!vq!ipvtjoh! sfrvjsft!npsf!uibo!qpmjdjft!jo!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/!! qsjwbuf!jowftunfou/!!Uijt!jowftunfou!pddvst!xifo! efnboe!fyjtut!ps!uif!Djuz!dbo!qspwjef!bo!jodfoujwf!up! buusbdu!jowftunfou/ Qbsu!pg!buusbdujoh!npwf!vq!ipvtjoh!dpnft!gspn! dsfbujoh!hsfbu!ofjhicpsippet!—!qmbdft!uibu!xjmm!buusbdu! boe!tvtubjo!uif!ipvtjoh!pqujpot!tpvhiu!cz!uif!Djuz/! Gjhvsf!4.7;!Sfmbujpotijq!Cfuxffo!Efwfmpqnfou!boe! Obuvsbm!Gfbuvsft!.!Usbjm!Dpssjeps Ofjhicpsippet!bsf!uif!cvjmejoh!cmpdl!pg!Qmbdft!up!Mjwf! up!dsfbuf!boe!nbjoubjo!buusbdujwf-!tbgf!boe!gvodujpobm! uijt!pckfdujwf; 2/!Ofjhicpsippet!tipvme!jodpsqpsbuf!uif!obuvsbm! dibsbdufsjtujdt!pg!uif!tfuujoh/!!Usfft-!ufssbjo-! esbjobhfxbzt-!boe!puifs!obuvsbm!gfbuvsft!qspwjef! dibsbdufs!up!ofjhicpsippet/ 3/!Ipvtjoh!tipvme!cf!psjfoufe!up!uif!mpdbm!tusffu-! tusffut/ 4/! uif!bqqfbsbodf!boe!dibsbdufs!pg!b!ofjhicpsippe/!! Cbmbodjoh!uif!Cvjmu!boe!Obuvsbm!Fowjsponfout bsfb!jodmvef!tusffut!xjui!dvsc!boe!hvuufs-!usfft!jo! uif!qvcmjd!cpvmfwbse-!tusffu!mjhiujoh!tztufnt-!boe! tpvui*!jo!Npoujdfmmp!tipvme!tfswf!bt!b!dbubmztu!gps! tupsn!xbufs!qpoejoh/ 5/!Tjefxbmlt-!usbjmt-!boe!cjlfxbzt!xjmm!dpoofdu!uif! ofjhicpsippe!up!puifs!qbsut!pg!uif!dpnnvojuz/ boe!sfdsfbujpobm!pqqpsuvojujft/!!Mblft-!xfumboet!boe! 6/!Fwfsz!ofjhicpsippe!tipvme!ibwf!sfbtpobcmf!bddftt! puifs!obuvsbm!bnfojujft!fyjtu!uispvhipvu!uif!psefsmz! up!b!qvcmjd!qbsl!bt!b!qmbdf!gps!sftjefout!up!hbuifs! boofybujpo!bsfb/ boe!qmbz/ Tuvejft!ibwf!tipxo!uibu!qbslt!boe!pqfo!tqbdf!ibwf!b! Bmm!pg!uiftf!fmfnfout!xpsl!uphfuifs!up!dsfbuf!b!eftjsbcmf! boe!tvtubjobcmf!qmbdf!up!mjwf/ bsujdmf!qvcmjtife!cz!uif!Obujpobm!Qbsl!boe!Sfdsfbujpo! Bttpdjbujpo!tubuft!uibu!”sfdfou!bobmztft!tvhhftu!uibu! pqfo!tqbdft!nbz!ibwf!tvctuboujbm!qptjujwf!jnqbdut! po!tvsspvoejoh!qspqfsuz!wbmvft!boe!ifodf-!uif! 4.9!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Gjhvsf!4.8;!Fybnqmf!pg!Dpotfswbujpo!Eftjho!Efwfmpqnfou OPSUIXFTU!OFJHICPSIPPE PQFO!TQBDF!EFTJHO Upubm!Ipvtjoh!Vojut;:9 Qbtuvsft Tfnj.Dvtupn-!Tjohmf.Gbnjmz!Ipnft Frvftusjbo!Gbdjmjuz Mpu!Xjeui; Xfumboet!Foibodfnfout Mpu!Tj{f; Dpotfswbujpo!Fbtfnfout Ipvtf!Tr/!Gu/; Dfousbm!Qbsl Qsjdf!Qpjou!Qbdlbhft; 38!Bdsf!Qbsl!Tpvui!pg!Mblf OPSUIFBTU!OFJHICPSIPPE OFJHICPSIPPE!GFBUVSFT Upubm!Ipvtjoh!Vojut;77 Dfousbm!Qbsl Dvtupn-!Mvyvsz!Uxjo!Ipnft Opsuifbtu!Ofjhicpsippe!Hsffo Mpu!Xjeui; Tpvui!Ofjhicpsippe!Hsffo Mpu!Tj{f; Bttpdjbujpo!Epdl!boe!Qbsl Ipvtf!Tr/!Gu/; Qsjdf!Qpjou!Qbdlbhft; qspqfsuz!uby!cbtf-!qspwjejoh!pqfo!tqbdf!bewpdbuft!gfbuvsft-!qsftfswjoh!qvcmjd!vtf!boe!bddftt/!!Uiftf! xjui!dpowjodjoh!bshvnfout!jo!gbwps!pg!pqfo!tqbdf! ofjhicpsippet!bsf!tpnf!pg!uif!nptu!eftjsbcmf!jo!uif! eftjhobujpo!boe!qsftfswbujpo/•!!Cbmbodjoh!uif!cvjmu!boe!sfhjpo-!efnpotusbujoh!uibu!qvcmjd!vtf!boe!qsjwbuf! obuvsbm!fowjsponfout!tipvme!qspwjef!b!dbubmztu!up!uif! uzqft!pg!efwfmpqnfou!eftjsfe!cz!uif!Djuz!boe!jo!uif! fyqbotjpo!pg!uif!qspqfsuz!uby!cbtf/ joufhsbujoh!ipvtjoh-!obuvsbm!gfbuvsft!boe!qvcmjd!vtf/!! Jo!buufnqujoh!up!nffu!sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!Gjhvsf!4.6!jt!uif!qbslxbz!dpodfqu/!!Bo!buusbdujwf!tusffu! pckfdujwft-!uif!Djuz!tipvme!opu!mptf!tjhiu!pg!mpoh.ufsn! gpsnt!uif!fehf!cfuxffo!uif!qbsl!)ps!obuvsbm!bsfb*!boe! uif!ipvtjoh/!!B!nvmuj.vtf!usbjm!gpmmpxt!uif!tusffu!xijmf! ipnft!gbdf!uif!tusffu!boe!esbx!po!uif!buusbdujwfoftt!pg! cpui!uif!qbslxbz!boe!uif!obuvsbm!bnfojujft/ jo!Npoujdfmmp!jt!dpouspmmfe!cz!qsjwbuf!qspqfsuz/!!Qvcmjd! bddftt!up!uif!Sjwfs!dpnft!bu!qpjout!qspwjefe!cz!qvcmjd! qbslt/!! uif!fehf!pg!uif!obuvsbm!bsfb/!!Bddftt!up!uif!usbjm!cfuxffo! B!xfmm!lopxo!fybnqmf!pg!cbmbodjoh!qvcmjd!vtf!xjui!mput!tipvme!dpnf!bu!sfbtpobcmf!joufswbmt/ qsjwbuf!efwfmpqnfou!jt!uif!Njoofbqpmjt!dibjo!pg!mblft! boe!Njoofibib!Dsffl/!!Qvcmjd!tusffut!)qbslxbzt*! Njooftpub!djujft!ibwf!vtfe!dpotfswbujpo!eftjho! boe!usbjmt!tfqbsbuf!ofjhicpsippet!gspn!uif!obuvsbm! tusbufhjft!!up!qspnpuf!ijhi!rvbmjuz!efwfmpqnfou!boe! 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.: Gjhvsf!4.8!tipxt!fmfnfout!pg!uif!Difwbmmf!efwfmpqnfou!qspqfsuz!nbobhfs!sfubjofe!cz!uif!pxofs!up!qfsgpsn! jo!Dibtlb/!!Vtjoh!pqfo!tqbdf!eftjho!boe!svsbm! nbjoufobodf!evujft/!!Pxofst!pg!buubdife!ipvtjoh!nbz! sftjefoujbm!dmvtufs!efwfmpqnfou!ufdiojrvft-!ILHj“t!bdu!dpmmfdujwfmz!uispvhi!b!ipnfpxofs“t!bttpdjbujpo/!! dpodfqu!qmbo!qspwjeft!gps!b!wbsjfuz!pg!ipvtjoh!pqujpot!Jo!nvmujqmf!gbnjmz!sfoubm!ipvtjoh-!uif!ufobout!ibwf!op! xijmf!qsftfswjoh!b!nbkpsjuz!pg!uif!bsfb!bt!qfsnbofou! pqfo!tqbdf-!jodmvejoh!qvcmjd!boe!dpnnpo!pqfo!ejtdvttjpo!epft!opu!jnqmz!b!qsfgfsfodf-!cvu!jt!joufoefe! tqbdft/!Bnfojujft!xpvme!jodmvef!bddftt!up!qspufdufe! pqfo!tqbdft!)mblftipsf-!xppet-!nfbepxt-!qbtuvsft-! cfdpnft!sfmfwbou!xifo!qvcmjd!bdujpo!jt!offefe!up! xfumboet*-!xbmljoh0cjljoh!usbjmt-!frvftusjbo!usbjmt!beesftt!b!gbjmvsf!pg!uif!qsjwbuf!nbjoufobodf!bqqspbdi/!! boe!gbdjmjujft-!dpnnpo!pvuepps!tusvduvsft!boe!bo!Ovjtbodf!psejobodft!bsf!pof!uppm!vtfe!cz!uif!Djuz! up!beesftt!gbjmvsft!jo!qsjwbuf!nbjoufobodf!boe!vtf!pg! djujft!boe!efwfmpqnfout!dbo!hvjef!gvuvsf!qmboojoh!boe!qspqfsuz/ efdjtjpo!nbljoh!jo!Npoujdfmmp/ Buusbdujwf!Qmbdft hsfbufs!uif!qpsujpo!pg!jodpnf!efwpufe!up!cbtjd!ipvtjoh! dptut!)npsuhbhf0sfou-!ubyft-!vujmjujft*-!uif!mftt!npofz! Buusbdujwf!qiztjdbm!bqqfbsbodf!jt!pof!pg!uif!nptu! bwbjmbcmf!gps!nbjoufobodf!bdujwjujft/!!Nbjoufobodf! dpnnpo!buusjcvuft!pg!Qmbdft!up!Mjwf!jo!Npoujdfmmp/! dbo!cf!efgfssfe-!cvu!opu!bwpjefe/!!Jg!mfgu!vodifdlfe-! Buusbdujwfoftt!jt!b!dpncjobujpo!pg!eftjho-!dpotusvdujpo! uijt!dzdmf!pg!bwpjefe!nbjoufobodf!qspevdft!ofhbujwf! boe!nbjoufobodf/!!Uiftf!dibsbdufsjtujdt!bqqmz!up! cvjmejoht!boe!tjuft/!!Buusbdujwfoftt!jt!sfmfwbou!gps!cpui! Tbgf!Qmbdft joejwjevbm!qsjef!jo!qspqfsuz!bt!xfmm!bt!bo!pwfsbmm!tfotf! Tbgfuz!jt!gsfrvfoumz!jefoujgjfe!bt!uif!nptu!eftjsfe! pg!dpnnvojuz!rvbmjuz/ dibsbdufsjtujd!pg!Qmbdft!up!Mjwf/!!Tfwfsbm!btqfdut!pg!uif! Uif!Djuz!nbz!vtf!b!wbsjfuz!pg!sfhvmbupsz!uppmt!up! tbgf!ofjhicpsippet/ !Cvjmejoh!dpeft!boe!beejujpobm!sfhvmbujpot!up!2/! qspnpuf!rvbmjuz!dpotusvdujpo/boe!efwfmpq!ofx!ofjhicpsippet!xifsf!qfpqmf! bsf!jowpmwfe!jo!uif!dpnnvojuz-!joufsbdu!xjui!uifjs! !Tvcejwjtjpo!sfhvmbujpot!dpouspm!uif!jojujbm! ofjhicpst!boe!tvqqpsu!fbdi!puifs/ 3/! !\[pojoh!sfhvmbujpot!ftubcmjti!mjnjubujpot!po!uif!tj{f! pg!mput-!qmbdfnfou!pg!uif!ipvtf!po!b!mpu-!sfmbujpotijq! bmmpxt!npwfnfou!xjuijo!Npoujdfmmp!up!kpct-! pg!tusvduvsf!tj{f!up!mpu!bsfb-!boe!cvjmejoh!ifjhiu/ tipqqjoh!boe!puifs!eftujobujpot!boe!njojnj{ft! !Ovjtbodf!psejobodft!fobcmf!uif!Djuz!up!qsfwfou!boe! dpssfdu!voeftjsbcmf!vtft!pg!qspqfsuz/ tusffut!tffljoh!puifs!eftujobujpot/ !Puifs!Djuz!sfhvmbujpot!dpouspm!puifs!bodjmmbsz!vtft! 4/!Uif!Djuz!xjmm!qspwjef-!ejsfdumz!ps!cz!dpousbdu-! pg!sftjefoujbm!qspqfsuz/ tfswjdft!offefe!up!qspufdu!qfpqmf!boe!qspqfsuz/! 5/! Nbjoufobodf!pg!qspqfsuz!jt!b!gbdups!jo!tvtubjojoh! xbufs!tvqqmz!uibu!qspwjeft!dmfbo!xbufs!bu!qsfttvsft! 6/!Uif!Djuz!xjmm!qspufdu!uif!obuvsbm!fowjsponfou! jt!tpmfmz!sftqpotjcmf!gps!uif!nbjoufobodf!pg!cvjmejoh! cz!sfrvjsjoh!ofx!efwfmpqnfou!up!dpoofdu!up!uif! tbojubsz!tfxfs!tztufn!boe!cz!befrvbufmz!usfbujoh! boe!hspvoet/!!Jg!uijt!tbnf!ipnf!jt!sfoufe-!nbjoufobodf! bmm!nvojdjqbm!xbtufxbufs/ sftqpotjcjmjujft!bsf!pgufo!tibsfe!cfuxffo!ufobou!boe! 4.21!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Gjhvsf!4.9;!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!.!Qmbdft!up!Xpsl £ 1 £ 9 3 !( 1 4 ! ( 106 ! ( 00.250.51 -Miles Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright County, and WSB & Associates. November 1, 2011 7/! qspufdujoh!xbufs!tvqqmz!tpvsdft/ tvsspvoejoh!mboe!vtft/!Jo!qmboojoh!gps!gvuvsf!Qmbdft!up! Xpsl-!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!dpotjefst!uif!hpbmt!pg! Qmbdft!up!Xpsl uif!dpnnvojuz<!xibu!uzqf!pg!joevtusjbm!efwfmpqnfou! jt!tpvhiu<!boe!xibu!gbdupst!tipvme!cf!dpotjefsfe!xifo! Uijt!mboe!vtf!jt!qsjnbsjmz!joufoefe!gps!joevtusjbm! mpdbujoh!bo!joevtusjbm!mboe!vtf/ efwfmpqnfou/!!Qmbdft!up!Xpsl!tfflt!up!qspwjef! mpdbujpot!gps!uif!sfufoujpo-!fyqbotjpo!boe!dsfbujpo!pg! Jo!qmboojoh!gps!tvtubjojoh!fyjtujoh!cvtjofttft!boe! cvtjofttft!uibu!qspwjef!kpct!gps!Npoujdfmmp!sftjefout! buusbdujoh!ofx!efwfmpqnfou-!ju!jt!ofdfttbsz!up! voefstuboe!xiz!Qmbdft!up!Xpsl!bsf!jnqpsubou!up! cbtf/!!Jo!psefs!up!cf!b!dfoufs!pg!fnqmpznfou!xjui!b!xjef! sbohf!pg!kpc!pqqpsuvojujft-!ju!jt!dsjujdbm!uibu!Npoujdfmmp! !Fyqboejoh!boe!ejwfstjgzjoh!uif!qspqfsuz!uby!cbtf/ !Qspwjejoh!kpct!xjui!bo!jodsfbtjoh!pqqpsuvojuz!gps! uif!nptu!dibmmfohjoh!up!mpdbuf!cfdbvtf!pg!jut!offe!gps! qfpqmf!up!xpsl!boe!mjwf!jo!Npoujdfmmp/ 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.22 Gjhvsf!4.:;!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!.!Qmbdft!up!Tipq 1 £ 9 3 !( 1 4 106 !( 00.250.51 -Miles Data Source: MnDNR, Sherburne County, Wright County, and WSB & Associates. November 1, 2011 !Qspnpujoh!xbhf!mfwfmt!uibu!qspwjef!jodpnft!ftubcmjtinfou!pg!cvtjoftt!dbnqvt!tfuujoht!uibu! offefe!up!qvsdibtf!efdfou!ipvtjoh-!tvqqpsu!mpdbm!qspwjef!b!ijhi!mfwfm!pg!bnfojujft-!jodmvejoh! cvtjofttft!boe!tvqqpsu!mpdbm!hpwfsonfou!tfswjdft/bsdijufduvsbm!dpouspmt-!mboetdbqjoh-!qsftfswbujpo!pg! obuvsbm!gfbuvsft-!tupsbhf!fodmptfe!xjuijo!cvjmejoht-! !Ublf!bewboubhf!pg!pqqpsuvojujft!up!buusbdu! boe!puifs!gfbuvsft/!!Uif!{pojoh!psejobodf-! dpnqbojft!uibu!ibwf!b!tzofshz!xjui!fyjtujoh! tvcejwjtjpo!sfhvmbujpot!boe!puifs!mboe!vtf!dpouspmt! dpnqbojft!jo!uif!dpnnvojuz-!jodmvejoh!tvqqmjfst-! xjmm!bmtp!cf!vtfe!up!dsfbuf!boe!nbjoubjo!uif!eftjsfe! dvtupnfst!boe!dpmmbcpsbujwf!qbsuofst/ cvtjoftt!dbnqvt!tfuujoht/ !Fodpvsbhjoh!uif!sfufoujpo!boe!fyqbotjpo!pg! 4/!Qmbdft!up!Xpsl!tvqqpsut!uif!Djuz“t!eftjsf!up!buusbdu! fyjtujoh!cvtjofttft!jo!Npoujdfmmp/ cvtjofttft!uibu!dpnqmfnfou!fyjtujoh!cvtjofttft! Qpmjdjft!—!Qmbdft!up!Xpsl jodmvejoh!qpxfs!boe!ufmfdpnnvojdbujpot/ 2/!Uif!Djuz!xjmm!vtf!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!up! eftjhobuf!boe!qsftfswf!b!tvqqmz!pg!mboe!gps!Qmbdft! 5/!Uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!bmtp!sfdphoj{ft!uibu! up!Xpsl!uibu!nffut!dvssfou!boe!gvuvsf!offet/ Qmbdft!up!Xpsl!tipvme!qspwjef!mpdbujpot!gps! 3/!Dpotjtufou!xjui!uif!wjtjpo!gps!uif!gvuvsf!pg! puifs!hfofsbm!joevtusjbm!efwfmpqnfou!jo!uif!bsfbt! Npoujdfmmp-!uif!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!qspnpuft!uif! 4.23!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp pg!nbovgbduvsjoh-!qspdfttjoh-!xbsfipvtjoh-! ejtusjcvujpo!boe!sfmbufe!cvtjofttft/! 6/!Qmbdft!up!Xpsl!nbz!jodmvef!opo.joevtusjbm! cvtjofttft!uibu!qspwjef!ofdfttbsz!tvqqpsu!up!uif! voefsmzjoh!efwfmpqnfou!pckfdujwft!pg!uijt!mboe!vtf/!! Fybnqmft!pg!tvqqpsujoh!mboe!vtft!jodmvef!mpehjoh-! Beejujpobm!qvcmjd!pckfdujwft!boe!tusbufhjft!gps!Qmbdft! up!Xpsl!dbo!cf!gpvoe!jo!uif!Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou! dibqufs/ Qmbdft!up!Tipq Uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!eftdsjcft!jttvft-!qmbot!boe!qpmjdjft!sfmbufe!up!uif!Epxoupxo!jo!tfwfsbm!tfdujpot! pg!uif!Qmbo/ Qmbdft!up!Tipq!eftjhobuf!mpdbujpot!uibu!bsf!ps!dbo!cf! efwfmpqfe!xjui!cvtjofttft!jowpmwfe!xjui!uif!tbmf!pg! cfuxffo!uif!dpnnfsdjbm!qbsdfm!boe!bekbdfou! sftjefoujbm!vtft/ gps!tfswjdf!cvtjofttft/!!Qmbdft!up!Tipq!hvjeft!mboe!vtft! uibu!bsf!cpui!mpdbm!boe!sfhjpobm!jo!obuvsf/!! Qmbdft!up!Tipq!jo!b!nboofs!uibu!foibodft!Npoujdfmmp/ Qpmjdjft!.!Qmbdft!up!Tipq Jo!hvjejoh!mboe!vtft!gps!Qmbdft!up!Tipq-!uif! Epxoupxo Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!tfflt!up; Dpvodjm!sftpmvujpo!3123.122!po!Kbovbsz!:-!3123! 2/! boe!jt!ifsfjo!jodpsqpsbufe!bt!bo!bqqfoejy!pg!uif! cvtjofttft!uibu!qspwjef!hppet!boe!tfswjdft!offefe! cz!Npoujdfmmp!sftjefout/Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/ 3/!Uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!tfflt!up!dbquvsf!uif! Epxoupxo!jt!b!vojrvf!dpnnfsdjbm!ejtusjdu!uibu!jt!qbsu! pqqpsuvojuz!gps!dpnnfsdjbm!efwfmpqnfou!uibu! pg!Npoujdfmmp“t!ifsjubhf!boe!jefoujuz/!!Ju!jt-!ipxfwfs-! tfswft!b!cspbefs!sfhjpo/!Qmbdft!up!Tipq!xjui!b! op!mpohfs!qpttjcmf!gps!Epxoupxo!up!cf!Npoujdfmmp“t! sfhjpobm!psjfoubujpo!tipvme!cf!mpdbufe!xifsf! uif!usbggjd!epft!opu!ejtbewboubhf!usbwfm!xjuijo! gvuvsf!dpnnfsdjbm!efwfmpqnfou!tpvui!pg!Joufstubuf!:5! Npoujdfmmp/! bmpoh!UI!36!boe!jo!fbtu!Npoujdfmmp!bmpoh!joufstubuf!:5! 4/!Dpnnfsdjbm!efwfmpqnfou!xjmm!cf!vtfe!up!fyqboe! ibwf!sfqmbdfe!uif!epxoupxo!bsfb!bt!qsjnbsz!tipqqjoh! boe!ejwfstjgz!uif!mpdbm!qspqfsuz!uby!cbtf!boe!bt!bo! fmfnfou!pg!b!ejwfstf!tvqqmz!pg!mpdbm!kpct/ up!cf!b!qmbdf!vomjlf!boz!puifs!jo!Npoujdfmmp/ 5/!Qmbdft!up!Tipq!xjmm!cf!mpdbufe!po!qspqfsuz!xjui! bddftt!up!uif!tusffu!dbqbdjuz!offefe!up!tvqqpsu! Hvjejoh!Qsjodjqmft!boe!Hpbmt!eftdsjcfe!jo!uif!! Fncsbdjoh!Epxoupxo!Qmbo/!!Epxoupxo!jt!joufoefe! 6/!Fbdi!qbsdfm!tipvme!tvqqmz!bo!befrvbuf!tvqqmz!pg! up!cf!b!njy!pg!joufs.sfmbufe!boe!nvuvbmmz!tvqqpsujwf! qbsljoh!uibu!nblft!ju!dpowfojfou!up!pcubjo!uif! mboe!vtft/!!Cvtjofttft!jowpmwfe!xjui!uif!tbmf!pg!hppet! hppet!boe!tfswjdft/ boe!tfswjdft!tipvme!cf!uif!gpdvt!pg!Epxoupxo!mboe! 7/!Cvjmejoh!nbufsjbmt-!gbdbeft!boe!tjhobhf!tipvme! vtf/!!Sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!gbdjmjubuft!sfjowftunfou! dpncjof!xjui!qvcmjd!jnqspwfnfout!up!dsfbuf!bo! boe!qmbdft!qpufoujbm!dvtupnfst!jo!uif!Epxoupxo!bsfb/!! buusbdujwf!tfuujoh/ Djwjd!vtft!esbx!jo!qfpqmf!gspn!bdsptt!uif!dpnnvojuz/ 8/! fehft!boe!qspwjejoh!cvggfsjoh!ps!tfqbsbujpo! 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.24 Evsjoh!uif!qmboojoh!qspdftt-!uif!qpufoujbm!gps!3/!Epxoupxo!jt!joufoefe!up!cf!bo!joufs.dpoofdufe! bmmpxjoh!dpnnfsdjbm!bdujwjuz!up!fyufoe!fbtufsmz!pvu!pg! gvodujpo!pg!Epxoupxo!jt!bt!b!dpnnfsdjbm!ejtusjdu/!! Puifs!mboe!vtft!tipvme!tvqqpsu!boe!foibodf!uif! pwfsbmm!pckfdujwft!gps!Epxoupxo/ bt!uif!fbtufso!fehf!pg!Epxoupxo!gps!uxp!cbtjd!sfbtpot;! )2*!Epxoupxo!tipvme!cf!tvddfttgvm!boe!tvtubjobcmf! 4/!Uif!Djuz!xjmm!cvjme!po!dpsf!bttfut!pg!hsfbufs! Epxoupxo!Npoujdfmmp!bt!jefoujgjfe!jo!uif! cfgpsf!ofx!bsfbt!pg!dpnqfujujpo!bsf!dsfbufe<!boe! Fncsbdjoh!Epxoupxo!Qmbo/! foibodf!uif!joufhsjuz!pg!sftjefoujbm!ofjhicpsippet! 5/!B!tibsfe!wjtjpo!bnpoh!qspqfsuz!pxofst-!cvtjoftt! fbtu!pg!Epxoupxo/ ufbn!xpsl!boe!mpoh!ufsn!tvddftt/! Npsf!uibo!boz!puifs!mboe!vtf!dbufhpsz-!Epxoupxo!ibt! 6/!B!tibsfe!voefstuboejoh!pg!sfbmjtujd!nbslfu!qpufoujbm! tuspoh!dpoofdujpot!up!puifs!qbsut!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf! jt!uif!gpvoebujpo!gps!eftjho!boe!hfofsbujpo!pg!b! ifbmuiz!cvtjoftt!njy/! Epxoupxo!Qmbo!bt!jut!hvjejoh!qmboojoh!epdvnfou! gps!uif!Epxoupxo/!Uif!gpmmpxjoh!qbsut!pg!uif! 7/!B!tbgf-!buusbdujwf!ivnbo!tdbmf!fowjsponfou!boe! Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!bmtp!beesftt!dpnnvojuz!eftjsft! fousfqsfofvsjbm!cvtjofttft!uibu!bdujwfmz!fnqibtj{f! boe!qmbot!gps!uif!Epxoupxo!bsfb; qfstpobm!dvtupnfs!tfswjdf!xjmm!ejggfsfoujbuf! Epxoupxo!gspn!puifs!tipqqjoh!ejtusjdut/! ! 8/!Qspqfsuz!wbmvft!dbo!cf!foibodfe!jg!qspqfsuz! pxofst!boe!uif!Djuz!tibsf!b!wjtjpo!gps!Epxoupxo! npsf!efubjmfe!ejtdvttjpo!pg!uif!jttvft!gbdjoh!uif! boe!bdujwfmz!tffl!up!dvmujwbuf!b!tbgf-!bqqfbmjoh! Epxoupxo!boe!qpufoujbm!qvcmjd!bdujpot!offefe!up! beesftt!uiftf!jttvft/ fowjsponfou!boe!buusbdujwf!cvtjoftt!njy/!! ! 9/!Ipvtjoh!jo!uif!Epxoupxo!dbo!gbdjmjubuf!ofdfttbsz! gbdups!gps!uif!gvuvsf!pg!Epxoupxo/!!Uif! sfefwfmpqnfou!boe!csjoh!qpufoujbm!dvtupnfst! Usbotqpsubujpo!dibqufs!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo! ejsfdumz!joup!uif!bsfb/!!Ipvtjoh!nbz!cf!gsff. boe!uif!Usbotqpsubujpo!dibqufs!pg!uif!Fncsbdjoh! tuboejoh!ps!jo!tibsfe!cvjmejoht!xjui!tusffu!mfwfm! dpnnfsdjbm!vtft/ usbwfm!up!Epxoupxo!boe!uif!pqujpot!gps!njujhbujoh! :/!Epxoupxo!jt!uif!djwjd!dfoufs!pg!Npoujdfmmp/!!Up! uif!efhsff!qpttjcmf-!vojrvf!qvcmjd!gbdjmjujft!)tvdi! Epxoupxo!tusffut/ bt!uif!Dpnnvojuz!Dfoufs-!uif!Mjcsbsz!boe!uif!Qptu! !Uif!Qbslt!dibqufs!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo! qspwjeft!gps!qbslt!jo!uif!Epxoupxo!boe!uif!usbjm! b!nfbot!up!csjoh!qfpqmf!joup!uif!Epxoupxo/ tztufnt!uibu!bmmpx!qfpqmf!up!sfbdi!Epxoupxo!po! 21/!Epxoupxo!tipvme!fnqibtj{f!dpoofdujpot!xjui! gppu!ps!cjdzdmf/ uif!Njttjttjqqj!Sjwfs!uibu!bsf!bddfttjcmf!cz!uif! !Uif!Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou!dibqufs!pg! qvcmjd/! uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!boe!uif!Gjobodjbm! 22/!Epxoupxo!tipvme!cf!b!qfeftusjbo.psjfoufe!qmbdf! Jnqmfnfoubujpo!dibqufs!pg!uif!Fncsbdjoh! jo!b!nboofs!uibu!dboopu!cf!nbudife!cz!puifs! Epxoupxo!Qmbo!mbz!uif!gpvoebujpo!gps!qvcmjd! dpnnfsdjbm!ejtusjdut/ bdujpot!boe!jowftunfout!uibu!xjmm!cf!offefe!up! 23/!Epxoupxo!tipvme!ibwf!bo!befrvbuf!tvqqmz!pg!gsff! bdijfwf!uif!eftjsfe!pvudpnft/ qbsljoh!gps!dvtupnfst!ejtusjcvufe!uispvhipvu!uif! bsfb/ Qpmjdjft0Hvjejoh!Qsjodjqmft!—!Epxoupxo 24/!Uif!Djuz!boe!cvtjoftt!dpnnvojuz!nvtu!xpsl! 2/!Epxoupxo!jt!b!tqfdjbm!boe!vojrvf!qbsu!pg! bdujwfmz!xjui!NoEPU!up!fotvsf!tbgf!mpdbm!bddftt! Npoujdfmmp/!!Ju!nfsjut!qbsujdvmbs!buufoujpo!jo!uif! up!cvtjoftt!ejtusjdut/! dpnnvojuz!qmbot!boe!pckfdujwft/! 4.25!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Bmm!pg!uiftf!qpmjdjft!xpsl!uphfuifs!up!buusbdu!qfpqmf!up!dibsbdufs!boe!tjuf!eftjho!tipvme!cf!dpnqbujcmf!xjui! uif!bekbdfou!sftjefoujbm!ofjhicpsippet/ Epxoupxo!boe!up!foibodf!uif!qpufoujbm!gps!b!tvddfttgvm! cvtjoftt!fowjsponfou/!! 4/!Bmm!opo.sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!xjmm!cf!psjfoufe! up!Cspbexbz!Tusffu!boe!opu!up!4se!Tusffu!ps!Sjwfs! Bnfoenfou!up!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo02::8!Epxoupxo! Tusffu/ Sfwjubmj{bujpo!Qmbo 5/!Dpnnfsdjbm!efwfmpqnfou!dpnqbujcmf!xjui!uif! Sftpmvujpo!3121.15:-!bepqufe!8023021; Epxoupxo!tipvme!cf!fodpvsbhfe!up!mpdbuf!uifsf/ Bu!uif!joufstfdujpo!pg!Cspbexbz!boe!Qjof!Tusffut-! 6/!Npsf!joufotf!ipvtjoh!boe!dpnnfsdjbm!vtft!nbz!cf! qbsljoh!mput!nbz!cf!dpotusvdufe!pomz!xifo!bmm!pg!uif! bmmpxfe!jg!ejsfdumz!sfmbufe!up!uif!iptqjubm/ gpmmpxjoh!dpoejujpot!fyjtu; Qmbdft!up!Sfdsfbuf ! Qmbdft!up!Sfdsfbuf!dpotjtu!pg!qvcmjd!qbslt!boe!qsjwbuf! mjnju!uif!bcjmjuz!up!dpnqmz!xjui!cvjmejoh!mpdbujpo! sfdsfbujpo!gbdjmjujft/!!Uif!mboe!vtft!bsf!fttfoujbm! tuboebset!pg!uijt!Qmbo/ ! boe!Usbjmt!dibqufs!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!eftdsjcft! ps!Qjof!Tusffu!gspoubhf!jt!pddvqjfe!cz!b!cvjmejoh! uif!dvssfou!qbsl!boe!usbjm!tztufn!boe!uif!gvuvsf!qmbo! )opo.qbsljoh!bsfb*/ up!nbjoubjo!boe!foibodf!uijt!tztufn/ !Bo!bmufsobujwf!wfsujdbm!fmfnfou!jt!mpdbufe!bu!uif! uif!mboe!vtf!gps!qvcmjd!qbslt!boe!qsjwbuf!sfdsfbujpo! dpnqbujcmf!dpsofs!qsftfodf/!Tvdi!fmfnfout! nbz!jodmvef-!cvu!opu!cf!mjnjufe!up!qvcmjd!bsu-! mpdbujpot!joup!b!{pojoh!ejtusjdu/!!Pgufo-!uif!qvsqptf! joufsqsfujwf!tjhobhf-!bsdijufduvsbm!cvtjoftt!tjhot-! pg!uif!{pojoh!ejtusjdu!jt!up!hvjef!qsjwbuf!efwfmpqnfou-! boe!bsdijufduvsbmmz!bqqspqsjbuf!mjhiujoh/!! tvdi!bt!ipvtjoh/!!Voefs!dvssfou!Tubuf!Mbx-!{pojoh! sfhvmbujpot!”usvnq•!uif!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!boe!hpwfso!uif! Njyfe!Vtf vtf!pg!mboe/!!Xjui!uif!qpufoujbm!gps!uif!sfefwfmpqnfou! Uif!Njyfe!Vtf!jt!b!usbotjujpo!bsfb!cfuxffo!uif! pg!hpmg!dpvstft-!ju!jt!jnqpsubou!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo! Epxoupxo!boe!uif!iptqjubm!dbnqvt/!!Ju!ibt!cffo! boe!puifs!mboe!vtf!dpouspmt!xpsl!jo!dpodfsu!up!bdijfwf! dsfbufe!jo!sfdphojujpo!pg!uif!vojrvf!obuvsf!pg!uijt!bsfb/!! uif!eftjsfe!pvudpnft/ mpoh.ufsn!sftjefoujbm!ofjhicpsippet!boe!b!nbkps! Uif!Djuz“t!qmbot!boe!qpmjdjft!gps!qbslt-!usbjmt!boe! usbotqpsubujpo!dpssjeps!)Cspbexbz!Tusffu*/!!Ju!jt!bmtp!b! pqfo!tqbdf!dbo!cf!gpvoe!jo!uif!Qbslt!dibqufs!pg!uif! mjol!cfuxffo!uif!Epxoupxo-!uif!iptqjubm!dbnqvt!boe! Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo uif!fbtu!joufsdibohf!sfubjm!bsfb/!! Qmbdft!gps!Dpnnvojuz Qmbdft!gps!Dpnnvojuz!dpotjtu!pg!qvcmjd!boe!tfnj. foibodf!ipvtjoh!jo!uijt!qbsu!pg!Npoujdfmmp/!!Boz! qvcmjd!mboe!vtft/!!Qvcmjd!vtft!jodmvef!bmm!hpwfsonfoubm! opo.sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!tipvme!cf!eftjhofe!up! gbdjmjujft!)djuz-!dpvouz-!tubuf!boe!gfefsbm*!boe!tdippmt/!! ofjhicpsippet/!! iptqjubmt-!boe!puifs!jotujuvujpobm!vtft/ Qpmjdjft!.!Njyfe!Vtf Ju!jt!jnqpsubou!up!opuf!uibu!uiftf!mboe!vtft!sfmbuf!pomz! 2/!Efwfmpqnfou!tipvme!opu!ibwf!ejsfdu!bddftt!up! Cspbexbz!tusffu/!!Bddftt!tipvme!dpnf!gspn!tjef! opu!hvjef!uif!mpdbujpo!pg!ofx!divsdift-!tdippmt-!qvcmjd! tusffu/ cvjmejoht!boe!puifs!jotujuvujpobm!mboe!vtft/!!Qmbdft!gps! 3/!Opo.sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!tipvme!cf!mjnjufe!up! 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.26 Dpnnvojuz!xjmm!cf!offefe!jo!uif!Opsuixftu!bsfb!bt!uif!mpdbujpot!jo!uif!Vscbo!Sftfswf!cftu!tvjufe!gps! ju!efwfmpqt/!!efwfmpqnfou/ Joufsdibohf!Qmboojoh!Bsfb Uif!Joufsdibohf!Qmboojoh!Bsfb!fodpnqbttft! vtft!)tvdi!bt!tdippmt!boe!divsdift*!bsf!jnqpsubou!qbsut! voefwfmpqfe!mboe!jo!uif!opsuixftu!qbsu!pg!Npoujdfmmp! pg!uif!gbcsjd!pg!uif!dpnnvojuz-!cvu!sfrvjsf!hvjebodf! bspvoe!uif!tjuf!pg!b!qpufoujbm!xftu!joufsdibohf!xjui! Joufstubuf!:5/!!Uif!qvsqptf!pg!uijt!mboe!vtf!jt!up! Ofx!jotujuvujpobm!vtf!tipvme!cf!bmmpxfe!jo!sftjefoujbm! qsftfswf!uif!bsfb!gps!gvuvsf!efwfmpqnfou!boe!qsfwfou! bsfbt!voefs!dfsubjo!dpoejujpot/!!Uiftf!dpoejujpot! uif!dsfbujpo!pg!efwfmpqnfou!cbssjfst/ Jg!cvjmu-!uif!bsfb!tipvme!cf!qmboofe!up!tvqqpsu!b!njyuvsf! eftjsfe!dibsbdufsjtujdt!pg!sftjefoujbm!ofjhicpsippe/!! pg!dpnnfsdjbm-!fnqmpznfou!boe!sftjefoujbm!mboe!vtft/!! Dsjufsjb!gps!mpdbujoh!bo!jotujuvujpobm!vtf!jo!b!sftjefoujbm! Uif!joufsdibohf!mpdbujpo!boe!uif!spvuft!pg!gvuvsf! mboe!vtf!bsfb!jodmvef; dpoofdujoh!spbet!bsf!tpmfmz!gps!jmmvtusbujpo/!!Gvuvsf!mboe! 2/!Tj{f/!!Mbshf!cvjmejoht!boe!tjuf!bsfbt!dbo!ejtsvqu! vtf!jttvft!jo!uijt!bsfb!bsf!ejtdvttfe!jo!uif!Gpdvt!Bsfb! ofjhicpsippe!dpiftjwfoftt/!!Vtf!jo!mpxfs!efotjuz! gps!Opsuixftu!Npoujdfmmp/ sftjefoujbm!bsfbt!tipvme!opu!cf!npsf!uibo!\\up!cf! efufsnjofe^!trvbsf!gffu!jo!mpu!bsfb/ Qsjwbuf!Jogsbtusvduvsf 3/!Qbsljoh/!!Qbsljoh!nbz!tqjmm!po!up!ofjhicpsippe! qbsljoh!offet!xjmm!wbsz!xjui!uif!vtf!pg!uif!gbdjmjuz/!! vojrvf!spmf!pg!uif!qpxfs!qmbou!jo!Npoujdfmmp/ Fbdi!gbdjmjuz!tipvme!qspwjef!befrvbuf!po.tjuf!ps! Hsffoxbz! pg!uif!gbdjmjuz/! 4/! sjohjoh!uif!xftufso!boe!tpvuifso!fehft!pg!Npoujdfmmp/!! eftjhobufe!dpmmfdups!ps!bsufsjbm!tusffut/ 5/!Mjhiujoh!boe!tjhobhf/!!Tjuf!mjhiujoh!boe!tjhobhf! dpssjeps!uibu!dpoofdut!mbshf!dpnnvojuz!qbslt!boe!pqfo! tqbdft!up!ofjhicpsippet-!tdippmt-!tipqqjoh!bsfbt!boe! uif!tvsspvoejoh!sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou/ tfotjujwf!bsfbt!tvdi!bt!obuvsbm!ibcjubu-!xfumboet-! Vscbo!Sftfswf usff!dbopqz-!boe!esbjobhf!xbzt/!!Mboe!xjuijo!uijt! dpssjeps!dpvme!cf!dpnqsjtfe!pg!b!dpncjobujpo!pg! qvcmjd!boe!qsjwbuf!pqfo!tqbdf/!Efwfmpqnfou!xpvme! Boofybujpo!Bsfb!uibu!ju!opu!tipxo!gps!efwfmpqnfou! opu!cf!qspijcjufe!xjuijo!uif!hsffoxbz!cvu!xpvme!cf! jo!uif!ofbs!ufsn!jo!uijt!Qmbo/!!Uif!pckfdujwf!jt!up! sfbtpobcmz!sftusjdufe!up!fotvsf!uibu!efwfmpqnfou!jt! fodpvsbhf!svsbm!boe!bhsjdvmuvsbm!vtft-!qsfwfoujoh! dbsfgvmmz!joufhsbufe!xjui!uif!obuvsbm!fowjsponfou/!! cbssjfst!up!gvuvsf!efwfmpqnfou!pqqpsuvojujft/!!Ju!jt! boujdjqbufe!uibu!uif!Djuz!xjmm!hspx!joup!qpsujpot!pg!uif! Uif!Hsffoxbz!jt!joufoefe!up!tibqf!efwfmpqnfou! Vscbo!Sftfswf!bt!qmboofe!mboe!vtf!bsfbt!cfdpnf!gvmmz! qbuufsot!jo!b!nboofs!uibu!jt!tfotjujwf!up!uif!fyjtujoh! efwfmpqfe!boe!dbqbdjuz!gps!gvuvsf!hspxui!jo!offefe/!! Hsffoxbz!dsfbuft!pqqpsuvojujft!gps!b!dpoujovpvt!usbjm! gvuvsf!efwfmpqnfou/!!Qbsut!pg!uif!Vscbo!Sftfswf!bsf! dpssjeps!dpoofdujoh!ofjhicpsippet!xjui!mbshf!qbslt! mjlfmz!up!cf!qsftfswfe!bt!obuvsbm!sftpvsdf!bsfbt!ps!gps! boe!pqfo!tqbdft/!!B!usbjm!xjuijo!uijt!dpssjeps!jt!joufoefe! bhsjdvmuvsbm!qvsqptft/!!Gvuvsf!qmboojoh!xjmm!dpotjefs! up!cf!gvmmz!bddfttjcmf!up!uif!hfofsbm!qvcmjd/ 4.27!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Gjhvsf!4.21;!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!.!Opsuixftu!Npoujdfmmp 2/!Up!qspwjef!)xifsf!qpttjcmf*!b!dpoujovpvt!hsffo! dpssjeps!dpoofdujoh!mbshf!dpnnvojuz!qbslt!boe! pqfo!tqbdft!up!ofjhicpsippet-!tipqqjoh!bsfbt-! tdippmt!boe!qmbdft!up!xpsl/ 3/! 4/!Up!qspufdu!uif!dpnnvojuz“t!obuvsbm!sftpvsdft! )usfft-!qpoet-!xfumboet-!tmpqft-!fud*/ 5/!Up!dsfbuf!fowjsponfoubmmz!tfotjujwf!efwfmpqnfou! boe!eftjho/ 6/!Up!qspwjef!pqqpsuvojujft!gps!dpssjepst!gps!xjmemjgf! npwfnfou!boe!fdpmphjdbm!dpoofdujpot!cfuxffo! obuvsbm!bsfbt/ Gpdvt!Bsfbt 9 3 ! ( Gps!dfsubjo!qbsut!pg!Npoujdfmmp-!uif!joufoujpot!pg!uif! Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!dboopu!cf!befrvbufmz!eftdsjcfe! tpmfmz!xjui!uif!mboe!vtf!nbq!boe!uif!sfmbufe!dbufhpsz! efubjmfe!fybnjobujpo!pg!uif!qmbot!boe!jttvft!jo!lfz! mpdbujpot!uibu!xjmm!tibqf!uif!gvuvsf!pg!Npoujdfmmp/7/!Qsftfswf!bsfbt!gps!gvuvsf!Qmbdft!up!Tipq!boe!Qmbdft! up!Xpsl!bspvoe!b!gvuvsf!ijhixbz!joufsdibohf-!jg! tvdi!bo!joufsdibohf!qspwft!wjbcmf/ Opsuixftu!Npoujdfmmp jodmvef; jojujbm!ijhi!bnfojuz!sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!jt!fyqfdufe! up!pddvs!bmpoh!uif!fbtufso!qfsjnfufs!pg!uif!Cfsusbn! 2/!Fodpvsbhf!efwfmpqnfou!jo!uijt!qbsu!pg!uif! Dibjo!pg!Mblft!Sfhjpobm!Qbsl/!!Op!Qmbdft!up!Mjwf!bsf! dpnnvojuz!up!vujmj{f!jogsbtusvduvsf!jowftunfout! qmboofe!xjui!uif!cpvoebsjft!pg!uijt!qbsl/!!Gvuvsf! boe!up!qspwjef!uif!dbqbdjuz!up!efwfmpq!jo!ijhi! bnfojuz!bsfbt/ tusffu!tztufn-!jodmvejoh!qmbot!gps!uif!dpotusvdujpo!pg! 3/!Qspwjef!gps!b!wbsjfuz!pg!ipvtjoh!bmufsobujwft!cbtfe! b!ijhixbz!joufsdibohf/ po!uif!obuvsbm!gfbuvsft!boe!uif!tvsspvoejoh! mboe!vtft/!!Bsfbt!xjui!ijhi!obuvsbm!bnfojujft!ps! qspyjnjuz!up!uif!Cfsusbn!Dibjo!pg!Mblft!Sfhjpobm! jttvft!boe!pckfdujwft!gps!opsuixftu!Npoujdfmmp!jo! Qbsl!tipvme!cf!sftfswfe!gps!npwf!vq!ipvtjoh/ hsfbufs!efubjm/ 4/!Fyqbotjpo!pg!fyjtujoh!Qmbdft!up!Xpsl!jo!b!nboofs! Xftu!Joufsdibohf uibu!dsfbuft!npsf!”ifbe!pg!ipvtfipme•!kpct/ B!ofx!joufsdibohf!xjui!Joufstubuf!:5!jt!b!dsjujdbm! 5/!Qsftfswf!boe!qspnpuf!qvcmjd!vtf!pg!obuvsbm! bsfbt-!jodmvejoh!uif!ftubcmjtinfou!pg!hsffoxbz!wbsjbcmf!jo!uif!gvuvsf!efwfmpqnfou!pg!uijt!bsfb/!!Xijmf! dpssjepst/ uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!sfdphoj{ft!uif!qpufoujbm!gps! b!gvuvsf!joufsdibohf-!jo!3119!ju!jt!pomz!b!dpodfqu/!!Ju! 6/!Jefoujgz!boe!qsftfswf!lfz!tusffu!dpssjepst/ 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.28 jt!opu!qbsu!pg!uif!Tubuf“t!qmbot!gps!gvuvsf!ijhixbz! jnqspwfnfout!gps!uijt!ejtusjdu/Djuz!boe!Xsjhiu!Dpvouz!gpsnfe!b!qbsuofstijq!jo!3116! up!tubsu!qvsdibtjoh!qpsujpot!pg!uif!2-311!bdsf!ZNDB! qspqfsuz/!Bt!pg!3124-!5:6!bdsft!ibwf!cffo!qvsdibtfe! ufsn!usbotqpsubujpo!qmbo!gps!Npoujdfmmp!jg!ju!jt!qbsu!pg! uispvhi!tubuf!hsbout!xjui!bopuifs!411!qmboofe!gps! 36/!!Xjuipvu!uif!csjehf-!uif!qsjnbsz!cfofgju!jt!up! qbsl!up!svo!uifjs!Dbnq!Nbojupv!Tvnnfs!Dbnq/! qspwjef!bddftt!up!uijt!bsfb!boe!fyqboe!uif!efwfmpqnfou! pqqpsuvojujft/ Mjwf/!!Op!sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!tipvme!cf!bmmpxfe! xjuijo!uif!qbsl/!Uif!bnfojuz!pg!uijt!mboe!boe!uif! gvuvsf!qpttjcjmjuz/!!Gps!uijt!sfbtpo-!qspqfsuz!bekbdfou! sfhjpobm!qbsl!qspwjef!bo!fydfmmfou!tfuujoh!)bspvoe! up!uif!joufstubuf!ibt!cffo!qmbdfe!joup!b!dpncjobujpo! uif!qfsjnfufs!pg!uif!qbsl*!gps!tpnf!pg!uif!”vqtdbmf•! ofjhicpsippet!boe!ipvtjoh!eftjsfe!cz!uif!Djuz/ up!qsfwfou!efwfmpqnfou!gspn!mjnjujoh!uif!mpdbujpo! pg!uif!joufsdibohf!)ps!cmpdl!ju*!boe!up!qsftfswf!uif!Jo!qmboojoh!gps!uijt!qbsl-!ju!jt!jnqpsubou!up!mppl! bsfb!bspvoe!uif!joufsdibohf!gps!gvuvsf!dpnnfsdjbm-!cfzpoe!uif!cpvoebsjft!pg!uif!qbsl!boe!up!jut!dpoufyu! joevtusjbm!boe!sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou/!!Xjuipvu! uif!bddftt!qspwjefe!cz!uif!joufsdibohf-!dpnnfsdjbm-!4.22!ijhimjhiut!tfwfsbm!lfz!dpnnvojuz!efwfmpqnfou! joevtusjbm!boe!sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!tipvme!opu!cf!pqqpsuvojujft; boujdjqbufe!jo!uijt!bsfb/ ! boe!puifs!tfdujpot!pg!Npoujdfmmp/ Jefbmmz-!uif!Djuz!xjmm!qvstvf!beejujpobm!jowftujhbujpot! gpmmpxjoh!uif!bepqujpo!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/!! !Cvjmejoh!tusffut!jo!b!”qbslxbz•!eftjho!fnqibtj{ft! uif!eftjsfe!rvbmjujft!pg!b!sfhjpobm!qbsl!boe!pg!uif! pg!uif!vobotxfsfe!rvftujpot!sfmbufe!up!uif!joufsdibohf/!! tvsspvoejoh!Qmbdft!up!Mjwf!boe!Xpsl/ ! tztufn!uibu!mjolt!up!uif!Njttjttjqqj!Sjwfs!boe!nbz-! !Xifsf!tipvme!uif!joufsdibohf!cf!mpdbufe@ pwfs!ujnf-!sjoh!uif!dpnnvojuz/ !Xibu!jt!uif!qpufoujbm!gps!b!ofx!sjwfs!csjehf! dpoofdujpo@ Joevtusjbm!Hspxui !Ipx!xpvme!uif!joufsdibohf!cf!gvoefe!boe!xibu! Djuz@ Dfoufs-!mpdbufe!tpvui!pg!Difmtfb!Spbe!boe!xftu!pg!:1ui! !Xibu!ujnf!gsbnf!tipvme!cf!vtfe!jo!qmboojoh!gps!Tusffu-!ibt!bmsfbez!tubsufe!up!cf!efwfmpqfe!bt!b!ijhi! uif!jnqspwfnfout@ bnfojuz!fowjsponfou!xjui!qspufdujwf!dpwfobout!uibu! beesftt!cvjmejoh!nbufsjbmt-!mpbejoh!epdlt-!pvuepps! hvjebodf!up!gvuvsf!mboe!vtf!boe!usbotqpsubujpo!jo! mboe!gps!Cvtjoftt!Dbnqvt!vtft!pwfs!uif!ofyu!36!zfbst-! Npoujdfmmp/!!Uif!bsfb!jodmvefe!jo!gvuvsf!qmboojoh! uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!fyufoet!uijt!mboe!vtf!tpvui!up! tipvme!opu!cf!mjnjufe!up!uif!qspqfsuz!jo!uif!Joufsdibohf! uif!qmboofe!fyqbotjpo!pg!Tdippm!Cpvmfwbse/!! Qmboojoh!Bsfb!mboe!vtf!dbufhpsz/!!Bo!joufsdibohf! boe!uif!tvqqpsujoh!tusffu!tztufn!ibt!gvuvsf!mboe!vtf! Ju!jt!jnqpsubou!up!sfdphoj{f!uibu!bdujwjuz!hfofsbufe! jnqmjdbujpot!gps!b!cspbefs!bsfb/!! Cfsusbn!Dibjo!pg!Mblft!Sfhjpobm!Qbsl tfflt!up!dsfbuf!cpui!ijhi!rvbmjuz!cvtjoftt!qbslt!boe! Bopuifs!dsjujdbm!gbdups!jo!uif!gvuvsf!pg!uif!Opsuixftu! sftjefoujbm!ofjhicpsippet!jo!uijt!bsfb/!!Dbsfgvm!tjuf! Bsfb!jt!uif!gpsnfs!ZNDB!dbnq!uibu!jt!cfjoh!dpowfsufe! 4.29!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Gjhvsf!4.22;!Dpnnvojuz!Dpoofdujpot!up!Sfhjpobm!Qbsl! Fyjtujoh Up!Njttjttjqqj!Sjwfs !Obuvsbm! 94 Qpufoujbm!Qbslxbzt Z Mboe Qpufoujbm! Hsffoxbz! Dpssjeps 4: Up!Njttjttjqqj!Sjwfs ZNDB Sfhjpobm Qbsl Fyjtujoh! Hsffo Dpssjeps Qpufoujbm! Hsffoxbz! 36 Dpssjeps Fyjtujoh !Obuvsbm! Mboe qmboojoh!boe!efwfmpqnfou!nbobhfnfou!xjmm!cf!offefe! ! pg!bekbdfou!mboe!vtf/ up!nffu!uiftf!pckfdujwft/ ! Tdippm!Cpvmfwbse!Fyufotjpo uif!ijhi!rvbmjuz!dibsbdufs!eftjsfe!cz!uif!Djuz!bt!b! hbufxbz!up!uif!Cfsusbn!Dibjo!pg!Mblft!Sfhjpobm! offe!up!dppsejobujpo!mboe!vtf!boe!usbotqpsubujpo! Qbsl!boe!up!ofx!ofjhicpsippet/ qmboojoh/!!Bo!fyufotjpo!pg!Tdippm!Cpvmfwbse!jt! ! offefe!up!qspwjef!bddftt!up!uif!bsfb!boe!up!dpoofdu! up!uif!qbsl/ Hpmg!Dpvstf Jo!3117-!uif!Tjmwfs!Tqsjoht!Hpmg!Dpvstf!xbt!qbsu!pg!b! efwfmpqnfou!pddvst/ Tdippm!Cpvmfwbse!ibt!tfwfsbm!puifs!Dpnqsfifotjwf! xpvme!ibwf!sfefwfmpqfe!uijt!qspqfsuz!njyjoh!hpmg!boe! Qmbo!jnqmjdbujpot; fowjsponfoubm!sfwjfx/ 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.2: !”Cjh!cpy•!boe!sfubjm!efwfmpqnfou!dpoujovf!up!pddvs! Sfdsfbuf!cbtfe!po!uif!dpoujovfe!vtf!bt!b!hpmg!dpvstf/!! ejsfdumz!dpnqfuf!xjui!uif!Epxoupxo!boe!buusbdu! tnbmmfs!cvtjofttft!)uibu!njhiu!puifsxjtf!dpotjefs! boe!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!bnfoenfou!gps!sftjefoujbm! b!Epxoupxo!mpdbujpo*!up!bekbdfou!qbsdfmt/ efwfmpqnfou/!!Ju!jt!mjlfmz-!ipxfwfs-!uibu!uijt!tdbmf!pg!ofx! efwfmpqnfou!xjmm!sfrvjsf!uif!bddftt!qspwjefe!cz!b!ofx! Epxoupxo!Hpbmt Hjwfo!dvssfou!qmbot!boe!dpoejujpot-!uif!Fncsbdjoh! Epxoupxo!Qmbo!boe!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo! pg!puifs!jogsbtusvduvsf!jowftunfout!cfgpsf!fyufoejoh! sfdpnnfoet!uif!gpmmpxjoh!hpbmt!gps!Epxoupxo/! vujmjujft!gps!sfefwfmpqnfou!pg!uif!hpmg!dpvstf/ Dpodfqut!gps!Epxoupxo!sfefwfmpqnfou!tipvme! Epxoupxo!Gpdvt!Bsfb jo!uif!sftfbsdi!boe!bobmztjt!pg!Epxoupxo!dpoejujpot! uibu!bsf!ejsfdufe!cz!uif!tubufe!hpbmt!gps!Mboe!Vtf-! Dpvodjm!sftpmvujpo!3123.122!po!Kbovbsz!:-!3123! boe!jt!ifsfjo!jodpsqpsbufe!bt!bo!bqqfoejy!pg!uif! tpmvujpot!tipvme!cf!uiptf!uibu!cftu!nffu!uiftf!hpbmt/! Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/! Mboe!Vtf Epxoupxo!Npoujdfmmp!offet!tqfdjbm!buufoujpo! !Ejwfstjgz!mboe!vtf!jo!uif!Epxoupxo<!tvqqmfnfou! jo!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo/!!Gpmmpxjoh!uif!3119! sfubjm!boe!tfswjdf!vtft!xjui!puifs!bdujwjujft!uibu! Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!vqebuf-!uif!dpnnvojuz!voefsuppl! !Fodpvsbhf!sfefwfmpqnfou!pg!pme!boe!pctpmfuf! tusvduvsft<!fodpvsbhf!dpotpmjebujpo!pg!tnbmm! fnqibtj{ft!uif!jnqpsubodf!uibu!uif!dpnnvojuz!qmbdft! qbsdfmt!xjui!nvmujqmf!pxofstijqt/! !Cbmbodf!qbsljoh!boe!mboe!vtf!up!fotvsf!bwbjmbcjmjuz! sfmjft!po!uif!Fncsbdjoh!Epxoupxo!Qmbo!bt!b!hvjef!gps! pg!befrvbuf!qbsljoh!bu!bmm!ujnft/! qvcmjd!boe!qsjwbuf!bdujpot!jo!uif!Epxoupxo!bsfb/ !Fodpvsbhf!njyfe!vtf!cvu!ep!opu!nblf!ju!b! Sfwjubmj{joh!boe!tvtubjojoh!Epxoupxo!Npoujdfmmp! sfrvjsfnfou!ps!qsfsfrvjtjuf!gps!efwfmpqnfou!ps! sfefwfmpqnfou/! qspqfsuz!pxofst!boe!puifs!tublfipmefst/!!Qmboojoh! !Ejtdpvsbhf!sftjefoujbm!bt!b!gsff.tuboejoh!mboe!vtf! gps!uif!gvuvsf!pg!uif!Epxoupxo!nvtu!sfdphoj{f!uif! xjuijo!uif!dpsf!epxoupxo!bsfb/ qsbdujdbm!sfbmjujft!gbdjoh!dpnnfsdjbm!efwfmpqnfou!jo! !Ftubcmjti!qiztjdbm!dpoofdujpot!cfuxffo!uif!dpsf! Epxoupxo; Epxoupxo!bsfb!boe!uif!sjwfsgspou!boe!qbsl/ ! !Fodpvsbhf!mboe!vtft!uibu!tfswf!bt!fwfojoh!boe! xfflfoe!buusbdujpot!up!uif!Epxoupxo!bsfb/ bddftt!gspn!uif!Ijhixbz!up!bekbdfou!qspqfsujft/ !Fyqboe!gbdjmjujft!boe!qbsljoh!bekbdfou!up!Xftu! ! Csjehf!Qbsl!up!ifmq!dsfbuf!bo!bodips!buusbdujpo!bu! jodsfbtf/!!Hsfbufs!wpmvnft!boe!dpohftujpo!bdu!bt!bo! uif!opsui!foe!pg!Xbmovu!Tusffu/! jnqfejnfou!gps!qfpqmf!mjwjoh!tpvui!pg!J.:5!dpnjoh! Usbotqpsubujpo up!Epxoupxo/ !Bdlopxmfehf!uibu!Ijhixbz!36!xjmm!cf!mjnjufe!jo! ! ufsnt!pg!qspwjejoh!ejsfdu!qspqfsuz!bddftt/ !Efwfmpq!djsdvmbujpo!qbuufsot!uibu!vujmj{f!mpdbm! wpmvnft!nblf!qfeftusjbo!dpoofdujpot!cfuxffo! tusffut!gps!joejwjevbm!tjuf!bddftt/ Epxoupxo!boe!sftjefoujbm!bsfbt!up!uif!fbtu!wfsz! 4.31!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Gjhvsf!4.23;!Gsbnfxpsl!Qmbo!gspn!uif!Fncsbdjoh!Epxoupxo!Qmbo 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.32 !Sfdphoj{f!Ijhixbz!36!bt!b!cbssjfs!cfuxffo!uif!fbtu! boe!xftu!qbsut!pg!uif!ijtupsjd!Epxoupxo!dpsf!bsfbt! fyufoejoh!up!fjuifs!tjef!pg!uif!Ijhixbz!36!dpssjeps/ !Dpotjefs!efwfmpqjoh!jo!ejtusjdut!up!sfevdf!uif!offe! ps!eftjsf!up!dsptt!Ijhixbz!36!cfuxffo!8ui!tusffu! boe!uif!sjwfs!dspttjoh/ !Tusfohuifo!qfeftusjbo!ujft!uispvhipvu!Epxoupxo! jodmvejoh!dpoofdujpot!up!puifs!qbsut!pg!uif!Djuz!up! uif!tpvui-!xftu-!boe!fbtu/!Epxoqmbz!Ijhixbz!36! bt!b!dpssjeps!gps!qfeftusjbo!npwfnfou/ !Jnqspwf!qfeftusjbo!dpoofdujpot!cfuxffo!Cspbexbz! Tusffu!boe!uif!sjwfsgspou!Qbsl!bsfb!up!bmmpx!uif!qbsl! up!tfswf!bt!bo!buusbdujpo!uibu!csjoht!qfpqmf!joup!uif! epxoupxo!bsfb/ !Jnqspwf!bddftt!up!uif!Njttjttjqqj!Sjwfs!up!fyqboe! po!sfdsfbujpobm!pqqpsuvojujft/ !Fyqmpsf!dsfbujpo!pg!b!gpvsui!tjhobmj{fe!joufstfdujpo! po!Ijhixbz!36!cfuxffo!8ui!Tusffu!boe!Cspbexbz! Uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!tfflt!up!foibodf!uif!fyjtujoh!dpnnfsdjbm!dpsf!bmpoh!Cspbexbz!cz!cvjmejoh! tuspoh!dpoofdujpot!xjui!uif!sjwfsgspou!boe!uif!djwjd0sfubjm!ejtusjdu!po!uif!tpvui!foe!pg!Xbmovu!Tusffu/ Tusffu!up!jnqspwf!bddftt!up!bsfbt!xjui!efwfmpqnfou! boe!sfefwfmpqnfou!qpufoujbm!po!fjuifs!tjef!pg!uif! Ijhixbz!36!dpssjeps/ Epxoupxo!Eftjho!boe!Jnbhf !Fodpvsbhf!eftjho!tuboebset!uibu!fmfwbuf!uif!rvbmjuz! pg!Epxoupxo!efwfmpqnfou!xjuipvu!dsfbujoh!voevf! ibsetijqt!gps!qspqfsuz!boe!cvjmejoh!pxofst/ !Bdlopxmfehf!uibu!uif!ijtupsjd!”Nbjo!Tusffu•! cvjmejoht!boe!efwfmpqnfout!bmpoh!Cspbexbz! Tusffu!bsf!gvodujpobmmz!pctpmfuf!gps!nboz!ufobout! boe!vtfst!jo!upebz“t!bvupnpcjmf!boe!dpowfojfodf. esjwfo!nbslfuqmbdf/ !Uif!qvcmjd!sfbmn!pg!tusffut-!cpvmfwbset!boe! tjefxbmlt!sfqsftfout!uif!cftu!pqqpsuvojuz!up!dsfbuf! bo!joufsjn!jnbhf!gps!epxoupxo!bt!ju!sfefwfmpqt/ Uif!dvssfou!foe!pg!Xbmovu!Tusffu!jt!b!cbssjfs!up!jnqspwjoh!dpoofdujpot!cfuxffo!Epxoupxo!boe!uif! sjwfsgspou/ ! tpgufofe!xjui!tusffutdbqf!boe!mboetdbqf!gfbuvsft!up! !Ofx!cvjmejoht!jo!uif!Ijhixbz!36!boe!Cspbexbz! dpssjepst!tipvme!cf!mpdbufe!up!bmmpx!gps!fwfouvbm! ftubcmjti!bo!jefoujuz!gps!uif!Dfousbm!Dpnnvojuz! xjefojoh!pg!uif!dpssjeps!sjhiu.pg.xbz!boe!spbexbz/ Ejtusjdu!)DDE*/ !Up!uif!fyufou!qpttjcmf-!cvjmejoht!tipvme!pddvqz! !Efwfmpqnfou!tipvme!psjfou!upxbse!uif!joufstfdujpo! tusffu!gspoubhft!boe!tipvme!gspou!po!qvcmjd! pg!Ijhixbz!36!xjui!Cspbexbz!up!ublf!bewboubhf!pg! tjefxbmlt!xjui!dpoofdujpot!up!b!dpoujovpvt! ”Epxoupxo•!tjefxbml!qfeftusjbo!tztufn/ !Ofx!efwfmpqnfou!jo!uif!Ijhixbz!36!dpssjeps! tipvme!cf!tdbmfe!up!bmmpx!wjtjcjmjuz!up!efwfmpqnfou! vq!up!b!cmpdl!ps!npsf!bxbz!gspn!Ijhixbz!36/ 4.33!!}!!Mboe!VtfDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp !Qspqptfe!vtft!tipvme!ibwf!befrvbuf!qbsljoh!B!lfz!up!efwfmpqnfou!jo!uijt!gpdvt!bsfb!jt!uif! )qsjwbuf!ps!qvcmjd*!xjuijo!fbtz!boe!dpowfojfou! xbmljoh!ejtubodf/ mfbet!up!uif!sfdpotusvdujpo!pg!Gbmmpo!Bwfovf!boe!uif! sfmbufe!fyqbotjpo!pg!nvojdjqbm!tbojubsz!tfxfs!boe! ! xbufs!tztufnt/!!Gvuvsf!efwfmpqnfou!xjmm!cf!mjnjufe! mpdbufe!qvcmjd!hbuifsjoh!tqbdft!up!csjoh!qfpqmf! xjuipvu!beejujpobm!vujmjuz!dbqbdjuz/ uphfuifs!up!fyqfsjfodf!b!tfotf!pg!dpnnvojuz!uibu! jt!bttpdjbufe!xjui!epxoupxo/ Fbtu!Gpdvt!Bsfb Tpvui!Dfousbm!Gpdvt!Bsfb Dpoujovfe!sftjefoujbm!hspxui!up!uif!tpvui!jt!bo! hspxui!up!uif!xftu!boe!tpvui/!!Efwfmpqnfou!tipvme! hspxui!bdijfwft!tfwfsbm!pckfdujwft; pckfdujwft!pg!uijt!Qmbo/ !Ju!ifmqt!up!gbdjmjubuf!uif!fyqbotjpo!pg!uif!tbojubsz! Tfwfsbm!gbdupst!dpvme!dbvtf!uif!Djuz!up!fodpvsbhf!gvuvsf! tfxfs!tztufn!jo!dpokvodujpo!xjui!uif!sfdpotusvdujpo! sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!jo!uif!Fbtu!Gpdvt!Bsfb; offefe!up!tvqqpsu!gvuvsf!joevtusjbm!hspxui!bsfb! !Jodsfbtfe!pwfsbmm!ipvtjoh!efnboe!uibu!fydffet!uif! bmpoh!Ijhixbz!36/!! dbqbdjuz!up!tvqqpsu!hspxui!jo!puifs!bsfbt/ ! ! vtf!uif!ofx!fbtufso!joufsdibohf!xjui!J.:5!sbuifs! offe!up!diboofm!vtf!up!uif!fbtu!joufsdibohf/ uibo!Ijhixbz!36/!! !Uif!offe!up!tpmwf!tupsnxbufs!boe!esbjobhf! !Uiftf!bsfbt!qspwjef!bqqspqsjbuf!mpdbujpot!gps! nbobhfnfou!jttvft!)Ejudi!44*!jo!uijt!bsfb/!!Tpmwjoh! dpoujovfe!hspxui!jo!fousz.mfwfm!tjohmf!gbnjmz!ipnft! esbjobhf!jttvft!bmmpxt!fbtuxbse!fyqbotjpo!bmpoh! Dpvouz!Spbe!29/ up!Mjwf!bsf!jnqpsubou!fmfnfout!pg!nbjoubjojoh!bo! befrvbufmz!ejwfstf!ipvtjoh!tupdl/ efwfmpqnfou!bsfb!xjuijo!uif!Psefsmz!Boofybujpo!Bsfb! !Psefsmz!fyqbotjpo!up!uif!tpvui!npwft!efwfmpqnfou! upxbset!bsfb!pg!ijhifs!obuvsbm!bnfojuz/!!Bsfbt!bmpoh! uiftf!bsfbt!bmmpx!gps!ijhifs!bnfojuz!ofjhicpsippet/!!!! uif!tpvuifso!fehf!pg!uif!Psefsmz!Boofybujpo!Bsfb! Uijt!hspxui!dbo!pddvs!xjui!ofx!dpmmfdups0bsufsjbm! qspwjef!bopuifs!mpdbujpo!gps!qpufoujbm!”npwf!vq•! tusffu!dpssjepst/!! ipvtjoh/ Gjhvsf!4.25;!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!.!Fbtu!Gpdvt!Bsfb Gjhvsf!4.24;!Mboe!Vtf!Qmbo!.!Tpvui!Dfousbm 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3125Mboe!Vtf!!}!!4.34 Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou 4 Jefbmmz-!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!epft!opu!ibwf!bo!Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou! Dibqufs!Dpoufout up!nffu!uif!efwfmpqnfou!pckfdujwft!pg!uif!dpnnvojuz/!!Jo!sfbmjuz-!dfsubjo! Buusbdujoh!Kpct!////////////////////////////5.2 Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou!dibqufs!pg!uif!Qmbo!gpdvtft!po!uif!btqfdut!pg! Fyqboejoh!uif!Uby!Cbtf!////////////5.4 Npoujdfmmp“t!gvuvsf!uibu!sfrvjsf!qbsujdvmbs!buufoujpo!boe!bdujpo!cz!uif!Djuz/!! Foibodjoh!Epxoupxo!///////////////5.6 !Buusbdujoh!boe!sfubjojoh!kpct Gbdjmjubujoh!Sfefwfmpqnfou!/////5.8 !Fyqboejoh!uif!uby!cbtf Efwfmpqnfou!Tusbufhjft!///////////5.8 !Foibodjoh!uif!fdpopnjd!wjubmjuz!pg!Epxoupxo !Gbdjmjubujoh!sfefwfmpqnfou Buusbdujoh!boe!Sfubjojoh!Kpct gps!Npoujdfmmp/!Kpct-!qbsujdvmbsmz!kpct!xjui!jodpnf!mfwfmt!dbqbcmf!pg! tvqqpsujoh!b!gbnjmz-!bsf!lfz!up!bdijfwjoh!nboz!fmfnfout!pg!Npoujdfmmp“t! wjtjpo!gps!uif!gvuvsf/ !Kpct!buusbdu!sftjefout!up!uif!dpnnvojuz/!!Kpct!xjmm!qbz!b!dsjujdbm!spmf!jo! dsfbujoh!uif!uzqf!pg!”npwf!vq•!ipvtjoh!tpvhiu!cz!uif!Djuz/ !Kpct!qspwjef!uif!jodpnf!offefe!up!tvqqpsu!mpdbm!cvtjoftt!boe! hpwfsonfou!tfswjdft/!! !Sfufoujpo!pg!cvtjofttft!qspnpuf!dpnnvojuz!tubcjmjuz!cz!lffqjoh!kpct! boe!sftjefout!jo!Npoujdfmmp/ !Xijmf!uif!dpnnvojuz!beefe!ofbsmz!6-111!qfpqmf!cfuxffo!3111!boe! 3121!bddpsejoh!up!uif!V/T/!Dfotvt-!ju!pomz!beefe!2-541!kpct!bddpsejoh! up!uif!Rvbsufsmz!Dfotvt!pg!Fnqmpznfou!boe!Xbhft!)RDFX*/!Jo!3121-! uif!dpnnvojuz!ibe!7-::3!kpct!bddpsejoh!up!uif!RDFX!cvu!8-1:4! qfpqmf!jo!uif!mbcps!gpsdf!bddpsejoh!up!uif!Dfotvt/! Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou!!}!!5.2 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3124 ! Cbdlhspvoe!Sfqpsut Tuvejft“!PouifNbq!xfctjuf!tipxt!uibu!jo!3121! 5-6:8!qfpqmf!mfbwf!uif!dpnnvojuz!fbdi!ebz!up! bt!offefe!up!ifmq!hvjef!jut!fdpopnjd!efwfmpqnfou! xpsl-!xijmf!4-95:!qfpqmf!dpnf!joup!uif!dpnnvojuz! up!xpsl/!Pomz!946!cpui!mjwf!boe!xpsl!jo!uif! tuvejft!bsf!tvnnbsj{fe!cfmpx!xjui!uif!nptu!sfdfou! dpnnvojuz/ !Bqqspyjnbufmz!26&!pg!sftjefout!jo!3121!bsf! 3121!Cvtjoftt!Sfufoujpo!boe!Fyqbotjpo!Sftfbsdi!)CS'F*! gspn!29&!jo!3113/! Sfqpsu !Bt!tipxo!jo!Gjhvsf!5/2-!3123!ebub!gspn!uif! Npoujdfmmp“t!Cvtjoftt!Sfufoujpo!boe!Fyqbotjpo!)CS'F*! Njooftpub!Efqbsunfou!pg!Fnqmpznfou!boe! qsphsbn!xbt!jojujbufe!cz!uif!Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp-!uif! Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou!)EFFE*!po!uifjs! Npoujdfmmp!Dibncfs!pg!Dpnnfsdf!boe!Joevtusz-!! noqsptqfdups/dpn!xfctjuf!tipxt!uibu!Npoujdfmmp! EFFE-!boe!uif!Vojwfstjuz!pg!Njooftpub!Fyufotjpo/!Ju! jt!nbef!vq!pg!b!xjef!sbohf!pg!tnbmm!up!nfejvn! xbt!bmtp!tqpotpsfe!cz!pwfs!b!ep{fo!mpdbm!cvtjofttft/! tj{fe!fnqmpzfst/!Pomz!21!fnqmpzfst!ibwf!npsf! Uispvhi!uif!CS'F!qsphsbn-!71!cvtjofttft!xfsf! uibo!211!fnqmpzfft/!Pwfs!ibmg!ibwf!gfxfs!uibo! wjtjufe/!Gjoejoht!gspn!uif!wjtjut!boe!ebub!bobmztjt!gpvoe; gpvs!)5*!fnqmpzfft/! !89&!pg!uif!wjtjufe!cvtjofttft!xfsf!mpdbmmz!pxofe! !Xpslfst!gps!Npoujdfmmp!cvtjofttft!dpnf!qsjnbsjmz! boe!pqfsbufe/ gspn!Npoujdfmmp!boe!uif!tvsspvoejoh!sfhjpo/!! Ofbsmz!86&!pg!qfpqmf!xpsljoh!jo!Npoujdfmmp!mjwf!jo! !31&!pg!cvtjofttft!xfsf!jo!nbovgbduvsjoh-!29&!jo! Npoujdfmmp-!bekbdfou!upxotijqt-!ps!puifs!qmbdft!jo! sfubjm!usbef-!boe!24&!jo!puifs!tfswjdft/ Xsjhiu!boe!Tifscvsof!dpvoujft!)3121!PouifNbq*/ ! !Ofbsmz!51&!pg!Npoujdfmmp!sftjefout!xpsl!jo! :86!qbsu.ujnf!fnqmpzfft-!xjui!b!usjnnfe!bwfsbhf! Ifoofqjo!Dpvouz-!xjui!uif!mbshftu!qfsdfoubhf!jo! )bo!bwfsbhf!xifsf!uif!mpx!boe!ijhi!xfsf!ejtdbsefe!! Njoofbqpmjt-!Qmznpvui-!boe!Nbqmf!Hspwf/!Bopuifs! up!qsfwfou!tlfxjoh*!pg!26/49!gvmm.ujnf!fnqmpzfft-! 26&!xpsl!fmtfxifsf!jo!Xsjhiu!Dpvouz-!jodmvejoh! tmjhiumz!epxo!gspn!26/63!uisff!zfbst!bhp/!Uif! fnqmpzfft-!vq!gspn!7/:7!uisff!zfbst!bhp/! !Uif!3118.3122!Bnfsjdbo!Dpnnvojuz!Tvswfz! )BDT*!Dfotvt!sfqpsufe!b!nfbo!usbwfm!ujnf!up!xpsl! !Nptu!gvmm.ujnf!fnqmpzfft!bsf!jo!nbovgbduvsjoh-! gppe!boe!cfwfsbhf-!sfubjm!usbef-!boe!nfejdbm-!xijmf! qbsu.ujnf!fnqmpzfft!bsf!jo!nfejdbm-!sfubjm!usbef-! uif!3118.3122!BDT!xbt!3:/8!njovuft!gps!Xsjhiu! boe!upvsjtn0sfdsfbujpobm!tfswjdft/ Dpvouz!boe!35/6!njovuft!gps!uif!sfhjpo!pwfsbmm/! !Tvswfz!sftvmut!joejdbufe!uibu!uif!nfejdbm!joevtusz! jt!uif!ijhiftu!fnqmpzfs!jo!Npoujdfmmp-!gpmmpxfe!cz! Gjhvsf!5.2;!3123!Upubm!Ftubcmjtinfout!cz!Tj{f sfubjm!usbef!boe!nbovgbduvsjoh/ !Cvtjofttft!jo!uif!dpnnvojuz!bsf!gbjsmz!tubcmf!xjui! Number of bcpvu!ibmg!fyqfdujoh!tpnf!uzqf!pg!dibohf/ Establishments by SizeNumberPercent 1-4 Employees 25452.05 5-9 Employees 9719.88 cvtjofttft!cfdpnf!npsf!qspgjubcmf/!Fbdi!tusbufhz! 10-19 Employees 6413.11 xbt!bddpnqbojfe!cz!b!mjtu!pg!qpufoujbm!qspkfdut! 20-49 Employees 428.61 joufoefe!up!cf!jefbt!gps!uif!dpnnvojuz!up!fyqmpsf/! 50-99 Employees 214.30 100-249 Employees 71.43 250-499 Employees 20.41 500-999 Employees 10.20 5.3!!}!!Fdpopnjd!EfwfmpqnfouDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp !Jnqspwf!Cvtjoftt!Sfufoujpo!boe!Fyqbotjpo! pg!gvoejoh!tpvsdft!xijdi!nbz!cf!bo!jodfoujwf!gps! cvtjofttft!mpdbujoh!jo!Npoujdfmmp/!Xifo!bwbjmbcmf!uif! !Jnqspwf!Mbcps!Gpsdf!Bwbjmbcjmjuz!boe!Qspevdujwjuz/ Djuz!tipvme!qbsujdjqbuf!jo!tqfdjbm!uby!{poft!uibu!ibwf! !Jnqspwf!Jogsbtusvduvsf!up!Ifmq!Npwf!Hppet-! cffo!nbef!bwbjmbcmf!bu!uif!tubuf!boe!gfefsbm!mfwfm!up! tvqqpsu!cvtjoftt!efwfmpqnfou!boe!sfufoujpo/! !Jnqspwf!boe!Qspnpuf!uif!Rvbmjuz!pg!Mjgf!jo! Npoujdfmmp/!! Fyqboejoh!uif!Uby!Cbtf Evsjoh!uif!3124!dpnqsfifotjwf!qmbo!fdpopnjd! efwfmpqnfou!vqebuf!qspdftt-!ju!xbt!opufe!uibu!uif!3121! B!usbejujpobm!pckfdujwf!pg!mpdbm!fdpopnjd!efwfmpqnfou! Cvtjoftt!Sfufoujpo!boe!Fyqbotjpo!Sftfbsdi!tusbufhjft! qmboojoh!jt!uif!fyqbotjpo!pg!uif!qspqfsuz!uby!cbtf/!! qspqfsuz!ubyft!bsf!uif!mbshftu!tpvsdf!pg!djuz!sfwfovf/!! tusbufhjft!joup!uif!gvuvsf/ Gps!uijt!sfbtpo-!ju!jt!bo!jnqpsubou!btqfdu!pg!fdpopnjd! efwfmpqnfou!qmboojoh!jo!Npoujdfmmp/ Qsfdfejoh!uif!efwfmpqnfou!pg!uif!3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf! Qmbo!bo!bttfttnfou!xbt!dpoevdufe!cz!Tu/!Dmpve!Tubuf! Voefstuboejoh!uif!Qspqfsuz!Uby!Tztufn Vojwfstjuz!up!efufsnjof!xifuifs!b!cjptdjfodf!qbsl! tipvme!cf!ftubcmjtife!jo!Npoujdfmmp/!Bu!uibu!ujnf!uif! cjptdjfodf!joevtusz!xbt!bo!fdpopnjd!efwfmpqnfou! cbtf!sfrvjsf!b!dmfbs!voefstuboejoh!pg!uif!qspqfsuz!uby! gpdvt!tubufxjef/!Xijmf!uif!buusbdujpo!pg!b!cjptdjfodf! tztufn/ cvtjoftt!jt!opu!b!qbsujdvmbs!gpdvt!pg!Npoujdfmmp!upebz-! Qspqfsuz!Wbmvbujpo dpotjefs!jo!uif!pwfsbmm!efwfmpqnfou!!pg!!fdpopnjd! Uifsf!bsf!uisff!gpsnt!pg!qspqfsuz!wbmvbujpo/!Uif! efwfmpqnfou!tusbufhjft!gps!uif!dpnnvojuz/! gpvoebujpo!pg!uif!qspqfsuz!uby!tztufn!jt!Ftujnbufe! Nbslfu!Wbmvf Tpnf!pg!uif!Npoujdfmmp“t!tusfohuit!gps!buusbdujoh! pg!qspqfsuz!bt!tfu!cz!uif!Dpvouz!Bttfttps/!Jo!tpnf! cvtjofttft!jodmvefe; djsdvntubodft-!uif!Tubuf!Mfhjtmbuvsf!mjnjut!uif!bnpvou! pg!Ftujnbufe!Nbslfu!Wbmvf!uibu!dbo!cf!vtfe!gps!ubybujpo/!! !Mboe!bwbjmbcjmjuz!)dpnqbsfe!up!Nfusp!Bsfb*/ Ubybcmf!Nbslfu!Wbmvf/!! !Bddftt!up!nbkps!ijhixbzt!)J.:5-!V/T/!21!boe!TUI! Uif!wbmvf!vtfe!up!dbmdvmbuf!qspqfsuz!ubyft!jt!Uby! 36*/ Dbqbdjuz/!Uby!Dbqbdjuz!Wbmvf!jt!b!qfsdfoubhf!pg!Ubybcmf! !Sfhjpobm!hspxui!pg!fnqmpznfou!cbtf/ ! Tubuf!Mfhjtmbuvsf!boe!wbsz!cz!dmbtt!pg!qspqfsuz/!! !Qspyjnjuz!up!vojwfstjujft/ Dibohft!jo!uif!Uby!Tztufn !Pwfsbmm!mpdbujpo/ Usbejujpobm!fdpopnjd!efwfmpqnfou!uifpsz!tfflt! !Fyqbotjwf!qbsl!tztufn/ dpnnfsdjbm!boe!joevtusjbm!efwfmpqnfou!bt!b!nfbot!pg! !Npoujdfmmp!Dpnnvojuz!Dfoufs/ cvjmejoh!uby!cbtf/!Ijtupsjdbmmz-!uif!tztufn!tvqqpsufe! uijt!bqqspbdi/!B!epmmbs!pg!ftujnbufe!nbslfu!wbmvf!pg! Sfdpnnfoefe!cvtjoftt!efwfmpqnfou!bdujwjujft!uibu! dpnnfsdjbm.joevtusjbm!qspqfsuz!dbssjfe!b!ijhifs!uby! bqqmz!up!uif!buusbdujpo!boe!sfufoujpo!pg!bmm!cvtjofttft! dbqbdjuz!wbmvf!uibo!sftjefoujbm!qspqfsuz/!!Pwfs!uif!qbtu! jodmvef!fotvsjoh!uibu!uifsf!bsf!tjuft!tvjubcmf!boe! uxfmwf!zfbst-!uby!”sfgpsnt•!cz!uif!Tubuf!Mfhjtmbuvsf!ibwf! buusbdujwf!up!qpufoujbm!cvtjofttft!bwbjmbcmf!boe!sfbez! dibohfe!uijt!tjuvbujpo/ fyqmpsf!boe!ftubcmjti!qbsuofstijqt!xjui!b!wbsjfuz!pg! tublfipmefst!uibu!dbo!xpsl!uphfuifs!up!tvqqpsu!cvtjoftt! 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3124Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou!!}!!5.4 Gjhvsf!5.3;!Dibohft!jo!Uby!Dbqbdjuz!Wbmvf!.!Dpnnfsdjbm0Joevtusjbm 1 561-1 511-111 461-111 411-111 361-111 311-111 Uby!Dbqbdjuz!Wbmvf 261-111 211-111 61-111 1 2::82::92:::311131123113!up!31 Gjhvsf!5.4;!Uby!Dbqbdjuz!Dpnqbsjtpo 411-111 361-111 311-111 261-111 Uby!Dbqbdjuz!Wbmvf 211-111 61-111 1 JoevtusjbmSfubjmPggjdfTjohmfUpxoipnfBqu JoevtusjbmSfubjmTjohmfUpxoipnfBqu Bdsft212121212121 Dpwfsbhf41&41&41&4723 Efwfmpqnfou!)TG!ps!Vojut*241-791241-791241-7914171231 FNW!qfs!TG!ps!Voju7691211511-111361-111261-111 FNW!9-5:5-31121-565-51124-179-11123-111-11126-111-11129-111-111 Uby!Dbqbdjuz27:-245319-449371-721231-111261-111336-111 5.5!!}!!Fdpopnjd!EfwfmpqnfouDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp Gjhvsf!5.5;!Ejtusjcvujpo!pg!3122!Ubyft!Qbzbcmf ibwf!sfevdfe!uif!uby!cbtf!dsfbufe!cz!dpnnfsdjbm. AllOther uby!dbqbdjuz!wbmvf!gps!%4-111-111!pg!Ubybcmf!Nbslfu! 1,614,256 8% Commercial/Industrial uby!dbqbdjuz!nfbo!uibu!uijt!qspqfsuz!qspevdfe!67&!mftt! 4,787,530 24% uby!cbtf!jo!3123!uibo!jo!2::8/ PublicUtility 9,707,817 50% up!puifs!dmbttjgjdbujpot!pg!qspqfsuz/!Gjhvsf!5.4! dpnqbsft!uif!uby!dbqbdjuz!wbmvf!gps!uif!qsjnbsz!gpsnt! dibsu!bsf!cbtfe!po!bttvnqujpot!bcpvu!uif!efotjuz! ResidentialHomestead pg!efwfmpqnfou!boe!ftujnbufe!nbslfu!wbmvf!pg!ofx! 3,470,090 18% efwfmpqnfou/!!Dibohft!jo!uiftf!bttvnqujpot!xjmm!bmufs! uif!sftvmut/! fdpopnjd!efwfmpqnfou!tusbufhjft/!Bmm!gpsnt!pg! xjmm!cf!offefe!up!bdijfwf!dpnnvojuz!pckfdujwft!gps! efwfmpqnfou!dpousjcvuf!uby!cbtf!up!uif!dpnnvojuz/!! Ju!jt!sjtlz!qmbdjoh!upp!nvdi!xfjhiu!po!pof!uzqf!pg! !Qvcmjd!jnqspwfnfout!up!qspwjef!tfswjdft!ps!up! efwfmpqnfou!gps!uby!cbtf!hspxui/!!Jo!beejujpo-!djujft! foibodf!uif!Epxoupxo!fowjsponfou/ ep!opu!dpouspm!uif!dsjujdbm!fmfnfout!pg!uif!uby!tztufn/!! !Qspwjtjpo!pg!befrvbuf!qbsljoh!tvqqmz/ Dibohft!jo!uif!tztufn!mfbe!up!voboujdjqbufe!sftvmut!bu! uif!mpdbm!mfwfm/ !Bdrvjtjujpo!pg!mboe/ !Qsfqbsbujpo!pg!tjuft!gps!efwfmpqnfou/ Uby!cbtf!hspxui!ibt!jnqmjdbujpot!uibu!bsf!vojrvf! !Sfnpwbm!pg!puifs!qiztjdbm!boe!fdpopnjd!cbssjfst! up!Npoujdfmmp/!Uif!dibsu!jo!Gjhvsf!5.5!tipxt!uif! up!bdijfwf!dpnnvojuz!pckfdujwft/ ejtusjcvujpo!pg!ubyft!qbzbcmf!jo!3122/!Vujmjujft-!mjlfmz! mbshfmz!Ydfm!Fofshz-!dpousjcvuft!bcpvu!pof.uijse!pg! uif!Djuz“t!ubyft-!xijmf!cpui!dpnnfsdjbm0joevtusjbm!boe! gjobodjoh-!uby!bcbufnfou-!ps!puifs!gjobodf!uppmt! sftjefoujbm!vtft!dpousjcvuf!39&!fbdi/!! bwbjmbcmf!up!uif!Djuz/ Jo!3122-!uif!Djuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp!dpoevdufe!b!sfubjm!nbslfu! Foibodjoh!Epxoupxo Fncsbdjoh! Epxoupxo!Npoujdfmmp-!ibt!cffo!jodpsqpsbufe!jo!uif! Nbjoubjojoh!b!tvddfttgvm!Epxoupxo!jt!bo!jnqpsubou! Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!bt!bo!bqqfoejy!boe!tfswft!bt!b! fmfnfou!pg!uif!fdpopnjd!efwfmpqnfou!qmbo!gps! sftpvsdf!gps!uif!jnqmfnfoubujpo!pg!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf! Npoujdfmmp/!Epxoupxo!jt!b!lfz!cvtjoftt!ejtusjdu! qspwjejoh!hppet-!tfswjdft-!boe!kpct!gps!uif!dpnnvojuz/!! Epxoupxo!jt!vomjlf!boz!puifs!cvtjoftt!ejtusjdu!cfdbvtf! fwbmvbujpo!pg!tipqqjoh!bsfbt!uibu!bsf!dpnqfujujpo!gps! pg!jut!vojrvf!spmf!jo!Npoujdfmmp“t!jefoujuz!boe!ifsjubhf/ Epxoupxo-!b!tvswfz!pg!dvtupnfst-!efmjofbujpo!pg!uif! usbef!bsfb-!boe!uif!ftubcmjtinfou!pg!nbslfu!efnboe! tusbufhjft!sfmbufe!up!Epxoupxo!Npoujdfmmp/!!Epxoupxo! gps!wbsjpvt!cvtjofttft/! jt!qbsu!pg!uif!Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou!dibqufs!cfdbvtf! pg!uif!mjlfmjippe!uibu!djuz!bdujpot!boe!jowftunfout! 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3124Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou!!}!!5.6 dpncjofe!Epxoupxo!boe!tfdpoebsz!usbef!bsfbt! xbt!238-2:1!jo!3121/! !Epxoupxo!Npoujdfmmp!fokpzt!b!tusbufhjd!mpdbujpo! !DfousbDbsf!Ifbmui!Tztufn-!xjui!36!cfet!boe!711! cfuxffo!uif!Njttjttjqqj!Sjwfs!boe!J.:5/!Uijt! fnqmpzfft!ibt!ftubcmjtife!Npoujdfmmp!bt!b!sfhjpobm! nfejdbm!dfoufs/ ijhifs!jo!Epxoupxo!uibo!tpvui!pg!J.:5 !Jodsfbtfe!sftjefoujbm!efwfmpqnfou!tujnvmbuft! !Evf!up!qiztjdbm!cbssjfst!dsfbufe!cz!uif!Njttjttjqqj! Sjwfs!boe!J.:5-!bcpvu!pof.uijse!pg!Epxoupxo!boe! fdpopnjd!dpoejujpot!ibwf!tmpxfe!sftjefoujbm! tfdpoebsz!usbef!bsfb!tipqqfst!nvtu!qbtt!uispvhi! efwfmpqnfou-!uivt!sftvmujoh!jo!sfevdfe!ufobou! Epxoupxo!Npoujdfmmp!up!sfbdi!uif!tipqqjoh!bsfbt! efnboe!gps!sfubjm!tqbdf/! tpvui!pg!J.:5/ !Beejujpobm!sfubjm!tqbdf!jo!Epxoupxo!Npoujdfmmp! !Epxoupxo!ibt!uif!mbshftu!dpodfousbujpo!pg! dbo!cf!tvqqpsufe!cz!uif!usbef!bsfb!qpqvmbujpo/!B! tipqqjoh!hppet!tupsft!boe!sftubvsbout/ sbohf!pg!tupsf!uzqft!dbo!cf!dpotjefsfe!jodmvejoh! !Epxoupxo“t!usbef!bsfb!qpqvmbujpo!xbt!ftujnbufe!bu! tipqqjoh!hppet-!dpowfojfodf!hppet-!boe!gppe! :4-611!jo!3121!boe!jt!qspkfdufe!up!ibwf!bo!boovbm! ftubcmjtinfout/!Epxoupxo“t!fyjtujoh!xjef!wbsjfuz! hspxui!sbuf!pg!3/3&/ pg!tfswjdft!mjnjut!qpufoujbm!gvuvsf!pqqpsuvojujft/! !Npoujdfmmp“t!mbshf!bodips!tupsft!)Dvc!Gppet-! Ipxfwfs-!nbslfu!sftfbsdi!joejdbuft!uibu!Npoujdfmmp! TvqfsUbshfu-!Xbmnbsu-!boe!Ipnf!Efqpu*!dsfbuf! dpvme!tvqqpsu!beejujpobm!nfejdbm!qsbdujdft/!!! b!tfdpoebsz!usbef!bsfb/!Uif!qpqvmbujpo!pg!uif! Gjhvsf!5.6;!Fncsbdjoh!Epxoupxo!Npoujdfmmp!Qsjnbsz!boe!Tfdpoebsz!Usbef!Bsfbt 5.7!!}!!Fdpopnjd!EfwfmpqnfouDjuz!pg!Npoujdfmmp 6/!Jo!beejujpo!up!bttjtujoh!cvtjoftt!tffljoh!up!mpdbuf! Gbdjmjubujoh!Sfefwfmpqnfou jo!Npoujdfmmp-!uif!Djuz!tipvme!bdujwfmz!ubshfu!boe! nbslfu!up!cvtjofttft!xijdi!xjmm!cf!b!tvqqmjfs-! mboe!vtf!qmbot-!qpmjdjft-!boe!dpouspmt!xpsl!uphfuifs! dvtupnfs!ps!dpmmbcpsbujwf!qbsuofs!up!fyjtujoh! xjui!qsjwbuf!jowftunfou!up!qspqfsmz!nbjoubjo!bmm! cvtjofttft!xjuijo!uif!dpnnvojuz/ qspqfsujft!jo!Npoujdfmmp/!Ju!jt!sfdphoj{fe!uibu!uijt! 7/! bqqspbdi!nbz!opu!tvddffe!jo!bmm!mpdbujpot/!Eftqjuf! uif!cftu!qmbot!boe!joufoujpot-!qspqfsujft!nbz!cfdpnf! dpnnvojdbujpot!jogsbtusvduvsf/! qiztjdbmmz!efufsjpsbufe!boe0ps!fdpopnjdbmmz!jowjbcmf/!Jo! 8/! tvdi!qmbdft-!djuz!joufswfoujpo!nbz!cf!offe!up!gbdjmjubuf! Tztufn!up!fotvsf!uif!sfufoujpo!boe!up!qspnpuf!uif! fyqbotjpo!pg!ifbmui!dbsf!tfswjdft!jo!Npoujdfmmp/ joufswfoujpo!nbz!jodmvef; 9/!Uif!Djuz!xjmm!vtf!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!up! !Bdrvjtjujpo!pg!mboe/ nbjoubjo!boe!foibodf!uif!rvbmjuz!pg!mjgf!jo! Npoujdfmmp!bt!b!uppm!gps!buusbdujoh!cvtjofttft!boe! !Qsfqbsbujpo!pg!tjuft!gps!efwfmpqnfou/ kpct/ !Dpotusvdujpo!ps!sfdpotusvdujpo!pg!qvcmjd! jnqspwfnfout/ !Qspwjtjpo!pg!befrvbuf!qbsljoh!tvqqmz/ !Sfnfejbujpo!pg!qpmmvufe!mboe!bt!offefe/ !Sfnpwbm!pg!puifs!qiztjdbm!boe!fdpopnjd!cbssjfst! up!bdijfwf!dpnnvojuz!pckfdujwft/ gjobodjoh-!uby!bcbufnfou-!ps!puifs!gjobodf!uppmt! bwbjmbcmf!up!uif!Djuz/ Efwfmpqnfou!Tusbufhjft uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!jo!uif!bsfb!pg!Fdpopnjd! Efwfmpqnfou; 2/!Uif!Djuz!nvtu!vtf!uif!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo! up!qspwjef!befrvbuf!mpdbujpot!gps!gvuvsf!kpc. qspevdjoh!efwfmpqnfou!)Qmbdft!up!Xpsl*/!! 3/! up!fodpvsbhf!tubcmf!cvtjoftt!tfuujoh!boe!qspnpuf! jowftunfou!boe!fyqbotjpo!pg!gbdjmjujft/ 4/!Uif!Djuz!tipvme!dppsejobuf!vujmjuz!qmboojoh! boe!nbobhf!puifs!efwfmpqnfou!up!fotvsf!uibu! fyqbotjpo!bsfbt!bsf!dbqbcmf!pg!tvqqpsujoh!ofx! efwfmpqnfou!jo!b!ujnfmz!nboofs/ 5/!Uif!Djuz!xjmm!dpoujovf!up!xpsl!xjui!fyjtujoh! cvtjofttft!up!nbjoubjo!bo!fydfmmfou!cvtjoftt! fowjsponfou-!sfubjo!kpct-!boe!gbdjmjubuf!fyqbotjpot/ 3119!Dpnqsfifotjwf!Qmbo!!Vqebufe!3124Fdpopnjd!Efwfmpqnfou!!}!!5.8 Planning Commission Agenda:09/05/17 3A.Consideration of the2017Housing Study(AS/JT) A.REFERENCEAND BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission is asked to consider for review the 2017 Housing Study. The Monticello EDA received and adopted this report in June of 2017 as part of a contract for services with WSB & Associates. The Housing Report contains information about the community and market area population demographics, growth trends and pairs that with information regarding the available housing inventory, trends, occupancy and affordability measures to arrive at amarket demand for several specific housing categories. Minor changes to accurately reflect current housing stock have been made since the report was presented to the EDA in June; they will receive a revised copy. The report provides recommendations to fulfill the current andprojected unmet demand, which will be helpful to the Planning Commission as it considers the potential update of the Comprehensive Plan’s Land Use plan in 2018. WSB staff will be in attendance at the meeting to present the report and answer questions. B.ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: No action; information item only at this time. C.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None SUPPORTING DATA: A.2017Housing Study, authored by WSB & Associates Acknowledgements We would like to thank everyone who participated in the development of the Monticello Housing Study, including the Monticello City staff, Wright County and the various realtors in the community. Completed in coordination with: WSB & Associates, Inc. 1 | Page PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF RESEARCH Housing is an important component of all communities. Housing quality, availability, affordability and diversity enhances the WSB & Associates, Inc. was engaged by the City of Monticello to conduct a Housing Study to assess the housing market conditions and provide recommendations for housing needs within the City of Monticello. The market analysis focused on the housing needs within the City of Monticello including market rate, subsidized, and move- up housing for various age categories including owner-occupied and renter occupied housing options. Monticello (Study) should be used as a reference to guide planning efforts, financial initiatives and strategies, and provide direction to the City regarding the approach it should take; the types of housing opportunities the City should promote, and the roles in providing those opportunities. This Study is intended to be flexible to meet unforeseen housing needs and future land use decisions. It should be noted that the findings presented in this report should not be used to determine the market feasibility of any single development or project; rather, it is designed to be a broad analysis of the entire Monticello housing market and is intended to guide planning efforts, especially as they relate to future land use designations. The Study contains data from both primary and secondary research. Primary research includes interviews with local officials, and the real estate community. Secondary research data includes data from the US Census, American Community Survey, Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), Wright County, 1 Business Analyst, and other local planning agencies. Secondary research is always used as a basis for analysis and is carefully reviewed along with other factors that may impact projections. All the information on pending developments was gathered by WSB & Associates, Inc. and is accurate to the best of our knowledge. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS This section looks at the demographic characteristics that underlie the need for various types of housing in Monticello. The U.S. Census and Business Analyst served as the primary sources for the demographic overview. While population projections are an effective planning tool when used correctly, their accuracy is dependent on several factors including assumptions for birth rates, death rates, migration, and economic conditions. Assumptions are based on past trends and the best information available at the time, but assumptions do not always remain true, and unexpected changes can occur. Therefore, Monticello should use the population projections presented in this Market Study as a general guide and not as an absolute certainty. Moreover, the City should periodically review and update the population projections based upon new conditions. WSB & Associates, Inc. determined the Study Area to be used as comparison points. The area was based on geographic and man-made boundaries, community orientation, our knowledge of the area, and the dictates of the proposal. Considering these factors, we determined a Study Area to include the cities of Monticello, Big Lake, Buffalo, Elk River, Becker, and Rogers. In addition, Wright County and the State 1 Business Analyst is a data processing service that uses ESRI technology, U.S. Census data, and American Community Survey data. 2 | Page of Minnesota are also included as part of the analysis in the report. Though outside the scope of this report, it is important to note that surr Figure 1: City of Monticello, MN HISTORIC POPULATION CHANGE The total population of Monticello has grown substantially since the 1980s. Between 1980 and 2010, the City has grown by 597% adding 10,929 new residents, accounting for 18% of the study areas total growth. During the last U.S. Census period (2000-2010), Monticello saw a 38% growth with the addition of 4,891 new residents. Please refer to Table 1-A for further details. 3 | Page Table 1-A: POPULATION CHANGE 1980-2010 Change US Census 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010 Place 1980 1990 2000 2010 No. % No. % No. % Monticello 1,830 4,941 7,868 12,759 3,111 170.0% 2,927 59.2% 4,891 62.2% Big Lake 2,210 3,113 6,063 10,060 903 40.9% 2,950 94.8% 3,997 65.9% Buffalo 4,560 6,856 10,097 15,453 2,296 50.4% 3,241 47.3% 5,356 53.0% Elk River 6,785 11,143 16,447 22,974 4,358 64.2% 5,304 47.6% 6,527 39.7% Becker 601 902 2,673 4,538 301 50.1% 1,771 196.3% 1,865 69.8% Rogers 652 698 3,588 11,197 46 7.1% 2,890 414.0% 7,609 212.1 % Study Area 16,638 27,653 46,736 76,981 11,015 66.2% 19,083 69.0% 30,245 64.7% Total Wright County 58,681 68,710 89,986 124,700 10,029 17.10% 21,276 30.90% 34,714 38.50 % Minnesota 3,806,104,075,907 4,375,094,919,47269,804 7.10% 299,197.30% 544,3812.40 3 9 9 2 0 % Source: U.S. Census Bureau age distribution has remained relatively consistent from 2000 to 2010 with the largest age group being 25 to 34 in both census periods. The percentage of people 19 and younger decreased from 33.7% to 32.8% while the percentage of those 65 and older increased from 8.9% to 9.8%. Keeping with national trends, the median age increased in Monticello from 2000 to 2010 from 29.8 to 31.6. Please refer to Table 2-A for further details. Table 2-A: MONTICELLO HISTORIC AGE DEMOGRAPHICS 2000-2010 2000 2010 Number % Number % Total Population 7,868 100.0 12759 100.0 Under 5 years 799 10.2 1292 10.1 5 to 9 years 725 9.2 1101 8.6 10 to 14 years 610 7.8 969 7.6 15 to 19 years 511 6.5 823 6.5 20 to 24 years 547 7 731 5.7 25 to 34 years 1,571 20 2255 17.7 35 to 44 years 1,215 15.4 1991 15.6 45 to 54 years 719 9.1 1505 11.8 55 to 59 years 271 3.4 490 7.0 60 to 64 years 202 2.6 395 3.1 65 to 74 years 316 4 584 5.0 75 to 84 years 260 3.3 394 3.0 85 years and over 122 1.6 229 1.8 Median age (years) 29.8 (X) 31.4 ( X ) Source: U.S. Census Bureau 4 | Page POPULATION ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS Population projections are an effective planning tool when used correctly. They are based upon assumptions for birth rates, death rates, migration, and economic conditions. In 2010, the U.S. Census reported Monticelloopulation as 12,759. Monticelloestimated population was 13,568 in 2016, and is projected to increase to 14,383 in 2021. Again, it is impossible to know with certainty what Monticello future population will be, but it is reasonable to believe that any future population increases resulting from new housing development or redevelopment in Monticello will be offset (to some extent) by population trends resulting from an aging population and diminishing household size. However, based on available data, Monticellolikely see a continued increase through year 2021. It is anticipated that Monticello and 2021. Monticello expected rate of population change is roughly equal to the County and double the State. Refer to Table 1-B: Projected Population Change: 2010-2021 for additional information. TABLE 1-B: PROJECTED POPULATION CHANGE: 2010-2021 Change U.S. Census Bureau 2010-2016 2016-2021 Place 2010 2016 2021 No. % No. % Monticello 12,759 13,568 14,383 809 6.3% 815 6.0% Big Lake 10,060 10,629 11,080 569 5.7% 451 4.2% Buffalo 15,453 16,093 16,699 640 4.1% 606 3.8% Elk River 22,974 23,984 24,891 1,010 4.4% 907 3.8% Becker 4,538 4,858 5,253 320 7.1% 395 8.1% Rogers 11,197 12,675 13,844 1,478 13.2% 1,169 9.2% Study Area Total 76,981 81,807 86,150 4,826 6.3% 4,343 5.3% Wright County 124,700 132,801 140,895 8,101 6.5% 8,094 6.1% Minnesota 4,919,479 5,541,669 5,720,647 622,190 12.6% 178,978 3.2% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ESRI forecasts The City of Monticello has developed its own projections based on building permits and certificates of utilized as base reference point. It indicated the City had 13,311 residents at the end of 2014. During the 2015-2016 time-frame, the City issued permits for 307 additional housing units. Using household size of 2.72, this yields an estimated population of 14,146 at the end of 2016. In recognition of the trend of increasing household size and the moderate pace of new residential development and household formation in the City, the projections for the 2017-2021 period indicate an increase of 893 people (2.74 persons per 326 new units or 65 +/- units per year). The annual population increase of 179 is sixteen (16) people higher than -accounted for the sizeable number of new units in the community during 2015-2016. Basically, ESRI does not factor in the steady recovery in building permit issuance in this period and applies its projections to a lower beginning population figure than a more realistic number. Refer to Tables 1-C and 2-C for more information. 5 | Page TABLE 1-C: MONTICELLO HOUSING PERMITS & POPULATION FORECAST CALCULATIONS Year: Single-Family Single-Family Multifamily Total Detached Attached 2010 2 0 0 2 2011 2 0 0 2 2012 22 0 0 22 2013 49 3 0 52 2014 70 3 0 73 2015 38 6 136 180 2016 61 0 66 127 Average Total 244 12 202 458 65.2 per year POPULATION FORECAST CALCULATIONS Time-Frame New Housing Average HH Size New Residents 2014 Pop End of 2016 Pop Units (Permits x HH Size) 2015 - 2016 307 2.72 835 13,311 14,146 Time-Frame New Housing Average HH Size New Residents 2016 Pop End of 2021 Pop Units (Permits x HH Size) 2017 - 2021 326 (65.2 x 5) 2.74 893 14,146 15,039 Source: City of Monticello, Minnesota State Demographer TABLE 2-C: POPULATION PROJECTION DIFFERENCE 2016 2021 Annual Growth City of Monticello 14,146 15,039 179 ESRI 13,568 14,383 163 Difference 578 656 16 Source: ESRI forecasts, The City of Monticello HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS AND FORECASTS In 2010, the US Census reported 4,693 households in Monticello and 3,164 families. A household refers to a housing unit occupied by at least one person. A household can involve a family living in a housing unit or it can involve unrelated people sharing an apartment or housing unit. A family refers to a household consisting of a householder and one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. In the future, it is likely that the percentage of married couples without children living with them will increase. The percentage of single parent households will also increase. Family households with no spouse present accounted for approximately 30% of the family households in Monticello in 2010. The average household size in Monticello in 2000 was 2.64 persons compared to 2.68 in 2010 according to the U.S. Census Bureau. These figures were projected to increase, according to ESRI, to 2.72 in 2016 and 2.74 by 2021. According to the American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Monticello has seen a decrease in family households, a decrease in households with children under the age of 18, and an increase in non-family households (see Table 1-D: Household Occupancy Characteristics for further details). These trends held true from 2009-2014 aside from an outlying year (2014 highlighted in gray on Table 1-D) when there was an increase in family households, an increase in families with children, and a decrease in nonfamily households. This may have been caused by an increased availability of single- family housing units. These trends have implications for the demand of future housing types in Monticello. Since the average household size is projected to decrease and the trend of family households has been decreasing, a shift in demand will likely occur less for 3-4 bedroom, single-family homes and more for smaller housing units, and multi-family units. 6 | Page TABLE 1-D: HOUSEHOLD OCCUPANCY CHARACTERISTICS 2009-2014 Family Family with Children Nonfamily 1-person 2-person 3-person 4-or-more-person 2009 72.2% 47.0% 27.8% 22.0% 29.8% 18.8% 29.4% 2010 69.6% 46.4% 30.4% 25.1% 25.8% 18.6% 30.6% 2011 68.5% 45.3% 31.5% 25.8% 26.9% 16.9% 30.9% 2012 66.8% 43.8% 33.2% 26.5% 25.3% 19.1% 29.1% 2013 66.2% 42.3% 33.8% 27.0% 27.0% 16.4% 29.6% 2014 68.8% 43.8% 31.2% 24.9% 29.0% 13.7% 32.4% Source: American Community Survey 5-year Estimates Between 2010 and 2016, the number of new households (4,693 and 4,936 respectively) has grown proportionally to the increase in population (12,759 and 13,568 respectively) suggesting stability in household size (see Table 1-E: Historic and Projected Households: 2010-2021). The number of households in Monticello is projected to increase by 5.3% by 2021 accounting for 18.2% of the study area TABLE 1-E: HISTORIC AND PROJECTED HOUSEHOLDS: 2010-2021 Change US Census 2010-2016 2016-2021 Place 2010 2016 2021 No. % No. % Monticello 4,693 5,136* 5,399 443* 8.6% 263 4.9% Big Lake 3,377 3,566 3,720 189 5.6% 154 4.3% Buffalo 5,700 5,872 6,058 172 3.0% 186 3.2% Elk River 8,080 8,452 8,780 372 4.6% 328 3.9% Becker 1,526 1,635 1,772 109 7.1% 137 8.4% Rogers 3,748 4,232 4,610 484 12.9% 378 8.9% Study Area Total 27,124 28,893 30,339 1,769 6.1% 1,446 4.8% Wright County 44,473 46,817 49,383 2,344 5.3% 2,566 5.5% Minnesota 2,087,227 2,176,475 2,258,733 89,248 4.3% 82,258 3.8% *The 200 occupied units of the new IRET Apartment Complex were accounted for here. Note: There is potential for household growth Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, ESRI forecasts, WSB & Associates 7 | Page AGE COMPOSITION& IMPACT ON HOUSING In addition to knowing how many people currently live and will likely live in Monticello, an understanding of can help the City plan for and provide necessary and desired services for its residents. The following provides an overview of the existing age composition of Monticello 2021 (see Table 1-F: Age Composition 2010-2021). Composition will remain relatively consistent outside of a slight decrease in the 25-34 age category (by 2.1%) and slight increase in the 55-64 age category (by 2.5%) which reflects aging baby boomers and a smaller succeeding generation. Extrapolating further past year 2021, Monticello can expect a surge of 7,438 residents entering the over- sixty-five (65) age group as is indicated by the red box in Table 1-F. The age cohort closest to age sixty- five (65) typically is comfortable downsizing their living situation. This is a substantial number of households who will be causing the demand in housing types to change in Monticello for future years as current projections do not have a corresponding offset in future age groups. TABLE 1-F: AGE COMPOSITION 2010-2021 2010 2016 2021 Age Number % Number % Number % Age 0 - 4 1,292 10.1% 1,206 8.90% 1,293 9.00% Age 5 - 9 1,101 8.6% 1,150 8.50% 1,226 8.50% Age 10 - 14 969 7.6% 1,033 7.60% 1,163 8.10% Age 15 - 19 823 6.5% 924 6.80% 949 6.60% Age 20 - 24 731 5.7% 901 6.60% 903 6.30% Age 25 - 34 2,255 17.7% 1,968 14.50% 2,246 15.60% Age 35 - 44 1,991 15.6% 2,065 15.20% 2,157 15.00% Age 45 - 54 1,505 11.8% 1,771 13.10% 1,682 11.70% Age 55 - 64 885 6.9% 1,240 9.10% 1,353 9.40% Age 65 - 74 584 4.6% 751 5.50% 836 5.80% Age 75 - 84 394 3.1% 372 2.70% 404 2.80% Age 85+ 229 1.8% 185 1.40% 171 1.20% Median Age 31.6 -- 33.1 -- 32.3 -- Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ESRI forecasts HOUSING SUPPLY Number and Types of Housing Units The US Census indicates that there were 4,693 households in Monticello in 2010: 1,749 more units than identified in 2000 (2,944). Data describing the household type, as shown below in Table 1-E, was only available as an estimate. The most recent data is from the 2014 American Community Survey. Roughly, 54.5% of the housing units in 2014 were single-family detached houses: this is considerably lower than Wright County (76.4%) and lower than the State of Minnesota (67.2%). In 2014, roughly 18.2% of the housing units in Monticello were single-family attached units (townhouses): this is almost double the figure for Wright County (9.8%) and much higher than the State (7.5%). In 2014, the City also had a considerably higher percentage of multi-family housing than Wright County but was consistent with the State of Minnesota. Refer to Table 1-G: Housing Supply by Type - 2014, for more information. 8 | Page TABLE 1-G: HOUSING SUPPLY BY TYPE -2014 Housing Type Monticello Monticello Wright County Wright County State State Units % Units % Units % Single-Family 2,663 54.5% 37,715 76.4% 1,589,773 67.2% Detached Single-Family 889 18.2% 4,863 9.8% 176,173 7.5% Attached 2-4 Unit Multi- 123 2.5% 799 1.6% 104,411 4.4% Family 5+ Unit Multi- 787 16.1% 3,609 7.3% 410,648 17.4% Family Mobile Home 422 8.6% 2,335 4.7% 82,441 3.5% Other - 0.0% 50 0.1% 703 0.0% Total Units 4,884 100% 49,371 100% 2,364,149 100% Source: 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Comparison and Forecast of Owner-Occupied and Renter-Occupied Units It is important to have a balance of owner-occupied and renter-occupied units. In general, many communities strive to have roughly 65-70% of their housing units owner-occupied and 30-35% renter occupied. In 2010, approximately 68% of the housing units in Monticello were owner-occupied; this is slightly lower than Wright County (75%), and about the same as the State of Minnesota (68%). During 2016, the City of Monticelloowner: renter) has changed slightly, with 69% of the housing units being owner occupied and 25% being renter occupied. In 2021, the housing occupancy ratio is forecasted to remain consistent with past trends. Refer to Table 1-H: Housing Tenure by Type 2010, for additional information. Please be aware that there is roughly a 6% gap between owner occupied housing units and renter occupied housing units; this gap will be addressed in the following section. TABLE 1-H: HOUSING TENURE - 2010 - 2021 Owner Occupied Housing Units % Renter Occupied Housing Units % Location: 2010 2016 2021 2010 2016 2021 Monticello 68.2% 68.7% 68.1% 26.2% 25.3% 24.9% Wright County 75.8% 74.7% 74.7% 14.9% 15.8% 15.9% State of MN 64.9% 64.0% 63.9% 24.0% 24.8% 24.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ESRI forecasts Vacancies Today, the City of Monticello faces an overall housing vacancy rate of 6.0%, which is 3.4% lower than the vacancy rate for Wright County, and 5.2% lower than that of the State. Monticellohas increased by 0.4% since 2010 and is projected to increase by 1% in 2021 which will still be significantly lower than the County and State. Both the County and State are projected to remain consistent through year 2021. The increase of vacant housing units in Monticello can partly be explained by the fact that the number of housing units in the City increased by nearly 6% from 2010-2016, and the housing market experienced a significant decline. Please see Table 1-I for further details. 9 | Page TABLE 1-I: VACANT HOUSING FORCAST & COMPARISION 2010-2021 Year City Vacant Units City Percent Vacant County Percent Vacant State Percent Vacant 2010 280 5.6% 9.2% 11.1% 2016 315 6.0% 9.4% 11.2% 2021 391 7.0% 9.4% 11.2% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ESRI forecasts The rental housing average vacancy rate is low in Monticello but is projected to increase indicating a demand for addition rental units at all levels of affordability. Table 2-I indicates specific vacancy rates for eight of the rental properties in the City. TABLE 2-I: RENTAL APARTMENTS VACANCIES AND RATES Vacancy Rates Ridgemont Apartments 0.0% $566 - $610 River Park View Apartments 0.0% 30% of income Ridgway Apartments 2.3% $460 - $725 Hillside Terrace 0.0% 30% of income Cedar Crest Apartments 0.0% 30% of income Broadway Square 0.0% 30% of income 7th Street Townhomes 6.7% $825 Monticello Crossings* 1.0% $925 - $2,210 Monticello Village 3.3% $1,018 $1,610 Average Vacancy Rate 1.5% * 202-unit IRET Apartment Complex built in 2016 Source: WSB & Associates Phone Interviews Value of Housing The median value of owner-occupied housing units in Monticello in 2016 was $179,095 and is projected to increase by $30,314 in 2021. Most housing in Monticello is valued in the range of $150,000 to $199,999, which is consistent with the County and State. In comparison to low and moderate valued housing, there is a relatively limited choice of higher valued housing units in Monticello. Only 16.5% of owner-occupied housing units have a value of $250,000 or greater compared to 38.8% in the County and 36.7% in the State. The median value of owner-occupied housing in Wright County was $216,395 and $205,288 in the State of Minnesota. Monticello needs to focus on later-stage housing opportunities to meet the demand for higher valued housing units. Refer to Table 1-J: Owner-Occupied Housing by Value -2016 for additional information. Table 2-J illustrates the affect that the Great Recession had on housing values in Monticello. Note that median sale price fell below median appraised value in mid-2007, then recovered and surpassed appraised value in 2011to regain a more traditional relationship. Data from Table 2-J came from the Wright County Assessor. 10 | Page TABLE 1-J: OWNER-OCCUPIED HOUSING BY VALUE -2016 Value City Units City % Wright County % State % Less than $50,000 411 11.4% 6.5% 6.5% $50,000 to $99,999 240 6.7% 4.8% 9.4% $100,000 to $149,999 407 11.3% 11.8% 14.7% $150,000 to $199,999 1282 35.5% 21.4% 17.9% $200,000 to $249,999 672 18.6% 16.7% 14.7% $250,000 to $299,999 269 7.5% 11.5% 10.3% $300,000 to $399,999 217 6.0% 13.2% 12.2% $400,000 to $499,99 65 1.8% 6.4% 6.1% $500,000 to $749,999 18 0.5% 4.5% 4.9% $750,000 to $999,999 22 0.6% 1.8% 1.9% $1,000,000 or More 5 0.1% 1.4% 1.3% Median Value $179,095 $216,395 $205,288 Source: ESRI Forecasts CHART 2-J: MONTICELLO HOUSING VALUES THOUGH THE GREAT RECESSION $210,000 $200,000 $190,000 $180,000 $170,000 $160,000 $150,000 $140,000 $130,000 200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016 Median SaleMedian Appraised Owner Monthly Costs as Percentage of Household Income Housing decisions should not be based solely on the value of housing, but also the cost of housing expenses in relation to household income. In general, housing costs (taxes, insurance, principal, interest, etc.) should not exceed 30% of total household income. In 2014, only 19% of homeowners in Monticello had monthly costs that were more than 30% of their household income, compared to 27% in Wright County and 29% in the State of Minnesota (see Table 1-K: Owner Monthly Costs as Percent of Household Income -2014). These figures suggest that housing was more affordable in Monticello than in Wright County and the State of Minnesota in 2014 possibly due to age and livability of housing units. This is an important strength for the City as it continues to grow and evolve into a regional center linking the Twin Cities Metro with the St. Cloud MSA. Monticello should consider a goal to maintain appropriate amounts of affordable housing to mitigate the negative impacts of a housing price correction like that seen during the Great Recession (2007-2010). This will allow for the community to see steady and modestly increasing home values and reduce the 11 | Page likelihood of rapidly increasing home prices causing homeowners to be required to spend a larger portion of their income on housing. While the provision of affordable housing is one side of the coin, the City should also incorporate a plan to encourage the development and attraction of livable wage employment opportunities in the City. TABLE 1-K: OWNER MONTHLY COSTS AS PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME - 2014 Percent of Household Income City Units* City % County % State % Less than 20% 1,286 47.0% 39.0% 41.3% 20.0 to 24.9% 611 22.3% 18.9% 17.8% 25.0 to 29.9% 611 11.4% 14.8% 12.3% 30.0 to 34.9% 169 6.2% 7.6% 7.9% 35.0% or More 361 13.2% 19.6% 20.8% Total 2,738 100% 100% 100% Source: 2010-2014 American Community Survey *Housing Units with a Mortgage Contract Rent In 2014, rental housing units accounted for roughly 25% of the occupied housing units in Monticello. In 2014, roughly 88% of units had a monthly rent of $500 or more, which is higher than Wright County (87%), and the State of Minnesota (79%). See Table 1-L: Renter-Occupied Housing Units by Gross Rent 2010, for additional information. TABLE 1-L: RENTER-OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS BY GROSS RENT - 2014 City County State Monthly Rent Units % Units % Units % Less than $200 23 2.0% 141 2.0% 24,764 4.2% $200 to $299 57 4.9% 233 3.3% 31,166 5.3% $300 to $499 66 5.6% 582 8.2% 68,601 11.6% $500 to $749 367 31.2% 2136 30.1% 159,802 27.1% $750 to $999 322 27.4% 2012 28.3% 139,386 23.6% $1000 to $1,499 306 26.0% 1514 21.3% 105,182 17.8% $1,500 or more 34 2.9% 188 2.6% 34,297 5.8% No Rent Paid 0 0.0% 300 4.2% 27,938 4.7% Median Rent Paid $773 $778 $747 Total Specified Units 1,175 100% 7,106 100% 590,136 100% Source: 2010-2014 American Community Survey Renter Monthly Costs as Percentage of Household Income In 2014, 46.5% of renters paid over 30% of their household income in rent (see Table 1-M: Gross Rent as Percent of Household Income 2014). This number is slightly lower than Wright County (47.7%) but higher than the State of Minnesota (46.1%). This suggests that there is not an abundance of affordable rental units in Monticello and efforts should be made to decrease rental costs. 12 | Page TABLE 1-M: GROSS RENT AS A PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME -2014 Percent of Household Income Units Percent Wright County State Less than 10% 0 0.0% 3.2% 3.5% 10 to 14.9% 73 6.2% 8.1% 8.2% 15 to 19.9% 205 17.4% 13.6% 12.3% 20 to 24.9% 262 22.3% 13.1% 12.5% 25 to 29.9% 72 6.1% 9.1% 11.4% 30 to 34.9% 194 16.5% 9.7% 8.8% 35 to 39.9% 86 7.3% 8.1% 6.1% 40 to 49.9% 102 8.7% 9.8% 8.1% 50.0% or More 164 14.0% 20.1% 23.1% Not Computed 17 1.4% 5.2% 6.0% Total Specified Units 1,175 100% 100% 100% Source: 2010-2014 American Community Survey Age and Maintenance of Housing Stock In 2014, roughly 39% (1,910 units) of the Citystructed before 1990 (greater than 27 years old). Just 5.4% of the housing units in Monticello were built before 1939. Monticello has a relatively new housing stock in comparison to Wright County and the State of Minnesota, with 60.8% of housing units being built since 1990 compared with 50.4% for the County and 29.0% for the State. TABLE 1-N: YEAR STUCTURE BUILT Year Structure Built Monticello Units Percent Wright County State 2010 or later 0 0.0% 0.7% 0.8% 2000 to 2009 1,697 34.7 32.2% 14.6% 1990 to 1999 1,277 26.1% 18.5% 13.6% 1980 to 1989 748 15.3% 12.2% 13.0% 1970 to 1979 654 13.4% 16.0% 15.6% 1960 to 1969 63 1.3% 4.9% 9.8% 1950 to 1959 96 2.0% 4.1% 10.4% 1940 to 1949 86 1.8% 2.3% 4.8% 1939 or Earlier 263 5.4% 9.2% 17.3% Total Specified Units 4,884 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: 2010-2014 American Community Survey 13 | Page LIFE-CYCLE HOUSING AND PROFILE OF HOUSEHOLDS The housing needs of a community relate to the demographic profile of the household. Typically, households move through several life-cycle stages; including entry-level households, first time homeowners, move-up buyers, empty nesters/young seniors, and senior citizens. The following describes each of these household types and the effect that they have on housing demands in Monticello. Entry-Level Households People in the 18 to 24-year-old age group typically leave their childhood home and establish their own household. They often rent a house or an apartment because they generally do not have the income and savings needed to buy a home. In addition, many people in this age group move frequently, so they are hesitant to buy a house. They are also more likely to share housing with other unrelated people of similar age. The entry-level household population in Monticello will fluctuate annually. Many Monticello residents that graduate from high school move to other communities to attend a university or to pursue other job opportunities. In the long term, unless current conditions and trends change, Monticello is projected to see a 0.5% decrease in the 15 to 24-year-old age group by year 2021 (Table 1-F). Job opportunities aimed at retaining this age cohort need to be strongly considered. Nevertheless, there will always be a strong need to provide affordable housing for people of all ages. First-Time Homeowners First time homeowners are - increasingly, first time homeowners are single. They are prone to moving within several years of buying their first home for several reasons; including, increased salaries allow them to move to more expensive housing, children may require larger housing, and job opportunities may require that they move to another 2 community. Monticello is projected to see a 0.3% increase in the 20-44 age group by year 2021 (Table 1- F), which could translate into an increased demand for lower-end housing units. Move-Up Buyers Move-up buyers are typically in their 30s and 40s. They move up from the smaller, less expensive house that they had previously purchased. From an economic growth perspective, this is an important age group of people. Typically, move-up buyers have children in school and an established career. They are less likely to move to another community and start over. Also, professionals who are moving to a community to advance their career are generally looking to move to a more expensive house than what they had in 3 their previous community. Monticello is projected to see a 0.5% decrease in the 25-54 age group by the year 2021 (Table 1-F). This is 0.3% lower than the study area average of a 0.8% decrease. This may be an indicator that there is a shortage of available units for move-up buyers. Monticello must continue to 2 People in their 40s were included due to U.S. Census age groups. 3 People in their 20s and 50s were included due to U.S. Census age groups. 14 | Page ensure that it has adequate choices for those who are looking for move-up housing that will satisfy their needs until they are in their 50s and beyond. Empty Nesters and Young Seniors Empty nesters and young seniors are generally in their 50s, 60s, and early 70s. Often, their children have moved out of their house and left them with a larger house than needed. Empty nesters and young seniors often want to live in a smaller home, like a townhouse or patio home, that has less maintenance. The baby boom generation in Monticello is projected to increase by 0.6% by year 2021 (Table 1-F). A notable increase in apartment rentals in Monticello by members of this population segment is likely to occur. A large portion of these individuals will likely desire higher-end apartment complexes with quality amenities so they can maintain their current lifestyles. Senior Citizens This age group is generally in their late 70s and older and are often looking for low maintenance or assisted living housing. As the population ages, Monticello must continually ensure that it has adequate housing to meet the needs of seniors. The City is projected to see a 0.1% decrease in the 75 and older age group by year 2021 (Table 1-F). Monticello should continue to strive to be a senior-friendly community that values the contributions of seniors, promotes positive intergenerational interactions, considers the needs of seniors in community planning, supports the efforts of seniors to live independently, and acknowledges the role that family, friends, and neighbors play in the life of seniors. Special Needs Housing for those with special needs includes housing for those with mental and/or physical disabilities or health issues and those who need temporary or transitional housing. The number of people with special housing needs is expected to increase as the population of Monticello continues to age and grow. Senior Housing Market Monticello City staff members have identified a need for senior housing market analysis. Based upon population growth forecasts, household forecasts, and the current age of householders, we can extrapolate what the senior housing market will require. Table 1-O: Senior Housing Projections 2010-2021 illustrates how the change in the sixty-five and older population will affect the number of occupied housing units. By year 2021, Monticello will need 940 units suitable for senior residents to meet demand, which is an increase of 136 units from 2010. We consider senior housing to be any housing unit (affordable, renter, duplex, patio house, etc.) that meets the needs of residents sixty-five (65) and older. 15 | Page TABLE 1-O: SENIOR HOUSING PROJECTIONS2010-2021 Year 2010 2016 2021 Total Population 12,759 13,568 14,383 Total Occupied Units 4,693 4,936 5,199 65+ Population 1,207 1,308 1,411 65+ Population Percent 9.5% 9.6% 9.8% Units Occupied by 65+ Population 804 871 940 Percentage of Units Occupied by 65+ Population 17.1% 17.7% 18.1% Source: U.S. Census, ESRI Forecasts, WSB & Associates AFFORDABLE HOUSING Affordable housing is important to a strong economy and a healthy community. Increasingly, housing is not affordable for many working families and the lack of affordable housing for people of all ages and incomes causes families stress, dampens productivity and stifles job growth. Various organizations define many ways. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) generally defines housing as affordabl Section 8 guidelines define low and moderate incomes on a sliding scale, depending on the number of persons in the family. For example, a four-person Most housing affordability programs and data place emphasis on creating owner-occupied units at eighty (80) percent of the median family income (moderate income) and rental units at fifty (50) percent of the median family income (low income). Since low income persons are typically renters, the definition of d to the number of persons in each unit. T eighty (80) percent of median income). Affordable rental units are based on fifty (50) percent of the median income and reflected on a per capita and per family basis. It is change as the cost of living increases and interest rates change. Therefore, the City should periodically review income/housing statistics and update the definition as warranted. Factors such as interest rates will impact housing affordability in both a positive and negative manner. Income by Age of Householder Looking at income data is also important when predicting future housing demands in the City of Monticello. In 2010, the median household income in Monticello was $68,135 ($67,963 in the County) and the largest employment industries were educational, health and social services, manufacturing, and retail trade. By 2016, the median household income increased significantly to approximately $76,954 ($73,798 in the County) and the top employment industries were the same. household income is projected to increase to $85,218 by 2021 ($83,257 in the County) according to ESRI Business Analyst. 16 | Page Income distributions as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau can be compared to affordability standards to determine how many households and families in the City of Monticello may require affordable housing. Table 1-P: Monticello Affordable Housing Units Requirements 2016 & 2021 depicts the number of households (renter and owner) that may require affordable housing (based on family income). The gray shaded area indicates family incomes of 80% or less of the median household income ($61,449 in 2016 and $68,174 in 2021). The red box indicates family incomes of 50% or less of the median household income ($38,406 in 2016 and $42,609 in 2021). By 2021, 2,214 owner households may require affordable housing, and 1,629 renter households may require affordable housing. TABLE 1-P: MONTICELLO AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS 2016 & 2021 2016 2021 Annual Household Number of Households % of Total Number of Households % of Total Income Less than $15,000 378 7.7% 411 7.9% $15,000 to $24,999 286 5.8% 271 5.2% $25,000 to $34,999 332 6.7% 316 6.1% $35,000 to $49,999 543 11.0% 631 12.1% $50,000 to $74,999 834 16.9% 512 9.8% $75,000 to $99,999 887 18.0% 937 18.0% $100,000 to $149,999 1,262 25.6% 1,564 30.1% $150,000 to $199,999 341 6.9% 472 9.1% $200,000 and over 74 1.5% 85 1.6% Total Households 4,937 100% 5,199 100% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ESRI forecasts The following table illustrated the maximum affordable housing costs for renters and owners based on median income. A direct relationship exists between monthly affordable housing costs and median income. Steps should be taken in Monticello to keep housing costs affordable as housing values increase such as maintaining current affordable housing stock and assuring opportunities for the construction of new affordable housing units. TABLE 1-Q: MAXIMUM AFFORDABLE HOUSING COSTS (RENTER & OWNER) - 2016 & 2021 Renter Owner Year 2016 2021 2016 2021 Median Income $76,811 $85,218 $76,811 $85,218 Affordable Income: $38,406 $42,609 $61,448.80 $68,174.40 50% Renter, 80% Owner 30% of Affordable $11,522 $12,783 $18,434.64 $20,452.32 Income Monthly Housing Cost $960 $1,065 $1,536.22 $1,704.36 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ESRI forecasts 17 | Page OWNER-OCCUPIED HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS This section analyses the City of Monticello are single-family home resale trends, home foreclosures, actively marketing subdivisions, pending subdivisions, interviews with local real estate professionals and others involved in the local housing market to gain their feedback on existing market conditions and trends. The Wright C Office provided data on resale trends. The following are key findings regarding the owner-occupied housing market. Home Resale Trends The average resale price of single-family homes in Monticello in 2016 was $202,073 and there were 342 sales. This was an increase in price from 2015 ($169,025 and 266 sales). While some of the price changes from year to year can be attributed to the age and quality of the homes sold during a year, an interview with a realty expert indicated the average resale price likely bottomed out in 2011 and slow price appreciation is expected to continue to bring prices back to a more market-neutral level. Median sale price is often a more reliable measure of price trends. In Monticello, the median sale price of single- family homes increased from $171,500 in 2015 to $185,269 in 2016, which reflects an increase of 8% for that period. TABLE 1-R: RE-SALE TRENDS OF EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES Year Number of Sales Median Sale Price Average Sale Price 2015 266 $171,500 $ 169,025 2016 342 185,269 $ 202,073 Source: Wright County Assessor's Office; WSB & Associates, Inc. Table 1-S shows the number of home sales in 2016 by the decade the homes were built. In 2016, 181 of the 342 (52.9%) single-family homes sold were built during year 2000 or later. Similarly, Table 1-N showed that approximately 34.7% of Monticello-occupied single-family homes were built after 2000. Only 11.7% of the sales in 2016 were homes built prior to 1980. This highlights the relatively large supply of newer homes available to potential new residents moving to the community. Table 1-S also highlights how the median sale price decreases as the homes get older. Most homes sold in Monticello in 2016 for under $170,000 were built before 1980. Homes priced above $180,000 were generally built since 2000. TABLE 1-S: HOME SALES BY DECADE BUILT 2016 Decade Number of Sales Percentage Median Sale Price 1970 and Older 27 7.9% $151,509 1971-1980 13 3.8% $166,000 1981-1990 23 6.7% $157,500 1991-2000 98 28.7% $181,467 2001-2010 132 38.6% $193,951 2010-2016 49 14.3% $221,050 Total: 342 100.0% - Source: Wright County Assessor's Office 18 | Page Foreclosures Beginning in the middle of the last decade, home foreclosures began to have a significant impact on housing markets across the nation. Initially, most foreclosures occurred among buyers with lower credit ratings who had sub-prime mortgages. Gradually, foreclosure activity increased as jobs plummeted and home prices sank precipitously. Foreclosures have gradually decreased over the past few years as housing markets have stabilized. Table 1-T presents foreclosure data for Wright County and Minnesota. The data are considered Minnesota Homeownership Center and published on their website. There were 7,212 foreclosures in Minnesota in 2015. This was down from 8,313 in 2014 and significantly lower than 11,834 in 2013. Wright County had 205 foreclosures in 2015, down from 240 in 2014 and 372 in 2013. Wright County has maintained a higher foreclosure rate than Minnesota. The foreclosure rate, as shown in Table 1-T, is defined as the number of foreclosed mortgages as a percent of total residential parcels. In 20150.49% compared to 0.40% in Minnesota. Foreclosures have hindered as they have other areas of the State. Out of 87 counties in the State, only 6 had a higher foreclosure count than Wright County. Those counties were Saint Louis, Washington, Dakota, Anoka, Ramsey, and Hennepin. TABLE 1-T: HOME FORECLOSURES WRIGHT COUNTY, 2013 to 2015 Wright County Minnesota Year Number of Foreclosures Foreclosure Rate Number of Foreclosures Foreclosure Rate 2013 372 0.89% 11,834 0.64% 2014 240 0.57% 8,313 0.46% 2015 205 0.49% 7,212 0.40% Sources: Minnesota Homeownership Center, HousingLink Single-Family Listings Based on a review of various Realtor websites, there were 77 single-family homes actively listed for sale in Monticello in November 2016. The homes were unevenly distributed by price range; weighted heavier toward higher priced homes. Only two (2) homes were priced below $120,000 and 68 priced $150,000 or higher listed for sale. Four (4) homes were listed for sale between $100,000 and $150,000. The average list price of homes on the market was $271,759 in November 2016. While homes typically sell for less than the list prices, the current prices suggest that Monticello should continue to see appreciation in home prices since the low point in 2011. Existing Lot Supply There are currently a limited number of lots available to accommodate new single-family homes in Monticello. The City is experiencing a shortage in buildable lots as bank owned lots have been purchased and developed. As of the end of 2016, there are a total of 74 single-family lots and sites that can accommodate up to 101 multi-family units. Permit numbers have steadily recovered from the 2010 and 2011 low point (two single family permits issued each year) to the issuance of 61 single-family permits in 2016. Prior to the recession, the City issued more than 300 permits annually. During that time (2002- 2007) housing lots were selling in the $70,000-$90,000 range. The sale price of lots fell by more than 80% after the recession. Bank foreclosures of developers resulted in existing lots becoming bank owned 19 | Page and ultimately being developed quickly. Many of the approved single family pre-plats were not completed due to the diminished demand for new homes. Refer to Table 1-U for full details. TABLE 1-U: AVAILABLE PLATTED & UTILITY SERVICED LOTS Development Single Family Lots Multi Family Lots Featherstone 15 0 Hunters Crossing 0 0 Hillside Farm 22 0 Spirit Hills 0 5 Sunset Ponds 21 0 Carlisle Village 7 17 Autumn Ridge 0 79 Eastview 1 0 Club West 7 0 Pine View 1 0 Total 74 101 Source: City of Monticello In mid-2016, the average price of a lot was about $20,000. As the housing market has improved and lot prices have increased due to the limited supply, it has allowed for an increase in prices for new single family lots. The new housing price situation is further aggravated by the limited number of remaining small home builders which have either closed or changed professions due to the recession and is now resulting in higher construction costs. According to a Monticello realty expert, another critical factor impacting the demand for single family homes is the degree to which first-time home buyers are riddled with college debt and unable to afford the price of a new home. The interest rate for new home loans has increased slightly from an all-time low of 3.4% during the depths of the recession to approximately 4.25% in late 2016. -sale price currently sits in the five to seven percent range and is expected to go up. There are no major complaints or concerns among current homeowners looking to move up into more expensive homes. However, Monticello currently lacks availability of lots that are attractive for higher end housing. The community should focus on the development or attraction of a high-end housing development. The two-major upper-bracket areas (Carlisle Village and Briar Oakes Boulevard) have limited availability of undeveloped lots and are surrounded by agricultural uses. City-annexed land west of Monticello provides development opportunities but is unattractive to developers looking to build higher-market homes due to the lack of natural amenities and features generally associated with high end housing areas. Single-family Housing Permits The City of Monticello issued sixty-one (61) building permits in 2016. This number is up 38.6% from 2015 when forty-four (44) permits were issued (6 attached and 38 detached). To meet demand, the City will need to continue this trend. Please refer to Table 1-C for additional information. 20 | Page RENTAL HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Affordable Rental Housing This section of the report analyses the affordable rental housing market in Monticello. The analysis includes data collected from Affordable Housing Online. All the properties in this section are general occupancy. As shown in the demographic and housing stock overview sections, there are approximately 1,175 renter households in Monticello which is down 127 households from 2010. The overwhelming majority of renters live in larger multifamily properties. There are approximately 2,923 renters (24% of total population) living in Monticello. As of 2014, 25% of total Monticello households were renter-occupied, compared to 15.6% for Wright County, and 28% for the State of Minnesota. Properties that include units assisted by federal programs were surveyed as part of this analysis. In total, eight (8) properties with 322 units were surveyed. Twenty-six (26) percent of the rental units are federally subsidized. financed through the following programs: TABLE 1-V: FEDERALLY ASSISTED AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING STOCK Program Properties Units Section 8 2 74 LIHTC 3 102 RD 515 6 189 Total 9 307 Note: The total does not necessarily equal the sum of each program as some properties may participate in multiple funding programs Source: Affordable Housing Online The average number of units per property for affordable rentals in Monticello is 34. The largest federally assisted affordable rental community in Monticello is Ridgemont Apartments at 48 units and the smallest is Hillside Terrace II at 12 units. Two apartment properties provide housing for seniors totaling 59 units. All 307 units include some form of rental assistance (like Section 8) to make rent more affordable for very low income families. In Monticello, a family of four must earn $42,900 or less to qualify for Section 8 housing. See Table 1-W: Federally Assisted Units by Property for details. TABLE I-W: FEDERALLY ASSISTED UNITS BY PROPERTY Name Sec 8 LIHTC RD 515 Senior Broadway Square - - - 28 Cedar Crest Apartments 38 - - - Hillside Terrace -- Monticello 36 - - - Hillside Terrace II - - 12 - Ridgeway Apartments - - 44 - River Park View Apartments - 31 31 31 Ridgemont Apartments - - 48 - Source: Affordable Housing Online Note: Not all unit counts are available from HUD 21 | Page Photographs of Monticello Apartment Buildings Image 1: Ridgemont Apartments Image 2: River Park View Apartments Image 3: Hillside Terrace Image 4: Cedar Crest Apartments Image 5: Broadway Square Image 6: Ridgeway Apartments 22 | Page Image 7: Monticello Crossings Image 8: 7th Street Townhomes Housing Development Opportunities There are currently three future housing development sites that have been identified in Monticello. Site A is an 11.93-acre area located at 506 Territorial Road and is the site of the historic registered Rand House which was the home of the Minnegasco founders. This site is zoned low density residential (R-1) and performance-based overlay and may be used for the development of a senior housing apartment complex with sixty to eighty units (60-80) in addition to forty (40) patio homes. The Rand House would be used as a community center and guest home for the development. Rezoning this area using the planned unit development (PUD) process may be the best option to allow for this higher density could be used to justify the PUD. Also, we believe the proposed housing development is consistent with the purpose of the performance based enhancement district. th Site B is a 6.4-acre area located north of the lake on the corner of Elm Street and 7 Street West. It is zoned for medium density residential (R-3) and may be used for multifamily, senior, or market-rate development. It is within proximity exposure to the wetland pond offers an attractive natural amenity. rd Finally, Site C is located at the corner of Locust Street and 3 Street West and has already been approved for the construction of a twenty-three (23) unit three story residential development. m 2010-2021 Monticello will need to construct 136 new senior housing units to meet the forecasted demand. Sites A and B have both been identified as ideal locations for senior housing development. Depending on the number of units permitted on each of these sites, and on how many senior housing units have been constructed from 2010-2016, Monticello may need to identify more sites suitable for senior housing. 23 | Page Image 9: Site A Image 10: Site B Image 11: Site C 24 | Page DEMAND ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS This section of the report utilizes data collected in the previous sections to calculate demand for owned and rental housing in Monticello through 2021. Housing Demand Analysis Demand for additional housing in Monticello will primarily come from household growth. Replacement of older homes will contribute to the need for additional residential development, as will pent-up demand. Table 1-X outlines our calculations for owner and rental housing demand in Monticello from 2017 to 2021. TABLE 1-X: POTENTIAL HOUSING DEMAND OVER NEXT 5 YEARS 2017 to 2021 A. Household growth* 500 B. Replacement Demand 10 C. Total housing growth (A+B) 510 Range to occur over next 5 years: D. Percent rental demand 30% to 35% E. Rental housing demand (C x D) 153 to 179 F. Pent-up rental demand 64 64 G. Total rental housing demand (E+F) 217 to 243 H. Percent owner demand 65% to 70% I. Total owner housing demand (C x H) 332 to 357 * Includes projected growth for Monticello (263 households) and one-fifth the growth in the remainder of the market area (237) Sources: US Census Bureau, ESRI forecasts, WSB & Associates, Inc. Table 1-E shows that Monticello is projected to add 263 households between 2016 and 2021 and the remainder of the market area is projected to add 1,183 households. We estimate that Monticello can capture one-fifth of the demand in the remainder of the market area, or 237 households, by providing greater housing choices to retain and attract some potential residents who otherwise would live in the surrounding areas. Thus, an additional 500 housing units would need to be developed from 2017 to 2021 to satisfy projected household growth in Monticello. Replacement demand is generated from the loss of housing or the need to replace housing units that are revealed that there are about 340 housing units built prior to 1950. values are decreasing at a faster rate relative to other types of housing. Most of these homes are in good 4 condition, and we estimate that 0.5% percent per year should be removed annually from the housing supply because of obsolescence, which equates to two units every year or ten units over the next five years. A healthy rental market is expected to have a vacancy rate of about 5% to allow for sufficient consumer choice and unit turnover. With pent-up demand (a shortage of units), persons who would normally form 4 Good condition meaning that these homes do not need renovated or demolished. 25 | Page their own rental households, instead decide to move in with other persons in a housing unit, live with their parents, or live in housing outside of the area and commute to jobs. In 2016, Monticello had an estimated 1,300 rental households, of which 20 units (1.5% from Table 2-I) were vacant. This percentage is well below the stabilized vacancy rate. In order to bring the overall vacancy rate to a balanced 5%, about 64 additional rental units would need to be added to the city. Based on demographic and market trends, we project 30% to 35% of the housing demand from household growth and replacement-need in Monticello between 2017 and 2021 will be for rental housing. There is a total of demand for approximately 217 to 243 rental households (about 44 to 49 annually). This demand is for all types of rental housing from subsidized and market rate general occupancy housing to senior housing. An estimate of 65% to 70% of housing demand in Monticello between 2017 and 2021 is projected to be for owner-occupied housing. This equates to demand for 332 to 357 households from 2017 to 2021 (66 to 71 homes annually.). This would equate to the projected demand for single-family homes and townhomes. These demand projections are based During this time, we experienced the market correction of 2009-2013 which greatly impacted the calculations causing the projections to be historically low. It can be anticipated that if the housing market continues its recovery, the demand for both rental-occupied and owner-occupied households will be greater than the projections. It can be further extrapolated that in response to the increased regulations on mortgages, and the high rates of student debt, the demand for rental housing will dramatically increase. Other Housing Recommendations Projected demand for new housing products in Monticello through the remainder of the decade from current and future residents is outlined on the preceding pages. In addition, there are other programs that Monticello can implement to assist in meeting local housing needs and improving the quality of the existing stock. The key programs/initiatives that Monticello should pursue are outlined below. Monticello needs to closely monitor rental vacancy rates and availability as new rental properties are added to the community. The addition of the 202-unit Monticello Crossing apartment complex has set a precedent with 200 of its units being occupied during a very short timeframe. This indicates a clear pent-up demand that should continue to increase at the housing market recovers from the correction. Monticello should also work towards converting vacant housing units into renter-occupied to reach 30-35% of total housing units. In its current state, the rental housing inventory sits at 25% of total housing units. As seen in Table 1-I, the City is projected to have seventy-six (76) additional vacancies. Monticello needs to maintain its low housing costs and low percentage (19%) of residents paying more than 30% of their monthly household income on housing to reduce the negative impacts from another housing correction like 2006-08. This percentage is much lower than county and state averages (27% and 29% respectively). Monticello should make efforts to increase affordable rental housing inventory so they are available for younger generations of citizens as well as baby-boomers and empty-nesters. The latter two cohorts of residents are downsizing their living spaces and need affordable places to 26 | Page live. Combining affordable housing options with job opportunities could lead to an increase in 19-24-year-old residents. Monticello should also ensure an adequate amount of higher-end rental units for higher-income individuals looking to retire and downsize their living quarters. While these individuals are looking for smaller spaces, they are not willing to surrender the amenities to which they have grown accustom. With the expected increase in the percentage of residents over the age of sixty-five (65), Monticello needs to increase their stock of senior housing units. Refer to Table 1-O for projected figures. Monticello should consider the development of housing in the downtown area to accommodate young seniors and millennial residents. Both cohorts share the same preference for areas that are rich with amenities and walkable, and housing properties that have lower maintenance requirements. Providing residents with downtown housing options is critical if the city wishes to achieve population age diversity and a complete life-cycle housing environment. 27 | Page Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/2017 3B.Consideration to call for a public hearing on Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 4, Section 13 –Telecommunication Towers and Antennas and related Sections as related to Small Cell and Wireless Telecommunication standards. (AS) A.REFERENCE & BACKGROUND The Planning Commission is asked to call for a public hearing on proposed amendments to Monticello Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 4, Section 13 (and related sections as necessary) as related to small cell and telecommunication standards. During the 2017 legislative session, new statutes were adopted which provide the ability forsmall wireless telecommunication providers to utilize public rights of way for placement of structures. It is recommended that the City address this change both within its City ordinances for rights of way, as well as in exiting language within the zoning ordinances for telecommunication towers and antennas. Reference materials on the issue are provided as supporting data. Planning, engineering and public works staff will be working with the City Attorney over the next weeks to prepareordinance language for consideration. B.ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS rd 1.Motion to call for a public hearing on Tuesday, October 3, for amendments to Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 4,Section 13 –Telecommunication Towers and Antennas and related Sections as related to Small Cell and Wireless Telecommunication standards. 2.Motion of other. C.STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Commission call for the hearing. Amendments are necessary to support regulations per statutes. D.SUPPORTING DATA A.League of MN Cities Reference Materials: 1.2017 telecommunications Right of Way User Amendments Permitting Process for Small Wireless Facilities 2.Information Memo: Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna Systems 1 2017 Telecommunications Right-of-Way User Amendments Permitting Process for Small Wireless Facilities Publication Date: August 1, 2017 (For information on related federal laws see LMC Information Memo “Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies, and Distributed Antenna Systems”) Introduction: 1 On May 30, 2017, Gov. Dayton signed into law a billamending Minnesota’s Telecommunications Right- 2 of-Way User Law. The amendments cleared up any confusion about whether wireless providers are treated the same as other telecommunications right-of-way users under state law, but created a separate, streamlined permitting system for placement of small wireless facilities on city-owned structures in rights of way. Most of the bill provisions became effective on May 31, 2017, with the exception that the prohibition on moratoria does not take effect until January1, 2018forthose cities that did not have a right- of-way ordinance in place on or before May 18, 2017, to give those cities an opportunity to enact an ordinance regulating theirpublic rights-of-way.Also, the amendments allow cities to enter collocation agreements with telecommunications right-of-way users, if they choose, as long as the collocation agreement for small wireless facilities is made available in a substantially complete form no later than six months after the effective date of this act or three months after receiving a small wireless facility permit application from a wireless service provider. Where can I read the new law? Until revisions of the state statute occur to include bills passed this session, cities can find the amendments at 2017 Laws, Chapter 94. Does the law require cities to do anything differently when regulating wireless providers attaching their equipment to city structures in the rightsof way? Yes, the amendments create a separate permit process for small wireless facilities. The below checklist was prepared to serve as a guide for cities to use when amending existing telecommunications ordinances, but does necessarily cover all nuancesof the new law and should not replace working with city attorneys to draft or amend existing ordinances. What is the purpose of Minnesota’s Telecommunication Right-of-Way User Law? 1 Chapter 94, Article 9 of the 2017 Regular Session, effective May 31, 2017. 2 Minn. Stat. §§ 237.162, 237.163. In 1997, the Minnesota Legislature recognized the need for a state law providing local government units with the authority to regulate the use of public rights of way by telecommunications right-of-way users. The resulting Minnesota Telecommunications Right-of-Way User Law allows telecommunications right-of-way users to construct, maintain, and operate conduit, cable, switches (and now small wireless facilities), and related appurtenances and facilities along, across, upon, above, and under any public right of way, but subjects those users to local regulations by cities to managetheir rights of way and to recover management costs. Can a city manage its right of way without doing anything? No, the city must adopt an enabling ordinance.A local government unit is not required to manage its rights of way, but most want to do so. As such, the local government authority must pass an ordinance exercising this authority. Many cities find that having a separate telecommunications right-of-way user ordinance (in addition to a general right-of-way ordinance) allows for better regulation of cell towers, small cell andother telecommunications equipment. Did the amendments in the 2017 laws impact all telecommunications right-of-way users? Some of the amendments impacted cities’ regulations on all telecommunications right-of-way users, but the amendments also createda distinct set of regulations specifically for placement of small wireless facilities. With respect to the regulations that apply to all telecommunications right-of-way users, the law: Requires all telecommunications right-of-way users seeking to excavate or obstruct a public right of way to obtain a right-of-way permit to do so. Requires a telecommunications right-of-way user using, occupying, or seeking to use or occupy a public right of way for providing telecommunications services to register with the local government unit by providing the local government unit with specific information (set forth in the statute), and including authorization for periodic updates. Requires telecommunications right-of-way users to submit plans for construction and major maintenance, to provide reasonable notice of projects that may require excavation and obstruction of public rights of way. Provides for restoration by the telecommunication right-of-way user after excavation occurs, either in the formof doing the restoration work or reimbursing the local governmental unit for the cost of the restoration work. Allows recovery of right-of-way management costs through a fee for registration, a fee for each right- of-way permit or, when appropriate, a fee applicable to a telecommunications right-of-way user when that user causes the local government unit to incur costs because of actions or inactions of that user. Can a city charge a fee for using the right of way? Yes, because when cities manage rights ofway, they incur costs. However, when cities charge right-of-way users, the fees must be calculated on a competitively neutral basis, and based on the actual costs incurred by the city in managing the public right of way. A fee for the cost of managing theright-of-way should reflect an allocation among all users of the public right-of-way, including the city itself. Can a city charge rent if a right-of-way user places equipment in the right of way? Yes. Nothing in the law prohibits a city from charging rent for the placement of technology or equipment by a telecommunications right-of-way user on a city owned structure. However, cities are limited in the amount 2 of rent they can charge for collocation of small wireless facilities on city-owned structures. Fee limitations are described in the statute. If a city does not have an ordinance, can it pass a moratorium on processing any applications it receives until it can pass an ordinance? Probably not.The law prohibits cities from establishing a moratorium with respect to filing, receiving, or processing applications for right-of-way or small wireless facility permits, or for issuing or approving right- of-way or small wireless facility permits.However, for cities that did not have an ordinance enabling it to manage its right-of-way before or on May 18, 2017, the prohibition on moratoria does not take effect until January 1, 2018, giving those cities an opportunity to enact an ordinance regulating its public rights-of-way. Can a city still deny applications for siting of telecommunications equipment in its right of way? Generally,yes, however, any denial or revocation of either a right-of-way permit or a small wireless facility permit must be done in writing and must document the basis for the denial, including the health, safety and welfare reasons for the denial. The local government unit must notify the telecommunications right-of-way user, in writing, within three business days of the decision to deny or revoke a permit. If the city denies a permit application, the telecommunications right-of-way user may cure the deficiencies identified by the local government unit and resubmit its application. If the telecommunications right-of-way user resubmits the application within 30 days of receiving written noticeof the denial, the city may not charge an additional filing or processing fee. The local government unit must approve or deny the revised application within 30 days after the submission of the revised application, or it is deemed granted. Can cities treatthe siting of all cell equipment the same? It depends. If the city plans to regulate cell sitings and require telecommunications right-of-way users to get permits, then the 2017 amendments to the law create a separate permit system for small wireless facility technology that places additional limitations on a city’s ability to regulate those specific types of technology. Does the new law mean our city cannot enter into a separate agreement with telecommunications right- of-way users who want to place equipment on city owned structures? The amendments donot requirecities to haveseparate agreements, and some cities may choose to put these provisions in their ordinance or permit instead. For cities that want a separate ‘collocation agreement’in place, they must develop and make that collocation agreement available no later than six months after May 31, 2017 (the effective date of theact)or three months after receiving a small wireless facility permit application from a wireless service provider.“Collocate" or "collocation"means to install, mount, maintain, modify, operate, or replace a small wireless facility on, under, within, or adjacent to an existing wireless support structure that is owned privately or by a local government unit.The template of the agreement must be made available in a substantially complete form.The partiesto theseparatesmall wireless facility collocation agreement always may incorporate additional mutually agreed upon terms and conditions. Also, the law now clearly classifies anysmall wireless facility collocation agreement between a local government unit and a wireless service provider aspublic data accessible to the public under Minnesota’s Data Practices Law. 3 What type of equipment is subject to the special requirements on small cell technology? The statute defines type of equipment, which include: “Small wireless facility”: (1) A wireless facility that meets both following qualifications: (i) Each antenna is located inside an enclosure of no more than six cubicfeet in volume or, in the case of an antenna that has exposed elements, the antenna and all its exposed elements could fit within an enclosure of no more than six cubic feet. (ii) All other wireless equipment associated with the small wireless facility, excluding electric meters, concealment elements, telecommunications demarcation boxes, battery backup power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switches, cutoff switches, cable, conduit, vertical cable runs for the connection of power and other services, and any equipment concealed from public view within or behind an existing structure or concealment, is in aggregate no more than 28 cubic feet in volume. (2) A micro wireless facility. “Wireless support structure”means a new or existing structure in a public right of way designed to support or capable of supporting small wireless facilities, as reasonably determined by a local government unit. “Collocate” or “collocation”means to install, mount, maintain, modify, operate, or replace a small wireless facility on, under, within, or adjacent to an existing wireless support structure that is owned privately or by a local government unit. What additional requirements must cities consider to comply with Minnesota’s Telecommunications Right-of-Way User Law, as amended? The law sets forth specific requirements related to placement of small wireless facilities or installation of new wireless support structures. The below information highlights items cities will want to consider when drafting an ordinance or amending an existing ordinance. Again, cities should work with their city attorneys to ensure full compliance with the law. NEW STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS GOVERNING PLACEMENT OF SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES IN RIGHTS OF WAY If a city decides to regulate or require permits for placement of a new wireless support structure or collocation of a small wireless facility, then the city should be aware that: Small wireless facilities and wireless support structures are a permitted use, except that in districts zoned as single-family residential use or district identified as historic (either by federal law or ordinance), a local government unit can require a conditional use permit. 4 Cities must not require an applicant for a small wireless facility permit to provide any information that the applicant previously had provided to the city in a different application for a small wireless permit (which the applicant must identify by specific reference number). Cities must not require an application to provide information that is not reasonably necessary to review a permit application for compliance with generally applicable and reasonable health, safety, and welfare regulations, or to demonstrate compliance with applicable Federal Communications Commission regulations governing radio frequency exposure, or other information required by this section. Permits for small cell facility collocation or placement of a new wireless support structure must specify that the term of a small wireless facility permit equals the length of time that small wireless facility is in use, unless the permit is revoked under this section. The total application fee for a small wireless facility permit must comply with the statutory requirement regarding costs related to the permit. The city must allow applicants for small wireless facility permits to file a consolidated permit application to collocate up to 15 small wireless facilities (or a greater number if agreed to by a local government unit), provided that all the small wirelessfacilities in the application are located within a two-mile radius, consist of substantially similar equipment, and are to be placed on similar types of wireless support structures. Thecity has 90 days after the date a small wireless facility permit application is filed to issue or deny the permit, or the permit is automatically issued. To toll the 90-day clock, the city must provide a written notice of incompleteness to the applicant within 30 days of receipt of the application, identifying all missing documents or information, and providing the applicant with a time to cure that 3 complies with the statute. If the city receives applications within a single seven-day period from one or more applicants seeking approval of permits for more than 30 small wireless facilities, the city may extend the 90-day deadline by an additional 30 days. If a city elects to invoke this extension, it must inform in writing any applicant to whom the extension will be applied. A city cannot require placement ofsmall wireless facilities on any specific wireless support structure other than the one proposed in the permit application. A city must not limit the placement of small wireless facilities, either by minimum separation distances between small wireless facilities or maximum height limitations, except that each wireless support structure installed in the right of way after the effective date of this act shall not exceed 50 feet above ground level (unless the local government unit agrees to a greater height). 3 Minn. Stat. §237.163, Subd. 3c(b). 5 A city can set forth in its ordinance separation requirements for placement of wireless support structures in relation to other wireless support structures. A city still may deny permit for health, safety, and welfare reasons or for noncompliance with decorative wireless support structures or signs. A city cannotrequire a person to pay a small wireless facility permit fee, obtain a small wireless facility permit, or enter into a small wireless facility collocation agreement solely in order toconduct routine maintenance of a small wireless facility; replace a small wireless facility with a new facility that is substantially similar or smaller in size, weight, height, and wind or structural loading; or install, place, maintain, operate, or replace micro wireless facilities suspended on cables strung between existing utility poles in compliance with national safety codes. A city cannot require an applicant to apply for or enter any individual license, franchise, or other agreement with the local government unit or any other entity, other than the optional standard small wireless facility collocation agreement. A city may require notice of any work that will obstruct a public right of way. OPTIONAL PROVISIONS FOR SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES A city is not required to have a separate agreement, but can choose to enter collocation agreements with applicants locating small wireless facilities onto city owned structures to address terms and conditions of the use of the structures. If a city chooses to do so, then it must make the agreement available to the public in a substantially complete formatno later than six months after the effective date or three months after receiving a small wireless facility permitapplication from a wireless service provider. A city may elect to charge each small wireless facility attached to a wireless support structure owned by the local government unit a fee (rental fee), in addition to other fees or charges allowed under the law, consisting of: (1) up to $150 per year for rent to occupy space on a wireless support structure; (2) up to $25 per year for maintenance associated with the space occupied on a wireless support structure; and (3) an additional monthly fee for electricity used to operate a small wireless facility, if not 4 purchased directly from a utility, at the rate set forth in the statute. 4 Minn. Stat. 237.163, Subd. 6 (d). 6 INFORMATIONMEMO Cell Towers, Small CellTechnologies & Distributed Antenna Systems Learn about large and small cell tower deployment and siting requests for small cell, small wireless and distributed antenna systems (DAS)technology. Better understand the trend of the addition of DAS, small wirelessor small cell equipmenton existing utility equipment. Be aware of common gaps in city zoning, impact of federal and state law,reasons for collocation agreementsand some best practices for dealing with largeandsmall cell towers,small wireless facilities andDAS. I.Deployment of largecell towers or antennas RELEVANT LINKS: A cell site or cell towercreates a “cell” in a cellular network and typically 47 U.S.C. § 253(commonly supports antennasplus other equipment, such as one or more sets of known as Section 253 of Telecommunications Act). transceivers, digital signal processors, control electronics, GPS equipment, primary and backup electrical power and sheltering. Only a finite number of 47 U.S.C. §332(commonly known as Section332 of calls or data can go through these facilitiesat once and the working range of Telecommunications Act). the cell site varies based on any number of factors, including height of the FCC Website. antenna. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)has statedthat cellular or personal communications services (PCS)towers typically range anywhere from 50to 200 feet high. The emergence of personal communications services, the increased number of cell providers,and the growing demand for better coverage havespurred requestsfor new cell towers,small cell equipment,and distributed antenna systems (DAS) nationwide. Thus, some cellular carriers, telecommunications wholesalers or tower companies, have attemptedto quickly deploytelecommunications systems or personal wireless service facilities,and, in doing so, oftenclaim federal law requires cities toallow construction or placement of towers, equipment,or antennas in rightsof way.Such claimsgenerally have no basis.Although not completely unfettered, cities can feel assured that, in general, federal lawpreserves local zoning and land use authority. A.TheTelecommunications Actand the FCC 47 U.S.C. § 253(commonly The Telecommunications Act of 1996(TCA)represented America’s first known as Section 253 of successful attempt to reform regulations on telecommunications in more Telecommunications Act). than 60 years,and was the first piece of legislation to address internet 47 U.S.C. §332(commonly access. Congress enacted the TCAto promote competition and higher known as Section332 of Telecommunications Act). quality in American telecommunications services and to encourage rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies. This material is provided as general information and is not a substitute for legal advice. Consult your attorney for advice concerning specific situations. 145 University Ave. Westwww.lmc.org8/1/2017 Saint Paul, MN 55103-2044(651) 281-1200 or (800) 925-1122© 2017 All Rights Reserved RELEVANT LINKS: FCC websiteinterpreting The FCCis thefederalagency charged with creatingrules and policies under Telecommunications Act of the TCA and other telecommunications laws. 1996. The FCC also manages and licensescommercial users (like cell providers and tower companies), as well as non-commercial users (like local governments). As a result, both the TCAand FCCrulings impact interactions between the cell industry and local government. The significant changes in the wireless industry and its related shared wireless infrastructures, along with consumer demand for fast and reliable service on mobile devices, have fueled a frenzy of requests for large and small cell/DASsite development and/or deployment.As a part of this, cities find themselves facing cell industry arguments that federal law requires cities to approve tower sitingrequests. Companies making these claims most often cite Section 253 or Section 332 47 U.S.C. § 253(Section 253 of the TCAas support. Section 253 states“no state or local statute or of Telecommunications Act). regulation may prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the ability of any 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7). entity to provide any interstate or intrastatetelecommunications service.” FCC 09-99, Declaratory Section 332 has a similar provision ensuringthe entry of commercial mobile Ruling(Nov. 18, 2009). services into desired geographic markets to establishpersonalwireless service facilities. 47 U.S.C. § 253(c)(e) These provisionsshould not, however, be read out of context.When (Section 253 of reviewing therelevant sections in their entirety, it becomes clear that federal Telecommunications Act). lawdoes notpre-empt local municipal regulations and land use controls. 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7). Specifically, the law states “\[n\]othing in this section affects the authority of astate or local government to manage the public rightsofway or to require FCC 09-99, Declaratory fair and reasonable compensation from telecommunications providers, on a Ruling(Nov. 18, 2009). competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory basis, for use of public rightsof way …” and that “nothing in this chapter shall limit or affect the authority of …local government …over decisions regarding the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities”. Sprint Spectrum v. Mills, Courts consistently have agreedthat local governmentsretain their 283 F.3d 404 (2nd Cir. regulatory authorityand,when faced withmaking decisions on placement of 2002). towers, antenna or newtelecommunication service equipmenton city USCOC of Greater Missouri facilities,they generally have the same rightsthatprivate individuals haveto v. Vill. OfMarlborough, 618 F.Supp.2d 1055 (E.D. Mo. deny or permitplacement ofa cellular tower ontheirproperty. This means 2009). cities can regulate and permit placementof towers and other personal FCC 09-99, Declaratory wireless service facilities, including, in most situations (though some state Ruling(Nov. 18, 2009). law restrictions existregarding regulations of small wireless support structures),controlling height, exterior materials, accessory buildings,and even location.Cities should be careful to make sure that local regulations don’t have the effect ofcompletely banningall cell towers or personal wireless service facilities.Such regulation could runafoul offederal law(not to mention state law as well). LeagueofMinnesota Cities Information Memo:8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 2 RELEVANT LINKS: Some cellular companiestry to gain unfettered accessto city rightofwayby claiming they are utilities.The basis for such a claim usually follows one of Vertical Broadcasting v. Town of Southampton,84 F. two themes—either that, as a utility, federal law entitles them to entry;or, in Supp.2d 379 (E.D.N.Y. the alternative, under the city’s ordinances, they get the same treatmentas 2000). other utilities.Courtshave rejectedthe first argumentof entitlement, citing to the specificdirective that local municipalities retain traditional zoning discretion. B.State law In the alternative, the argument that a city’s local ordinancesincludetowers Paging v. Bd. of Zoning as a utilityhas,on occasion and in different states, carried more weight with Appeals for Montgomery Cty.,957 F.Supp.805 (W.D. a court.Tocounter such arguments, cities may considerspecifically Va. 1997). excludingtowers, antenna, small cell, and DAS equipment from their ordinance’s definition of utilities. The Minnesota Department of Commerce, in a letter to a wireless infrastructure provider, cautioned one infrastructure company that its certificate of authority to provide a local niche service did not authorize it to claim an exemption from local zoning. The Minnesota Department of Commerce additionally requested that the offending company cease from making those assertions. In Minnesota, to clear up confusion about whether wireless providers Letter from Minnesota represent telecommunications right-of-way users under state law and to Department of Commerce to Mobilitie. address concerns about deployment of small wireless technology, the Legislature amended Minnesota’s Telecommunications Right-of-Way User Minn. Stat. §237.162 Minn. Stat. §237.163 statutes, or Minnesota Telecom ROW Law, in the 2017 legislative session to Chapter 94, Art. 9,2017 specifically address small wireless facilities and the support structures on Regular Session. which those facilities may attach. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, Meeting Agenda (Nov. 3, 2016). Because of these amendments, effective May 31, 2017 additional specific state statutory provisions apply when cities, throughan ordinance, manage their rights of way, recover their right-of-way management costs (subject to certain restrictions), and charge rent for attaching to city-owned structures in public rights of way. Rent, however,iscapped for collocation of small wireless facilities. State law defines “collocate" or "collocation" as a means to install, mount, maintain, modify, operate, or replace a small wireless facility on, under, within, or adjacent to an existing wireless support structure that is owned privately or by a local government unit. The Minnesota Telecom ROW Law allows cities to require Minn. Stat. §237.162. telecommunications right-of-way users to get a permit for use of the right of Minn. Stat. §237.163 Chapter 94, Art. 9,2017 way; however, it creates a separate permitting structure for the siting of Regular Session. small wireless facilities. LeagueofMinnesota Cities Information Memo:8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 3 RELEVANT LINKS: Because of the recent significant changes in the state law and the specific requirements for deployment of small wireless facilities that do not apply to other telecommunications right-of-way users, cities should work with their city attorneys to review and update their ordinances. C.Limitations on cities’ authority 1.Federal law Althoughfederallawexpressly preserves local governmental regulatory authority,itdoes place several substantive and procedural limits on that authority.Specifically, a city: USCOC of Greater Missouri Cannot unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally v. Vill. Of Marlborough, 618 F.Supp.2d 1055 (E.D. Mo. equivalent services. 2009). Cannot regulate those providers in a manner that prohibits or has the Minnesota Towers Inc. v. effect of prohibiting the provision of telecommunications services or City of Duluth, 474 F.3d personal wireless services. th 1052 (8Cir. 2007). Must act on applications within a reasonable time. NE Colorado Cellular, Inc. v. Must document denial of an application in writing supported by City of North Platte,764 F.3d 929 (8th Cir. 2014) “substantial evidence.” (denial of CUP for tower must be “in writing” but need not be a separate finding from the reasons in the denial). Smith Comm. V. Washington Proof that the local zoning authority’s decision furthers theapplicable local Cty, Ark., 785 F.3d 1253 (8th zoning requirements or ordinances satisfiesthe substantial evidence test. Cir. 2015)(substantial evidence' analysis involves Municipalitiescannot cite environmental concerns as a reason for denial, whether the local zoning however, whenthe antennas comply with FCC rules on radio emissions. In authority's decision is consistent with the applicable the alternative, citiescanrequest proof of compliancewith the FCC rules. local zoning requirements and can include aesthetic reasons). Bringing an action in federal court represents therecourse available to the cellular industry if challenging the denial of a siting request under federal law. Based on the limitations set forth in the federal law on local land use and zoning authority, most often, when cities deny siting requests, the challenges to those denials claimone of the following: FCC 09-99, Declaratory The municipal action has the effect of “prohibiting the provision of Ruling,Nov. 18, 2009. personal wireless service.” Tower and Antenna Siting The municipal action unreasonably discriminates among providers of FAQ sheet from FCC. functionally equivalent services (i.e.,cell providers claiming to be a type T-Mobile West V. Crow, of utility so they can get the same treatment as autility under city No. CV08-1337 (D. AZ. Dec. 16, 2009). ordinance). LeagueofMinnesota Cities Information Memo:8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 4 RELEVANT LINKS: 2.State law Minn. Stat. §237.162 In addition to mirroring some of the federal law requirements, such as the Minn. Stat. § 237.163 requirement of equal treatment of all like providers, state law permits cities, Chapter 94, Art. 9,2017 Regular Session. by ordinance, to further regulate “telecommunications right-of-way users.” Minnesota’s Telecom ROW Law expressly includes wireless service providers as telecommunications right-of-way users, making the law applicable to the siting of both largeand small, wire-lined or wireless telecommunications equipment and facilities, in the rights of way. See further discussion of State lawplaces additional restrictions onthe permitting andregulatingof state law restrictions in small wireless facilitiesand wireless support structure placement. Section II-A, below Accordingly,cities should workwith city attorneys when drafting, adopting, or amending their ordinance.The Telecom ROW Lawstill expressly protects local control, allowing cities todenypermits for reasonable public health, welfare,and safety reasons, with no definitions of or limitations on . what qualifies ashealth, welfare,and safety reasons. D.Court decisions th Minnesota Towers Inc. v. The 8U.S. CircuitCourt of Appeals(controlling law for Minnesota) City of Duluth, 474 F.3d th recognizes that citiesdo indeed retain local authority over decisions 1052 (8Cir. 2007).Smith Comm. V. Washington Cty, regarding the placement and construction of towers and personal wireless Ark., 785 F.3d 1253 (8th Cir. service facilities. 2015). Voicestream PCSII Corp. v. The 8th Circuit also has heard cases where a carrier or other City of St. Louis, No. telecommunications company argued they are a utility and should be treated 4:04CV732 (E.D.Mo. August 3, 2005)(city interpretation as such under local ordinances. Absent a local ordinance that includes this of city ordinance treats type of equipment within its definition of utilities, courts do not necessarily communication facility as a utility). deem cell towers or other personal communications services equipment functionally equivalent to utilities. Additionally, courts have found that the federal law anticipates some USCOC of Greater Missouri disparate application of the law, even among those deemed functionally v. Vill. Of Marlborough,618 F.Supp2d 1055, 1064 (E.D. equivalent. For example, courts determined it reasonable to consider the Mo. 2009)(TCA explicitly location of a cell tower when deciding whether to approve tower contemplates some discrimination amount construction (finding it okay to treat different locations differently), so long providers of functionally as cities do not allow one company to build a tower at a specific location at equivalent services). the exclusion of other providers. LeagueofMinnesota Cities Information Memo:8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 5 RELEVANT LINKS: E.City approaches Regulation of placement of cell towers and personal wireless services can occur through an ordinance. The Minnesota Telecom ROW Law provides For regulation of telecommunications right-of- cities with comprehensive authorityto manage their rights of way. With the way users, see Appendix A, unique application of federal law to telecommunications and the recent Sample Ordinances and Agreements. changes to state law, along with siting requests for locations both in and out For regulation of city right- of rights of way, many cities find having a separate telecommunications of-way generally, see LMC information memo, right-of-way user ordinance (in addition to a right-of-way ordinance) allows Regulating City Rights of cities to better regulate towers and other telecommunications equipment, as Way, and Right of Way Regulation, LMC Model well as collocation of small wireless facilities and support structures. Ordinance. Some cities also have modified the definitions in their ordinances to exclude cell towers, telecommunications, wireless systems, DAS, small cell equipment, and more from utilities to counter the cell industry’s requests for equal treatment or more lenient zoning under the city’s zoning ordinances. In addition to adopting specific regulations, many city zoning ordinances recognize structures as conditional uses requiring a permit (or many of these regulations include a provision for variances, if needed). While cities may require special permits or variances to their zoning for siting of large cell facilities, under state law, small wireless facilities and wireless support structures accommodating those small wireless facilities are deemed a Minn. Stat. 237.163, Subd. 2 (f).Chapter 94, Art. 9, 2017 permitted use. The only exception to the presumed, permitted use for small Regular Session. wireless is that a city may require a special or conditional land use permit to install a new wireless support structure in a residentially zoned or historic district. Cities will want to review their zoning to make sure it complies with the Minnesota Telecom ROW Law. II.Deployment of small cell technologies and DAS Small cell equipment and DAS both transmit wireless signals to and from a defined area to a larger cell tower.They are often installed at sites that support cell coverage either within a large cell area that has high coverage needs orat sites within large geographic areas that havepoor cell coverage overall. LeagueofMinnesota Cities Information Memo:8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 6 RELEVANT LINKS: Situational needs dictate when cell providers use small cell towers, as opposed to DAS technology. Generally, cell providers install small cell towers when they need to target specific indoor or outdoor areas like stadiums, hospitals, or shopping malls. DAS technology, alternatively, uses a small radio unit and an antenna (that directly link to an existing large cell tower via fiber optics). Installation of a DAS often involves cell providers using the fiber within existing utility structures to link to its larger cell tower. Cities sometimes are askedto provide the power needed for the radios, which the city can negotiate into the leasing agreement with the cell provider. A.Additional zoning and permittingneeds under state law Minn. Stat. §237.162. Historically, manycities’ ordinances address large cell sites, butnot small Minn. Stat. §237.163. cell towers or DAS. With the recent changes to state law, cities shouldwork Chapter 94, Art. 9, 2017 Regular Session. with their city attorney to review their ordinances in consideration of the See Appendix A, Sample new statutory permitprocess for the siting of smallwireless facilities. Ordinances and Agreements. Cities can charge rent (up to a cap for small wireless siting) under the statute See League FAQ on for placement of cell technology or DAS on existing or newly installed Minnesota 2017 Telecommunication Right of support structures, like poles or water towers; and, also, can enter into a Way User Amendments(July separate agreement to address issues not covered by state law or ordinance. 2017). Cities should work with their city attorney to get assistance with drafting these agreements and any additional documents, like a bill of sale (for transferof pole from carrier to city), if necessary. See AppendixA, Sample The terms and conditions of these agreements, called collocation Ordinances and Agreements agreements, for siting of small wireless facilities, most likely will mirror agreements formerly referred to as master licensing agreements, often including provisions such as: Definitions of scope of permitted uses. Establishment of right-of-wayrental fee(note statutory limitations). Protection of city resources. Provision of contract term(note statutory limitations). Statement of general provisions. Maintenance and repair terms. Indemnity provisions. Insurance and casualty. Limitation of liability provision. Terms for removal. LeagueofMinnesota Cities Information Memo:8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 7 RELEVANT LINKS: State law does not requirea separate agreement, and some cities have chosen to put these provisions in their ordinance or permit instead.For cities that choose to have a separate agreementin place, they mustdevelop and make that agreement publicly available no later than November 31, 2017 (six months after the effective date of this act)or three months afterreceiving a small wireless facility permit application from a wireless service provider. The agreement must be made available in asubstantially completeform; however, thepartiesto thesmall wireless facility collocation agreement can incorporate additional mutually agreed upon terms and conditions.The law classifies anysmall wireless facility collocation agreement between a local government unit and a wireless service provider aspublic data,not on individuals, making those agreementsaccessible to the public under Minnesota’s Data Practices Law. Minn. Stat. §237.162 Additionally, the new amendments to Minnesota’s Telecom ROW Law set Minn. Stat. §237.163 forth other requirements that apply only to small cell wireless facility Chapter 94, Art. 9,2017 Regular Session. deployment. The 2017 amendments changed Minnesota’s Telecom ROW Law significantly, the details, of which, can be found in the League’s FAQ onMinnesota 2017 Telecommunication Right of Way User Amendments (July 2017). However, after the amendments, the law now generally provides: See League FAQ on A presumption of permitted use in all zoning districts, except in districts Minnesota 2017 zoned residential or historical districts. Telecommunication Right of Way User Amendments(July The requirement that cities issue or deny small wireless facility requests 2017). within 90 days, with a tolling period allowed upon written notice to the applicant, within 30 days of receipt of the application. An allowance to batch applications (simultaneously submit a group of applications), with the limitation to not exceed 15 small wireless requests for substantially similar equipment on similar types of wireless support structures within a two-mile radius. Rent not to exceed $150 per year with option of an additional $25 for maintenance and allowances for electricity, if cities do not require separate metering. The limitation that cities cannot ask for information already provided by the same applicant in another small cell wireless facility application, as identified by the applicant, by reference number to those other applications. A restriction that the height of wireless support structures cannot exceed 50 feet, unless the city agrees otherwise. A restriction that wireless facilities constructed in the right of way may not extend more than 10 feet above an existing wireless support structure in place. LeagueofMinnesota Cities Information Memo:8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 8 RELEVANT LINKS: Aprohibition on moratoriums with respect to filing, receiving, or processing applications for right-of-way or small wireless facility permits; or issuing or approving right-of-way or small wireless facility permits.For cities that did not have a right-of-wayordinance in place on or before May 18, 2017, the prohibition on moratoria does not take effect until January 1, 2018, giving those cities an opportunity to enact an ordinance regulating its public rights-of-way. NOTE: These additional state law requirements do NOT apply to collocation on structures owned,operated maintained or served by municipal utilities. Also, the small wireless statutory requirements do not invalidate agreements in place at the time of enactment of the 2017 amendments (May 31, 2017). 47 U.S.C. §332(commonly The siting ofDAS or new small cell technologies also must comply withthe known as Section332 of same restrictions under federal law that apply to large cell sitings. Telecommunications Act). Specifically,a city: FCC 09-99, Declaratory May not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally Ruling(Nov. 18, 2009). equivalent services. May not regulate in a manner that prohibits or has the effect of FCC 14-153, Report & Order (October 21, 2014). prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. Must act on applications within a reasonable time. Must make any denial of an application in writing supported by substantial evidence in a written record. Because of the complexities in the state law and the overlay of federal regulations, some cities have found it a best practice to adopt or amend a telecommunications right-of-way ordinance separate from their general right-of-way management ordinance. Cities that do not choose to adopt separate ordinances, at a minimum, should work with their attorney to review and amend their existing right-of-way ordinances, if necessary,to accommodate for telecommunications right-of-way usersand the recent state law amendments for small wireless facilities. For example, since state law now recognizes small wireless facilities as a permitted use, zoning ordinances that require conditional use permits for these facilitieslikely will need amending. Since wireless providers seek to attach their small cell and DAS equipment to city-owned structures, many cities choose to have a separate agreement in place to address terms and conditions not included in ordinances or permits. If the city chooses to do so, the law requires the city to have these Minn. Stat. §237.163, Subd.3a(f). agreements available in a substantial form so applicants can anticipate the Chapter 94, Art. 9,2017 terms and conditions. Again, cities should work with the city attorney to Regular Session. draft a template agreement governing attachment of wireless facilities to See Appendix A, Sample municipally owned structures in the right of way. Ordinances and Agreements. LeagueofMinnesota Cities Information Memo:8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 9 RELEVANT LINKS: With the nationwide trend encouraging deployment of these new technologies, if a city denies an application, it must do so in writing and provide detailed reasonable findings that document the health, welfare, and safety reasons for the denial. With the unique circumstances of each community often raising concerns about sitings, cities may benefit from proactively working with providers. B.Modifications of existing telecommunication structures Section 6409(a) of the If a siting request proposes modifications to and/or collocations of wireless Middle Class Tax Relief and transmission equipment on existing FCC-regulated towers or base stations, Joe Creation Act of 2012, codified at47 U.S.C. §1455. then federal law further limits local municipal control. Specifically, federal law requires cities to grant requests for modifications or collocation to FCC Public Notice AD 12- existing FCC-regulated structureswhen that modification would not 2047 (January 25, 2013). “substantially change” the physical dimensions of the tower or base station. FCC 14-153, Report & Order The FCC has established guidelines on what “substantially change the (October 21, 2014). physical dimensions” means and what constitutes a “wireless tower or base station.” FCC Public Notice AD 12- Once small cell equipment or antennas gets placed on that pole, then the pole 2047 (January 25, 2013). becomes a telecommunication structure subject to federal law and FCC regulations. Accordingly, after allowing collocation once, the city then must comply with the more restrictive federal laws that allow modifications to these structures that do not substantially change the physical dimensions of the pole, like having equipment from the other cell carriers. FCC Public Notice AD 12- Under this law, itappears cities cannot askan applicant who is requesting 2047 (January 25, 2013). modification fordocumentation information otherthanhow the modification City of Arlington Texas, et. impactsthe physical dimensions of the structure. Accordingly, al. V. FCC, et. al.,133 S.Ct. documentation illustrating the need for such wireless facilities or justifying 1863, 1867 (2013)(90 days to process collocation the business decision likely cannot be requested.Of course, as with the other application and 150 days to siting requests, state and local zoning authorities must take prompt action on process all other applications, relying on §332(c)(7)(B)(ii)). these siting applications for wireless facilities(60-day shot clock rule). This model ordinance and Twowireless industry associations, the WIA (formerly known as the PCIA) other information can be and CTIA, collaborated with the National League of Cities, the National found at National Association of Counties Association of Counties, and the National Association of Website. Telecommunications Officers and Advisors to: (1) develop a model ordinance and application for reviewing eligible small cell/DAS facilities requests under federal law;(2) discuss and distribute wireless siting best practices; (3) create a checklist that local government officials can use to help streamline the review process; and (4) hold webinars regarding the application process. LeagueofMinnesota Cities Information Memo:8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 10 RELEVANT LINKS: III.Moratoriums The cellular industry often challenges moratoriums used tostall placement of cell towers, as well as small cell/DAS technology, untilcities canaddress regulation of these structures. Generally, these providers argue thatthese moratoriumsdo one of the following: Prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. Violate federal law by failing toact on an application within a reasonable time. Minn. Stat. §237.163, Subd. State law now prohibits moratoriums with respect to: (1) filing, receiving, or 2(d).Chapter 94, Art. 9, processing applications for right-of-way or small wireless facility permits; or 2017 Regular Session. (2) issuing or approving right-of-way or small wireless facility permits.For cities that did not have an ordinance enabling it to manage its right-of-way on or beforeMay 18, 2017, the prohibition on moratoria does not take effect until January 1, 2018, giving those cities an opportunity to enact an ordinance regulating its public rights-of-way. IV.Conclusion With the greater use of calls and data associated with mobile technology, cities likely will see morenew cell towers, as well as small cell technology/DAS requests. Consequently, it would make sense to proactively review city regulations to ensure consistency with federal and state law, while still retainingcontrol over the deployment of structures and the use of rights of way. LeagueofMinnesota Cities Information Memo:8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 11 Appendix A: Sample Ordinancesand Sample Agreements Many cities address cell towers in their ordinances already. For informationalpurposes only, the links below reference sometelecommunications facilities ordinances in Minnesota. PLEASE NOTE, these ordinances reflect each city’s unique circumstances and may pre-date the 2017 Legislative Session which, then, wouldnot have consideredthe amendments to Minn. Stat. §§ 237.162, 237.163when drafted. Sample Telecommunications Ordinances City of Edina(predates 2017 amendments) Ordinance: (Chapter 34:Telecommunications) City of Brainerd Memo to Planning Commission from City Planner, July 13, 2017 Re: Draft Ordinance: Section 35:Anetennas and Towers City of Minneapolis Ordinance: (Amendment to Ordinance to accommodate Small Cell/DAS equipment) CPED Staff Report, City of Minneapolis regarding Amendment City of Bloomington Ordinance: (Part II City Code, Chapter17:Streets and Rights-of-Way) Ordinance: (No. 2017-16, Amending Section 14.03 of the City Code Concerning the Permit Fee) Permit: Small Cell Permit Sample CollocationAgreement for DAS/Small Call Texas City Attorney Association Addendum toLocal Gov. Code, Chapter 283 San Antonio, Texas Boston,Massachusetts San Francisco, California League ofMinnesota Cities Information Memo: 8/1/2017 Cell Towers, Small Cell Technologies & Distributed Antenna SystemsPage 12 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/17 3C.Consideration of Community Development Director’s Report Council Action on Commission Recommendations Consideration to approve a Development Stage Planned Unit Development, and Preliminary Plat for Autumn Ridge Villas for detached single-family lots in an R-3 (Medium Density Residential) District at Autumn Ridge 3rd Addition Applicant: SW Wold Construction/Ocello, LLC City Council approved unanimously on August 28th. Application for final stage PUD and th final plat submitted and will be reviewed by City Council on September 11, 2017. th Vacation of easements hearing will also occur on September 11with easement to be re- established per plat. Public Hearing -Consideration of a request for amendment to official Monticello Zoning Map for rezoning fromA-O (Agriculture –Open Space) District to R-1 (Single Family rd Residence) District and Preliminary Plat for Featherstone 3Addition for detached single family lots Applicant: Graser, Horst th Approved unanimously by City Council on August 14, 2017. Public Hearing -Consideration of a request for amendment to official Monticello Zoning Map for rezoning from B-4 (Regional Business) to B-3 (Highway Business) District and text amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Section 5.2 Use-Specific Standards Applicant: Ryan Buffalo Land Company, LLC. th City Council approved unanimously on August 28, 2017. Public Hearing -Consideration of a request for Conditional Use Permit for Micro- Brewery/Taproom in CCD (Central Community District) Applicant: Burt, Bill and Penny th City Council approved unanimously on August 14, 2017. Council concurred with Planning Commission’s recommendation regarding the parking counts. Public Hearing -Consideration of a request to amend the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Chapter 4, Section 8 for regulations on driveway width for residentially zoned parcels Applicant: City of Monticello City Council approved an amendment to allow a maximum width of 30’ at the property th line, tapering to 28’ at the public street, in a 3-2 vote on August 28, 2017. Staff have begun work on an implementation plan for the new ordinance. Consideration to approve a a Development Stage Planned Unit Development for Self-Storage Facility in a B-3 (Highway Business) District. Applicant: KB Properties, LLC th Council approve d the development stage PUD on August 14, 2017. The Council st approved with the conditions in Exhibit Z, including those per the August 1Planning 1 Planning Commission Agenda –09/05/17 Commission recommendation, and with the condition that will allow the applicant to use an alternate surface with paving on phase 1 to be completed in spring 2018.Final Stage th PUD application has been submitted for Council consideration on September 11, 2017. Artwork –TH25/CSAH 75 The unveiling of the new swan sculptures at the southeast corner of Trunk Highway 25 st and CR 75/Broadway occurred on Thursday, August 31. The swan sculptures are part of a larger effort to support economic vitality and interest in the downtown. Thank you to Monticello Parks and Recreation, the Monticello EDA, the Ellison Family, and artist Sue Seeger for their contributions to the beautification of this corner. GTS Training Information on upcoming training session offered by GTS Educational Events is including for references. Commissioners are encouraged to attend these sessions; there are funds available for registration costs. If you are interested in attending, please let Angela or Jacob know. 2 Archived:Wednesday,August30,201710:10:49AM From:GTSEducationalEvents Sent:Wednesday,August30,20178:00:52AM To:AngelaSchumann Subject:FallLandUseWorkshopsComingUpFAST! Importance:Normal SEPTEMBERWORKSHOPS ShorelandandfloodplainregulationisanTherearemanyimportantprinciplesandlegal importantaspectoflanduse.Learnbytakingissuesthatguidelandusedecisions.Learnby theworkshop:takingtheworkshop; APRACTICALGUIDEFORMANAGINGRISK:MAKING VARIANCESINSHORELANDSSOUNDPLANNING&ZONING ANDFLOODPLAINSDECISIONS When:September27 When:September27 Time:8:30am-12:00pm Time:8:00amto12:00pm (check-inbeginsat8:00am)(check-inbeginsat7:30am) Where:Mankato,VerizonWirelessConvention Where:Mankato,VerizonWirelessConvention Center,1CivicCenterPlazaCenter,1CivicCenterPlaza Fee:$80 Fee:$80 *Registrationforthesepre-conferencesessionsisseparatefromthestateconference. Formoreinformationabouttheconference,visithttp://www.plannersconference.com OTHERUPCOMINGWORKSHOPS YOURROLEASPLANNINGCOMMISSIONER *Aspecialworkshopforplanningcommissionerstolearnessentialinformationandpracticaltips onbecomingthebestplanningcommissionertheycanbe! •October17-LittleFalls •October24-Eagan Thankstoourworkshopsponsors: GTSEducationalEvents|1380EnergyLane,Ste.206,St.Paul,MN55108 Unsubscribeangela.schumann@ci.monticello.mn.us UpdateProfile|Aboutourserviceprovider Sentbyevents@mngts.orgincollaborationwith Tryitfreetoday