HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-26-2010 Council Work Session Packet Council Work Session
Tuesday,January 26, 2010, 6:30 p.m.
Orono City Council Chambers
AGENDA
1. Common Bond Discussion Regarding Property Behind Long Lake Fire Station—Mike
Gaffron(30 minutes)
2. Comp Plan Discussion— Stephen Grittman/Mike Gaffron(40 minutes)
3. Open Book vs. Local Board of Review—Ron Olson(5 minutes)
4. Comments Regarding Information Updates—Lin Vee (5 minutes)
Previous Work Session Topics
Januarv 12, 2010—Minutes Attached
o Comp Plan Discussion
o Website Redevelopment Update
o Upcoming Street Projects
o Employee Compensation/Step Increases
o Letter of Request for Trail Parking
o Utility Rate Study
o Comments Regarding Information Updates
December 14, 2009
o Website Redevelopment Update
o Bond Sale Analysis
o Utility Rate Study Presentation
o Schedule Joint Council and Planning Commission Work Session
o Comments Regarding Information Updates
MEMORANDUM 1-26-10 Work Session
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Mike Gaffron, Asst. City Administrator f�/�,���
S
Date: January 25, 2010
Subject: Common Bond Presentation
Amanda Novak of Common Bond will be presenting conceptual plans for development
of the Willow Drive Fire Station site for affordable housing.
Council should be considering a number of questions regarding the future of this site:
- Use of the site for affordable housing or housing in general?
- If so, at what density?
- Future use/guiding/density of immediately adjacent properties?
- Conceptually, a single larger building versus multiple smaller buildings?
- Level of City participation in any project that may be proposed? Financial or otherwise?
- Development Fees Consideration? (Park, Stormwater,Utility Connection)
- Other considerations? Concerns? Issues?
MEMORANDUM I-26-10 Work Session
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Mike Gaffron, Asst. City Administrator ` ��'�—,
Date: January 25, 2010
Subject: Comprehensive Plan
Steve Grittman of NAC will be presenting information regarding the Comprehensive
Plan Update.
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Ron Olson, Finance Director
Date: January 26, 2010
Subject: Local Board of Review/Open Book
Each spring after valuation notices are mailed to residents, the City holds a Local Board of
Appeals and Equalization (LBAE) hearing. The purpose of the hearing is to allow property
owners the opportunity to appeal their assessed property values. Property owners appear
before the Council during a public meeting and present their concerns about their valuation. If
they are not satisfied by the decision of the LBAE they can appeal to the County Board and
eventually to the Minnesota Tax Court.
State Statute allows cities to transfer their authority to the County using an "open book"
meeting in place of the LBAE process. An open book meeting is held between the property
owner and the assessor during a one-on-one conversation with the assessor.
Staff was asked about changing to an open book process. The deadline to notify the County of
a change is December 1. Because many of our LBAE participants attend the meeting every
year, staff would like to announce any changes at this year's LBAE meeting.
Local Board of Appeals and Equalization and Open Book Meeting Comparison Page 6 of 6
LBAE O en Book
P�os For Property Owners: For Property Owners:
: Properry owners are able to have interaction and make direct appeals ro r No appointment needed,property owners can attend any of the open
the city and its elected officiels book meetings held throughout the counry
i- Property owners are able to deal with their elected officials directly, r Property owners can verify or cortect information about their property
which may be easier since they are"familiar faces" S= Property owners can schedule a time for the assessor to view their
For the Cily CounciULBAE: property
� Allows the Council to change assessments of property y 7�he setting is less intimidating than a LBAE meedng
: Acts as an oversight on property assessments and counry service y �e properry owner does not need to"present"their appeal in front of
delivery friends,neighbors,etc.
: Effective actions taken by the LBAE may potentially make a direci y Properry owners can compare their values to the values of other similar
contribution to obtaining assessment equaliry homes at the meeting
For the County: � effuciency �d concems are often resolved immediately creating greater
➢ Ciry is able to direcdy solve some assessment issues before they reach : Properry owners may appeal to the Counry Board of Appeals and
the couny Equalization and/or to Tax Court if not satisfied with outcome
i- Creates a more clear line of who is responsible for assessment service
provision and takes the"polirics"out of the process
For the City CounciVLBAE:
: Open book meeting would save time for council members and allow
them to spend more time on other duties
� : It would eliminate the need for the Council to become familiar with and
o educated on the local real estate market and with the LBAE process
i- % Would place the responsibiliry of making tough decisions regarding
3 resident's property values or classifications on the counry
� : Streamlines the assessment prceess and create clearer lines of
� accountabiliry
For the Counry:
: An open book process allows for immediate consideration of issues and
appeals can be solved before reaching the County Board of Appeals and
Equalization
➢ Process can be more efficient because it can often consolidate several
urisdictions imo one meetin� or several meetin s
COns For Property Owners: For Property Owners:
: Often citizens simply have questions or concerns over their property ta�c : Lose the opportunity to make an appeal directly�o[he ciry and the Ciry
assessments that could be better addressed in a diff'erent setting,rather Council
than consuming the time of the LBAE For the City CounciULBAE:
For the City CounciULBAE; : Lose an oversight function on the counry's assessment services
i Most LBAE members do not have expertise in the property assessment . Would no longer be able to make direct changes ro the appeals of
process,and therefore i[is difficult for them to make determinations residents
� Administering the LBAE takes time away from other ciry business For the County:
For the County: ➢ Requires the counry to commit more time and resources in tertns of
i Must educate Ihe LBAE on the assessment process and explain how a setting up the mee[ings and assigning personnel
determination was made,which is likely less e�cient and effective than
if they could address[he property owner directly
__ .
L1
Washington Counry Assessment Divisioa(March,2007).2007 A,c.ce.c.cmem Repnrt.Weshington Counry:p 35.
U
State Statute:274.01,subdivision 3.
http://www.ci.woodbury.mn.us/govt/workshop/091907/3.htm 1/25/2010
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: LIN VEE, CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: COMMENTS REGARDING INFORMATION UPDATES
DATE: JANiJARY 25, 2010
Attached are the Information Update memos from January 15 and January 22 for reference if
Council wishes to discuss any of these items.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: ORONO MANAGEMENT TEAM
SUBJECT: INFORMATION UPDATE
DATE: JANUARY 15, 2010
• On December 23Ta an unmarked Orono squad car and the Orono road Grader were involved
in an accident. No one was hurt,but we were notified by our insurance company on Tuesday
that the squad is being totaled. Pictures are attached.
• We have received a list of road projects that the County will be undertaking in Orono for the
next five years. It includes replacing the bridge over West Arm Channel and the TH 12
turnback. The major funding for the turnback is listed as beyond 2014. See attached letter.
• Last week the Star Tribune had the attached article about Greenfield and alleged violations of
open meeting laws. The article is a good reminder that serial conversations are a violation of
the open meeting law. Another interesting item is in the reader's comments found at the end
of the article. It is titled"Same thing in Orono," and 9 of 9 people liked the comment. One
anonymous comment by itself is not a concern,but it does demonstrate that people are
watching our actions.
The City of Orono complies with the Minnesota Data Practices and Open Meeting Law. The recipients of this
electronic file are asked not to "Forward"or "Reply to All"concerning information contained in this email.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: ORONO MANAGEMENT TEAM
SUBJECT: INFORMATION UPDATE
DATE: JANUARY 22,2010
• Invitation to attend LMC Online Briefing: Addressing Pera's Future Funding Shortfalls. See
attached mema
• Attached are two letters received from Bob Jodan of the Stonebay Homeowners,both with
regard to use of the LOC funds for infrastructure completion. I had asked Bob to provide us
in writing their specific concerns and recommendations,which he had verbally imparted to
me recently. Staff, City Engineer and City Attorney will confer on this and provide Council
with an update and suggested response in the next few weeks.
• For Tuesday's work session,we have the Common Bond presentation schedule first,
followed by the Comp Plan. I have been advised that Bob Erickson of Welsh Companies
will be in attendance to monitor our progress on the Comp Plan, as it affects the 875 Wayzata
Boulevard property for which Welsh has a client interested in doing a project similar to what
Comforts of Home had proposed for that site. Since Welsh also owns the 20 acres at the SW
quadrant of Old Crystal Bay/Wayzata Blvd,they have an interest in re-guiding for mixed use
at that site...
• Comment from James Wisker of MCWD regarding Rules D &F. See attached memo.
The Ciry of Orono complies with the Minnesota Data Practices and Open Meeting Law. The recipients of this
electronic file are asked not to "Forward"or "Reply to All"concerning information contained in this email.
Orono City Council
Committee of the Whole
January 12, 2010, 6:30 p.m.
Orono City Council Chambers
Present: Mayor Jim White, Council Members Cynthia Bremer, Doug Franchot and Lili McMillan;
Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategy Mike Gaffron, Finance Director Ron
Olson, City Engineer Tom Kellogg and City Clerk Lin Vee
1. Website Redevelopment Update
• Rachel Dodge presented the design that the IT Committee selected for the website, noting that
both Council ideas and staff recommendations were incorporated as much as possible.
o City Hall and Casco Point pictures were added and the logo for GovOffice was removed.
o The Casco Point background picture is unique to Orono. The background colors match the
pictures and buttons.
0 8 sets of banner pictures were also presented.
• Staff has been working on navigation tabs, which will include resident and contractor sections at
the top of the web pages.
• Council expressed positive feedback with the results of the final design.
2. Comp Plan Discussion
• Steve Grittman led a PowerPoint presentation regarding the Comp Plan Update process, which
included the following:
o Objectives/goals of Council for completing the Comp Plan
o Preliminary options to achieve goals
o Likelihood of success of goals
o Other issues relevant to Council concerns
• Goals
a. Rural Area—continue development per traditional 2 and S acre zoning. Orono is placed into
two classes:
1. Developing—everything in MUSA regardless of how zoning is defined
2. Diversified Rural—everything outside MUSA regardless of how zoning is defined
Options to achieve traditional development:
■ Redesignate areas to Rural Residential, potentially at the time Met Council does
updates to the System Statement and their maps.
■ Obtain waiver from rules. The City would need to have something to "trade" or play
on the "uniqueness" angle (i.e. historical development pattern); other communities
have used this strategy.
■ Wait out Met Council policy.
b. Exempt Orono from Urban Reserve requirement of 1 unit per 10 acres for non-MUSA areas.
This is a very important policy for Met Council.
Options to achieve:
■ Redesignate to Rural Residential
■ Waiver by Met Council action
■ Note—Met Council has used a 1,000 acre/500,000 gpd sewer threshold as being a
reasonable estimate of feasibility for sewer extension (threshold to build
interceptor). Some areas won't ever meet feasibility to work for 1 unit/10 acres and
could never become Urban Reserve.
■ McMillan asked about corporate boundaries and how sewer extensions might
work. Grittman commented that this is something to consider while moving
forward with the update.
Page 1 of 4
Orono City Council
Committee of the Whole
January 12, 2010,6:30 p.m.
Orono City Council Chambers
c. Continue Urban area (MUSA) development pattern at low densities consistent with current
zoning
o Identify areas of new or redevelopment that will provide acceptable levels of density or
offset the lower density development.
o Create zoning regulations that account for lower density development areas without the
"penalty" estimates at the low range.
o Develop strategies for reducing the baseline land area such as conservation easements
on large lots.
o Negotiate the policy requiring use of the low-end of the density range.
■ At some point, conservation easements will be identified on GIS system.
■ Dayton parcel is the only large parcel (40 acres) remaining in the city. The Dayton
family is very supportive of land conservation.
d. Connect existing large-lot homes to sewer without offsets on as-needed or as-requested
basis. For example, if a house was built prior to 1985 and has no alternate septic site, it
could qualify for sewer. Charlie Kelley's neighborhood is good example. The neighborhood
will be doing an analysis of alternate septic sites and could potentially meet the criteria to
be exempt from density calculations. If so, the neighborhood could be brought into the
MUSA without causing density problems.
o Reiterate the Met Council policy and write into Orono's plan.
e. Avoid requirement for concurrent offset development at higher densities when sewering
lower density homes.
f. Allow extension of sewer to developed rural area neighborhoods which meet Met Council
criteria for exemption from inclusion in the density calculation, i.e. failing septic systems
• Other issues of Council concern:
o Comforts of Home—other cities have been allowed to count density for similar
development. Land isn't guided for assisted living, it is guided for high density.
o Total unit count—to meet Met Council projections for 2030, the city must accommodate
95% of the projected change in number of units between 2010 and 2030. The city should
clarify that all units count,with no discount/penalty for unoccupied households. Every unit
in the plan counts.
o Ways to add to housing count—mixed use categories can be an effective tool in increasing
unit counts where redevelopment in commercial areas is an option; i.e. downtown Navarre.
Although the city currently doesn't have any mixed used zoning classifications, it may want
to consider establishing a mixed use zoning district.
■ Land use designations for redevelopment and mixed use do not need to coincide with
current market realities. Although the current market may not support mixed use
development, the city may be able to accommodate higher unit counts and higher
densities with emphasis on later staging periods, such as 2020-2025 or 2025-2030.
o Bremer stated the main goal is to get the Comp Plan Update approved.
o Council directed staff to invite property owners with larger properties to a work session,
including those owners of property that may be reguided.
• Other comments related to the Comp Plan
o Common Bond has been scheduled for a presentation at the next work session. The
developer has asked about the status of an appraisal of the city property. An appraisal has
not been ordered. Common Bond would also like input regarding development, such as one
building vs. several small buildings and if there is a specific density to achieve.
o The public hearing for last Comp Plan was at the High School auditorium. Council may want
to hold the next public hearing at the Freshwater Center, probably in February.
Page 2 of 4
Orono City Council
Committee of the Whole
January 12, 2010, 6:30 p.m.
Orono City Council Chambers
o Met Council's policy has typically been that if a 1 acre property is hooking up to sewer,the
city has to find another area to provide density at 3 units per acre.
o Housing unit forecast for 2030 needs to be considered.
o A proposed subdivision on Bohn's Point is changing from one 5 acre parcel to 3 parcels. Per
recent Met Council meetings, areas included in the MUSA prior to 1997 won't need to be
developed at 3 units per acre. This will allow several properties to move forward with
development prior to final adoption of the Comp Plan.
3. Upcoming Street Projects
• Kellogg and staff have been discussing the Pavement Management Plan and the State Aid
dollars available for projects. There is a cap on State Aid dollars and account balances. Orono's
account is reaching its maximum value. For projects that cost more than State Aid allows in the
account, cities are allowed to use their account balance and borrow against future State Aid
contributions.
• Scheduled projects for 2010 include Willow Drive from Fox Street to Watertown Road. Willow
Drive north of Watertown Road to the fire station is not eligible for State Aid funding, but it
makes sense to include this road section in the project. The cost to the city would be
approximately$90,000-$120,000. This request will be brought to the next council meeting for
formal approval.
• Casco Point Reconstruction Project—The mill and overlay portion of the project was delayed
until 2010. Oil costs have increased since the original bid. The city could potentially get lower
bids through the annual materials bid process than the contractor price. If better pricing is
available, Geislinger wouldn't be required to do the mill and overlay portion of the project.
Bonestroo is estimating the project will come in approximately$150,000-180,000 under the
contract amount.
• McMillan commented that the bike lane along Willow from the Luce Line to Fox Street should
be included in the improvements as it connects the Luce Line and Dakota Rail trails.
• As part of the bridge inspections program, the guard rail on McCulley Road at the Luce Line
crossing was identified as being too low and not meeting current guidelines. The estimated cost
to make the correction is$40,000, which could be a State Aid project. The bridge was probably
constructed in the early 1980's and the grade of the road may have changed over time with road
maintenance. Mn/Dot has recently raised additional issues on bridge inspections, probably as a
result of the 35W bridge collapse.
• Council directed the Engineer to proceed with the process for a bridge improvement project.
4. Employee Compensation/Step Increases
• Council recently requested information regarding the city's employee compensation plan and
step increases.
• White commented that there is concern that a new employee could reach the top step within 3
years with few incentives to follow.
• McMillan commented that Council could rethink the compensation plan/step increases and
discuss further once the new City Administrator starts. There are other methods available
besides step increases, such as performance reviews. Bremer suggested that the new City
Administrator and Personnel Committee meet to continue discussions.
• Franchot noted that a complete compensation review is currently being done at the LMCC by a
local consultant. He indicated he could share Orono's current plan with her and obtain her
comments. The goal is to have a fair and competitive plan.
• The City Administrator salary survey showed that all other cities have more steps than Orono.
Page 3 of 4
Orono City Council
Committee of the Whole
lanuary 12, 2010, 6:30 p.m.
Orono City Council Chambers
• Any changes to the compensation plan would most likely only affect future, not current,
employees.
• Olson stated a salary study with market values was done and became effective in 2008. Market
value changes need to be considered as part of compensation plan revisions.
5. Letter of Request for Trail Parking
• Gaffron distributed a draft letter to the Three Rivers Park District to express appreciation for
establishing the Dakota Rail Trail and to formalize a relationship to continue efforts related to
trail parking needs.
• McMillan expressed the following concerns:
0 other cities may not be as accommodating as Orono;
o Orono could become the focus for parking resolutions;
o too much paving for parking areas could create an overly urban look that the city may not
like.
• McMillan cautioned not to over-invite Orono's participation in parking solutions. The parking
study that was done by the Three Rivers Park District basically identified Spring Park locations.
• Bremer suggested adding "other trail communities' to the letter.
6. Utility Rate Study
• Jonathan North of Ehlers presented the results of the Utility Rate Study at the December work
session. Olson indicated he would like to bring a resolution to the next Council meeting for the
2010 utility rates as recommended by Ehlers.
• Council agreed with the utility rate study recommendation and directed staff to include
approval on the next Council agenda.
7. Comments Regarding Information Updates
• McMillan shared maps of the 10-acre parcel near Saga Hill that the owner is trying to sell to the
Watershed District for preservation and water management purposes. There is a second parcel
on the east side with some lakeshore access. The 10 acre parcel is outside the MUSA; the
lakeshore parcel is in the MUSA.
• The owner wanted to develop with 5 homes, but could probably only get 3 lots as the parcel is
difficult to develop.
• The parcel has been assessed at$866,000. Because the parcel is adjacent to Saga Hill Park,
there could be some benefit to the city. There may be some matching grant funds available.
• Council agreed the parcel would be a great amenity for the neighborhood and the city should
find a way to show interest to the Watershed District. The property has been for sale for a long
time so there is probably no urgency to make a decision regarding the city's commitment. The
property to the north already has some conservation easements, but it would be difficult to
build stormwater ponds on this parcel.
8. Gaffron distributed a draft follow-up letter to the Watershed District with comments on proposed
changes to Rules D and F based on discussion at the Council meeting. Council was asked to review
and provide feedback to Gaffron.
• Council indicated their intent is to meet with the MCWD Board to discuss the proposed changes.
Page 4 of 4