The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-09-1997 Council Packetr AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JUNE 9,1997, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by ojUMamion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Ageai^iX^dif^^fj^ai\2ib\e in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet. ® 19$^ROLL CALL 1. Audit Report - Dennis Hoogeveen, Representative of Malloy, Montague, Karn^ski, Radosevich &Co. * 2. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES ^ *3. Regular Meeting of May 27, 1997 ^ * 4. West Neighborhood Meeting Concerning the Highway 12 Design of May 27, 1997 * 5. Special Meeting of May 21, 1997 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Charles Schroder Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT #2216 Winston & Barbara Adams, 3195 Casco Circle > Withdraw of Application for Variances 7. #2241 Kyle Hunt and Partners, Inc., 1185 Femdale Road West - Variance - Resolution 8. #2182 Herbert Terry Olson, 3640 Bayside Road - Variance - Resolution 9. Saga Hill Subdivision - Resolution 10. Accessory Structures MAYOR/COUNCBL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT •#11. Engineer Scope of Services for North Femdale Road Plan 12. North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club Addition Sewer Project Easement - Eminent Domain - Resolution CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 13. Requests for Sewer Service Outside the MUSA Line 14. Schedule TIF Work Session '^IS. Lin Vee Position Reclassification and Pay Adjustment J'16. Greg Gappa Salary Adjustment 17. Local Performance Aid Certification CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT % ibj. ) AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET BOR MONDAY, JUNE 9.1997 7 00 P M ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 2780 KELLEY PARKWA y V oW)N o!^i5SJ; 18. LICENSES * 19. BILLS -A UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 06/06 - Mn/DOT Stormwater meeting 8:30-10:30 a.m. 06/09 - Public Information meeting 6:30 p.m. - Residents east of Willow Drive in Highway 12 corridor 06/09 - Council meeting 7:00 p.m. 06/10 - Planning Staff meeting with Big Island Vet Camp's Board 7:00 p.m.- Council Chambers 06/16 - Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. 06/23 - Council meeting 7:00 p.m. 06/25 - Grand Opening Ceremony DNR Maxwell Bay Access -10:00 a.m. r " OOf/V, 12 CoiwciL □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other Public A ttendance Meeting Date •JOlVT y ■JUn INg i99r C/?Oy Please fill out the information REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 4. 5., 7.. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.. 14. 15. •*UfS^ \t> f request for council action JUf^ ^Nq ^ 1997 DATE: June ITEM NO: Department Approval:tuicui Approval: 1/ Name Tom Kuehir‘^9^^^^' Title Finance Director Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended December 31,1996 Aflachmenfc^^mpreten^ve Report, and Management Report for the The City's audit fiim of Malloy, Montague Kamowskt, Radosevich & Co. will be represented by Dennis Hoogeveen at COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: No action required. :v ’I' \\ - \ » ?,’*■ H >:■ bi: J ’n-J 0 a y •T'' Management Report City of Orono, Minnesota December 31, 1996 m. ^ ill iiiiiliirViliniliiiliilf wiitirrur^*" * - ■ — 1 i J : I ♦ •j \i •: ^ 1 \ % t i t JtA 4 ] u » .9% !1 T1 I PRINCIPALS M<^’'iT-TTITTiW^ KENNETH W MALLOY. CPA THOMAS M MONTAGUE. CPA THOMAS A KARNOWSKl. CPA PAUL A. RADOSEVICH. CPA WILLIAM J LAUER. CPA To the City Council City of Orono Orono, Minnesota We have prepared this management report in conjunction with our audit of the City’s financial records for the year ending December 31, 1996. The purpose of this report is to communicate information relevant to city finances in Minnesota and to provide comments resulting from our audit process. We have organized this report into die following sections: O o o o o City Finance in Minnesota Financial Trends and Conditions of the City of Orono Accounting and Reporting Comments Accounting and Auditing Updates Formal Required Communications We would be pleased to further discuss any of the information contained in this report or any other concerns that you would like us to address. We would also like to express our thanks for the courtesy and assistance extended to us during the course of our audit. April 29, 1997 410 PARK NATIONAL BANK BUtLDINO 5353 WAY2ATA BOULEVARD MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55416 TELEPHONE 612 545 0424 TELEFAX 612*545^9 niarii k 1 I ; I I : i *■ WW" C ity Finance In Minnesota Municipal finance within the State of Minnesota continues to be contioversial, complex, and ever-changing. Meeting the public’s increasing demands for accountability and more performance-based measurements, while at the same time providing increased services and lower tax burdens, continues to challenge city councils and administrators. The following tc^ics highlight a few issues which may assist you in managing your city. Pr’1 ! t. j “I -J I • C iy Legislative Activity At the time of writing this report, we find ourselves in the midst of the 1997 Minnesota legislative session. One hot topic currently being debated during the session that could have significant impact on municipalities foils under the general description of Property Tax Reform.” Interest in some sort of property tax reform has been simmering for years but has grown significantly since the February economic forecast from the Department of Revenue reporting an estimated state budget surplus of $2.3 billion. Since tax reform movements tend to involve the shifting of tax burdens between t)rpes or groups of taxpayers, it is commonly thought that the best time to implement change is when the state has the financial ability to soften the impact on those most affected. The common elements found in current reform proposals include accountability, smqiUfication, enhancing the competitive position of Minnesota businesses, and general relief to all property owners. Some specific proposals include levy limits for municipalities and reducing die education ftinding reliance on property taxes by increasing the state ’s share of those programs. Although many believe that a comprehensive property tax reform cannot be accomplished in the 1997 legislarive session, some changes are likely to lu^ipen. The following b a brief summary of the 1996 legblative issues and changes relating to city government finance in Minnesota. Restoration of Aid to Local Governments - Cities, counties, towns, and special taxing dbtricts will benefit fi-wn the restoration of $16 million in cuts made to HACA in 1996. In addition, local government aid wUl be increased by approximately $10.7 million for all cities (or an estimated 2.5%) for the 1997 dbtribution based on the implicit price deflator adjustment that was adopted in 1994. Temporary Municipal Liquor Licenses - No organization, registered political committee, or locadm be granted more than one temporary liquor license in any thirty day period. However, combinations of two, three, and four day licenses which do not exceed 12 total days in any given year can be granted. Sununary Budget Statement Publication - Cities outside of the metro area now have the additional optKHi of including the summary budget statement in a city newsletter or other city mailing sent to all households in the city rather than publishing it in the official newspaper. Special Service and Housing Improvement Districts - Cities are authorized to establish special service districts and housing improvement districts without special legislation. Upon properly adopting an ordinance and meeting petitioning requirements, cities can collect fees within the districts and may also issue bonds for improvement expenses. These special service and housing improvement provisions sunset on June 30, 2(X)1. -1- f -j * r-- ‘ J I ( i 11 |. kI I InforniatkNi <m Permit Applications - Cities may now require applicants for permits to certify that there are no delinquent property taxes, special assessments, penalties, interest, or municipal utility fees due on the parcel to which the application relates. Inflow and InfUtration ^evention - Cities are now authorized, with a proper public hearing, to establish inflow and infiltration prevention programs and provide grants and loans to property owners to assist in financing the cost of abating inflow and infiltration. Federal, state, city or private funds may be used to finance the program. City funds may include, but are not limited to, general fund ai^ropriations, sanitary or storm utility funds and fees or charges. Local Performance Aid (LPA) - Cities can increase their share of state aid by establishing performai^ measures and applying for “local performance aid" from a new fund created in an attempt to increase the accountability of local governments. The program encourages cities to adopt goals and performance measures for services provided to its residents and then work toward achieving them. HACA payments to cities will be reduced by approximately $1 per capita to partially fund this new program. Liquor Store Sample - Liquor stores can now give customers free samples of hard liquor in containers iq> to 15 milliliters. The law already allowed samples of wine, beer, cordials and liqueurs. POwnbroken Re^laticm Act - The state established minimum standards for pawnbrokers in the state. While individual cities can set stricter standards, at a minimum, pawnbrokers are required to apply for and receive a revocable license from the city in which they do business, must be at least 18 years old, and cannot have been convicted of a crime directly related to the pawnbroker business unless sufficiently rehabilitated. Temporary Vacancies - City councils can now replace local elected officials who are unable to serve due to Illness or other reasons. Under the new law, the city councU could declare a temporary vacancy after a member has been absent from his or her job for 90 days. perform fire prevention duties, such as education programs a^ home motions, or siqxiyise those activities now qualify as volunteer firefighters. This makes fire prevention workers eligible for the same benefit coverage as firefighters who perform fire suppression duties, however, eligibility depends on the approval of each respective governing body. Vo^teer Firefighters - An additional state aid amount for volunteer fire relief associations is now ayadable and is mtended to increase state aid amounts for a number of cash-poor associations. The aid is to be allocated such that all municipalities or fire departments with volunteer firefighter relief associations recf&ve at least a minimum amount of state aid based on a maximum of 30 firefighters. Volunteer Fire Relief Associations - The state delayed by one year the dates by which small yolun^r fire relief associations must begin collecting and submitting investment-related information from Jaiai^ 1 and October I, 1997 until January 1 and October 1, 1998, respectively. In addition. economic interest statements, already required to be available for public inspection, must now be filed with the Ethical Practices Board. PuUtab Refunds - Organizations that purchase pulltabs and tipboard games can now get an annual remnd on unsold tickets. Refund claims, for a credit equal to 2% of the face value of each unsold pulltab or tipboard ticket, are due by March 20 for the previous year’s unsold tickets. -2- ^ I t: L t I S tatewide Trends and Comparisons This section of the report is to provide you with a summary of financial trends of Minnesota cities of comparable size. Most of this information is based on data as of December 31, 1995 (only partial information for 1995 is available from the State at this time) and prior years. Governmental Funds Sources of Revenue Governmental funds include General. Special Revenue. Debt Service, and Capital Project Funds. A municipality’s governmental fund revenues are affected by many factors, including the size and make-up of its tax base, the amount of development in the City, and the level of services it provides. Therefore, it is difficult to compare one City to the next. However, the following per capita revenue information is provided as one means of evaluating recent revenue trends. Population Class 1991 Per Capita 1992 Per Capita 1993 Per Capita 1994 Per Capita 1995 Per Capita 20.000 to 100,000 $ 586.32 $ 610.33 $ 636.21 $ 641.64 $ N/A 10,000 to 20,000 608.32 633.01 645.47 650.26 N/A 2,500 to 10,000 531.31 577.03 591.01 579.69 N/A 2,000 to 2,500 575.91 585.93 574.75 606.11 N/A 1,500 to 2,000 City of Orono 684.73 661.88 642.60 631.94 N/A ----1 (Class 2,500 to 10,000) N/A - Not Available 468.52 570.21 591.26 676.56 627.43 For the City of Orono, 1996 per capita revenue is approximately $608.56 based on an estimated population of 7,530. The components of revenue in the governmental funds by class is useful to compare the reliance on certain revenue sources. Sutewide for Year Ending December 31. 1994 City of Orooo 20.00a 100.000 10.000-20.000 2.500-10.000 2,000-2.500 1,500-2,000 1995 1996 Propeny taxes 26.6%22.0%24.4%24.8%21.7%41.3%43.3% Tax increments 9.8 11.6 7.8 5.2 4.7 Other taxes 2.8 1.0 0.5 0.3 0.2 • Special assessments 10.6 11,0 9.5 6.5 7.5 4.0 4.4 Licenses and permits 3.2 2.7 2.6 1.8 1.3 4.3 4.5 Intergovernmental 25.0 32.9 36.1 40.8 45.3 18.3 15.3 Charges for services 70 6.3 7.6 8.3 7.6 19.7 21.3 Other 15.0 12.5 11.5 12.3 11.7 12.4 11.2 Toul revenue 100.0%100.0%100 0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0% -3- i I % ; y \ • M „ k I ' * f t L y Change in Market Values Property values within cities experienced strong growth increasing 5.9% from 1995 to 1996 statewide. This growtli results from both new construction and increases in existing property values. This marks the second year of substantial valuation increases following a period of rather sluggish growth. As the following chart illustrates, the major component of growth was again in the residential homestead classification. Statewide Change In Market Values (within Cities) Taxes Payable 1995 to 1996 0 0% CewfwwwiitjOwWOI RMMMUMHDmMlMd In comparison, the total market value increase on property within the City of Orono from 1995 to 1996 was 8.5%. -4- I t n Tax Capacities and Rates Tax capacity is considered the actual base available for taxation. It is calculated by applying the state’s property classification system to each property's market value. As an example, for residential homestead property, the Hrst $72,000 of market value has a tax capacity of I % and the remaining value has a tax capacity of 2%. Each property classification has a different calculation and uses different rates. Although it is impossible to consider every aspect and variable of local government spending, average tax rates are often used as a benchmark. The following rates are expressed as a percentage of tax capacity: Rates exprc'»/B.'d as a percentage of tax capacity Average City Tax Rate Average County Tax Rate Average School Tax Rate 1995 1996 1995 19%1995 19% All cities statewide 26.6 26.4 37.5 36.8 65.0 63.3 Meu-o area cities 23.9 23.1 36.9 35.8 67.5 64.9 City of Orono *15.6 14.7 37.5 37.3 65.6 62.9 * For the City of Orono. 19% and 1995. average special tax rates were 8.43% and 8.69%. respectively. As the above table indicates, the City of Orono’s average tax rate remains well below both the statewide and metro area average. The Citizens League and Minnesota Taxpayers Association issued a report named Minnesota Homestead Property Tax Review 1996 . Orono’s average estimated market value for homes was over $259,000, the second highest in the survey and more than double the metro average. The higher the average property value, the larger the percentage of the property being taxed at the 2% tax capacity rate discussed above. Consequently. Orono had one of die highest total taxes on average value homes of the 105 metropolitan communities in the survey. This report also compared property taxes on a $105,000 home for each of the same 105 metropolitan communities. The table below shows how property taxes on Orono residents compare to the average on this basis. Tax on $105,000 home in 105 Metropolitan Communities Orono Metro Residents Average Rank * City taxes $203 $ 321 93rd out of 105 cities County taxes 514 495 lOlh out of 18 counties School taxes 867 932 40th out of 50 sch(N)l districts Special district taxes 116 72 6th out of 65 special districts $1.700 $ 1.820 78th out of 105 cities Rank #1 is highc.si taxes and #105 is U'west -5- •■s K. '4 ’j ► .•r. V- ».• Governmental Expenditure Trends Due to the differences in cities and the services they provide, it is very difficult to compare allocation of service expenditures to individual cities. However, for your information, we have provided a five-year statewide trend which portrays the typical level of expenditures by function for cities over 2,500 in population and a similar comparison to the City of Orono ’s IW5 and 19% expenditures. Statewide for Cities over 2,500 Population 1991 1992 1993 1994 City of Orono 1995 1996 Expenditures (excluding debt principal) Gener„. gover unent Public safety * Streets and highways Sanitation Health Libraries Parks and recreation HRA and economic development Airports and transit Interest and fiscal charges Miscellaneous expenditures Capital outlay 9.8% 21.7 23.6 1.7 1.0 2.1 8.5 13.7 0.5 9.7 4.4 3.3 10.3% 23.7 22.1 1.8 1.1 2.1 8.5 11.9 0.4 9.4 4.5 4.2 11.3% 23.3 21.9 1.6 1.0 2.0 8.5 12.5 0.4 8.7 3.9 4.9 11.0% 23.4 23.9 0.5 1.0 2.4 9.1 10.5 0.8 8.6 4.1 4.7 19.0% 38.6 26.0 1.6 17.0% 41.7 14.6 1.6 3.3 7.3 8.0 3.3 0.2 7.6 4.1 6.1 Total expenditures 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%100.0%100.0% The City of Orono ’s Public Safety Expenditures are a fairly high percentage of total spending due primarily to the cost of services provided to surrounding cities. These costs are offset by corresponding revenue which is included in charges for services. -6- 4 4 :. . i >1 r i - Financial Trends and C onditions of the C ity of Orono General Fund The General Fund had a deficiency of revenue over expendinires and other financing sources fuses) of $105,615 in 1996, bringing the tota! fund balance down to $1,551,086 at December 31, 19%. This was due to the City taking advantage ^f an opportunity to purchase a parcel of property key to the development along Highway 12, using General Fund reserves. Excluding this purchase. General Fund operations realized an operating surplus of $153,488. The City had net transfers out of $165,400 during 19%, compared with net transfers out of $84,900 during 1995. This increase was primarily due to the one-time transfer of funds to the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund for the purpose of funding a stormwater management plan and potential stormwater runoff corrections. The General Fund cash and investments balance was $1,587,878 at December 31, 19%, decreasing 8.3% from the previous year. The following graph shows the financial position of the General Fund over the last ten years. The general trend has been an increasing fund balance. General Fund Financial Position Years Ended December 31 3000 2500-1 2000“ 1000 - 1000- 500“ 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Revenue Fund balance Cash balance » % The significant drop in cash and fund balances in. 1989 reflects the planned accumulation and transfer of funds to finance a portion of the City’s facilities construction. f m -7- r ♦ * I \ ‘ > •*' ' * i'-' ' m , i it If ■»; ■J ^1 '4 '• *•« II < . r.‘*. IniMW >j \ iV.-i f n ’ A key aspect in determining a sufficient level of fund balance relates to the corresponding cash flow. This is particularly important because of the high and low cash flow fioints throughout the year caused by the timing of lax and state revenues. The graph below shows that while the cash balance in the General Fund fluctuated significantly, a positive cash position was maintained throughout the entire year. General Fund Cash & Investment Flow Month-End Balances for 1996 and 1995 41 The following chart reflects the City’s General Fund reliance on its revenue sources. General Fund Revenue By Source Year Ended December 31,1996 Taxes 47.3% State 12.5% Fines 2.0% Licenses & permits 6 0% All other 4.0% Charges for services 28.2% -8- r y tv The following table presents the City’s General Fund revenue sources for the past ten years. Taxes State Other Total Year Amount Percent Amount Percent Amount Percent Revenue 1987 $ 1.072.390 41.8 %$ 434.497 16.9 %$ 1.061.027 41.3 %$ 2.567.914 1988 1.139.509 41.4 438,303 15.9 1.173.420 42.7 2.751,232 1989 1.179.747 41.2 465.510 16.3 1.218.640 42.6 2.863.897 1990 1.581.776 53.6 111.626 3.8 1.258.069 42.6 2.951.471 1991 1.620.232 58.9 140.448 5.1 988,932 36.0 2.749.612 1992 1.561.034 53.8 219.667 7.6 1.122.004 38.6 2.902.705119931.546.814 48.7 398.903 12.7 1.227.792 38.6 3.173.509 1994 1.645.133 50.1 442.512 13.5 M95.950 36.4 3.283.595 199S 1.644.440 48.1 142.460 12.9 1.335.507 39.0 3.422.407 f 1996 1.641.943 47.3 433.570 12.5 1.397,227 40.2 3.472.740 Total actual revenue in the General Fund exceeded the budgeted amount by $124,985 or approximately 3.7% for 1996. Much of the additional revenue is attributable to permit revenue which resulted from the increase in development activity. Another area with a significant increase was charges for services which related to an additional salaried employee ’s services being reimbursed from the public works area. Total General Fund revenues have increased 35% since 1987, an average of 3.8% per year. The amount coUecled from taxes has increased 53.1 % while state revenue actually decreased 0.2% over the same period. As a result, the City continues to become more dependent on taxes and other revenue sources (primarily clwrges for services, licenses and permits) to finance its General Fund Operations. This has resulted in the City becoming less dependent on increasingly unstable state revenue sources. Even though a larger proportion of the City’s operating budget is funded through taxes it is important to emphasize that total taxes certified to City taxpayers since 1990 have increased just 4% during that time period. The City’s tax rate actually decreased from 1995 to 19%. General Fund Revenue By Source Years Ended December 31 Taxes State All Other -9- J *•■4 The following graphs illustrate the components of the City ’s General Fund spending for 1996 and for the past seven years. General Fund Expenditures By Function Year Ended December 31,1996 Public safety 51.0% General govl. 21.1% " Recycling 2.0% Streets 13.7% Parks 1.5% All other 10.7% Total General Fund expenditures for 19% were $3,412,955, which represents an increase of $301,591 or 9.7% over 1995. This increase was primarily due to the $259,000 purchase of property on Highway 12. Without this one cost in 19%. expenditures would have been held steady against 1995 levels. General Fund expenditures were held under budget in every department for 19%. General Fund Expenditures By Function Years Ended December 31 1500 I 1000 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 General govt. Streets Public safety Parks/recycling/all other -10- r ■^r‘5, I t ■ i f" Enterprise Funds The Enterprise Funds comprise a considerable portion of the City ’s activities. As the graph below illustrates, golf revenues have remained fairly stable over the past several years. The water and sewer revenues continued to rise due to rate increases which were effective during 19% and 1995. Enterprise Funds Operating Revenue Years Ended December 31 700 100 M ■ I 1987 1988 < • • 1969 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Water Golf course Sewer ; j u -11- - -- n p -n t i I • vc^;*! *'^* WaTF.M OPKRATINn FlJNn The table below shows a summary of the Water Operating Fund financial results for the past six years. Metered water sales increased 13% over 1995 amounts, due mainly to a rate increase implemented during 1996. For the firsi time in six years, the City had net income before operating transfers in. During 1996, the Water Operating Fund received a $70,000 operating transfer from the Sewer Operating Fund. This transfer was recorded as an other financing source and it is intended to help finance the revenue bond debt of 1995. *-4 Water 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 19% r Metered water sales $153,199 $169,470 $151,798 $199,208 S 220,848 $249.504 Total operating revenue $157,152 $171,376 $155,126 S 202.446 $223,638 $251,538 Total operating expenses (200,912)(219,277) (198,527)(231,518)(243,378)(250,184) ‘I Operating income (loss)(43,760)(47.901)(43,401)(29.072)(19,740)1,354 Nonoperating revenue 77.691 50,315 10,252 40,975 47,894 118.438 Nonoperating expenses (77.013)(74,808)(70.143)(64.691) (58,871)(42.278) Operating transfers in --142,088 -—70,000 Net income (loss)$(43,082)S (72,394)$38,796 $(52,788)$(30.717)$147,514 I ; Depreciation on I r 1 contributed assets charged r k"*to operations s 33,329 $33,329 $33,329 S 34,872 $32,886 $32,886 Net income (loss) as a percentage of operating revenue (27.4)%(42.2)%25.0%(26.1)%(I3.7)%58.6% Statewide average 6.7%7.7%5.4%10.8%N/A N/A ♦ Per report of the Slate Auditor on Revenues, Expenditures, and Debt of Minnesota Cities over 2,500 in population. We have also indicated the amount of depreciation expense on contributed assets which is included in operating expenses. These are assets that were paid for by other funds which typically were fmanced by special assessments or taxes. In sotw cases, it is not the intent of the City to entirely recover this depreciation through user charges. -12- 1 J U J 3 m 1 J ■- F ' “<• M ^ Sewer OPKRATiMf: PitMn Sewer revenue increased 7% in 1996, mainly due to an increase in sewer rates. While this increase in revenues reduced the operating loss by approximately the same amount, overall, the fund recognized a loss of $120,281, v'hich included a $70,000 transfer to the Water Operating Fund. Sewer 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 User charges $ 3%,378 $397,159$ 397,993$ 544,471 $578,149 $ 619,169 Total operating revenue $ 446,776 $402,475 $ 441,255 $ 551,963 $579,390 $ 621,235Total operating expenses (475,109)(588,328)(655,835)(647,610)(771,112)(765,045)Operating loss (28,333)(185,853)(214,580)(95.647)(191,722)(143,810)Nomiperating revenue 166,253 141,412 116,744 151,670 167,138 135,093Nonoperaung expenses Net operating transfers (74,730)(72,843)(68,531)(63.150)(67,721)(41,564) in (out)--98,912 (70,000) Net income floss)$ 63,190$(117,284)$ (67,455)$ (7,137)$(92,305)$(120,281) Depreciation on contributed assets charged to operations $ 127,264 $122,905 $ 122,905 $ 127,582 $124,052 $ 158,895 Net income (loss) as a percentage of operating revenue 14.1%(29.1)% (15.3)%(1.3)%(15.9)% (I9.4)% Statewide average 4.3%(0.2)%0.7%4.1%N/A N/A Per report of the State Auditor on Revenue, Expenditures, and Debt of Minnesota Cities over 2 500 m population. TJie Sewer Operating Fund had a loss before operating transfers of $50,281 for the year ended December 31, 1996, compared with the loss before (grating transfers in 1995 of $92,305 (a $42,024 decrease) This improvement was caused by the rate increases implemented in 1996, and to a lesser extent by the reduced operating expenses related to reduced charges for groundwater inflow and infllU'ation. The noi^rating revenue earned by the fund is primarily interest earned on investments. These investments are for future debt service, operations, and construction expenses, therefore, it will be important for the City to keep sewer rates at an adequate level to finance annual operating expenses. -13- r > • } i - • Ia i: COI.F COURSK OPF.RATINn FllNH The following table presents six years of comparative operating results for the City’s Golf Course Operating Fund: Gross profit from sales $ 3,783 Total operating revenue 127,649 Total operating expenses (107,973) Operating income 23,439 Nonoperating revenue 2,942 Nonoperating expenses ____(798) $ 5,623 142,320 $ 5,750 136,620 $ 8,349 169,934 $ 7,261 166,673 $ 7,848 184,505 (115,814) (123,616) (130,461) (142,170) (144,658) 32,129 5,854 18,754 4,581 47,822 5,582 (8,774) 31,764 8,150 47,695 12,573 (3,252) Net income $ 25,603 $ 37,983 $ 23,335 $ 44,630 $ 39,914 $ 57,016 Depreciation on contributed assets Operating income as a percentage of operating revenue Statewide average $254 $254 $ 254 $254 $709 $793 18.4%22.6%13.7%28.1%19.1%25.9% 6.1%3.7%3.5%5.4%N/A N/A * Per report of die State Auditor on Revenue. Expenditures, and Debt of Minnesota Cities over 2,S(X) in population. As the preceding table illustrates, the Golf Course Operating Fund continues to be quite profitable, with operating margins well in excess of the statewide average for municipal golf course operations. Golf Course revenues increased due to an increase in fees for 1996. The City’s Golf Course Operating Fund’s profits have remained fairly consistent and have resulted in a healthy retained earnings balance. .14- V j % c V i J J ^"1 < I b A ccounting and R eporting Comments Installation of Banyon Data Systems TTk City implemented an on-site financial applications system during 1995. This new system should save the City a^roximately $11,000 annually in comparison with the previous system that was in place. The City . ° 15!“"Plementing a system which will belter serve its needs and save money at the same time. City staff has adjusted to the new financial applications system. The audit took place one month earlier than that in 1995 and we found that the 1996 audit went much smoother than in the prior year. Accounting and A uditing U pdates Single audit - audits of Federal Financial A ssistance Programs In July 1996, the President signed into law an amendment to the Single Audit Act that calls for a number of significant c.ianges m the requirements for performing single audits. The amended Act will be effective for Tsral ye?/s beginning on ot after July 1,1996, meaning it will apply to audits of Minnesota cities for the 1997 ^en^ yw The revised act calls for the elimination of Office of Management and Budget (0MB) Circul^A-128-Audits of State and Local Governments.- In the future, all single audits will be done under * “Audits of Institutions of Higher Learning and Nonprofit Insotunons. This will make the guidance uniform for all single audits. Under the new Act. the threshold for requiring a single audit wUl rise from $100,000 to $300,000 of federal revenue, which will exclude most Minnesota cities. Investment V aluation pie Goverrane^ Accounting Standards Board recenUy issued Statement No. 31. “Accounting and Financial External Investment Pools.- The statement establishes fair value stai^ for governmental entities investments in interest-earning investment contracts, external investment ^Is. <j)en-end mutual funds. deN securities, and equity or equity-related securities with readily determinable fair values. Governmental entities will be required to report investments at fair (market) value on their financial statements, except for certain money market investments purchased with a remaining maturity of one year or less. The statement also changes revenue recognition, as all investment income, including changes m the fair value of mvestments. will be reported as revenue in the operating statement. The provisions of this statement are effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15. 1997, with earlier application encouraged Broker N otification - Law C hange Several years ago, a Minnesota Statute was passed that requir.d cities investing public funds to notify all brokers with which it mtended to invest idle funds of the Stale laws governing such transactions, as well as any additional investment policies that the city may have in place. The broker notification form created to ^ument thi^nderstanding was to be signed by the brokers prior to cities investing any funds with them, pw law aibwed that for brokers with which the city maintained an ongoing relationship, the notification form need only be completed once. Effective January 1. 1997. Minnesota cities are required to complete the broker notification process annually for all brokers with which they invest. -15- J ' i il;> ; < Stt' f . J < f R eporting Model In January 1997, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board issued an exposure draft that would establish new and updated fliiancial reporting standards for state and local governments, including states, cities, towns, school districts, ?nd other local governmental units. If approved, this exposure draft is designed to make governments general purpose external financial reports ei^'ler to understand and more useful to the citizenry, legislamre and oversight bodies, and investors and creditors. The basic financial statements would continue to report much of the information currently reported in the general purpose financial statements. However, the proposed standards also would make some modifications and require additional information that governments have not previously reported. The most significant change wo^ require the governmental unit to report using an entity-wide perspective as well as the fund perspective which is similar to what is currently being used. The purpose of the entity-wide perspective is to provide a more comprehensive view of a government’s operations and financial position than is possible when information if reptn^ mily by fund or fund type. This statement would make numerous other changes to the reporting standards including requiring capitalization of infrastrucmre assets and depreciation of general fixed assets. The expected effective date for this exposure draft is for periods beginning after June 15, 2000. Tax Increment Financing The 1995 CMbw Tax Bill contained a provision which transferred the responsibility to enforce the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) laws from the Department of Revenue to the Office of the State Auditor (OSA). Accordingly, beginning in 1996, each TIF district is required to complete an annual disclosure statement, financial report, and debt repOTt for the preceding calender year and file the forms with the OSA. This statute also allows the OSA to examine and audit accounts and records on a random basis, without previous notice, as the auditor deems to be in the public interest. The OSA is now in the process of completing numerous audits of TIF districts. These audits review closely the contents of TIF plans, reporting forms, and other required supporting documentation. As these audits have been completed the OSA have revealed recurring problems. Most of the problems have occurred because of improper accounting for administrative expenses, inadequate TIF plan documents, inadequate documentation of developer expenditures, and inadequate records of TIF district expenditures. We recommend all municipalities review TIF district operations closely for compliance with these and other issues. -16- i { ■ ^ I \ i i r ■ . I •»». ’ j w-•J ; ■ U: t . tf-t ^ |V V Formal R equired Communications Statement on Auditing Standards Number 61, “Communication With Audit Committees," requires the auditor tc ensure that certain matters related to the conduct of an audit are communicated to those who have n^sponsibility for oversight of the financial reporting process. The following constitutes our communication of such matters. The A uditor 's R esponsibility U nder Generally A ccepted A uditing Standards Our audit, conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatemenL These fuiancial statements are the responsibility of management and it is our responsibility to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit results. SiGNincANT A ccounting Policies There were no changes in significant accounting policies or their application during the year audited. SiGNDicANT A udit A djustments Our audit of the 1996 financial statements resulted in no audit adjustments (except for the normal year-end accrual entries) which we considered significant enough to be recorded by the City to prevent the financial statements from being misleading. We recognize that for management purposes, the City maintains its accounting records primarily using the cash basis during the year. Other Matters Statement on Auditing Standards Number 61 also requires communications to the committee in the following areas; Accounting estimates and management judgments Other information in documents containing audited financial statements Disagreements with management Consultations with other accountants Major issues discussed with management prior to retention as auditors Difficulties encountered in performing the audit During our audit, we did not encounter any circumstances and we are unaware of any items in any of these areas which require discussion with those who have responsibility for oversight of the financial reporting process. This report is intended solely for the information and use of those who have responsibility for oversight of the financial reporting process. -17- » I f . r« ¥ 4 n» < C/Ty, City of Orono, Minnesota Hennepin County » f Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year Ended December 31.1996 'IVfS',*- i f I r U 0 ‘ J 1 I '^ t CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year Ended December 31, 1996 h t ■ Prepared by Department of Finance Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director TfflS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK ji_BlMUftffW m • i f D »♦ »< • t r M ■! •-•4 J . ♦ F : ’ m \ li CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Table of Contents INTRODUCTORY SECTION CITY COUNCIL AND OTHER OFnCIALS ORGANIZATIONAL CHART TRANSMITTAL LETTER CERTinCATE OF ACHIEVEMENT AWARD FINANCIAL SECTION INDEPENDENT AUDITOR ’S REPORT GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (LIFTABLE STATEMENTS) Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups Combined ''tatement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - All Governmental Fund Types and Expendable Trust Fund Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) - General and Special Revenue Funds Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Fflmin£!9 - Proprietary Fund Type Statement of Cash Flows - Proprietary Fund Type Notes to Financial Statements COMBINING AND INDIVIDUAL FUND STATEMENTS General Fund Comparative Balance Sheet Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) Special Revenue Funds Combining Balance Sheet Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Park Fund Statement of Revenue, Expendinires, and Changes Fund Balance - Budget and Acnial (GAAP Basis) Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes Fund Balance - Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) Building Capital Outlay Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes Fund Balance - Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) Exhibit Page 1 2 3-13 14 A-1 16-19 A-2 20-21 A-3 22-23 A-4 24 A-5 25-26 27-50 51 B-1 52 B-2 53-57 58 C-1 59 C-2 60 C-3 61 C-4 62 C-5 63 ' ‘/i -/■ ’ < ^ <• THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK ri'iiAiliN^iiiiiniimiiii * ? ■1 II f ! ► # c 3 n li II M : a i :i 1] :j ♦ I •» j^ r ill I iBi'n^i^ IIIIIIIIIIII lAirtmhir “ - " .^-..-^i.-.A..^ rl/‘ r I >n * i • CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Table of Contents (continued) COMBINING AND INDIVIDUAL FUND STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) Debt Service Funds Combining Balance Sheet Combining Statement of Revenue, Expendinires. and Changes in Fund Balance Capital Project Funds Combining Balance Sheet Combining Statement of Revenue, Expendinires, and Changes in Fund Balance Enterprise Funds Combining Balance Sheet Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Combining Statement of Cash Flows Water Operating Fund Comparative Balance Sheet Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Conqiarative Statement of Cash Flows Sewer Operating Fund Comparative Balance Sheet Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Comparative Statement of Cash Flows Golf Course Operating Fund Comparative Balance Sheet Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Comparative Statement of Cash Flows Trust and Agency Funds Combining Balance Sheet Flexible Benefit Plan Expendable Trust Fund Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Agency Funds Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities FINANCIAL SCHEDULES Comparative Schedule of General Fixed Assets by Source Schedule of General Fixed Assets by Function and Activity Schedule of Changes in General Fixed Assets by Function and Activity Funire Property Tax Levies to Retire Bonds Exhibit Page D-1 64 65-66 D-2 67-68 E-1 69 70-71 E-2 72-73 F-1 74 75-76 F-2 77-78 F-3 79-80 F-4 81-82 F-5 83 F-6 84 F-7 85-86 F-8 87 F-9 88-89 F-10 90 F-11 91 F-12 92 G*1 93 94 G-2 95 G-3 96-97 Schedule 1 98 2 99 3 100 4 101 --- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ■■ THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK "" - ------ L 1 *4 fc- N - 1 1 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Table of Contents (continued) STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) (jeneral Revenue by Source General Expenditures by Function Property Tax Levies and Collections Assess^ Value or Tax Capacity and Estimated Market Value of Taxable Property Property Tax Rates - Direct and (Overlapping Governments Special Assessments Levies and Collections Computation of Legal Debt Margin Ratio of Net General Bonded Debt to Assessed Value or Tax Capacity and Net Bonded Debt Per Capita Ratio of Annual Debt Service Expenditures for General Bonded Debt to Total General Expenditures Computation of Direct and Overlapping Debt Revenue Bond Coverage - Enterprise Funds Demographic Statistics Property Value, Construction, and Bank Deposits Principal Taxpayers Miscellaneous Statistics Tax Capacity, Tax Levies, and Tax Extension Rates INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON THE INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE AND OTHER REQUIRED REPORTS Independent Auditor’s Report on the Internal Control Structure Based on an Audit of the General Purpose Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards Independent Auditor’s Compliance Report Based on an Audit of the General Purpose Financial Statements Performed in Accordance With Government Auditing Standards Independent Auditor’s Report on Compliance With Minnesota State Laws and Regulations Schedule of Findings and (^estioned Cost Table 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Page 102 - 103 104 - 105 106 - 107 108 - 109 110-111 112-113 114 115-116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 - 126 127 128 129 r I THIS PAGE LEFT DiTENTIONALLY BLANK t I I f o ti M It a •I •< II a a • Introductory Section 1-, fc. iff-rt • I f w . t f .> ____ i ■iiiJ.niaiilr^lMfriliiTM.......A_______ ,’i ■1 t i ] i r -- ■ i I > CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL AND OTHER OFFICIALS Year Ended December 31, 19% -1- Term of Office From To i City Council : 1 Edward Callahan Mayor 1/1/95 12/31/96 rnmmJ J. Diann Goenen Councilmember 1/1/95 12/31/98 )Gabriel Jabbour Councilmember 1/1/95 12/31/98 Charles Kelley Councilmember 1/1/93 12/31/% JoEllen Hurr Councilmember 1/1/93 12/31/96 City Officials j Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator Thomas M . Kuehn Finance Director - Treasurer -J Dorothy M. Hallin City Clerk I i j THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 1—»—■IlflfciliXii »1W>W tt*-.'>^»- 1 f j m 9 ( : f • 3 s Si II « •, -I iir>.M , *,m.. I ^ i • I . CITY OF ORONO ORGANIZATIONAL CHART -2- i-s ■ 1 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK M M * » • n y n M • I n ft I r. I n I « -> F \ A vV.GITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 MeMiai Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 April 29. 1997 To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono The Con^)rehensive Annual Financial Report of the City of Orono for the fiscal year ending December 31, 1996 is hereby submitted. Responsibility for both the accuracy of the data, and the completeness and fairness of the presentation, including all disclosures, rests with the City. To the best of our knowledge and belief, the enclosed data is accurate in all material respects and is reported in a manner designed to present fairly the financial position and results of operations of the various funds and account groups of the City. AH disclosures necessary to enable the reader to gain an understanding of the City’s financial activities have been included. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report is presented in four sections: Introductory, Financial, Statistical, and Internal Control Structure and Other Required Reports. The Introductory Section includes this transmittal letter, the City’s organizational chart, a list of principal officials, and a copy of the GFOA Certificate of Achievement Award for the City’s 1995 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. The Financial Section includes the general purpose financial statements, the combining and individual fund statements, financial schedules, and the Independent Auditor’s Report on the general purpose financial statements. The Statistical Section includes selected fiiumcial and demographic information, generally presented on a multi-year basis. The Internal Control Structure and Other Required Reports Section contains various Independent Auditor’s report letters on internal control and legal compliance. All City funds and account groups, departments, commissions, and other organizations for which the Mayor and City Council of the City of Orono are financially accountable are presented in the City of Orono’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Included within the reporting entity is the Orono Housmg and Redevelopment Authority, whose board is comprised of the mayor and council members. There are no other organizations that when considered would be included in the general purpose financial statements. The City provide . a variety of municipal services. These include police protection, street maintenance, buildii'ig inspection, planning and zoning, public improvements, general administrative services, public water and sewer utilities, and a municipal golf course. The City contracts for fire protection from the neighboring cities of Long Lake, Wayzata, Mound, and Maple Plain; and the City provides police protection and/or building inspection services and/or animal control services to the cities of Long Lake, Spring Park, and Minnetonka Beach. -3- Tclephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 r To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono April 29. 1997 Economic C ondition and Outlook The City of Orono was incorporated effective January 1, 1955. The City is located on the northern shore of Lake Minnetonka about 15 miles west of Minneapolis. Of the City’s 24.5 square miles of area, 50% is open water or marshland (with a total of 12.3 square miles of land area). Of Lake Minnetonka, 40% of the shoreline and 33 % of the lake area is in Orono. The City of Orono is a third ring suburb in the seven-county metropolitan Twin Cities area of Minneapolis/St. Paul, and is located on Lake Minnetonka, the tenth largest and most heavily used recreational lake in Minnesota. Orono developed primarily because of this aesthetic amenity. This heavy use is a result of the quality of the lake’s aesthetic appeal, together with its proximity to the metropolitan urban core. The City is primarily a residential community with a mixture of several types of housing, and includes a small commercial district. Orono totally surrounds two communities, which are part of the original township, and substantially surrounds a third community. As indicated earlier, Orono cooperates with these cities for the most cost effective provision of City services. Orono is home to many of the metropolitan area’s top executives who appreciate the community ’s natural amenities. It is anticipated that the positive appeal of the community, togetlier with the extent of available land, will see the community experiencing continued development for the next ten years. The City is in a strong financial position. Because of its strong residential tax base, Orono continued in 1996 to have a tax capacity rate that is one of the lowest in the county for communities over 1,000 in population, ranking fourth lowest of 40 communities. The strength of the City’s financial condition is reflected in its bond rating of Aal since 1989. In 1996, residential construction continued at a strong level. Building permit and plan review fees significantly exceeded expected levels. Even with the uncertainty concerning the Highway 12 corridor location, the improvement in the economy generated substantial residential development activity. A 6C-unit subdivision, approved in 1994, continued to generate a high level of residential development activity in 1996. The Navarre commercial area will receive a shot-in-the-arm from three redevelopment projects - one recently completed, one approved for construction, and one in the planning stages. These projects are as follows: A Culvers restaurant and convenience store/service station. This project is complete. The local grocery store has been approved for an expansion project which will include the addition of a pharmacy. The developer of the Culvers project is planning additional development which will be a bank/office/commercial building on an adjacent site. It is anticipated these projects will serve as a catalyst for additional improvements in the Navarre area. -4- 1 . ! t f.... f To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono April 29. 1997 COOPERATIVE Efforts With Other Jurisdictions The City continues to pursue opportunities for reducing the cost of City services. In 1992, Orono joined with three other cities for the provision of prosecution services. This arrangement reduced the City’s annual prosecution costs from a three-year average of approximately $100,000 to an annual fixed fee of $30,000 through 1994, $31,823 for 1995, and $35,880 for 1996. As indicated earlier, the City is involved in cooperative arrangements for both police and fire semce. T^e City of Long Lake provides fire service to the majority of Orono. The City of Orono provides police services to Long Lake. In 1993, the two cities were able to agree to three-year contracts for both the police and fire services. This has increased the stability of this cooperative arrangement between the two cities. The City Council has given conceptual approval to a joint project with Hennepin Parks to constmct a bike/hike trail on Old Crystal Bay Road connecting two regional park facilities - the Luce Line Trail and Baker Park. This trail will also serve the new City facilities and the Orono school campus. Funding for the trail is to be shared between the City and Hennepin Parks. In response to the purchase of a residential lakeshore property by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for a proposed public boat launch, Orono took action to cause the DNR to rethink its procedures related to the provision of public access. Orono urged the DNR to take a wider and longer range view of this issue to prevent a piecemeal qiproach to the provision of public access. In response, the DNR stopped all activity related to the initial site and has purchased an existing marina for conversion to a public boat launch. This will provide for public access needs without expanding commercial uses on the lake and without forcing public boat launching facilities into the City’s residential areas. This was an outstanding example of a cooperative effort between two governmental jurisdictions to find a mutually beneficial solution to a difficult problem. The public access facility is now open. Orono is currently working in a cooperative effort with the cities of Long Lake and Medina and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to accomplish a major water quality impiovement project on Long Lake, a lake contiguous to both the cities of Long Lake and Orono. This project is to be fiinded by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. A School Liaison Officer Program was initiated through a cooperative agreement with the school district. Through this program a police officer works with school adminisu-ative and counseling staff, and builds positive relationships with the students, to enable them to assist in addressing and preventing problems, and to assist in intervening with “at risk” students. This program is fully funded by the school district. The City is currently involved with a group of 14 cities located adjacent to Lake Minnetonka in an effort to identify new opportunities for cooperative service delivery to enable improved services and increased efficiency. -5- I To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono April 29. 1997 Water and sewer Fund Operations The City continued its program to reduce the amount of ground water and stormwater entering the sanitary sewer system, with the purpose of reducing sewage treatment costs. The program includes inspection of manholes, lift stations, and sewer lines to identify significant sources of infiltration and inflow (I & I), then sealing the manholes and lift stations, and repairing the sewer lines to eliminate the I & I. In 1996, the City completed the inspection, sealing, and repair of sanitary sewer facilities in the initial project area. The City has now received a $10,000 grant from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services to inspect a second project area, and a $17,000 loan to assist in funding the sealing and repairs needed in this area. These efforts will result in substantial reductions in I & I, as well as reductions in the related sewage treatment costs. The savings generated by these efforts will then be put toward addressing I & I problems in another project area. This program will be ongoing. The City is planning a multi-year rehabilitation of the Navarre water plant. This project will address mamtenance and repair needs while upgrading the plant to meet projected water supply needs. The rehabilitation plan will be guided by a comprehensive analysis of the water plant performed by the City ’s consulting engineer. Storm Water Management Planning In 1996, the City Council authorized the development of a surface water management plan for the City. The plan will clarify city objectives and policies regarding surface water management, will provide solutions to existing storm water problem areas, will enable the City to be proactive in planning surface water management facilities so that the surface water management needs of the City can be met as cost effectively as possible, and will identify necessary capital projects so that the City can identify funding needs and funding sources well in advance of the projects. Labor R elations Labor relations are continuing on a positive path. The police officers have agreed to a two-year contract for 1997 and 1998 with wage incieases of 3% in both years. The police lieutenant bargaining unit has been eliminated due to the only member being promoted to the position of Police Chief. Park Planning The City continued efforts toward developing a parks and open space master plan. The Paries and Planning Commissions participated in a process to identify priority open space preservation objectives to guide the development of the plan. -6- • I M m •( II a a I .1^m m .<1 r I- To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono April 29, 1997 Highway 12 C orridor The major east/west transportation route in Orono is State Highway 12. Orono and the other cities along the Highway 12 corridor have l^n involved in a process with Mn/DOT since the late 1980’s to determine a corridor for the upgrade of Highway 12 to addr^ safety and transportation needs. A proposed corridor location has now been approved by all of the affected cities and by Mn/DOT. subject to the completion of an environmental assessment which is to be completed by the end of 1997. The proposed corridor addresses the major concerns of the affected cities. Land U se Planning In 1995, the City placed a moratorium on development on both sides of Highway 12 in central Orono. During the moratorium period, a committee conducted a land use study of the area. The purpose of the study was to develop guidelines for the types and character of development envisioned for the area. The need for the moratorium and land use study was caused by an upsurge in development proposals for the area. The study, focused on the area planned for commercial development on the north side of highway 12, has now been completed and the moratorium has been lifted. Based on the study, the City clariHed its commercial development plans for the area as including office type development and smaller scale neighborhood type retail development versus larger “regional" type retail. The City purchased the key parcel located on the northeast comer of Highway 12 and Old Crystal Bay Road, adjacent to the city hall. This will provide the City with a substantial amount of control over the type of development that occurs along Highway 12. Management Information Systems During 1995, the fmance staff completed a study of the City ’s information systems, which had been provided by LOGIS (1^ Government Information System) since 1979. As a result, the City decided to phase-out its association with LOGIS in favor of an on-site system. The payroll, utility billing, and financial systems were converted during 1995. The police records system was converted in 1996. The City is currently seeing alternatives to the permit tracking system and anticipates conversion by January 1, 1998. The cost projection comparison between the two systems for the period 1995-2000 indicates that the City should experience an average savings of $14,000 per year. I ♦ 't: FINANCIAL Information General Fund The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City and is used to account for all financial r?.v.ufces except those required to be accounted for in another fund. General Fund revenues, including tr.?' 'tt 'S for 1996, totaled $3,504,840, an increase of $82,433 or 2.4% over the prior year. Expenditures, u cludinti transfers, totaled $3,610,455, an increase of $414,191 or 13.0% over 1995 levels. The undesignated fund balance of the General Fund decreased from $1,515,788 at December 31, 1995, to $1,399,566 at December 31, 1996, for a 7.7% reduction. The 1996 ending undesignated fund balance provides 40.6% coverage of the 1997 adopted budget of $3,447,605. -7- r To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono April 29, 1997 The following table presents a comparative analysis of General Fund Revenues for 1996 and 1995, respectively: 1996 1995 Source Amount %of Total Amount % of Total Propeny taxes $ 1,641,943 47.3%$1,644,440 48.0% Special assessments 20 -460 - Licenses and permits 207,277 5.9 202,195 5.9 ' Intergovernmental revenue 454,660 13.1 464,061 13.6 ^ Charges for services 976,891 28.1 928,121 27.1 1 Fines and forfeits 71,556 2.1 80,610 2.4 Interest 68,449 2.0 62,347 1.8 i Other revenue 51,944 1.5 40,173 1.2 1r $ 3,472.740 100.0%$3,422,407 100.0% Intergovernmental revenue in 1996 decreased 2.0% from the 1995 amount due to a reduction in the State paid Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA). The 1996 net increase in charges for services revenue totaled $48,770, or 5.3% over the 1995 amount This resulted mainly from increases in contracted police services to surrounding communities, police special service fees, and public works contracted services fees. The 1996 fines and forfeits revenue decreased $9,054, or 11.2% from the prior year. The increase in interest revenue of 9.8% over the prior year reflects the effects of higher levels of investment activity and improved interest rates. Other revenues increased 29.3% from the prior year, due principally to higher than normal property and casualty insurance dividends. The amount of expenditures from the General Fund for 1996 and 1995, respectively, are presented in the following table: Total General Fund Expenditures increased $301,591, or 9.7% over the previous year. The major portion of this increase is within the miscellaneous area, and resulted from the purchase of land from Hennepin county. The two acre parcel, located adjacent to the current city hall site, was purchased for future use at a cost of $252,603 and was funded from Undesignated Fund Balance. The decrease in general government expenditures of $40,520, or 5.3% reflects the reduced cost of insurances and the first year savings related to the replacement of the contracted data processing service with an in-house system. The increase in street department expenditures of $45,282, or 10.7% is a result of increased levels of street maintenance and snow removal costs compared to the prior year. -8- Function 1996 1995 m Amount % of Total Amount % of Total urrent and capital outlay General government $ 719,153 21.1%$759,673 24.4% Public safety 1,739,605 51.0 1,724,200 55.4 Streets 468,892 13.7 423,610 13.6 Parks and recreation 51,142 1.5 50,449 1.6 Recycling 68,634 2.0 70,682 2.3 Miscellaneous 365,529 10.7 82,750 2.7 $ 3,412,955 100.0%$3,111,364 100.0% f « To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono April 29. 1997 ! Special R evenue Funds Special Revenue Funds are used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are legally restricted to expenditures for specific purposes, including current operating expenses and capital outlay. Park Fund The Park Fund was created by Ordinance of the City Council to receive contributions for subdivisions in lieu of conveyance or dedication of land for parks, playgrounds, and other public purposes. Such contributions, termed park dedication fees, are to be used for the acquisition, development, or maintenance of public parks, playgrounds, surface water holding areas (ponding areas), and debt retirement in connection with land previously acquired for such public purposes. The fund balance as of December 31, 1996 was $194,946. Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund The Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund was established by resolution of the City council to provide a source of funds for equipment purchases and improvements previously included in the General Fund budget, and thus level out the peak and valley effect of capital outlay expenditures within the General Fund budget. The fund was established by a transfer from the General Fund and is maintained by annual budgeted transfers from the General Fund, by investment earnings, and by user charges to participating departments for certain office equipment. The fund balance as of December 31, 1996 was $391,550. Buildino Capital Outlay Fund The Building Capital Outlay Fund was established to receive annual budgeted transfers from the General Fund for the purpose of reducing the need for future bonding of non-Enterprise building facilities. The 1991 Public Facilities Capital Project Fund received several advances from the Building Capital Outlay Fund. As an offset to these transfers, proceeds from land sold to reduce the project costs were deposited in the Building Capital Outlay Fund. The City Council has determined that investment earnings of the Building Capital Outlay Fund will be used to partially pay the debt service of the 1991 Public Facilities Revenue Bonds and sets the amount to be transferred out annually through the budget. The fund balance at December 31, 1996 was $2,487,440. Debt Service Funds Debt Service Funds are used to account for the current year payment of matured principal and interest on long-term general bonded debt. Sources available for payment of the debt service are primarily provided by special assessments and property taxes. The combined fund balance for all Debt Service Funds as of December 31, 1996 was $1,604,920, an increase of $236,947, or 17.3% from 1995. The transfer of $136,993 in residual equity from the 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Construction Fund to the 1992 Debt Service Fund was a significant portion of the increase to fund balance. -9- I To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono AprU 29, 1997 Capital Project Funds SOTA STATE-Am STREETS rONSTRUCTION FUND The Minnesota State-Aid Streets Construction Fund is used to account for state-aid construction revenue and the use of that revenue for improvements to thoroughfare roads and bridges within the City. The deficit fund balance was reduced from $265,543 at December 31, 1995 to $105,713 as of December 31, 1996. The remaining deficit fund balance will be eliminated through future reimbursements of project costs from state-aid construction revenues or transfers from other funds. Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund The Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund provides financing for construction costs prior to obtaining permanent fmancing or levying of assessments against benefmed properties for those projects funded directly. Within this fund there is also an account for major road and bridge repairs, construction, or maintenance. The fund balance as of December 31, 1996 was $539,312, which was an increase of $67,873 from 1995. 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Construction Fund The 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Construction Fund was created to account for the bond proceeds from the 1992 Improvement Bonds and the costs of construction of the 1992 Stubbs Bny area sanitary sewer project. Since this project was completed in 1996, the resulting residual equity of $136,993 was transferred to the 1992 Improvement Bonds Debt Service Fund, and the 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Construction Capital Project Fund was closed. Enterprise Funds Water O perating Fund The Water Operating Fund accounts for the provision of water services to the residents of the City who have water service available. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, billing, and collection. The summary of operations for 1996 and 1995 is as follows: December 31 Operating revenue Operating expenses -10- ♦ I »I n • < IM *1 1 II »f •« f1 i 1996 1995 M $ 251,538 $223,638 i 250,184 243,378 $ 1,354 $(19,740)1 : ii » I ■' z r M .1 To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono April 29. 1997 income for 1996 does not include nonoperating revenues and transfers in of SI 88.438 or nonoperating expenses of $42,278. The operating loss for 1995 also does not include nonoperating revenue of $47,894 or nonoperating expenses of $58.871. Retained earnings as of December 31. 1996 were $336,638, which represents an increase of $180,400 from 1995. net of the effects of depreciation on contributed assets and nonoperating items. During 1996 the Sewer grating Fund transferred $70,000 to the Water Operating Fund to assist in financing the Water Operatmg Fund’s share of revenue bond debt. Sewer OPERATiNn Finsm The Sewer 0|»rating Fund accounts for the provision of sewer services to the residents of the City who have sanitary sewer service available. All activities necessary to provide such services are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, billing, and collection. ® The summary of operations for 1996 and 1995 is as follows: December 31 1996 1995 m Isif Operating revenue $ 621.235 $ 579,390 Operating expenses 765.045 771,112 Operating loss $ (143.810)$ (191.722) I: n i.. The operating expenses in 1996 decreased primarily from efforts to reduce groundwater inflow and infiltration into the sanitary sewer system. This resulted in lower measured flows and subsequent treatment costs with the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). The operating loss for 1996 does not include nonoperating revenues of $135,093 or nonoperating expenses and transfers out of $111,564. The operating loss for 1995 also does not include nonoperating revenue of $167,138 or nonoperating expenses of $67,721. Retained earnings as of December 31, 1996 were $1,749,833, which represents an increase of $38,614 from 1995, net of the effects of depreciation on contributed assets and nonoperating items. During i996 the Sewer Operating Fund transferred $70,000 to the Water Operating Fund to assist in financing the Water Operating Fund’s share of revenue bond debt. Golf C oluse Operatinh Fin>m The Golf Course Operating Fund accounts for the operation of the City-owned and operated golf course facility. All activities necessary for operations are accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, and maintenance. I ^ -11- r r' F ' k t To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono April 29. 1997 The summaiy ’ of operations for 1996 and 1995 is as follows: December 31 Operatine expenses Operating income The operating income for 1996 does not include nonoperating revenue of $12,573, and nonoperating expenses of $3,252. The operating income for 1995 also does not include nonoperating revenue of $8,150. Retained earnings as of December 31, 1996 were $326,653, which represents an increase of .$57,809 from 1995, net of the effects of depreciation on contributed assets and nonoperating items. D ebt A dministration At December 31, 1996, the City had four bond issues outstanding. The City ’s legal debt limitation, based on state statutes, equals 2% of market value. All City bonded debt at December 31, 1996 is special assessment or revenue funded and therefore is excluded from the limit. The City bond rating from Moody’s Investors Service is Aal for all bond issues except the 1991 Public Facilities Revenue Bond which has a bond rating from Moody’s Investors Service of Aa. C ash Management Cash temporarily idle during the year was invested in demand deposits, money market funds, obligations of federal agencies, the U.S. Treasury, obligations of local governmental units, the State of Minnesota, repurchase agreements, bankers’ acceptances, and commercial paper. The City ’s investment objective as stated in the investment policy is to first ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio, second to maximize yield while matching maturity dates with expenditure needs, and third to diversify the investment portfolio by financial institution, government agency, or by the corporation in the case of commercial paper to reduce the exposure to risk of loss. At December 31, 1996, the City had an investment portfolio of $8,341,492, at cost (exclusive of the assets held by deferred compensation trustees) diversified as shown in the following table: -12- 1996 1995 im' $192,353 $173,934 If 144.658 142,170 m $47,695 $31,764 ») • ( Type of Investment Cost Percent Investment Pool - Money Market Funds $ 549,866 6.59% Certificates of Deposit 452,218 5.42 U.S. Federal Agencies 4,216.337 50.55 U.S. Treasury Obligations ■' 737 4.78 City of Goodview, Minnesota .jo.OOO 0.60 State of Minnesota 235,000 2.82 r - Commercial Paper 2,439,134 29.24 - $ 8,341,492 100.00%• r f. I- k ui: r* f •- ua > « h -h H i4 - :.-i ’f; «► — To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono April 29, 1997 For the year ended December 31, 1996, the City had cash and investment interest eamines of $465 675 at an average yield of 6.19%. * R isk Management The City p^icipates in the liability, property, and workers’ compensation programs sponsored by the L^gue of Mini^ta Cities Insurance Tnist. In addition, Jje City appoints an agent of record to assist with tne admimstration, loss prevention, and risk management. Other Information Independent audit Minnesota State Stamtes require that the City have an annual audit performed bv a certified public Mcountant or the State Auditor. The City appointed the certified public accounting firm of Malloy, ^nto^, I^mowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A., to perform the audit for the year ended December 31,’ i. * . , ® Auditor’s Report on the general purpose financial statements is included in theFinancial Section of this report. Award The Govemment Finance Officers' Association (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excelle^ m Financial Reporting to the City for its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year end^ Decembei 31, 1995. Tliis was die ninth consecutive year that the City received this prestigious award. In order to be awarded a Cenificate of Achievement, the City published an easily readable and efficiently organized Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. This report satisfied both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable *egal requirements. A Certificate of ^ nievement is valid for a period of one year only. We believe that our current Comprehensive .^rmual Financial Report continues to meet the Cen ficate of Achievement Program’s requirements and we are submitting it to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate Acknowledgments We would like to express our appreciation to the entire City suff for their individual contributions in assisting with die preparation of this report and to the outside agencies who assisted with essential mfomiation for this report. We also would like to express appreciation to the Mayor and City Co^ilmembers for their interest and support in planning and conducting the financial operations of rhe m* * Sincerely, Ronald J. Moorse Administrator Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director -13- I i (-1 Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting 1 Presented to I i j City of Orono, Minnesota For its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 1995 A Certificate of Achievement for Excellence In Financial Reporting is presented by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada to government units and public employee retirement systems whose .mprehensive annual financial reports (CAFRs) achieve the highest standards in government accounting and financial reporting. •! : ^ [ Executive Director -14- • Rnancial Section • General Purpoae Financial Statements u wm P r »« r ! - i t Wl ^ .'■Mil I '1 1 1 w I • M<^ PRINCIPALS INDEPENDENT AUDITOR S REPORT KENNETH W MALLOY. CPA THOMAS M MONTAGUE. CPA THOMAS A KARNOWSKI. CPA PAUL A RADOSEVICH. CPA WILLIAM J LAUER CPA City Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Orono. Minnesota, as of and for the year ended December 31, 1996, as listed in the table of contents. These general purpose financial statements are the responsibility of the City’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these general purpose financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing StfliiUflrdSi issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the general purpose financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall general puipose financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the general purpose financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the City of Orono at December 31, 1996, and the results of its operations and cash flows of the proprietary fund type for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. The City has elected early implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 27, Accounting for Pensions by State and Local Governmental Employers for disclosure of the Public Employers Retirement Association of Minnesota Defined Benefit Pension Plan. In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued a report on our consideration of the City of Orono ’s internal control structure and a report on its compliance with laws and regulations both Gated April 29, 1997. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. The combining and individual fund statements and financial schedules as listed in the table of contents are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the general purpose financial state,.lents. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the general purpose financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly s'.ated in all material respects in relation to the general purpose financial statements ta,.en as a whole. The statistical information as listed in the table of contents is not necessary for a fair presentation of the general purpose financial statements, but is presented as additional analytical data. This information is unaudited atid we do not express an opinion on it. April 29, 1997 rztr.i* 1 If It 410 PARK NATIONA*. BANK BUILDING S353 WAYZATA BCX,". EVARO MINNLAPOUS. MINNESOTA SS416 TELEPHONE 612 545 0424 TELEEAX 612 545^569 -15- 1 r THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK : I rN w * i n -N 4 t r i I (f t M t ( U J f i ? -J GENERAL PURP OSE FINANCIAT. STATF.MFM iQ (LIFTABT.F STATFMFNT<;^ I ! ■1 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Combined Balance Sheet All Fund Types and Account Groups As of December 31,1996 (with Comparative Total > as of December 31,1995) Assets and Other Debits Assets Cash and temporary investments Cash and investments held by trustee Receivables Accounts Accrued interest Delinquent taxes Delinquent special assessments Deferred special assessments Contract for deed Due from other funds Due from other governmental units Inventories Prepaid items Deferred charges Discount on revenue bonds Other assets Restricted assets Cash and temporary investments Accrued interest Property, plant, and equipment - net Other debits Amount available in Debt Service Funds General Fund for vested vacation and severance benefits Amount to be provided for debt service Total assets and other debits See notes to financial statements Governmental Fund Types -16- f » k * General Special Revenue Debt Service Capital Project ? $ 1,587,878 $ 3,000,046 $ 1,143,054 $ 412,991 ——413,023 - 1,265 _ 77,065 102,412 42.114 35,497 44,667 —7,826 611 i 5,195 —9,801 1,322 ——615,681 55,905 5,560 ——' I ——12,295 157,800 45,218 —7,809 102,359 -—•-I 12,847 —..• 12,295 -—•ini —-—— 3,740 mm 1 --—— ♦ • —— w $ 1.795.730 $ 3,102.458 $2,251,603 $ 766.485 # ^ ■ .5' 1 I .j I n I ‘« " \' i^- ' iw * f^-% I ♦ N M b Proprictaiy Fund Type Enterprise 8^12,569 Fiduciary Fund Type Trust and Agency Account Groups General Fixed Assets General Long-Term Debt $ 1,930,537 $ 329,950 50,722 1,924 18,099 271,828 259,917 2,268 374 - $- $ 925,112 6 254,531 1,604,920 151,520 4,000,080 $ 11,078.188 $ 925.112 $ 6.254.531 Exhibit A-1 Totals (Memorandum Only) -17- 1996 1995 S 8,074,506 $ 7,250,665 1,338,135 1,189,983 331,215 305,601 307,810 421,847 55,028 49,286 34,417 45,605 943,414 1,154,717 5,560 10,025 170,095 150,375 415,303 538,118 2,268 2,289 13,221 39,553 1235 15,375 -10,416 3,740 1.163 —2,324,845 —37,626 14,467,100 12,371,597 1,604,920 1,367,973 151,520 140,913 4.000.080 4,537,027 $ 31.930.627 $ 31.964.999 I «r.. (continued) CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Combined Balance Sheet All Fund Types and Account Groups (continued) As of December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals as of December 31,1995) Governmental Fund Types See notes to financial statements -18- * ! » < Special Debt Capital - -General Revenue Service Project ♦ Liabilities, Equity, and Other Credits Liabilities a—• Accounts and contracts payable S 52,84:S 28.522 S 1,080 $ 117,248 Accrued salaries and compensated absences payable 23,900 —-— i Accrued interest payable ——-— Due to other funds 12,295 ——157,800 Due to other governmental units 100,185 ——- Deferred credits ————• 1 Deferred revenue 55,422 —645,603 57,838 Deferred compensation payable to employees ———— Liabilities related to restricted assets r« Accrued interest payable —- - — Long-term debt ————M Total liabilities 244,644 28,522 646,683 332,886 Equity and other credits Investment in general fixed assets -——— Contributed capital ———— Retained earnings Unreserved --——M Fund balance (deficit) Reserved for debt service -413,023 — Unreserved Designated for emergency contingencies ———325,000 Designated for road/bridge/stormwater projects -——172,906 Designated for capital outlay -3,073,936 —— Designated for debt service ——1,191,897 — Designated for vacation'severance benefits 151,520 -——— Undesignated 1,399,560 ——(64,307) Total equity and other credits 1,551,086 3,073,936 1,604,920 433,599 Total liabilities, eo’iity, and other credits $ 1,795,730 S 3.102,458 $ 2.251,603 $ 766.485 r I « j 'hii.,-- 1 Exhibit A-1 Proprietary Fund Type Fiduciary Fund Type Accou nt Groups General Totals (Memorandum Only) Enterprise Trust and Agency General Fixed Assets Long-Term Debt 1996 1995 i S 3U46 S $$$ 230,938 $ 540,821 35,133 -——59,033 111,813 26,134 ---26,134 ————170,095 150,375 4,739 *--—104,924 140,183 —92,948 —--92,948 102,479 ————758,863 936,558 “•925,112 ——925,112 776,874 —-——47,756 !1,550,000 --5,756,520 7,306,520 9,345,913 1,740,200 925,112 ••5,756,520 9,674,567 12,152,772 !—6,254,531 6,254,531 5,811,375 )6,924,864 ——-6,924,864 5,314,249 2,413,124 ——-2,413,124 2,136,301 --——413,023 413,109 !—--—325,000 325,000 ————172,906 122,830 _————3,073,936 3,134,302 •———1,191,897 954,864 —“——-151,520 140,913 ——-—1,335,259 1,459,284 9,337,988 -6,254,531 —22,256,060 19,812,227 —$ 11.078.188 $ 97s.;i:2 5.254.531 $ 5.756.520 $ 31.930.627 $ 31.964.999 -19- ■ j 1 '* .t CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance AH Govemmenul Fund Types and Expendable Trust Fund Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31,1995) Revenue Property taxes Special assessments Licenses and permits Intergovernmental Charges for services Fines and forfeits Other Interest earned on investments Rents and refunds Miscellaneous Total revenue Expenditures Current General government Public safety Streets Parks and recreation Recycling Miscellaneous Capital outlay Debt service Principal retirement Interest Fiscal agent fees and other Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures Other financing sources (uses) Bond proceeds (net) Payment to refund bond issue Operating transfers in Operating transfers (out) Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other financing sources over expen< ditures and other financing uses Fund balance Beginning of year Residual equity transfers in Residual equity transfers (out) End of year See notes to financial statements Governmental Fund Types General Special Revenue Debt Service Capital Project * $ 1,641,943 $$ 303,283 S 39,410 20 -180,556 18,521 207,277 — 454,660 —35,442 212,440 976,891 71,556 ——- i i 68,449 177,582 70,730 31,312 I 41,913 —_ 10,031 38,178 625 1,663 3,472,740 215,760 590,636 303,346 1 719,153 1,696,087 468,892 -•mm* 51,142 — 68,634 -—1 365,529 7,765 —/ 43,518 235,861 —191,980 t-H j ——300.000 -- —-313.960 —-6,722 3,412,955 243,626 620,682 191,980 1 59,785 (27,866)(30,046)111,366 — _mm -——mm 32,100 97,500 130,000 125,100 • « (197,500)(130,000)—(57,200){ I (165,400)(32,500j 130,000 67,900 *»- (105,615)(60,366)99,954 *179,266 f 1,656,701 3,134,302 1,367,973 391,326 --275,241 — -(138,248)(136.993) S 1.551.086 S 3.073.936 S 1.604.920 S 433.599 - -20- li T :■n 4 o * *\ Exhibit A-2 Fiduciary Totals Fund Type (Memorandum Onlv) Expendable Trust Fund 1996 1995 $S 1,984,636 S 1,933,371 —199,097 189,545 —207,277 202,195 —702,542 856,590 -976,891 928,121 —71,556 80,610 —348,073 351,013 -41,913 29,456 58,207 108,704 176,448 58,207 4,640,689 4,747,349 719,153 759,673 —1,696,087 1,693,420 468,892 423,610 -51,142 50,449 -68,634 70,682 58^07 431,501 176.488 ••471,359 931,130 —300,000 340,000 -313,960 353,121 -6,722 13,341 58,207 4,527.450 4,811,914 -113,239 (64,565) —357,899 —-(360,000) —384.700 207,900 -(384,700)(207,900) -—(2.101) —113,239 (66,666) _6,550.302 6,643,294 -275,241 .. -(275,241)(26.320 i —$ 6.663.541 $ 6.550.302 -21- r t fj '■ J • i 4 •i r CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) General and Special Revenue Funds Year Ended December 31,1996 Revenue Property taxes Special assessments Licenses and permits Intergovernmental Charges for services Fines and forfeits Other Interest earned on investments Rents and refunds Miscellaneous Total revenue Expenditures Current General government Public safety Streets Paries and recreation Recycling Miscellaneous Capital outlay Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures Other financing sources (uses) Operating transfers m Curating transfers (out) Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other financing sources over expen ditures and other financing uses Fund balance Beginning of year End of year See notes to financial statements -22- General Fund 1,656,701 $ 1,55 L086 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget $ 1,647,940 $ 1,641,943 $ (5,997) 20 20 185,000 207,277 22,277 442,830 454,660 11,830 915,270 976,891 61,621 61,200 71,556 10,356 59,285 68,449 9,164 28,095 41,913 13,818 8,135 10,031 1,896 3,347,755 3,472,740 124,985 749,865 719,153 (30,712) 1,710,775 1,696,087 (14,688) 482,960 468,892 (14,068) 51,870 51,142 (728) 76,155 68,634 (7,521) 378,950 365,529 (13,421) 49.680 43,518 (6,162) 3,500,255 3,412,955 (87,300) (152,500)59,785 212,285 32,100 32,100 (197,500)(197,500)— (197,500)(165,400)32,100 $ (350.000)(105,615)$ 244.385 GS *1 K 1 U • i I« m a- a a • I •i I SI :-V:'- iS t TTi!^. L;'". if Exhibit A-3 Special Revenue Funds Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget $$$ 174,400 177,582 3,182 28,080 202,480 38,178 215,760 10,098 13,280 7,765 388,265 396,030 7,765 235,861 243,626 (152,404) (152,404) (193,550)(27,866)165,684 97,500 (130,000) 97,500 (130,000) — (32,500)(32,500)— $ (226.0501 (60,366) $ 165.684 3,134,302 $ 3.073.936 4 -23- «ii:! i' f. ii- ■i CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit A-4 Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Proprietary Fund Type Years Ended l>v:'**nhcr iCdA Wv5 See notes to financial statements -24- Enterprise Funds __1996___•995 _k Sales and cost of sales Sales $ 19.163 S 17.728 Cost of sales 11.315 10.467 Gross profit 7.848 7.261 ^ • Operating revenue Metered water sales 249,504 220.848 User charges 619,169 578,149 Green fees 152.947 136.809 Equipment rental 31.523 29.084 Other 4.135 4.811 i Total operating revenue 1.057.278 969.701 Total gross profit and operating revenue 1.065.126 976.962 - Operating expenses >... 4 Personal serv ices 276.301 261,356 Purchased water 13,092 10,878 Sewer disposal charges 318.940 329.536 i Professional serv'ices 22.375 76,262 W Operating and maintenance supplies 38,889 25.780 Heat, light, and power 47.992 45.496 Depreciation 257.488 222.246 Rent and equipment 6.977 5,456 Maintenance and repairs 85,981 49.270 Administrative and other expense 84.824 93.293 Other expenses 7.028 37.087 Total operating expenses 1,159,887 _M5y60 Operating loss (94.761)(179.698)-1 Nonoperating revenue (expense) Property tax revenue 93.566 83,794 Interest income 163.007 128.797 # 4 Amortization of deferred credits 9.531 9.530 Interest expense (82.482) (115,962) Revenue bond expense (1.100)(405) Loss on disposal of assets (3.512)(9.1^ Total nonoperating revenue (expense)179.0i0 96.590 c Net income (loss) before other financing sources (uses)84.249 (83,108) Other financing sources (uses)1 Operating transfers in 70.000 —w Operating transfers (out)(70,000)— Total other financing sources (uses)-— Net income (loss)84,249 (83,108)w Credit for depreciation on contributed assets 192,574 157,647 Net increase in retained earnings 276.823 74.539 Retained earnings Beginning of year 2,136.301 2,061.762 End of year 52.413,124 .Sy36,30J^ 1 4 mm r wm. I’’ :.«r t,.t? I I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit A-4 Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Proprietary Fund Type Years Ended December 31, 1996 and 1995 End of year See notes to financial statements -24- $2,413,1.24 $2,136,30! ! i r « * • Sales and cost of sales 1996 1995 Sales S 19,163 $ 17,728 (mm, Cost of sales 11,313 10,467 Gross pront 7,848 7.261' Operating revenue Metered water sales 249,504 220,848 -- User charges 619,169 578,149 Green fees 152,947 136,809 Equipment rental 31,523 29.084 Other 4,135 4,811 Total operating revenue 1,057,278 969,701 Total gross profit and operating revenue 1,065,126 976,962 - Operating expenses Personal serv ices 276,301 261,356 1 ♦ Purchased water 13,092 10,878 m Sewer disposal charges 318,940 329.536 Professional services 22,375 76,262 Operating and maintenance supplies 38,889 25,780 Heat, light, and power 47,992 43.496 Depreciation 257,488 222,246 Rent and equipment 6,977 3,456 m Maintenance and repairs 85,981 49,270 Administrative and other expense 84,824 93,293 Other expenses 7,028 37,087 Total operating expenses 1,159,887 1.1 56.6M n Operating loss (94,761)(179.698)m Nonoperating revenue (expense) Property tax revenue 93,566 83.794 • m Interest income 163,007 128,797 t 1 Amortization of deferred credits 9,531 9,530 Interest expense (82,482)(115,962) Revenue bond expense (1.100)(405) Loss on disposal of assets (3,512)(9.164)^4 Total nonoperating revenue (expense)179,010 96.590 Net income (loss) before other financing sources (uses)84,249 (83,108) Other financing sources (uses) Operating transfers in 70,000 r Operating transfers (out)(70,000)— Total other financing sources (uses)-— i Net income (loss)84^49 (83.108) 1 Credit for depreciation on contributed assets 192,574 157,647 » 1 Net increase in retained earnings 276,823 74,539 Retained earnings Beginning of year 2,136,301 2.061,762 ■ I i: i f I 4 r ■ I n Exhibit AS CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Statement of Cash Flows Proprietary Fund Type Years Ended December 31,1996 and 1995 Cash flows from operating activities Operating loss Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash provided by operating activities Depreciation Loss on disposal of assets Amortization of revenue bond discount Change in assets and liabilities (Increase) decrease in Accounts receivable Due from other governmental units Inventory Prepaid items Increase (decrease) in Accounts payable Salaries and compensated absences payable Due to other governmental units Net cash provided by operating activities Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Residual equity transfer in Taxes collected for revenue bond debt Special assessments for revenue bond debt Acquisition or construction of capital assets Proceeds from sale of capital assets MWCC current value credit Principal paid on revenue bonds Interest paid on revenue bonds Proceeds received from revenue bonds issued Other charges on revenue bonds Operating transfer from Sewer Fund Operating transfer to Water Fund Net cash provided (used) by capital and related financing activities See notes to financial statements -25- Enterprise Funds 1996 1995 $ (94,761) $ (179,698) 257,488 (3,512) 10,416 (41,119) 484 21 3,576 (32,791) (1,719) (28,59?) 69,484 92,983 81,231 (106,450) 34,944 (1,750,000) (104,104) (1,100) 70,000 (70,000) (1,752,496) 222,246 (9,164) 1,525 (14,137) (7,106) 1,310 27,621 54,443 3,605 30,462 131,107 26,326 83,504 52,733 (67,736) 7,299 35,370 (200,000) (120,300) 1,550,000 (405) 1,366,791 (continued) r ij CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit A-5 Statement of Cash Flows Proprietary Fund Type (continued) Years Ended December 31, 1996 and 1995 value of 31. 1996, the City disposed of equipment with an adjusted book Equipment Original price Accumulated depreciation $ 10,902 7,390 Loss on disposal of equipment $3,512 See notes to financial statements -26- ___Enterprise Funds •• Cash flows from investing activities 1996 __i^5_ _» Interest received on investments 159,005 82,699 - Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents (1,524,007)1,580,597 Cash and cash equivalents Beginning of year 3,454,544 1,873,947 End of year $ 1,930,537 $ 3,454,544 U Cash and cash equivalents Unrestricted cash and temporary investments $ 1,930,537 $ 1,129,699 Restricted cash and temporary investments —2,324,845 Total cash and cash equivalents $_J,930,537 $ 3,454,544 m Supplementary schedule of noncash investing, capital, and financing activities mm Assets contributed from other funds k -1.8W j 189_$•mi MWCC current value credit applied $____^4,594 $ 4^594 . ^ I i I« I I -* t. CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements December 31, 1996 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES A. Organization The City operates under “Optional Plan A" form of government as defined in the State of Minnesota Statutes. Under this plan, the City Council, composed of an elected mayor and four elected trustees or councilmembers, exercises legislative authority and determines all matters of policy. The City Administrator, q>pointed by the Council, is responsible for the proper administering of all affairs relating to the City. The financial statements and the accounting policies of the City conform to generally accepted accounting principles as applicable to governmental units. B. Reporting Entity As required by generally accepted accounting principles, these financial sutements include the City of Orono (the primary government) and its component unit. A component unit is a legally separate entity for which the primary government is financially accountable, or for which the exclusion of the comiwnent unit would render the financial statements of the primary government misleading. The criteria used to determine if the primary government is financially accountable for a component unit include whether or not the primary government appoints the voting majority of the potential component umt s board, is able to impose its will on the potential component unit, is in a relationship of financial benefit or burden with the potential component unit, or is fiscally depended upon by the potential component unit. The Orono Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) is a legally separate organization created in accordance with Minnesota Statutes § 469.(X)3. Its purpose is to clear and redevelop blighted areas within the City and to provide adequate housing for low and moderate income residents. The HRA is fiscally dependent upon the City of Orono, and its governing board consists of the City’s mayor and councilmembers. Therefore, the HRA has been reported as a blended component unit of the City, with its funds reported as though they are funds of the City. There are no other organizations that when considered would be included in the financial statements as a component unit. C. Fund Accounting 'fhe accounts of the City are organized on the basis of funds and account groups, each of which is considered a separate accounting entity. The City maintains the following funds, grouped by fund type and account group: -27- j ' t i K CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 1 - SIGNinCANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) 1. Governmental Fund Types a. General Fund - The General Fund is the general operating fimd of the City. It is used to account for all fuiancial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fimd. b. Special Revenue Funds - The Special Revenue Funds are used to account for the proceeds of speciHc revenue sources (other than expendable trusts or major capital projects) that are restricted to expenditures for specified purposes. c. Debt Service Funds - The Debt Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, bonded general long-term debt principal, interest, and related costs. d. Capital Project Funds - The Capital Project Funds are used to account for fmancial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by Proprietary Funds). 2. Proprietary Fund Type a. Enterprise Funds - The Enterprise Funds are used to account for operations that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private business enterprises - here the intent of the governing body is that the costs of providing goods or services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges. 3. Fiduciary Fund Type a. Expendable Trust Fund - The Expendable Trust Fund is used to account for assets held by the City in a trustee capacity. The Expendable Trust Fund includes the City’s flexible benefit plan (Internal Revenue Code § 12S). b. Agency Funds - The Agency Funds are used to account for assets held by the City in the capacity of agent. These funds are used for the City’s deferred compensation plan (Internal Revenue Code § 457). 4. Account Groups a. General Fixed Assets - This separate account group contains the fixed assets of the governmental fund types. b. General Long-Term Debt - This account group contains the long-term obligations of the City, other than those liabilities included in the Proprietary Funds. -28- I IM 4 ♦i It t n m f f I* It M “1 t ^ fej - 14 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) D. Measurement Focus and Basis of Accounting Measurement Focus The measurement focus of a fund determines ahai the fund measures. generally are included on the balance sheet ODera^TJ"! current assets and current liabilities ““ '*'> "O' “volve measu rement of results Er;sri;crri2,r=‘zr S" rssa”? t? Basis of Accounting > “““'■‘0 “ ” «e„, is i„ u.e fund’s op.ra.ing in the following manner: -29- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31. 1996 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) 1. Revenue Recognition - Revenue is recognized when it becomes measuraMe and available. “Measurable” means the amount of the transaction can be determined and “available" means collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay liabilities of the current period. Major revenue that is susceptible to accrual includes property taxes, rpecial assessments, intergovernmental revenue, charges for services, and interest earned on investments. Other revenue that is not susceptible to accrual includes licenses and permits, fees, and miscellaneous revenue. Such revenue is recorded only when received because it is not measurable until collected. 2. Recording of Expenditures - Expendimres are recognized under the modified accrual basis of accounting when the related fund liability is incurred, except for principal and interest on general long-term debt which is recognized when due. Proprietary Funds are accounted for using the accrual basis of accounting. Under this method, revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recognized when they are incurred. The City applies only those applicable pronouncements of the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued on or before November 30, 1989 in accounting and reporting for its proprietary operations. E. Cash and Investments Cash and temporary investments include balances from all funds that are combined and invested to the extent available in various securities authorized by state law. Earnings on pooled investments are allocated to the respective funds on the basis of applicable cash balance participation by each fund. Cash and investments held by trustee includes balances held in segregated accounts that are established for the deferred compensation plan payable to employees and also includes debt service funds held in a trust account a'' required by the 1991 Public Facilities Revenue Bond debt issue. Certain proceeds of the Enterprise Fund Revenue Bonds, as well as certain resources set aside, are classified as restricted assets on the balance sheet when their use is limited by bond covenant. Investments are stated at cost or amortized cost. Assets held by deferred compensation trustees are carried at market value. F. Property Taxes Propert)' tax levies are set up by the City Council in October of each year, and are cenified to Hennepin County for collection in the following year. In Minnesota, counties act as collection agents for all property taxes. A portion of the property taxes levied is paid by the State of Minnesota through Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA), which is included in intergovernmental revenue in the financial statements. -30- f| n 7 m II • t m1 If m If S it It w i ! n m 11 t ^ I r CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 S'- i' \ NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) The county spreads all levies over taxable property. Such taxes become a lien on January 1 and are recorded as receivables by the City on that date. Revenue is accrued and recognized in the year collectible. Taxes which remain unpaid at December 31 are classified as delinquent taxes receivable. Revenue from property taxes which is not collected within 60 days of year-end is deferred since it is not available to meet obligations of the current year. Property taxes may be paid by taxpayers in two equal installments on May 15 and October 15. The county provides tax settlements to cities and other taxing districts several times throughout the year. G. Special Assessments Special assessments represent the financing for public improvements paid for by benefitting property owners. These assessments are recorded as receivables upon certification to the county. The corresponding revenue from the delinquent (unremitted) and deferred (certified but not yet levied) special assessments receivable is deferred until the year in which it becomes available (collected within 60 days of year-end>. H. Inventories Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market on the first-in, first-out basis and are accounted for using the consumption method. Inventory in the Golf Course Operating Fund consists of resale items. I. Property, Plant, and Equipment Fixed assets are stated at cost, estimated historical cost, or in the case of contributions, at fair market value at the time received. 1. General Fixed Assets Account Group - No depreciation has been provided on general fixed assets. The costs of property, plant, and equipment are accounted for as current expendinires of the governmental Kind types in the year purchased. The City has elected not to record infrastructure fixed assets in its accounting records. Interest incurred during construction of general fixed assets is not capitalized. 2. Proprietary Fund Type - Fixed assets of the Proprietary Funds are depreciated using the straight- line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, as follows; Buildings and improvements Equipment Distribution/collection system 25-50 years 3-20 years 10-75 years Depreciation on contributed assets charged to operations is closed to the contributed equity account. -31- r t « * Ik.' CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) J. Liability for Compensated Absences Vacation and sick leave expected to be liquidated with expendable available fuiancial resources is icported as an expenditure and a ftuid liability of the governmental fund type that will pay it. The remaining portion of such obligations is recorded in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group. The unused vacation of the Proprietary Funds is included in accrued liabilities of the respective fund. K. Bond Discounts/Issuance Costs In the governmental fund types, bond discounts and issuance costs are recognized in the current period. Bond discounts and issuance costs in the Enterprise Funds are deferred and amortized over the term of the bonds using the bonds outstanding method which approximates the effective interest rate method. L. Budgets and Budgetary Accounting Each Fall, after holding a meeting to obtain public comments, the City Council legally adopts the General Fund and all of the Special Revenue Funds’ ./Udgets for the following fiscal year beginning January 1. These budgets are adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The City has established budgetary control at the department level. City management must request Council approval before exceeding the budget at that level. City management may transfer appropriations within the department level without Council approval. Appropriations lapse at year-end; however, the Council may approve the carryover of specific amounts. Budget amounts are presented on a modified accrual basis of accounting and include several amendments adopted by the City Council during the year. Encumbrance accounting is not used. During the year, the City made significant budget amendments to the General Fund appropriations and the Special Revenue Funds’ revenue and appropriations as reflected in the following tables: Net Adopted Budget Amended Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Expenditures Administration $ 185,715 $3,500 $ 189,215 Assessing 76,160 840 77,000 Finance 147,930 1,100 149,030 Fire protection 197,465 1,260 198.725 Engineering 15,130 915 16,045 Special services - consulting/police 41,850 4,650 46,500 Contingency 78,670 237,735 316,405 Operating transfer out 97.500 100,000 197,500 Net amendments S 350,000 -32- » ' ' I I t < * • I •N I . 4 ■i I; ^ ‘ It! CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINtJED) The expenditure budget amendments in the General Fund were for the following purposes: ® Administration - The budget was increased to reflect the mid-year salary adjustment for the city administrator. Funds for this adjustment were included in the Contingency. ® Assessing - The budget was increased to reflect an increase in the assessor’s contract for services. ® Finance - The budget was increased to reflect a mid-year salary adjustment for both the assistant finance director and the accountant/management analyst. ® Fire Protection - The budget was increased to reflect an increase in the fire protection contract with the City of Wayzata. " Engineering - The budget was increased for higher than anticipated engineering services related to drainage issues. ® Special Services - consulting/police - The budget was increased for higher than anticipated police special duty assignments and engineering services related to development activity. ® Contingency - The budget was increased to reflect the acquisition of a two acre parcel of land. ^ Operating Transfer Out - The budget was increased to provide additional funds needed in the Capital Project Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund to fund storm water drainage projects and to fund the storm water management plan. Special Revenue Funds Expenditures Park Fund Capital outlay Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund Capital outlay Building Capital Outlay Fund Miscellaneous Capital outlay The expenditure budget amendments in the Special Revenue Funds were for the following purposes: ® Park Fund - The budget was increased to provide for the Saga Hill land acquisition and costs related to the acquisition of portable docks. -33- Adopted Budget Net Budget Amendment Amended Budget $ 217,000 $ 51,540 $ 268,540 67,380 44,260 111,640 3,339 4,426 7,765 1,961 6,124 8,085 ^0 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 1 - SlGNmCANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Improvement and Equipment Capital Outtay Fund - The budget was increased to provide for police department reimbursement of costs related to the conversion to a stand alone record keeping system. Building Capital Outlay Fund - The budget was increased to provide for additional groundwater sampling, prevention of soil and groundwater contamination, and monitoring of wells at the old city hall site. M. Memorandum Only Columns Because the accounting system is organized and operated on a fund basis, the columns on the combined financial statements captioned, “Totals (Memorandum Only)," are presented for informational purposes only and are not intended to represent consolidated information. Data in these columns does not present financial position, results of operations, or cash flows in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Interfund eliminations have not been made in the aggregation of this data. N. Comparative Data/Reclassifications Comparative total data for the prior year has been presented in the accompanying financial statements in order to provide an understanding of changes in the City ’s financial position and operations. However, comparative data has not been presented in all statements because its inclusion would make ceruin statements unduly complex and difficult to understand. Also, certain amounts presented in the prior year data have been reclassified in order to be consistent with the current year ’s presentation. O. Statement of Cash Flows For purposes of the Statement of Cash Flows, the City considers all highly liquid debt instruments with an original maturity from the time of purchase by the City of three months or less to be cash equivalents. The Proprietary Funds’ portion in the Citywide cash and investment management pool is considered to be cash equivalent. P. Risk Management 'The City is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts; theft of, damage to, and destruction of assets: errors and omissions; and natural disasters. The City participates in the Uague of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMC Trust), a public entity risk pool for its general property and casualty, workers ’ compensation, and other miscellaneous insurance coverages. The LMC Trust operates as a common risk management and insurance program for approximately 780 cities. The City pays an annual premium to the LMC Trust for insurance coverage. The LMC Trust agreement provides that the Trust will be self- sustaining through member premiums and wUl reinsure through commercial companies for claims in excess of certain limits. The major reinsurance points are generally $200,(XX) per occurrence for property loss or damage and $540,000 per occurrence for workers ’ compensation. -34- 1 I >1 i II n ti ti m 4 » I ■i-v, : ,t-i k- CITY OF ORONCi, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) The City also carries commercial insurance for certain other risks of loss, including employee health insurance and liquor liability. Settled claims resulting from these risks have not exceeded commercial insurance coverage in any of the past three fiscal years. NOTE 2 - DEPOSITS AND INVESTMENTS A. Deposits In accordance with applicable Minnesota Statutes, the City maintains deposits at depositoiy banks authorized by the City Council. Minnesota Statutes require that ail deposits be protected by insurance, surety bond, or collateral. The market value of collateral pledged must equal 110% of the deposits covered by insurance or bonds (140% in the case of mortgage-backed collateral). Authorized collateral includes the legal investments described below, as well as certain first mortgage notes and certain other state or local government obligations. Minnesota Stamtes require that securities pledged as collateral be held in safekeeping by the City or in a financial institution other than that furnishing the collateral. Deposits consist of checking accounts, savings accounts, and certificates of deposit held in a bank or savings instinition. At year-end, the carrying amount of the City ’s deposits was $597,895, while the balance on the bank records was $751,561. At December 31, 1996, all deposits for the City were insured or collateralized by securities held by the City ’s agent in the City ’s name. B. Cash on Hand Cash in the possession of the City, consisting of petty cash and change funds, at year-end totaled $360. C. Investments The City may also invest idle funds as authorized by Minnesota Stamtes, as follows: direct obligations or obligations guaranteed by tlie United States or its agencies; shares of investment companies registered under the Federal Investment Company Act of 1940 and whose only investments are in securities described above; general obligations of the State of Minnesota or any of its municipalities; bankers’ acceptances of United States’ banks eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System; commercial paper issued by United States’ corporations or their Canadian subsidiaries, of the highest quality, and mamring in 270 days or less; repurchase or reverse purchase agreements with banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System with capitalization exceeding $10,000,000, a primary reporting dealer in U.S. government securities to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, or certain Minnesota securities broker-dealers; and fumres contracts sold under authority of Minnesota Stamtes § 471.56, Subd. 5. -35- r ' 1 i CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 2 - DEPOSITS AND INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED) The City’s investments are categorized below to give an indication of the level of custodial credit risk assumed at year-end. Category 1 includes investments that are insured or registered or for which the securities are held by the City or its agent in the City’s name. Category 2 includes uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the counterparty’s trust department or agent in the City’s name. Category 3 includes uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the counterparty or by its trust department or agent but not in the City’s name. Deposits and investment balances at December 31, 1996 are as follows: Deposits Cash on band 597,895 360 Total deposits, investments and cash on hand $ 9.412,641 Deposits, investments, and cash on hand are reported on the City’s combined balance sheet as follows: Cash and temporary investments Cash and investments held by trustee $ 8,074,506 1,338,135 Total cash and investments $ 9.412.641 -36- Custodial Credit Risk Catettorv Carrying Market 1 2 3 Value Value U.S. Government securities $4,200,368 $ - $414,906 $ 4,615,274 $4,796,058 Sute and local government securities 285,000 --285,000 292,004 Commercial paper 1.589.677 -849,457 2,439.134 2.463.257 $6,075,045 $ - $1,264,363 7,339,408 7,551,319 Investment pools - unclassified Money market funds 549,866 549,866 Held by deferred compensation trustees 925.112 925,112 Total investments 8,814,386 $9.026.297 11 i •* « |i U: H: . ■>I r-L< li !1 -, /■' • ^ I •i ^ CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31,1996 NOTE 3 - PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT A. Changes in General Fixed Assets Balance Beginning of Year Additions Deletions Balance End of Year —>Land and improvements $ 1,250,680 $ 303,528 $$ 1,554,208 Buildings and improvements 3,205,130 -—3,205,130 Equipment 1,355,565 193,601 53,973 1,495.193 $ 5,811,375 $ 497,129 $53,973 $ 6.254.531 B. Proprietary Fund Type Property, Plant, and Equipment (Golf Water Sewer Course Operating Operating Operating Total i Land and improvements $ 57,132 $ 16,654 $127,977 $ 201.763 Buildings and improvements 756,594 31,014 51,550 839,158 •-7 Equipment 77,843 71,879 116,942 266,664JDistribution/collection system 2,083,535 8,582,393 10,665,928 Work in progress -86,497 *86.497 2,975,104 8,788,437 296,469 12,060,010 Less accumulated depreciation 966.854 2,809.380 71,207 3.847.441 $ 2,008,250 $ 5,979,057 $225,262 $ 8,212,569 NOTE 4 - DEFERRED CREDITS AND REVENUE A. Contract for Deed The City sold a section of land to a homeowners’ association on a contract for deed in February 1984. The sales price of $100,000 will oe received in equal quarterly payments over a 15-year period, without interest. At December 31,1996, the remaining balance of $5,560 on the contract for deed is recorded as deferred revenue in the General Fund until collected and available to finance current operations. -37- iihii Ml r CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31,1996 NOTE 4 - DEFERRED CREDITS AND REVENUE (CONTINUED) B. 1985 Special Assessments The City adopted a special assessment roll in 1985 which included $46,175 relating to improvements on City-owned property. The General Fund will pay these assessments over 15 years in annual installments with 9.2% interest. The remaining assessment principal balance of $12,295 at December 31, 1996 has been recorded as due to/from other funds. The related revenue and charges have been deferred in the 1995 Refunding Bonds Debt Service and General Funds, respectively. C. Sewer Openttiiig Enterprise Fund - Due From Other Governmental Units/Deferred Credits This amount represents the credits resulting from the transfer of the City’s sewer treatment facilities to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC). The remaining balance due from MWCC is $255,089 for the facilities and is included in due from other governmental units as of December 31,1996. The total price for each portion of the facilities will be received over 30 years with interest at 4% per aimum by credits against the annual sewage handling charges of MWCC. MWCC has included the cost of these facilities in its base rate, thus “payment" of credits is dependent upon MWCC’s setting funire user fees at a level sufficient to cover all such credits from participating municipalities. Therefore, the revenue has been deferred until such user fees are paid or accrued. Composition of the deferred balance is as follows: -38- f f • I ¥ I ¥ k 6" • A MWCC Remaining Acquisition Deferred Facility Year Credits Treatment Works 1971 $ 1,570 1 1 1963 Interceptor 1977 85,652 • 1 1965 Interceptor 1977 5,726 M $ 92,948 8 \ 4 f t » I » I ’' i t I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31,1996 t ( t \ * J 1 ■ n NOTE 5 - LONG-TERM DEBT A. Components of Long-Term Debt Original Issue Interest Rate Issue Date General long-term debt General Obligation Bonds Improvement Bonds of 1982 Improvement Bonds of 1992 Refunding Bonds of 1995 Public Facilities Revenue Bonds of 1991 Vacation and severance benefits payable Proprietary Fund debt Revenue Bonds G.O. Refunding Bonds of 1995 Final Maturity Date Balance End of Year $475,000 6.50-10.00%12-1-1982 3-1-1999 $ 45,000 $2,000,000 3.30-5.50%8-1-1992 2-1-2008 1,730,000 $360,000 3.85-4.15%12-26-1995 2-1-2002 360,000 $4,000,000 4.50-6.50%12-1-1991 2-1-2008 3,470,000 debt N/A N/A N/A N/A 151.520 5.756,520 $1,550,000 3.854.15%12-26-1995 2-1-2002 1.550.000 ^ i Total all long-term debt $ 7.306.520 r I I • f h- t ^ - i -39- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 • t »« * i ’■ ■ ”, f-M Cf NOTE 5 - LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) B. Statement of Changes in Long-Term Debt General long-term debt General Obligation Bonds Public Facilities Revenue Bonds Vacation and severance benefits payable - net Proprietary Fund debt Revenue Bonds C. Minimum Debt Payments Minimum annual principal and interest payments required to retire long-term debt, excluding vacation and severance benefits payable: «I r Balance Balance Beginning End of t t of Year Additions Retired Year _ $ 2,245,(XX)$-$ 110,000 $ 2,135,000 3,660,000 -190,000 3,470,000 140.913 10.607 151.520 6,045,913 10,607 300,000 5,756,520 • ri m 3.300.000 1.750.000 1.550.000 $ 9.345.913 $10,607 $ 2.050.000 $ 7.306.520 1 ’ I m •^4 t Year Ending December 31 General Long-Term Debt Enterprise Funds Total ► 1 1997 $ 681,046 $305.350 $ 986.396 1998 683,020 299.674 982,694 r 1999 681,152 305,513 986,665 ! ! 2000 672,204 306,524 978,728 2001 668.376 291,036 959,412 Thereafter 4.314.112 231.940 4.546.052 - $ 7.699.910 $1 1.740.037 $ 9,439.947 • •CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31,1996 • t »t NOTE 5 - LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) D. Descriptions and Restrictions of Long-Term Debt 1. General Long-Term Debt * General Obligation Bonds - These bonds were issued to finance various improvements and will be repaid from taxes and special assessments. ** Public Facilities Bonds of 1991 - These bonds were issued by the Housing and Redevelop ment Authority of Orono for the purpose of financing the construction of facilities for a City meeting hall. City offices, police offices, detention and processing, public works office space, storage, maintenance, and repair of machinery and equipment, aiid a cold storage building. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 469.103a, lease-purchase contracts between the Authority and the City and a Trust Indenture between the Authority and American National Bank and Trust Company have been established. The bonds are special obligations of the City as issuer and owner of the land and buildings. The City has pledged rental payments in amounts equal to the debt service requirements and plans to annually appropriate City funds available for this purpose. As required by bond covenant, a reserve account has been established with a trustee which is to be used to pay principal and interest on the bonds in the event that other available resources are inadequate to do so. In addition, Minnesota Statutes § 475.50, Subd. 5(e) allows cities to make a special levy (outside of levy limits) to pay principal and interest on bonds of another political subdivision. The Minnesota Department of Revenue has determined that because a Housing and Redevelopment Authority is a political subdivision of the state, a levy to pay principal and interest on the bonds would be outside the City’s levy limits. ^ Vacation and Severance Benefits Payable - This liability represents vested benefits earned by employees other than Proprietary Fund employees through the end of the year (other than the current portion paid within 60 days), which will be paid or used in fuhire periods. The liability for Proprietary Fund employees is included in the accrued liabilities of those funds. ♦ r 1 n h‘ I 4 -41- r .>-v» I CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 I i i NOTE 5 - LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) 2. General Long-Term Debt and Proprietary Fund Debt • Refunding Bonds - In December 1995, the City issued $1,910,000 of General Obligation Refunding Bonds of 1995 to advance refund $360,000 of the City ’s General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1985 on December 31,1995, and to advance refund $1,550,000 of the City ’s General Obligation Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds of 1989 on February 1. 1996. This refunding issue does not stipulate the restriction of assets in the Enterprise Funds as had been required by the original bond issue. This advance refunding was undertaken to reduce total debt service and resulted in a total savings of $189,023 with a combined present value savings at issuance of $168,262. Under GASB Statement No. 23, when governmental entity refunds proprietary fund debt, the difference between the book value of the old debt and the amount required to retire the debt should be accounted for as a deferral and not be reported on the fund’s operating sutement. The City evaluated the requirements of GASB Statement No. 23 in relation to this refunding and determined that the amount to be deferred and amortized was insignificant and, therefore, expensed the entire amount during 1996. E. mtimate Responsibility for Debt Long-term debt is backed by the fuU faith and credit of the City, except the Public Facilities Revenue Bonds of 1991. F. Resources to Meet Future Debt Requirements * Amounts Available for Long-Term Debt - Available fund balance designated or reserved for repayment of long-term debt includes: General Fund $ 151,520 Debt Service Funds 1,604,920 $ 1.756,440 ® Amount to be Provided in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group - This amount represents fiimre revenue to be generated for debt payments, generally including deferred tax levies, special assessment fund transfers, and interest earnings. Deferred tax levies scheduled to be placed on the tax rolls, as needed, total $185,000 at December 31, 1996. »« b I t ■ * -42- r :s ;>• it' I* CITY Or ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 6 - DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLANS The City o^ers its employees deferred compensation plans created in accordance with Internal Revenue Code § 457. The plans, available to all employees, permit them to defer a portion of their salary until future years. The deferred compensation is not available to employees until termination, retirement, death, or unforeseen emergency. All amounts of condensation deferred under the plans, all property and rights purchased with those amounts, and all income attributable to those amounts are solely the property and rights of the City, subject to the claims of the City’s general creditors. Participants* rights under the plans are equal to those of general creditors of the City in an amount equal to the fair market value of the deferred account for each participant. The City has no liability for losses under the plans but does have the duty of due care that would be required of an ordinary prudent investor. The City believes that it is unlikely that it will use the assets to satisfy the claims of general creditors in the future. NOTE 7 - FLEXIBLE BENEFIT PLAN The City offers a flexible benefit plan. The plan is a "cafeteria plan ” under § 125 of the Internal Revenue Code. All employees who meet the eligibility requirements may participate in the plan. To be eligible an employee must be at least 20 years of age and be an employee who is regularly scheduled to work more than 20 hours per week. Eligible employees can elect to participate by contributing pre-tax dollars withheld from payroll checks to the plan for health care and dependent care benefits. Payments are made from the plan to participating employees upon submitting a request for reimbursement of eligible expenses actually incurred by the participant. All assets of the plan are held by the City. The plan is administered by an independent contract administrator for child care and medical expense reimbursements, and by the City for health insurance premiums. The plan is included in the financial statements as an Expendable Trust Fund. All plan property and income attributable to that property is solely the property of the City, subject to the claims of the City’s general creditors. Participants ’ rights under the plan are equal to those of general creditors of the City in an amount equal to the eligible health care and dependent care expenses incurred by the participants. The City believes that it is unlikely that it will use tlie assets to satisfy the claims of general creditors in the future. -43- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 8 - DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE A. Plan Description All full-time and certain part-time employees of the City of Orono are covered by defmed benefit plans administered by the Public Employees ’ Retirement Association of Minnesota (PERA). PERA administers the Public Employees ’ Retirement Fund (PERF) and the Public Employees ’ Police and Fire Fund (PEPFF) which are cost-sharing, multiple-employer retirement plans. These plans are established and administered in accordance with Minnesota Stamtes, Chapters 353 and 356. PERF members belong to either the Coordinated Plan or tl .e Basic Plan. Coordinated Plan members are covered by Social Security and Basic Plan members are not. All new members must participate in the Coordinated Plan. All police officers, fire fighters, and peace officers who qualify for membership by statute are covered by the PEPFF. PERA provides retirement benefits as well as disability benefits to members, and benefits to survivors upon death of eligible members. Benefits are established by state statute, and vest after three years of credited service. The defined retirement benefits are based on a member ’s highest average salary for any five successive years of allowable service, age, and years of credit at termination of service. Two methods are used to compute benefits for PERF’s Coordinated and Basic Plan members, ‘fhe retiring member receives the higher of a step-rate benefit accrual formula (Method 1) or a level accrual formula (Method 2). Under Method 1, the annuity accrual rate for a Basic Plan member is 2.0% of the average salary for each of the first 10 years of service and 2.5% for each remaining year. For a Coordinated Plan member, the annuity accrual rate is 1.0% of the average salary for each of the first 10 years and 1.5% for each remaining year. Using Method 2, the annuity accrual rate is 2.5% of the average salary for Basic Plan members and 1.5% for Coordinated Plan members. For PEPFF members, the annuity accrual rate is 2.65% for each year of service. For all PEPFF members and for PERF members whose annuity is calculated using Method 1, a full annuity is available when age plus years of service equal 90. A reduced retirement annuity is also available to eligible members seeking early retirement. There are different types of annuities available to members upon retirement. A normal annuity is a lifetime annuity that ceases upon the death of the retiree - no survivor annuity is payable. There are also various types of joint and survivor annuity options available which will reduce the monthly normal annuity amount, because the annuity is payable over joint lives. Members may also leave their contributions in the fund upon termination of public service in order to qualify for a deferred annuity at retirement age. Refunds of contributions are available at any time to members who leave public service, but before retirement benefits begin. The benefit provisions stated in the previous paragraphs of this section are current provisions and apply to active plan participants. Vested, terminated employees who are entitled to benefits but are not receiving them yet are bound by the provisions in effect at the time they last terminated their public service. -44- 11 I t *'4 • I t « ri j ^ j f • ( ► • t » • * { • * j r i^ It? Sf. I ‘ k ¥ f-’' H 3 f }•L* CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 8 - DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE (CONTINUED) PERA issues a publicly available financial repon that includes financial statements and required supplementary information for PERF and PEPFF. That repon may be obtained by writing to PERA, 514 St. Peter Street #200, St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 or by calling (612) 296-7460 or 1-800-652-9026. ’ B. Funding Policy Miimesota Stamtes Chapter 353 sets the rates for employer and employee contributions. These statutes are established and amended by the state legislature. The City makes annual contributions to the pea«ion plans equal to the amount required by state statutes. PERF Basic Plan members and Coordinated Plan members are required to contribute 8.23% and 4.23%, respectively, of their annual covered salary. PEPFF members are required to contribute 7.60% of their annual covered salary. The City of Orono is required to contribute the following percentages of annual covered payroll: 10.73% for Basic Plan PERF members 4.48% for Coordinated Plan PERF members, and 11.40% for PEPFF members. The City ’s contributions for the years ended December 31, 1996, 1995, and 1994 were $131,818, $127,447, and $123,339, respectively, equal to the contractually required contributions for each year as set by statute. NOTE 9 - INDIVIDUAL FUND DISCLOSURES A. Interfund Receivables and Payables at Year-End Interfund Interfund Receivables Payables General Fund $$ 12,295 »» mtJ Debt Service Fund —j 1995 Refunding Bonds Capital Project Funds 12,295 - i Minnesota State-Aid Streets Construction 157,800 Permanent Improvement Revolving 157,800 $ 170.095 $ 170.095 B. Deficit Fund Balance The Minnesota State-Aid Streets Construction Capital Project Fund had a deficit fund balance of $105,713 at December 31, 1996. This deficit will be eliminated through reimbursements of project costs from state-aid construction revenue or transfers from other funds. -45- I r * i 1 ! CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 9 - INDIVIDUAL FUND DISCLOSURES (CONTINUED) C. Reservations and Designations of Fund Balances For various reasons, certain funds have a portion of their fund equity reserved or designated for specific purposes. A discussion of each such item as it appears on the Combined Balance Sheet follows: Reservation of Fund Balance ** Reserved for Debt Service - This reserve represents resources which are legally restricted to provide financial resources to pay principal and interest on a specific bond issue. Designated for Unreserved Fund Balances Designated for Emergency Contingencies - This amount in the Permanent Improvement Revolving Capital Project Fund represents fund balances which have been designated by the City Council to be segregated as an emergency source of funds. Designated for Road/Bridge/Stonnwater Projects - The amount in the Permanent Improvement Revolving Capital Project Fund represents fund balance that has been designated for specific road, bridge, and stormwater improvement projects. * Designated for Capital Outlay - These amounts represent fund balances which are committed to pay for capital outlay in the Special Revenue Fu.ids. Designated for Debt Service These amounts represent fund balances in the Debt Service Funds which are presently committed to provide financial resources to pay principal and interest on the City’s general obligation bonds. Designated for Vacation/Severance Benefits - This amouiM m the General Fund represents fund balance which has been designated for payment of the e.ttimated long-term liability for vacation and severance benefits. -46- II o > I fa li • I ' »i m •I II N N •1 ti 11 •i m It * I • I . i- J'V- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 10 - FUND TRANSFERS The following transfers were made during the year ended December 31,1996: A. Operating Transfers Funds «Transferred From Transferred To Amount Description General Fund Special Revenue Fund -$ 97,500 To fmance capital outlay Improvement and expenditures. Equipment Capital Outlay , - i General Fund Capital Project Fund -100,000 To finance capital outlay j ^ i Permanent Improvement expenditures. Revolving Special Revenue Fund -Debt Service Fund -130,000 To finance current debt Building Capital Outlay 1991 Public Facilities service payments. Revenue Bonds --Sewer Operating Water Operating 70,000 To finance current debt service payments of the 1 1995 Refunding Bonds. Capital Project Fund -General Fund 32,100 To reimburse general 1^2 Stubbs Bay Sewer administrative charges. Construction ;Capital Project Fund <-Capital Project Fund -25,100 To reimburse preliminary 1S?92 Stubbs Bay Sewer Permanent Improvement project costs for legal. Construction Revolving engineering, and city staff labor. $ 454,700 -47- I iiintilliiiiii] mlii itrt CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 10 - FUND TRANSFERS (CONTINUED) B. Residual Equity Transfers Funds _____ Transferred From Transferred To Amount Description Capital Project Fund - Debt Service Fund - $ 136,993 To close 1992 Stubbs Bay 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer 1992 Improvement Bonds Sewer Construction Capital Construction Project Fund. Debt Service Fund - Debt Service Fund - 1985 Improvement Bonds 1995 Refunding Bonds 138,248 To close 1985 Improvement Bonds Debt Service Fund. $ 275,241 NOTE 11 - SEGMENT INFORMATION FOR ENTERPRISE FUNDS The City provides services which are accounted for in the Enterprise Funds. The segment information for these Enterprise Funds for the year ended December 31, 1996 is as follows: Gross profit and operating revenue Depreciation expense Operating income (loss) Income (loss) before operating transfers Operating transfers in (out) Net income (loss) Property, plant, and equipment - additions Property, plant and equipment - deletions Net working capital Bonds payable Total assets Total equity Property tax revenues 48- ! ll II • I f ’ Water Operating Sewer Operating Golf Course Operating Total $251,538 $621,235 $192,353 $1,065,126 r $64,342 $184,730 $8,416 $257,488 r* $1,354 $(143,810)$47,695 $(94,761)1 $77,514 $(50,281)$57,016 $84,249 $70,000 $(70,000)$-$— $147,514 $(120,281)$57,016 $84,249 $-$1,888,734 $20,905 $1,909,639 r* $1,036 $2,168 $7,698 $10,902 $265,383 $1,773,129 $239,979 $2,278,491 $784,145 $765,855 $-$1,550,000 $2,489,820 $8,119,551 $468,817 $11,078,188 0- $1,668,668 $7,211,210 S 458,110 $9,337,988 $90,175 $3,391 $-$93,566 ■'3 1 • t '■ t - r/-‘. i r< CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 12 - PROPRIETARY FUNDS ’ CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL This balance represents the cost of property contributed to the Enterprise Funds by the City, less depreciation thereon charged to operations. Changes occurring in this account during the year were as follows: : Water Operating Sewer Operating Golf Course Operating Total Balance - beginning of year $ 1,364,916 $ 3,818,479 $ 130,854 $ 5,314,249 1 Assets contributed -1,801,793 1,396 1,803,189 Less depreciation on contributed assets (32,886)(158,895)(793)(192,574) Balance - end of year $ 1,332,030 $ 5,461.377 $ 131,457 $ 6,924,864 NOTE 13 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES A. General Amounts recorded or receivable from state agencies are subject to agency audit and adjustment. Any disallowed claims, including amounts already collected, may constitute a liability of the applicable funds. The amount, if any, of claims which may be disallowed by the grantor agencies cannot be determined at this time although the City expects such amounts, if any, to be immaterial. B. Construction During the year ended December 31, 1996, the City awarded certain contracts for various construction projects. The City ’s commitment for uncompleted work on these contracts at December 31, 1996 was approximately $42,669. C. Facility Lease During the year ended December 31, 1991, the City entered into an unconditional lease with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Orono for the City Hall and the police and public works facilities. The lease, with an option to purchase, continues until February 1, 2008 or until terminated through cancellation by not appropriating sufficient funds for payment, defeasance, default, or purchase of the project by the City. The City is responsible for the real estate taxes, insurance, utilities, and maintenance of the property. The rent expense in 1996 was approximately $402,455. -49- i CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1996 NOTE 13 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (CONTINllED) Future minimum rental commitments under the lease are as follows: The lease purchase payments will equal the principal and interest due on the 1991 - HRA Public Facilities Bonds issued to construct the facilities. -50- .-a»r -I—. • i f i I i I I Year Amount 1997 $ 402,700 ¥ , 1998 406,903 1999 405,017 2000 406,990 2001 407,755 M Thereafter 2,889,740 $ 4,919,105 m ^’4 IN n •m u r» i v»• Rnancial Section • ComMning and Individual Fund and Account Group Statamantt J f * \ . I ■ n GENERAL FUND The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City. It is used to account for all fmancial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. lU -51- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Fund Comparative Balance Sheet As of December 31,1996 and 1995 -52- 1996 Exhibit B-1 1995 Assets Cash and temporary investments $ 1,587,878 $ 1,730,921 Receivables Accounts 1,265 16,770 Accrued interest 77,065 102,292 Delinquent taxes 44,667 41,516 Delinquent special assessments 5,195 5,195 Contract for deed 5,560 10,025 Due from other governmental units 45,218 42,020 Prepaid items 12,847 35,603 Deferred charge - assessments on property owned by City 12,295 15,375 Other assets 3,740 1,163 Total assets $ 1.795.730 $ 2.000.880 Liabilities and Fund Equity Liabilities Accounts payable $ 52,842 $ 90,262 Accrued salaries payable 23,900 74,961 Due to other funds 12,295 15,375 Due to other governmental units 100,185 106,84< Deferred revenue Contract for deed 5,560 10,025 Delinquent taxes 44,667 41,516 Special assessments 5,195 5,195 Total liabilities 244,644 344,179 Fund equity Fund balance Unreserved Designated for vacation/severance benefits 151,520 140,913 Undesignated 1,399,566 1,515,788 Total fund equity 1,551,086 1,656,701 Total liabilities and fund equity $ 1.795.730 $ 2.000.880 11 11 M I . a a s IIm 7 j 11 L#rH- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit B-2 General Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31,1995) Revenue Property taxes Property Penalties and interest Total property taxes Special assessments Licenses and permits Licenses Permits Total licenses and permits Intergovernmental Federal emergency preparedness State grants Homestead and agricultural credit aid Police town aid Police training reimbursement Municipal state-aid streets County grant - recycling Other Total intergovernmental Charges for services General government Public safety Total charges for ser\'ices Fines and forfeits Other Interest earned on investments Rents Refunds and reimbursements Contract for deed - land Miscellaneous Total other Total revenue 1996 1995 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget Actual $ 1,647,940 $ 1,641,943 $ (5,997)$ 1,644,394 46 y,647,946'~ 1,641,943 (5,997)1,644,‘4’46 —20 20 460 14,500 170,500 185,000 8,019 199,258 207,277 (6,481) 28,758 2’2,277~ 15,633 186,562 202,195 4,500 4,500 —4,287 254,710 80,000 6,000 84,000 13,420 200 442,830 254,710 88,283 5,159 85,418 15,090 1,500 ’454,660 8,283 (841) 1,418 1,670 1,300 11.830' 270,705 82,261 5,518 83,976 14,114 3,200 464^061* 275,625 639,645 915,276 320,726 656,165 976,891 45,101 16,520 6T,62I 286,500 641,621 928,121 6U00 71,556 10,356 80,610 59,285 5,400 22,695 3,335 4,800 95,515 68,449 5,400 36,513 4,464 5,567 120,393 9,164 13,818 1,129 _ 767 24,878 62,347 5,400 24,056 3,333 7,384 i02;520 3,347,755 3,472,740 124,985 3,422,407 (continued) -53- t 1 ? 1 ! I t » Exhibit B-2 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) (continued) Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31,1995) 1996 1995 f • Over (Under)! Budget Actual Budget Actual Expenditures General government Mayor and council Personal services 16,270 16,063 (207)16,139 Supplies 50 —(50)— Other services and charges 40,305 40,457 152 39,699 Total mavor and council 56,625 56,520 “ (105)55.838 Administration - Personal services 176,115 178,144 2,029 173.045 Supplies 400 176 (224)157 Other services and charges 12,700 10,860 (1,840)11,272 Total administration 189,215 .....189,780“(35)184,474 Elections Personal services 5,800 4,980 (820)— Supplies 50 307 257 — Other services and charges 815 1,230 415 — Total electirns 6,665 6,517 (148)— Assessing Other services and charges 77,000 77,000 —74,160 Finance Personal services 143,180 143,436 256 124,677 Supplies 50 34 (16)10 i Other services and charges 5,800 5,475 (325)5,789 Total finance r49^630 148,945 (85)i 30.476 Legal i Other services and charges 92,080 65,260 (26,820)105,403 Human services Other services and charges 15,760 15,351 (409)14,271 (continued) -54- 1 i i. r^ 7 ' 'mWK: ;J tv .' n M CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) (continued) Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31,1995) Expenditiirts (continued) General government (continued) Central services Supplies Other services and charges Total central ser\'ices Total general government Public safety Police protection Personal services Supplies Other services and charges Capital outlay Total police protection Fire protection Contracted fire protection Protective inspection and zoning Personal services Supplies Other services and charges Total protective inspection and zoning Emergency preparedness Supplies Other services and charges Total emergency preparedness -55- Exhibit B-2 1996 1995 Budget Actual_ Over (Under) Budget Actual 11,000 152,490 _ 163,490 11,197 149,183 ' 160,380 197 (3,307) _(3,1JP) 16,468 178,583 7 195P5|" 749.865 719,153 (30,712)759,673 994,300 52,400 146,185 49,680 1,242,565 1,005,342 47,073 131,453 43,518 1,227,386 11,042 (5,327) (14.732) (6,162) (15,179) 1,024,616 51,053 129,503 30,780 1,235,952 198,725 198,719 (6)186,479 290,380 1,500 10,585 289,638 1,130 9,497 (742) (370) (1,088) 279,026 875 9,161 302,465 300,265 (2,200)289,062 2,000 148 1,444 148 (556)2,251 2,000 1,592 (408)2,25 i (continued) i I Exhibit B-2 CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA General Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) (continued) Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31,1995) Expenditures (continued) Public safety (continued) Animal control Personal services Supplies Other services and charges Total animal control Total public safety Streets Personal services Supplies Other services and charges Total streets Parks and recreation Personal services Supplies Other services and charges Total parks and recreation Recycling Personal services Supplies Other ser«'ices and charges Total recycling Miscellaneous Engineering Special services - consulting/police Contingency Total miscellaneous Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures • ^ lAiailhi itlaalh -56- U II l! 1996 1995 li Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget Actual 12,250 11,124 (1,126)9,404 300 33 (267)180 mm 2,150 486 (1.664)872 mi14,700 11,643 (3.057)10^456 1,760,455 1,739,605 (20,850)1,724,200 241,850 240,551 (1,299)233,740 94,850 108,840 13,990 73,913 *4 146,260 119,501 (26,759)115,957 482,960 468,892 (14,068)423,610 PI 26,770 22,732 (4038)23,126 3,200 3,552 352 1,505 3 21,900 24,858 2,958 25,818 H 5i,870 ' “si,142 (728)50,449 II H 1,685 1,201 (484)2,253 350 —(350)—II 74,120 67,433 (6,687)68,429 J76,155"‘68,634 (7,521)70,682 16,045 16,042 (3)24,060 46,500 46.497 (3)39,966 316,405 302,990 (13,415)18,724 tf 378,950 365,529 (13,421)82,750 m 3,500,255 3,412,955 (87,300)3,111,364 11 m (152,500)59,785 212,285 311,043 II mi (continued)H * ? I. JJ r ^. I’3 _j ■ ) oJ f] n Exhibit B-2 CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA General Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) (continued) Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31,1995) 1996 1995 Other financing sources (uses) Operating transfers in Operating transfers (out) Total other financing sources (uses) Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget Actual (197,^00) (197,500) 32,100 (197,500) ^6M00) 32,100 32,100 (84,900) ' (84,900) Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other financing sources over expenditures and other financing uses $_.C350,Q00) (105,615) $ 244,38 5 226,143 Fund balance Beginning of year 1 ,656,701 End of year $ ! ,551,086 1,430j^5^ $J,656,701 -57- -<mM * ^ 1 "A >; I*'-- . I I r THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 0 \ ^ * i ■ • < iM •H m • i n f I ♦ I r —5 t i f t f * y SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special Revenue Funds are used to account for revenue derived from specific revenue sources that are legally restricted to expenditures for specific purposes. Park Fund - used ic account for park dedication fees received to be used for land acquisition and park development. Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund - used to replace non-enterprise, non-police City equipment. Bidlding Capital Outlay Fund - used to partially finance building facilities construction and additions through transfers from the General Fund. -58- r p W rr i .■ ir: ! Exhibit C-l CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Special Revenue Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals as of December 31 ,1995) -59- 11 * I It Improvement Building 1 and Equipment Capital Totals !Park Capital Outlay Outlay 1996 1995 Assets 1 i Cash and temporary investments $ 207,856 $ 387,435 $ 2,404,755 $ 3,000,046 $ 2,996,000 1 Receivables ! i Accrued interest 8,798 10,016 83,598 102,412 158,825 ! i Total assets $ 216.654 $ 397.451 $ 2.488.353 $ 3.102.458 $ 3.154.825 Liabilities and Fund Balance 1 U. Liabilities > i Accounts payable $ 21,708 $ 5,901 $ 913 $ 28,522 $ 20,523 — ■ Fund balance 1 i Unreserved ( M Designated for 3,134,302^»■ 1 '■•r ^capital outlay 194,946 391,550 2,487,440 3,073,936 r“' f-f Total liabilities w.„ j and fund balance $ 216.654 $ 397.451 $ 2.488.353 $ 3.102.458 $ 3.154.825 . N # • ^ CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Special Revenue Funds Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1995) Exhibit C-2 I f ^ < Paric Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Building Capital Outlay Totals 1996 1995 Revenue Intergovernmental5State grant $$$$$ 18,658Other Interest earned on investments 16,369 19,390 141,823 177,582 174,056User fees —4,272 4.272 3,597Park dedication fees 30,864 —30,864 24,322Miscellaneous——3,042 3,042 30,419■ i Total revenue 47,233 23,662 144,865 215,760 251,052 Expenditures , t Current Miscellaneous ——7,765 7,765 18,423Capital outlay 119,639 110,483 5,739 235,861 185,978 i!Total expenditures 119,639 110,483 13,504 243,626 204,401 Excess (deficiency) %of revenue over expenditures (72,406)(86,821)131,361 (27,866)46,651 Other financing sources (uses) ; »Operating transfers in —97,500 97,500 84.900Operating transfers (out)——(130,000)(130,000)(123,000)Total other financing ,soiures (uses)—97,500 (130,000)(32,500)(38,100) Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other w financing sources over expenditures and other financing uses (72,406)10,679 1,361 (60,366)8,551 Fund balance Beginning of year 267,352 380,871 2,486,079 3,134,302 3,125,751 End of year $ 194.946 $ 391.550 $ 2.487.440 $ 3.073.936 $ 3,134,302 -60- ■ >3 w Exhibit C-3 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA ParicFund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31,1995) -61- I • 1996 1995 Over (Under) Budget Actual Budget Actual Revenue Intergovernmental State grant $$$$ 18,658 1• Other Interest earned on investments 17,500 16,369 (1.131)16,599 Paric dedication fees 25,000 30,864 5,864 24,322 i__ Total revenue 42,500 47,233 4,733 59,579 Expenditures Current Miscellaneous ———649 Capital outlay 268,540 119,639 (148,901)96,276 Total expenditures 268,540 119,639 (148,901)96,925 Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures $(226,040)(72,406)S 153.634 (37,346) Fund balance e* • Beginning of year 267,352 304,698 ^ « End of year $ 194.946 S 267.352 r- ’ 4 I * \ ■ t \u CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1995) Exhibit C-4 .1 \1996 1995 'Ml.*Over (Under) Budget Actual Budget Actual Revenue Other Interest earned on investments $ 17,900 $ 19,390 $ 1,490 $ 17,028 User fees 3,080 4,272 1,192 3,597 Total revenue 20,980 23,662 2,682 20,625 Smm Expenditures , Capital outlay f 1 General government Smmrn‘ Administration 22,700 22,498 (202)10,157 Finance)260 226 (34)35,416 * '1 Public safety '>* ■' Building and zoning 7,545 7,383 (162)6,721 Police protection 42,000 41,986 (14) 1 Streets 38,160 37,462 (698)16,672 Parks and recreation 975 928 (47)300 Total expenditures 111,640 110,483 (1,157)69,266 Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures (90,660)(86,821)3,839 (48,641) Other flnancing sources Operating transfer in 97,500 97,500 —84,900n _ _i Excess of revenue and other financing sources over expenditures $ 6.840 10,679 $ 3.839 36,259 I Fund balance Beginning of year 380,871 344,612 End of year $ 391.550 $ 380.871 -62- H tf. “ - ' i .4 4 touktim >' CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit C-5 Building Capital Outlay Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) Year Ended December 31, 1996 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December J 1,1995) -63* 1 I n II 1996 1995 Over iM (Under)li Budget Actual Budget Actual Revenue Other Interest earned on investments $ 139,000 $ 141,823 $ 2,823 $ 140,429 w Miscellaneous —3,042 3,042 30,419 Total revenue 139,000 “■ [44,865 5,865 170,848 Expenditures Current Miscellaneous 7,765 7,765 17,774 Capital outlay ; General government General government buildings 8,085 5,739 (2,346)20,436 Total expenditures r5”850'13,504 (2,346)3”8,210 §4 Excess of revenue over expenditures 123,150 131,361 8,211 132,638 • 1 Other financing uses m Operating transfers (out)(130,000)(130,000)(123,000) Excess (deficiency) of revenue M over expenditures and other financing uses .$-__.(^85Q)1,361 $___J,211 9,638 mi Fund balance Beginning of year 2,486,079 2,476,441 ♦4 End of year Ji2,487,440 $ 2,486^079 I I % f iiiYh iiltfnnftlfl ..... R' I *"W s -.. •' I i 'I DEBT SERVICE FUNDS Debt Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources used for the payment of principal, interest, and fiscal agent fees on general long-term debt. 1 ; = t ^ -64- I III « > I ■ h r CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Debt Ser/ice Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1995) Assets Cash and temporary investments Cash and investments held by trustee Receivables Accrued interest Delinquent taxes Delinquent special assessments Deferred special assessments Due from other funds Due from other goveriiments Total assets Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities Accounts payable Deferred revenue Delinquent taxes Special assessments Special assessments on City property Total liabilities Fund balance Reserved for debt service Unreserved Designated for debt service Total fund balance Total liabilities and fund balance -65- 1991 i ‘A- -■ . # I *« 1982 1985 Public m Improve Improve Facilities » • ment ment Revenue Bonds Bonds Bonds L $ 42,689 $$ 137,791 ——413,023 iQ.<n4 10,434 59 -6,018 1 8,831 -— 27 1,369 j % 61,640 $$ 568,635 *—• $$$ 1,080 1 > pm 5 59 6,018 - 8,831 —— 8,8W -7,098 t 1 ——413,023 52,750 __148,514 ♦ • i i 52,750 —561,537 ; 5_61,640 $$ 568,635 i .. < t • % ? • { ^ r nil ■ I i I i • • •» I 1 S:; wm Exhibit D-1 i V 1992 Improve ment 1995 Refund ing Totals Bonds Bonds 1996 1995 $ 761,835 $ 200,739 $ 1,143,054 $ 898,684 —413,023 413,109 §12,129 9,517 42,114 54,074 534 1,215 7,826 6,429 4,843 4,958 9,801 17,882 570,716 36,134 615,681 762,703 —12,295 12,295 15,375 6,137 276 7,809 ______9,163 $ 1,356.194 $ 265,134 $ 2,251,603 $_ 2.,77^419 $$$ 1,080 $ 7,057 534 1.215 7,826 6,429 575,559 41,092 625,482 780,585 J —12,295 12,295 15,375576,093~54,602 646.683 809,446 » ——413,023 413,109 !780,101 210,532 1,191,897 954,864 __ 780J 01 210,532 1,604,920 1,367,973 £XJ|^^1?4.$ 265J34 $ 2,251^603.^$^2,177,419 -66- i -1 1 ^ ............... Jk CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Debt Service Funds Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31,1995) 1982 1985 1991 Public ImproveImprov'e-Facilities ment ment Revenue Bonds Bonds Bonds Revenue Property taxes Property $ 4,512 $$ 226,919 Pw'nalties and interest --— Special assessments -—— Intergovernmental Homestead and agricultural credit aid --35,442 Other Interest earned on investments 2,553 -26,452 Miscellaneous ——— Total revenue 7,065 —■ ~288,81T Expenditures Deb? service Principal retirement 15,000 —190,000 Interest on bonds 5,231 —212,455 Fiscal agent fees 235 -2,155 Miscellaneous 135 -- Total expenditures 20,601 ---------- -----404,610 Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures (13,536)—(115,797) Other financing sources (uses) Bond proceeds (net)—-— Payment to refund bond issue - - - Operating transfers in --130,000 Total other financing sources (uses)——130,000 Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other financing sources over expenditures and other financing sources (uses)(13,536)—14,203 Fund balance Beginning of year 66,286 138,248 547,334 Residual equity transfers in ——— Residual equity transfers (out)—(138,248)— End of year $ 52,750 $$ 561,537 -67- j I r •mM** -I I t,.,. J Exhibit D-2 i * •-* « 1992 Improve ment 1995 Refund ing Totals !Bonds Bonds 1996 1995 $ 23,748 $ 45,821 $ 301,000 $ 287,4862,283 —2,283 1,445L;154,773 25,783 180,556 173,983 ; i —-35,442 35,270 wl 31,285 10,440 70,730 77,044 ;625 -625 50,375; w«>212,714 82,044 590,636 6l5,6b3 i 95,000 300,000 340,000 ;87,627 8,647 313,960 353,121389332,812 4,4072,695 1,080 3,910 8,934185,711 9,760 620,682 706,462' — 27,003 72,284 (30,046)(80,859) ——357,899 ^I • -——(360,000) —130,000 123,000 ——130.000 1210,899 w* ! 27,003 72,284 99,954 40,040 •***?616,105 —1,367,973 1,354,259136,993 138,248 275,241 ——(138,248)- (L6^326) $ 1,367,973 —>$ 780.101 $ 210.532 $_L604.920 -68- (! • *: ■i f f m TfflS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK --------------------------------------------------■—n~r 1 \ \ ,1 r- •r, f / ^ -.1. I' "^.1 a ■f. ! <K. : t !J CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS Capital "Voject Funds are used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition construction of major capital facilities. Minnesota State-Aid Streets Construction Fund - used to account for state-aid allotments used by the City for improvement projects to designated roads and bridges within the City. Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund - used to account for construction costs prior to obtaining permanent fmancing. 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Construction Fund - used to account for construction costs of the Stubbs Bay area sanitary sewer system. -69- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Capital Project Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1995) Assets Cash and temporary investments Receivables Accrued interest Delinquent taxes Delinquent special assessments Deferred special assessments Due from other funds Due from other govemn. mtal units Total assets Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities Accounts and contracts payable Due to other funds Deferred revenue Delinquent taxes Special assessments Total liabilities Fund balance (deficit) Unreserved Designated for emergency contingencies Designated for road/bridge/stormwater projects Undesignated Total fund balance (deficit) Total liabilities and fund balance -70- Minnesota State-Aid Streets Construction Permanent Improvement Revolving 1 1 n n m I H $ 223 $412,768 n —35,497 —611 m —1,322 28,786 27,119 —157,800 II101,184 1,175 $ 130,193 S.-636,292 9\ •1 $ 49,320 $67,928 ti j 157,800 1 l4 6II l!^ 28,786 28,441 235,906 96,980 i( li —325,000 m —172,906 (105,713)41,406 t . (105,71^)—539,312 M $ 130,193_$636,292 Pi 1 1- t 4 r ~rir m \ 1 « Exhibit E-1 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Totals Construction 1996 1995 : -*n $$412,991 $495,361 •W 35,497 52,157 —611 — —1,322 2,552 -55,905 74,881 -157,800 135,000 •—102,359 202,750 . m4 $1-766,485 $962,701 -rj il S $117,248 $358,942 —157,800 135,000 611 —57,227 77,433 ‘H* ••332,886 571,375" 325,000 325,000 —172,906 122,830 —(64,307)(56,504) —433,599 391,326 $—$766,485 $962,701 -71- ^I’l I ___ CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Capital Project Funds Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1995> Revenue Property taxes Special assessments Intergovernmental State aid for construction Other Interest earned on investments Miscellaneous Total revenue Expenditures Capital outlay Professional services Construction costs Miscellaneous Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures Other financing sources (uses) Operating transfers in Operating transfers (out) Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other financing sources over expenditures and other financing uses Fund balance (deficit) Begiiming of year Residual equity transfers (out) End of year -72- Minnesoi State-Aid Streets Construction S 5,308 212,440 1,097 218,845 • ... Permai.vnt Improvement Revolving $ 39,410 13,213 20,289 566 73,478 ¥ ♦ t i I 4,979 67,080 I 54,036 63,625 r 1 1 f 59,015 130,705 159,830 (57,227) 1 ; i i. ] i —125,100 ? ! 1 ! i ' i —125,100 ;1 : 159,830 67,873 i (265,543)471.439 j i $ (105,713)$ 539,312 1 i - - r m i U Exhibit E-2 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Totals Construction 1996 1995 $S 39,410 $ —18,521 15,102 212,440 338,601 11,023 31,312 37,566 —1,663 372 11,023 303,346 391,641 — 72,059 52,492 1 1 1,500 119,161 679,038 wJ 760 760 1,511 2.260 191,980 733,041 5 8,763 111,366 (341,400) mmm 125,100 (57,200)(57,200)— (57,200)67,900 — — —1 f ♦ (48,437)179,266 (341,400) wJ —s 185,430 391,326 732,726 !(136,993)(136,993)— $$ 433.599 $ 391.326 -73- r I f THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK ; m"I II In L r L 1 «»ir 'h « < • I . • I wm I I ENTERPRISE FUNDS Enterprise Funds an; used to account for the operations of self-supr>orting activities which render services or goods to the public. The accounting records are maintainea accrual basis of accounting. Water Operating Fund - used to account for the provision of *' services to the residents of the City who have water ser»^ice available. Sewer Operatiu^ Fund - used to account for the provision of sewer services to the residents of the City who have sai.itary sewer service available. Golf Course- Operating Fund - used to account for the golf course operation sales and related expenses.N ; j -74- CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Exhibit F-l Enterprise Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1995) » I Golf Water Sewer Course Totals • ' Operating Operating Oj)erating 1996 1995 Assets » . Current assets Cash and temporary investments $ 283,714 S 1,405,826 $ 240,997 S 1,930,537 $ 1,129,699 Accounts receivable —329,950 —329,950 288,831 — Accrued interest receivable 5,892 44,733 97 50,722 54,499 Delinquent taxes receivable 1,688 236 —1,924 1,341 — Delinquent special assessments receivable —18,099 —18,099 19,976 . Deferred special assessments, current ponion 31,597 13,708 —45,305 45,305 W— Due from other governmental units 583 27,836 193 28,612 29,096 Inventory ——2,268 2,268 2,289 Prepaid items 112 262 —374 3,950 Total current assets 323,586 1,840,650 243,55^1407,791 1,574,986 Restricted assets Cash and temporary investments ————2,324,845 — Accrued interest receivable ————37,626 Total restricted assets -———2,362,471 Other assets, less current portion Deferred special assessments 157,984 68,539 -226,523 271,828 Due from other governmental units —231,305 —231,305 255,089 Discount on revenue bonds ————10,416 Total other assets 157,984 299;84V —451828 537,333' Property, plant, and equipment i Land and improvements 57,132 16,654 127,977 201,763 201,319 Buildings and improvements 756,594 31,014 51,550 839,158 866,330 Equipment 77,843 71,879 116,942 266,664 224,852 Distribution/collection system 2,083,535 8,582,393 —10,665,928 8,864,177 Work in progress —86,497 —86,497 — 2,975,104 8,788,437 296,469 I2,()66,0I()10,156,678 -- Less accumulated depreciation 966,854 2,809,380 71,207 3,847,441 3.596,456 Net property, plant, and equipment 2,008,250 5,979,057 225,26f 8,212,569 6,560,222 Total assets S 2,489,820 $8,119,551 S 468^817.S 11,078,188 $ 11,035,012,r- I : ; i : ^ -75- m M 1 R i ‘r-: ! i».'> si ■■'>1 Exhibit F-I Water Operating Golf Sewer Course Operating Operating Totals 1996 1995 Liabilities and Fund Equity Current liabilities Accounts payable $ Salaries and compensated absences payable Accrued interest payable Due to other governmental units Revenue bonds payable _ Total current liabilities Current liabilities payable from restricted assets Revenue bonds payable Accrued interest payable Total current liabilities payable from restricted assets 10,229 $ 18,295 $ 2,722 S 31,246 $ 64,037 4,257 4,233 854 9,344 10,529 13,221 12,913 —26,134 — 1,239 3,500 —4,739 33.338 29,257 28,580 —57,837 — 58,203 67,521'3,576 129.300 i 07,904 1,750,000 _—-47,756 _1,797.756 Long'term liabilities, less current portion Revenue bonds payable Compensated absences payable Deferred credits Total long-term liabilities 754.888 8,061 737,275 10,597 92.948 7,131 1,492,163 25,789 92,948 1.550.000 26,323 102,479 762,949 840,820 7,131 1,610,900 1,678,802 Total liabilities 821,152 908,341 10,707 1,740,200 3,584.462 nd equity Contributed capital 1,332,030 5,461,377 131,457 6,924.864 5,314,249 Retained earnings Unreserved 336,638 1,749,833 326,653 2.413,124 2.136.301 Total fund equity 1,668,668 7,211,210 458,110 9,337,988 7,450,550 Total liabilities and fund equity $ 2.489,820 S 8.119.551 $ 468,817 $ If.078,188 $ 11,035,012 -76- Exhibit F-2 t t CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Enterprise Funds Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Year Ended December 31, 1996 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1995) Sales and cost of sales Sales Cost of sales Gross profit Operating revenue Metered water sales User charges Greens fees Equipment rental Other Total operating revenue Total gross profit and operating revenue Operating expenses Personal services Salaries and wages Retirement contributions Health and life insurance contributions Purchased water Sewer disposal charges Professional services Operating and maintenance supplies Heat, light, and power Depreciation Rent and equipment Maintenance and repairs Administrative and other expense Administrative charges from General Fund Communications Office supplies Printing, publishing, and advertising Data processing Insurance Other expenses Total operating expenses Operating income (loss) Water Operating 249,504 2,034 251,538 251,538 75,136 8,765 1,362 13,092 3,601 19,250 26,759 64,342 19,173 5,825 1,903 98 551 174 9,027 1,126 250,184 1,354 Sewer Operating - $ 619,169 2,066 621,235 621,235 105,281 12,354 3,177 318,940 15,699 11,748 17,141 184,730 58,356 16,840 1,331 283 1,108 193 13,257 4.607 765,045 (143,810) -77- Golf Course Operaung $ 19,163 11,315 7,848 152,947 31,523 35 184,‘505 192,353 61,930 4,524 3,772 3,075 7,891 4,092 8,416 6,977 8,452 10,350 1,381 214 5,396 16,893 1,295 14^658 47,695 Totals 1996 19,163 11,315 7,848 249,504 619,169 152,947 31,523 4,135 1.05 7,278 1,065,126 242,347 25,643 8,311 13,092 318,940 22,375 38,889 47,992 257,488 6,977 85,981 33,015 4,615 595 7,055 367 39,177 7,028 1,159,887 1995 17,728 10,467 7,261 220,848 578,149 136,809 29,084 4.8 IL 969;70I 976,962 226,020 24,045 11,291 10,878 329,536 76,262 25,780 45,496 222,246 5,456 49,270 32,080 5,836 258 5,348 11,994 37,777 37,087 1,156,660 (94,761) (179,698) (continued) I I • i 11 ♦ * •r ♦ IM M II M « I » < ¥■ ' iv's:'* :f' -1, J.ff "1 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Enterprise Funds Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings (continued) Year Ended December 31, 1996 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1995) Exhibit F-2 Golf r Water Sewer Course Totals Operating Operating_Operating 1996 __1995 Nonoperating revenue (expense) . 1 Property tax revenue 90,175 3,391 —93,566 83,794 mmU Interest earned on investments 8,014 97,015 12,573 117,602 108,267 Interest on special assessments 20,249 13,996 34,245 8,532 'Interest income from MWCC —11,160 11,160 11,998 •Amortization of deferred credits —9,531 9,531 9,530 Interest expense (41,727)(40,755)—(82,482)(115,962) Revenue bond expense (551) (549) —(1,100)(405) Loss on disposal of assets —(260)(3,252)(3,512)(9,164) Total nonoperating revenue(expense)76,160 93,529 ___9,3^1 179,0i0 96,590 Income (loss) before other ■) financing sources (uses)77,514 (50,281)57,016 84,249 (83,108) .1,I p Other financing sources (uses) Operating transfers in 70,000 —70,000 i Operating transfers (out)—(70,000)—(70,000) ^1 ■ Total other financing sources (uses)70,600 (70,000)- fT*)i Net income (loss)147,514 (120,281)57,016 84,249 (83,108) S1 Credit for depreciation on contributed equity 32,886 158,895 793 192,574 157,647 Net increase in i retained earnings 180,400 38,614 57,809 276,823 74,539 Retained earnings i Beginning of year 156,238 1,711,219 _ 268,844 2,136,301 2,061,762 End of year 5 33^6^638 $ 1,749_,833 $326^653,$^413,124 |2,136,10X -78- i*.'' ' I I 'f ■ f' Exhibit F-3 Cir»' OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Enterprise Funds Combining Statement of Cash Flows Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31,1995) Golf (continued) -79- »..v '■‘jt # I I I • i Water Operating Sewer Operating Course Operating Totals 1996 r995_'1 Cash flows from operating activities Operating income (loss)$ 1,354 S (143,810)$ 47,695 $ (94,761) $(179,698) Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash provided (used) by operating activities Depreciation 64,342 184,730 8,416 257,488 222,246 Loss on disposal of assets —(260)(3,252) (3,512) (9,164) Amortization of revenue bond discount 5,269 5,147 —10,416 1,525 Change in assets and liabilities (Increase) decrease in Accounts receivable 451 (41,570)—(41.119)(14,137) Due from other governmental units (103)780 (193)484 (7.106) Inventory ——21 21 1,310 Prepaid items 1,288 1,338 950 3,576 27,621 i Increase (decrease) in Accounts payable (6,498)(27,284)991 (32,791)54,443 Salaries and compensated absences payable 598 (770)(1,547)(1,719)3,605 Due to other governmental units (2,173)(26,426)—(28,599)30,462 Net cash provided (used) by operating activities 64,528 (48,125)53,081 69,484 131,107 \ Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Residual equity transfer in mm 26,326 L Taxes collected for revenue bond debt 89,165 3,818 -92,983 83,504 Special assessments for revenue bond debt 51,846 29,385 -81,231 52,733 Acquisition or construction of capital assets —(86,941) (19,509)(106,450)(67,736) Proceeds from sale of capital assets -—--7,299 MWee current value credit —34,944 —34,944 35,370 Principal paid on revenue bonds (885,327) (864,673) (1,750,000)(200,000) Interest paid on revenue bonds (52,666) (51,438) —(104,104) (120,300) Proceeds received from revenue bonds issued ———-1,550,000 Other charges on revenue bonds (551)(549)-(1,100)(405) Operating transfer from Sewer Fund 70,000 -—70,000 —\ Operating transfer to Water Fund —(70,000)—(70,000)- Net cash provided (used) by capital and related financing activities (727,533)(1,005,454) (19,509) (1,752,496) 1,366,791 »• •• • 4 ■y I 'ri-5 a» =z % vs . t ♦ I j ’I f I Exhibit F-3 F;: It \ i'i , } J! '• .r 1 r CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Enterprise Funds Combining Statement of Cash Flows (continued) Year Ended December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31.1995) uJ Water Operating Sewer Operating Golf Course Operating Totals 1996 1995' ■ Cash flows from investing activities Interest received on investments 18,055 122,933 18,017 159,005 82,699 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents (644,950)(930.646)51,589 (1.524,007)1,580,597 Cash and cash equivalents Beginning of year 928,664 2,336,472 189.408 3,454,544 1,873,947 End of year $ 283,714 $ 1,405,826 $ 240.997 S 1.930.537 y . 3t454,5^ 1 Cash and cash equivalents Unrestricted cash and temporary investments Restricted cash and temporar>’ investments $ 283,714 $ 1,405,826 $ 240.997 S 1,930,537 s 1,129,699 2,324,845 Total cash and cash equivalents S 283,7 14 $_L4^5j826 S 240,997 $ 1 ,930,537 S . 3i'*54,544 Supplementarj’ schedule of noncash investing, capital, and financing activities Assets contributed from other funds S - $_^Ij80l,793, $__Ij3?^ $__[,803jl89 MWee current value credit applied S__- $4.594 - $4,594 $ S 4,594 During the year ended December 31,1996, the City disposed of equipment with an adjusted book value of S3,51 2. Equipment Original price S 1,036 S 2.168 $ 7,698 S 10,902 Accumulated depreciation 1,036 —1,908 4,446 —----7,390 Loss on disposal of equipment $260 $ 3,2^s 3,512 -80- -i w-:« ' ••‘ - F ]> ■ .-. •' I I"r: M- ■' ' CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Water Operating Fund Comparative Balance Sheet As of December 31, 1996 and 1995 Assets Current assets Cash and temporary investments Accounts receivable Accrued interest receivable Delinquent taxes receivable Deferred special assessments, current portion Due from other goverrunental units Prepaid items Total current assets Restricted assets Cash and temporary investments Debt service Accrued interest receivable Debt service Total restricted assets Other assets, less current portion Deferred special assessments Discount on revenue bonds Total other assets Property, plant, and equipment Land and improvements Buildings and improvements Equipment Distribution/collection system Less accumulated depreciation Net property, plant, and equipmen* Total assets •81- 1996 Exhibit F-4 1995 I • • i ♦ * 1 S 283,714 $ 143,143 —451 5,892 6,654 1,688 678 31,597 31,597 583 480 112 1,400 323,586 184,403 1 785,521 c mmm 9,279 in —794,800 m 157,984 189,581 —5,269 ' 157,984 194,850 1 M l-l 57,132 57,132 1 tM 756,594 786,594 77,843 48,837 2,083,535 2,083,577 2,975,104 2,976,140 966,854 903,548 2,008,250 2,072,592 S 2.489.820 $ 3.246.645 4 4 f--. i Exhibit F-4 I Liabilities and Fund Equity Current liabilities Accounts payable Salaries and compensated absences payable Accrued interest payable Due to other governmental units Revenue bonds payable Total current liabilities Current liabilities payable from restricted assets Revenue bonds payable Accrued interest payable - revenue bonds Total current liabilities payable from restricted assets Long-term liabilities, less current portion Revenue bonds payable Compensated absences payable Total long-term liabilities Total liabilities Fund equity Contributed capital Retained earnings Unreserved Total fund equity Total liabilities and fund equity -82- 1996 1995 $ 10,229 4,257 13,221 1,239 29,257 $ 16,727 3,144 3,412 58,203 23,283 885,325 —24,160 909,485 754,888 784,147 8,061 8,576 762.949 792,723 821,152 1,725,491 1,332,030 1,364,916 336,638 156,238 1,668,668 1,521,154 $ 2.489.820 $ 3.246.645 -83- Exhibit F-5 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Water Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings t ' Years Ended December 31,1996 and 1995 1996 _ 1995 _i 1 Operating revenue Metered water sales $ 249,504 $ 220,848 •• Other 2,034 2,790 ^ i Total operating revenue ■ 251,538 223,638 * Operating expenses mm Salaries and wages 75,136 59,035 Retirement contributions 8,765 6,759 Health and life insurance contributions 1,362 2,847 Purchased water 13,092 10,878 Professional services 3,601 31,512 Operating and maintenance supplies 19,250 11,709 Heat, light, and power 26,759 21,454 Depreciation 64,342 64,764 * . Maintenance and repairs 19,173 6,686 Administrative charges from General Fund 5,825 5,830 Communications 1,903 2,612 Office supplies 98 — Printing, publishing, and advertising 551 117 Data processing 174 3,726 Insurance 9,027 9,154 Other expenses 1,126 6,295 r" Total operating expenses 250,184 243,378 • Operating income (loss)1,354 (19,740) Nonoperating revenue (expense) Property tax revenue 90,175 40,586 Interest earned on investments r-* Operations 8,014 5,069 i Interest on special assessments 20,249 1,178 Wm* Interest expense on revenue bonds (41,727) (58,666) Revenue bond expense (551)(205)1 Gain on disposal of assets —1,061 Total nonoperating revenue (expense)76,160 (10,972) r' Income (loss) before operating transfers 77,514 (30,717)• Operating transfers in 70,000 — Net income (loss)147,514 (30,717)— Credit for depreciation on contributed equity 32,886 32,886 ' Net increase in retained earnings 180,400 2,169 Retained earnings •• * Beginning of year 156,238 154,069 rnm0 End of year ■$J3_6.638 $ 156,23|^ ii { 3 i.. i,. CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Water Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Cash Flows Years Ended December 31,1996 and 1995 Cash flows from operating activities Operating income (loss) Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities Depreciation Gain on disposal of assets Amortization of revenue bond discount Change in assets and liabilities (Increase) decrease in Accounts receivable Due from other governmental units Prepaid items Increase (decrease) in Accounts payable Salaries and compensated absences payable Due to other governmental units Net provided by operating activities Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Residual equity transfer in Taxes collected for revenue bond debt Special assessments collected for revenue bond debt Acquisition or construction of capital assets Proceeds from sale of capital assets Principal paid on revenue bonds Interest paid on revenue bonds Proceeds received from revenue bonds issued Other charges on revenue bonds Operating transfer from Sewer Fund Net cash provided (used) by capital and related financing activities Cash flows from investing activities Interest received on investments Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents Cash and cash equivalents Beginning of year End of year 1996 64,342 5,269 451 (103) 1,288 (6,498) 598 64,528 89,165 51,846 (885,327) (52,666) (551) 70,000 18,055 928,664 Exhibit F-6 1995 $ 1,354 $ (19,740) 64,764 1,061 772 246 (480) 440 12,591 2,245 536 62,435 26,326 40,548 16,383 (790) 4,941 (101,180) (60,860) 784,145 (205) (727,533) 709,308 3,780 (644,950) 775,523 153,141 $ 283,714 $ 928,664_ During the year ended December 31, 1996, the City disposed of equipment with an original price and accumulated depreciation of $1,036. -84- I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Sewer Operating Fund Comparative Balance Sheet As of December 31, 1996 and 1995 Assets Current assets Cash and temporary invesmients Accounts receivable Accrued interest receivable Delinquent taxes receivable Delinquent special assessments receivable Deferred special assessments, current portion Due from other governmental units Prepaid items Total current assets Restricted assets Cash and temporary investments Debt service Construction Total cash and temporary investments Accrued interest receivable Debt service Construction Total accrued interest receivable Total restricted assets Ofrier assets, less current portion Deferred special assessments Due from other governmental units Discount on revenue bonds Total other assets Property, plant, and equipment Land and improvements Buildings and improvements Equipment Distribution/collection system Work in progress Less accumulated depreciation Net property, plant, and equipment Total assets -85- Exhibit F-7 n n 1996 1995 i m $ 1,405,826 $ 797,148 1 t 329,950 288,380 44,733 42,304 236 663 18,099 19,976 13,708 13,708 1 27,836 28,616 1 262 1,600 1,840,650 1,192,395 819,565 —719,759 —1,539,324 3,466 —24,881 • —28,347 r-*’' —1,567,671 68,539 82,247 231,305 255,089 —5,147 299,844 342,483 16,654 16,210 r 31,014 31,014 71,879 74,047 %»■ 8,582,393 6,780,600 r 86,497 —i 8,788,437 6,901,871 2,809,380 2,627,014 r5,979,057 4,274,857 S 8.119.551 $ 7.377.406 .• ■.**' •• •' mw •ItllTt AiZlWi] iihri'itjufrti •I«7ifW L?i£iMi«j iT'c w • I ii rrn ij WiimiinrTtRTOTi^ • V^.lfiTliTti hurtiiUiTir^ r Exhibit F-8 1 CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Sewer Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings 1 * Years Ended December 31. 1996 and 1995 1996 __1995 * ‘ Operating revenue User charges $ 619,169 $ 578.149 Other 2,066 1,241 Total operating revenue 621,235 579.390 1 Operating expenses Salaries and wages 105,281 104,952 Retirement contributions 12,354 12,443 » • Health and life insurance contributions 3,177 4.823 Sewer disposal charges 318,940 329,536 w Professional services 15,699 42,697 Operating and maintenance supplies 11,748 5.804 •»» Heat, light, and power 17,141 21.112 Depreciation 184,730 144.461 Maintenance and repairs 58.356 35.346 Administrative charges from General Fund 16.840 16.130 w Communications 1,331 1.634 Office supplies 283 42 mm Printing, publishing, and advertising 1,108 709 Data processing 193 8.268 Insurance 13.257 13.906 Other expenses 4,607 29.249 Total operating expenses "765,045 771,1 i2 |p< Operating loss (143,810)(191,722) Nonoperating revenue (expense) Property tax revenue Interest earned on investments 3,391 43.208 Debt service —266 Operations 51,627 54.505 Construction 45.388 40.277 ^ I Interest income on special assessments 13.996 7.354 Interest income from MWCC 11,160 11,998 m Amortization of deferred credits 9,531 9,530 Interest expense on revenue bonds (40.755) (57,296) Rev enue bond expense (549)(200)A. Loss on disposal of assets Total nonoperating revenue (expense) (260) 93,529 (10.225) '99'4f7' km PH Loss before operating transfers (50,281)(92.305) Operating transfers (out)(70,000) - * ■¥ * Net loss (120.281)(92,305)- Credit for depreciation on contributed equity 158.895 124.052 Increase in retained earnings 38.614 31.747 - Retained earnings ¥■ • Beginning of year I.71I.2I9 1,679.472 End of year S 1.749,833 S 1,711.219 -87- r £ 1 * Exhibit F-9 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Sewer Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Cash Flows Years Ended December 31, 1996 and 1995 -88- f %Cash flows from operating activities 1996 1995 •Operating loss Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash provided (used) by operating activities $ (143,810)$ (191,722) [Depreciation 184,730 144,461 Loss on disposal of assets (260) (10,225) n f Wi Amortization of revenue bond discount Change in assets and liabilities (Increase) decrease in 5,147 753 Accounts receivable (41,570)(14,383) 1 Due from other governmental units 780 (6,626) Prepaid items Increase (decrease) in 1,338 26,903 . i Accounts payable (27,284)40,567 J Salaries and compensated absences payable (770)547 Due to other governmental units (26,426)29,926 Net cash provided (used) by operating activities Cash flows from capital and related financing activities (48,125)20,201 Taxes collected for revenue bond debt 3,818 42,956 Special assessments collected for revenue bond debt 29,385 36,350 Acquisition or construction of capital assets (86,941)(60,521) 1 Proceeds from sale of capital assets —1,297 <MWee current value credit 34,944 35,370 Principal payments on revenue bonds (864,673)(98,820) Interest paid on revenue bonds (51,438) (59,440) Proceeds received from revenue bonds issued —765,855 '>mad Other charges on revenue bonds (549) (200) Operating transfer to Water Fund Net cash provided (used) by capital and (70,000) MV related financing activities (1,005,454)662,847 (continued) CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit F-9 II Sewer Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Cash Flows (continued) Years Ended December 31, 1996 and 1995 I I I 1996 1995 Cash flows from investing activities Interest received on investments 122,933 72,952 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents (930,646)756,000 Cash and cash equivalents Beginning of year 2,336,472 1,580,472 • End of year $ 1,405,826 $ 2,336,472 1 Supplementary schedule of noncash investing, capital, and financing activities Assets contributed from other funds $ 1,801,793 $. MWCC current value credit applied $ 4,594 $ 4,594 - During the year ended December 31, 1996, the City disposed of equipment with an adjusted book value of $260. -- Equipment Original price $ 2,168 Accumulated depreciation 1,908 Loss on disposal of equipment $ 260 r u.-. ■ i -89- i ' CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Golf Course Operating Fund Comparative Balance Sheet As of December 31, 1996 and 1995 Exhibit F-10 1996 1995 '[■; '■ f,;' ■ > V' - -Assets t Current assets -N Cash and temporary investments $ 240,997 $ 185,408 1 Accrued interest receivable 97 5,541 Due from other governmental units 193 — Inventory 2,268 2,289 •Prepaid items 950 Total current assets 243,555 198,188 Property, plant, and equipment —Land and improvements 127,977 127,977 Buildings and improvements 51,550 48,722 Equipment 116,942 101,968 296,469 278,667 Less accumulated depreciation 71,207 65,894 Net property, plant, and equipment 225,262 212,773 Total assets $ 468.817 $ 410.961 1 Liabilities and Fund Equity Current liabilities 1 j 1 Accounts payable $ 2,722 $ 1,731 Salaries and compensated absences payable 854 2,747 Total current liabilities 3,576 4,478 —Long-term 'labilities, less current portion Compensated absences payable 7,131 6,785 —Total liabilities 10,707 11,263 Fund equity —Contributed capital 131,457 130,854 Retained earnings 326,653 268,844 "I Total fund equity 458,110 399,698 Total liabilities and fund equity $ 468.817 $ 410,961 i i--90- r b Exhibit F-11 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Golf Course Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Years Ended December 31,1996 and 1995 Sales and cost of sales Sales Cost of sales Gross profit Operating revenue Greens fees Equipment rental Other Total operating revenue Total gross profit and operating revenue Operating expenses Salaries and wages Retirement contributions Health and life insurance contributions Professional services Operating and maintenance supplies Heat, light, and power Depreciation Rent and equipment Maintenance and repairs Administrative charges from General Fund Communications Office supplies Printing, publishing, and advertising Insurance Other expenses Total operating expenses Operating income Nonoperating revenue (expense) Interest earned on investments Loss on disposal of assets Total nonoperating revenue (expense) Net income Credit for depreciation on contributed equity Increase in retained earnings Retained earnings Beginning of year End of year -91- 268,844 228,221 $ 326^653 $ 268,844 1996 1995 $ 19,163 $ 17,728 1 11,315 10,467 7,848 7,261 ^ • 152,947 136,809 31,523 29,084 35 780 184,505 166,673 192,353 173,934 • 61,930 62,033 4,524 4,843 3,772 3,621 ’ 3,075 2,053 7,891 8,267 • — 4,092 2,930 8,416 13,021 6,977 5,456 ■ 8,452 7,238 10,350 10,120 •Mi- 1,381 1,590 214 216 i 5,396 4,522 16,893 14,717 1,295 1,543 144,658 142,170 #"• 47,695 31.764 1 i k 12,573 8,150 (3,252)— 9,321 8,150 1 57,016 39,914 793 709 0- • 57,809 40,623 i r f 1 til ' » Lt;-J ■ ( CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit F-I2 Golf Course Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Cash Flows Years Ended December 31, 1996 and 1995 Cash flows from operating activities 1996 1995 - Operating income $ 47,695 $ 31,764 Adjustments to reconcile operating income to net cash provided by operating activities Depreciation 8,416 13,021 Loss on disposal of assets Change in assets and liabilities (3,252)- (Increase) decrease in Due from other governmental units (193)— Inventory 21 1,310 Prepaid items 950 278 Increase (decrease) in i f Accounts payable 991 1,285 Salaries and compensated absences payable (1,547)813 'I Net cash provided by operating activities 53,081 “ 48,47i < Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Ti Acquisition of capital assets (19,509)(5,364) / ■ 4 Cash flows from investing activities t Interest received on investments 18,017 5,967 Net increase in cash and cash equivalents 51,589 49,074 <Cash and cash equivalents V-Beginning of year 189,408 140,334 J End of year $ 240,997 S 189,408 Supplementary schedule of noncash investing, capital, and financing activities Assets contributed from other funds $ 1,396 $ During the year ended December 31, 1996, the Citv disposed of equipment with an adjusted book value of $3,252. Equipment Original price Accumulated depreciation $ 7,698 4,446 Loss on disposal of equipment $ 3^52 -92- 1 4 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 1 fi ti n M f < i^4 m m fM m #» ^ M # ♦ t I i 1 4 4 1 i i m.> w-^ i: 1 .* *> W ! r. 1^ TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS Trust Funds are used to account for assets held by the City in a trustee capacity. Flexible Benefit Plan Fund - used to account for employee participation in the cafeteria plan created in accordance with Internal Revenue Code § 125. Agency Funds are used to account for assets held by the City in an agent capacity for individuals, private organizations, other governmental units, or other funds. Deferred Compensation Agency Funds - ICMA Fund, Minnesota Supplemental Investment Fund, Great West Life Insurance Company Fund, and USCM/PEBSCO Fund - used to account for employee deferred compensation plans created in accordance with Internal Revenue Code § 457. >4 "'I ! J. rfS -93- SW'V.’ ‘ Exhibit G-1 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Trust and Agency Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of December 31,1996 (with Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1995) ; Expendable Trust Mency Totals Flexible Benefit Plan Deferred Compensation Funds 1996 1995 Assets Cash and investments held by trustee $ 925.112 $ 925.112 $ 776.874 Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees $ 925,112 $ 925.112 $ 776.874 -94- , r «»•* m •. It i “I t } 1 « tiH r ! - 1 ■ilplllifillllpll'"'-’"I, t -J t">'y n r •« CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit G>2 Flexible Benefit Plan Expendable Trust Fund Comparative Statement of Revenue. Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Years Ended December 31. 1996 and 1995 1996 1995 t Revenue Payroll withholdings for Flexible Benefit Plan $ 58.207 $ 56,646 ---Expenditures - »Miscellaneous Employee benefits 58,207 56,646 1 Excess of revenue over expenditures Fund balance j Beginning of year End of year .*$ -$ -95- igtUta 1 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Agency Funds Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities Year Ended December 31,1996 Deferred CompensntioB Agency Fund flCMAI Assets Cash and investments held by trustee Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees Supplemental Investment Fund) Assets Ccsh and investments held by trustee Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees Deferred Compeniation Agency Fund (Great West Life Insurance Company! Assets Cash and investments held by mistee Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees Balance January 1, 1996 -96- Additions Deductions $ 123,521 $ 23,734 $ $ 123J21 $ 23,734 $ $ 496,907 S 65,480 $ 12,000 Exhibit G-3 Balance December 31, 1996 $ 147,201 $ 147,201 $ 33,174 $ 11,044 $_2,1^ $ 42,112 $ 33,174 $ 11,044 $ 2,106 $ 42,112 $ 550,387 $ 496,907 $ 65,480 S 12,000 $ 550,387 (continued) I ; t s \ • I % i ► ' I 1. I J p J ‘ ‘ i.I\K> t * ■; i f)i : i CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit G-3 Agency Funds Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities (continued) Year Ended December 31,1996 Balance January I, 1996 Additions Deductions Balance December 31, 1996 Deferred Compensation Aggncy pynd (USCM/PEBSCO Fund) Assets Cash and investments held by trustee S 123.272 $ 63.094 $954 $ 185.412 Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees $ 123.272 $ 63.094 $954 $ 185,412 All Agency Funds Assets Cash and investments held by trustee S 776.874 $ 163,352 $ 15.114 $ 925,112 Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees S 776.874 $ 163.352 $ 15.114 $ 925.112 -97- * ! r ; ! I THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK /ij ^ ^ n li II • t 9 i i ►M • Financial Section Hnancial Schedules 1. I i ( I I tkaOaki I ■!______ Wf ^ f i I r^I 1^'. I • .V* ■J ' >«- i -••■ ; -J FINANCIAL SCHEDULES ; I "i :|!i ^ I r r . **C'- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Comparative Schedule of General Fixed Assets by Source December 31, 1996 and 1995 General fixed assets Land and land improvements Buildings and building improvements Equipment Total general fixed assets Investment in general fixed assets by source General Fund after December 31,1984 Special Revenue Funds after December 31,1984 Capital Project Funds after December 3 1,1990 Donations after December 31,1984 Years prior to January 1,1985 Total investment in general fixed assets -98- Schedule 1 m II m 1996 1995 m li $ 1,554,208 $ 1,250,680 M 3,205,130 335,130 1,495,193 1,355,565 m $ 6.254.531 $ 5.811.375 •• $ 259,907 $ 169,362 1,193,678 834,086 3,989,224 3,989,224 4,025 4,025 807,697 814,678 $ 6.254.531 $ 5.811,375 1 f I t I f • » i ■ J • . t 1 r- \ I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Function and Activity General government Council Administration Elections Assessing Finance Central services Total general government Public safety Police Protective inspection and zoning Emergency preparedness Total public safety Streets Parks Other - unclassified Total general fixed assets Schedule of General Fixed Assets By Function and Activity December 31,1996 -99- Schedule 2 Land and Buildings Land and Building Improvements Improvements Equipment Total $$$ 3,128 $ 3,128 ——44,161 44,161 -—24,476 24,476 --2,336 2,336 ——69,924 69,924 959,845 1,999,912 166,318 3,126,075 959,845 1,999,912 310,343 3,270,100 345,353 345,353 --46,561 46,561 -—29,155 29,155 ——421,069 421,069 -1,178,319 645,088 1,823,407 266,314 1,899 118,693 386,906 328,049 25,000 353,049 $ 1.554.208 $ 3.205.130 $ 1.495.193 $ 6.254.531 1 i '.S i m ■ ■ hi t I 0 I' 1^1 u ^1 r''>*• i CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Schedule of Changes in Ceneral Fixed Assets By Function ano Activity Year Ended December 31,1996 General Fixed Assets January 1, -100- Schedule 3 General Fixed Assets December 31, Function and Activity 1996 Additions Deletions 1996 Genera! government Council $ 2,818 $ 310 $$ 3,128 Administration 29,555 19,796 5,190 44,161 Elections 24,476 ——24,476 Assessing 2,336 ——2,336 Finance 69,942 3,637 3,655 69,924 Central services 2,873,472 252,603 —3,126,075 Total general government 3,002,599 276,346 8,845 3,270,100 Public safety Police 254,808 118,493 27,948 345,353 Protective inspection and zoning 43,532 3,513 484 46,561 Emergency preparedness 29,155 ——29,155 Total public safety 327,495 122,006 28,432 421,069 Streets 1,800,153 35,880 12,626 1,823,407 Parks 328,079 62,897 4,070 386,906 Other - unclassified 353,049 353,049 Total general fixed assets $ 5.811.375 $ 497.129 $ 53.973 $ 6.254.531 m It «t • • •M •n «N P * ' jta • » r“! J I J 4i] I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Future Property Tax Levies to Retire Bonds (I) As of December 31,1996 Year Collectible 1982 Improvement Bonds 1995 Refunding Bonds Total Levies (4) 1997 $4,500 (2)$ 30,000 (3)$ 34,500 1998 500 50,000 50,500 1999 —50,000 50,000 2000 —50,000 50,000 2001 ——— $5,000 $ 180,000 $ 185,000 Schedule 4 (1) The levies for these issues are the general obligation property tax levies which are in addition to the amounts levied in the sp>ecial assessment rolls. Tax levies are placed (as required by law) at 105% of debt service requirements. 0‘ ' (2) The City levied $4,500 for the 1982 Improvement Bonds due to a projected shortfall prior to 1997. The City will continue to monitor the issue and levy additional taxes as required to generate sufficient sources to pay future debt requirements. (3) The City levied $30,000 for the 1995 Refunding Bonds due to the assessment appeals and subsequent reductions of deferred assessments. The City established future taxes to generate sufficient sources to pay future debt requirements as required by law. (4) Additional debt service levies are available for other general obligation debt issues on an as-needed basis determined annually. -101- * / ■ r'V. i-" ■ V 1 ■'***^^ THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 1 H •a li •t »4 m i H •X •H W y •a « * t t ft M • » • Statistical Section j i - -4 » ' r <-•) V JJ STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) • i w m CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Revenue by Source (1) cal Year Property Taxes Special Assessments Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental Charges for Services m li 1987 $ 1,106,603 $$ 136,420 $ 499,864 $ 594,424 « ti 1988 1,170,411 —124,334 489,319 643,151 m 1989 1,211,541 -148,564 493,385 685,952 • ( 1990 1,637,643 -136,552 135,512 758,369 M ri m 1991 1,682,260 —81,202 178,901 726,118 1992 1,842,320 327,053 (2)129,365 316,871 781,235 1993 1,818,753 425,408 165,897 497,165 866,034 1994 1,922,775 257,175 147,888 539,226 851,165 m 1995 1,933,371 174,443 202,195 517,989 928,121 1996 1,945,226 180,576 207,277 490,102 976,891 (1) Includes General, Special Revenue, and Debt Service Funds. (2) Prior to December 31,1992, special assessment revenue and interest income was included in other revenue. -102- 1 i' c - 1 r "1 I '' t*m. .-j ■ '‘i u 0 u 1= Fines and Forfeits 108,231 72,728 62,458 61,491 58,158 80,610 71,556 Table 1 Interest Earned on Investments Other Revenue Total $ 102,058 $ 140,657 125,357 - $ 717,467 $ 3,156,836 254,054 286,435 313,447 316,761 706,2,7 3,274,119 676,838 3,341,637 637,446 3,413,753 504,819 3,246,028 282,582 (2) 72,623 (2) 3,814,507 71,948 4,160,750 170,500 4,233,322 148,886 4,299,062 90,747 4,279,136 -103- r ¥ m If Fiscal Year 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 General Government $ 535,558 589.137 655,987 683,176 652,105 596.138 656,849 667,018 759,673 719,153 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Expenditures by Function (1) Public Safety $ 1,187,328 1,247,623 1,376,323 1.419.419 1,508,485 1,562,709 1,609,867 1.616.087 1.693.420 1.696.087 Streets $ 385,422 344,407 494,742 471,420 474,350 463,710 495,983 485,491 423,610 468,892 (1) Includes General, Special Revenue, and Debt Service Funds, -104- Parks and Recreation 94,114 61,582 32,961 48,129 44,791 53,590 58,080 55,739 50,449 51,142 Unallocated and Other 63,154 67,160 95,164 106,778 165,228 148,908 152,547 171,729 190,524 441,928 !1 I m It •I »i m § i <N IN #*1 ►4 I « I > vl, • ‘R •-J Capital Debt Table 2 Outlay Service Total « $ 70,614 $ 678,773 $ 3,014,963 I 92,198 534,876 2,936,983 131,437 475,520 3,262,134 1 1 259,921 426,393 1 3,415,236 46,147 406,266 3,297,372 1 164,708 403,209 3,392,972 ' 1 { 48,483 562,254 3,584,063 • , WJ 201.192 938,991 4,136,247 n 198,089 706,462 4,022,227 w 279,379 620,682 4,277,263 a D -105- V I \ r ■^1 '1 Fiscal Year Collected 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Certified Tax Levy for Fiscal Period (11 $ 1,246,520 1,293,426 1,382,690 1,638,246 1,713,541 1,961,381 2,120,835 2,281,570 2,322,145 2,370,992 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Property Tax Levies and Collections Current Tax Collections (1)(2) $ 1,218,410 1,257,297 1,332,632 1,579,616 1,638,621 1,902,394 2,080,775 2,246,902 2,289,584 2,335,759 (1) Total tax levy and current tax collections include the State paid Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA). (2) Includes County adjustments for abatements, cancellations, and additions of taxes. -106- 1 Percent of Levy Collected Delinquent Tax Collections (2) Total Collections as a Percent of Current Levy M i 97.7 %$ 28,478 100.0 % ' 97.2 27,998 99.4 t » 96.4 30,844 98.6 96.4 41,984 99.0 95.6 37,233 97.8 97.0 39,181 99.0 98.1 68,246 101.3 98.5 53,629 100.8 . 98.6 32,592 100.0 98.5 26,032 99.6 1 i ■E Vi« HL - VI rI . J . ■ ! ' 'I # p- S.'.' ti- • ■' ■m. Outstanding Delinquent Taxes $ 45,770 53,658 64,866 71,166 86,352 128,786 123,136 81,796 49,286 55,028 Table 3 Outstanding Delinquent Taxes as a Percent of Current Levy 3.7 % 4.1 4.7 4.3 5.0 6.6 5.8 3.6 2.1 2.3 -107- • ; ! 5 I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Assessed Value or Tax Capacity and Estimated Market Value of Taxable Property (1) Real Property Personal Property Taxes Payable Assessed Value or Estimated Market Assessed Value or Estimated Market Fiscal Disparities Adjustment to Assessed Value or (1) All property, assessed, tax capacity, and estimated market values, and fiscal disparities adjustment are from the Hennepin County Assessor. (2) Beginning with taxes payable in 1989, the terminology for Assessed Valuations and Mill Rates is no longer used. Tax Capacity replaces Assessed Valuations and is determined in the same manner except using smaller percentages for each property class. (3) In 1990, the State of Minnesota redefined the tax base from "gross" tax capacity to "net" tax capacity. -108- » I j Year Tax Capacity Value Tax Capacity Value Tax Capacity 1987 $ 101,291,782 $ 402,896,400 $ 1,678.677 $ 3,903,900 $ 581,055 1988 105,021,213 431,023,100 1,596,719 3,713,300 796,738 — 1989 (2)14,049,094 477,834,580 183.499 3,495,200 119,216 mmt- 1990 (3)12,568,353 527,348,000 172,131 3,401,800 151,730 1991 14,035,873 585,697,300 178,110 3,598,200 164,776 1992 12,922,819 604,793,400 195,919 4,124,600 45,844 1993 11,572,538 625,445,300 182,211 3,876,800 (15,389)- 1994 12,007,816 654,919,200 183,655 3,992,500 (22,572) 1995 12,780,145 697,660,900 194,020 4,217,800 (62,597) 1996 13,942,213 756,861,400 200,133 4,350,700 (42,026) 1 i i I r I ‘ Table 4 Total Assessed Value or Tax Capacity Estimated Market Value Ratio of Total Assessed Value or Tax Capacity to Total Estimated Market Value Per Capita Valuations Assessed Value or Tax Capacity -109- Estimated Market Value $ 103,551,514 $ 406,800,300 25.46 %$ 14,358 $ 56,406 —107,414,670 434,736,400 24.71 14,747 59,684 14,351,809 481,329,780 2.98 1,945 65,230 12,892,214 530,749,800 2.43 1,787 73,582 i’ 14,378,759 589,295,500 2.44 1,969 80,692 13,164,582 608,918,000 2.16 1,787 82,677 11,739,360 629,322,100 1.87 1,602 85,855 12,168,899 658,911,700 1.85 1,648 89,283 12,911,568 701,878,700 1.84 1,727 93,884 14,100,320 761,212.100 1.85 1,872 101,091 1 . ! f -... CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Property Tax Rates - Direct and Overlapping Governments (1) (Per $1,000 of Assessed Value or Tax Capacity) City ofOrono Taxes Payable Year General Fimd PIR Ftmd 1985 Debt Service Fund 1980 Debt Service Fund 1982 Debt Service Fimd 1991 Debt Service Fund 1992 Debt Service Fund (3) Water Operating Fund 1987 11.68 0.39 1988 11.76 —0.28 ————— 1989 (2) 9.42 —0.21 ————— 1990 12.36 —0.27 0.14 ——— 1991 11.43 —0.28 0.12 0.04 ——— 1992 12.02 —0.36 0.12 0.04 1.69 —— 1993 13.26 —0.37 0.12 0.04 1.83 0.12 — 1994 13.43 —0.35 —0.04 1.75 0.12 0.29 1995 12.75 —0.33 —0.04 1.72 0.14 0.31 1996 11.67 0.28 0.33 —0.03 1.62 0.17 0.64 Certain areas of the City are served by other school districts. Property in those areas would be subject to one of the following rates instead of the rate for ISD #278. Taxes Payable Year ISD #276 ISD #277 ISD #284 1987 61.55 53.56 49.88 1988 63.95 57.06 57.38 1989 (2) 58.06 47.92 50.56 1990 52.55 42.33 49.77 1991 55.36 45.78 50.28 1992 64.02 56.13 58.55 1993 74.18 58.97 64.91 1994 76.51 66.98 59.67 1995 76.14 66.44 60.41 1996 76.34 62.31 60.11 Beginning with taxes payable in 1989, the terminology for Assessed Valuations and Mill Rates is nu Icrr c used. Tax Capacity replaces Assessed Valuations and is determined in the same manner except using smaller percentages for each property class. Tax Extension Rates are determined in a similar manner to Mill Rates in that the tax levy is divided by the tax capacity. General obligation water and sewer revenue bond debt. -110- 1 1 n m II ■I ti m li a a »( •( n • 4 4 t F Table 5 *^*4 i ; 1 (3) Sewer Operating Fund Total ISO #278 School District (1) Area Vo-Tech School Hennepin County Metro Council/ Transit Other Special Districts Total 12.07 55.08 1.42 29.36 3.90 2.19 104.02 —12.04 59.50 1.49 31.67 4.05 2.28 111.03 —9.63 50.01 1.22 27.10 3.41 2.05 93.42 —12.77 47.17 1.10 27.92 3.72 2.03 94.71 ——11.87 52.74 1.05 30.11 4.11 3.39 103.27 —14.23 59.80 0.51 34.33 4.48 1.66 115.01 —15.74 67.19 1.10 35.84 4.40 2.31 126.58 0.27 16.25 65.03 0.81 37.44 4.42 2.15 126.10 ; ! 1 0.31 15.60 65.72 —37.45 4.45 4.24 127.46 w —14.74 62.86 —37.27 5.06 3.37 123.30 -111- ■ i»F f 'i,:^ Fiscal Year CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Special Assessments Levies and Collections Current Assessments Due Current Assessments Collected Ratio of Current Collections to Amoimt Due -112- Delinquent Assessments Collected 1 1 • 5 fl ' : It 1987 $ 296,702 $ 262,268 88.4 $ 23,446 t j 1988 257,154 216,503 84.2 68,506 1989 208,158 183,261 88.0 17,604 1990 222,063 198,202 89.3 35,565 1991 228,169 213,418 93.5 14,419 P 1992 200,477 183,375 91.5 18,390 1993 387,230 355,530 91.8 9,338 1994 294,073 274,403 93.3 23,295 1995 278,904 258,595 92.7 24,853 1996 271,013 254,524 93.9 28,021 m c > * i fm V -J ?r- Special Assessments Delinquent $ 147,635 90,023 61,562 43,766 43,313 54,657 55,507 55,159 45,605 34,417 Table 6 Total Outstanding Assessments $ 1,021,321 764,234 663,372 735,609 581,048 1,639,996 1,277,078 1,027,451 1,200,322 977,831 -113- i j ii riiiliiM-nTilirniir iSlY I ^1 r THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK • I * ♦ • L r ' ‘■.i % ■J J Table 7 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Computation of Legal Debt Margin December 31,1996 Minnesota state law defines a city's legal debt margin as 2.0% of its estimated actual property valuation, less all bonds repayable solely from tax levies, plus all sinking funds on hand to retire said debt. Based on this formula, the City's legal debt margin is as followf: Estimated total market value of taxable property $ 761.212.100 Debt limit (2.0% of estimated actual property value)$ 15,224,242 Total bonded debt $ 7,155,000 Less bonds not repaid solely from tax levies G O. Improvement Bonds Public Facilities Revenue Bonds G.O. Refimding Bonds 1.775.000 3.470.000 1.910.000 7,155,000 Total amount of debt applicable to debt limit Legal debt margin $ 15^224,242 5 -114- CITY OF OROT40, MINNESOTA Ratio of Net General Bonded Debt to Assessed Value or Tax Capacity and Net Bonded Debt Per Capita « • I Fiscal Year Population (2) Assessed Value (in 1,000s) Gross Bonded Debt(l) Debt Service Funds Available (I) Net Bonded Debt 1987 7,212 $ 103,552 $ 1,504,562 $ 1,158,862 $ 345,700 1988 7,284 107,415 1,350,789 1,035,242 315,547 1989 7,379 14,352 (4)1,207,220 867,436 339,784 1990 7.213 (5)12,892 1,010,710 694,251 316,459 1991 7,303 14,379 4,811,055 928,917 3,882,138 1992 7,365 13,165 5,561,340 1,2.53,423 4,307,917 1993 7,330 11,739 5,734,084 1,518,649 4,215,435 1994 7,380 12,169 5,362,830 1,349,726 4,013,104 1995 7,476 12,912 5,142,297 1,361,687 3,780,610 1996 7,530 •14,100 4,989,319 1,597,170 3,392,149 »I Includes bonds recorded in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group. Gross bonded debt has bee ; '-siaced by Debt Service deferred special assessments receivable in order to reflect onh ax supported debt burden. For purposes of this analysis, Debt Service Funds available j not include individual fund balance amounts in excess of the related individual bond issue amount included in gross bonded debt. Population from Metropolitan Council estimate as of April 1, annually. Rating history from Moody Investors Service. Beginning with fiscal year 1989, the terminology for Assessed Valuations is no longer used. Tax Capacity replaces Assessed Valuations and is determined in the same manner except using smaller percentages for each property class. Federal census. The rating for the 1991 Public Facilities Revenue Bonds issued by the City of Orono's Housing and Redevelopment Authority is Aa, as the City is making lease purcliase payments equal to the annual debt service requirement. While the intent is to continu.i the annual payments and budget annual appropriations, the City may terminate the lease as provided in the lease-purchase contract. Estimate. t • t -115- Il ■ 4 •r^ ] ■■ • t f ♦ * < • I I » Ratio of Net Tax Supported Bonded Debt Net Bonded Bonded ;to Assessed Debt Debt Value Per Capita Rating (3) } 0.33 %$ 47.93 Aa 0.29 43.32 Aa 2.37 (4)46.05 Aal 2.45 43.87 Aal 27.00 531.58 Aal 32.72 584.92 Aal (6) 35.91 575.09 Aal (6) 31.08 543.78 Aal (6) 29.28 505.69 Aal (6) 24.06 450.48 Aal (6) CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Ratio of Annual Debt Service Expenditures for General Bonded Debt to Total General Expenditures (1) Table 9 Ratio of Debt Service to Fiscal Interest To^al Debt Total General Total General Year Principal and Other Service Expenditures Expenditures m 1987 $ 485,000 $ 197,184 $ 682,184 $ 3,014,963 22.6 % 1 i M 1988 360,000 174,876 534,876 2,936,983 18.2 1989 325,000 im5:>475,520 3,262,134 14.6 1990 300,000 126,393 426,393 3,415,236 12.5 • * 1991 300,000 106,266 406,266 3,297,372 12.3 PN P 1 1992 155,000 248,209 403,209 3,392,972 11.9 1993 150,000 412,254 562,254 3,584,063 15.7 PP 1994 550,000 388,991 938,991 4,136,247 22.7 1995 (2) 340,000 366,462 706,422 4,022,227 17.6 1996 300,000 320,682 620,682 4,277,263 14.5 Includes General, Special Revenue, and Debt Sei vice Funds. Excludes $360,000 of bond principal paid to the refund bond pin.-ipal from refunding bond proceeds in 1995. -117- J n * *1 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Computation of Direct and Overlapping Debt December 31,1996 Table 10 Net Debt —i Governmental Unit Gross Debt(I) Sinking Funds Net Debt Applicable to Orono Percent Amount j t Direct debt City of Orono $ 4,989,319 $ 1,588,340 $ 3,392,149 100.000 % S 3,392,149 , 1 Overlapping debt School districts No. 278 (Orono)5,405,000 345,590 5,059,410 49.250 2,491,759 No. 7?6 (Mi;:netonka)58,490,000 20,029,700 38,460,300 0.170 65,383 N’o. 277 (Westonka)13,700,000 1,271,479 12,428,521 24.260 3,015,159 !No. 284 (Wayzata)113,227,742 6,494,542 106,733,200 1.340 1,430,225 Hennepin County 67,030,000 6,125,572 60,904,428 1.530 931,838 Metro council 110,525,000 49,444,954 61,080,046 0.790 482,532 —Hennepin Suburban Park District 13,940,000 2,324,096 11,615,904 2.080 241,611 Total overlapping debt 382,317,742 S6,0 j 5,933 296,281,809 8,658,507 ‘w.. Total direct and overlapping debt $ 387.307.061 $ 87,624,273 $ 299,673.958 S 12,050.656 Gross bonded debt used for the net debt calculation excludes revenue bonds for all governmental units except the City ofOrono. -118- r ..5 ;■ Water Operating Fund Sewer Operating Fund CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Revenue Bond Coverage - Enterprise Funds (5) Table 11 (1) Total revenues. incIudi.Y^ interest. (2) Total operating expenses, net of depreciation. (3) Includes S784.145 principal refunded in 1996. (4) Includes $765,855 principal relunded in 1996. (5) Revenue bonds did not exist prior to 1989. -119. I ( I I Gross Operating Net Revenue f 1 Fiscal Revenues Expenses Available for Debt Service Requirements Year (I)(2)Debt Service Principal Interest Total Coverage M- t 1989 $ 189,086 $ 159.586 $ 29,500 $$17,917 S 17,917 1.65 1990 265.068 163,271 101,797 —74.975 74.975 1.36 I99I 234,843 162.010 72,833 —74,493 74.493 0.98 1992 221.691 171,373 50,318 —74.495 74.495 0.68 1993 165.378 150,154 15.224 88.530 69,931 158,461 0.10 1994 243,421 169.023 74,398 88.533 64,472 153,005 0.49 1995 270,471 178.614 91.857 101.180 58,666 159.846 0.57 ^4 1996 369,976 185,842 184.134 £85,327 (3)41.727 927.054 0.20 1989 489,658 299,797 189.861 —17,499 17,499 10.85 1990 583,998 305,980 278.018 —72,188 72,188 3.85 1991 613.009 343,230 269.779 —72,755 72.755 3.71 1992 543.887 445,562 98.325 —72,756 72,756 1.35 1993 557.999 509.286 48.713 86,470 68,324 154.794 0.31 j-.. 1994 708.030 502,043 205.987 86,467 62,944 149,411 1.38 1995 746.528 626.651 119.877 98,820 57,296 156.116 0.77 1996 756,328 580.315 176,013 864,673 (4)40,755 905,428 0.19 ■4 1 'f ■ y^y&ti '^v ‘ • ■L*n ^ ; J ! I J r ^ ;'il 1 '1 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Demographic Statistics Fiscal Year 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Population (11 7.212 7,284 7,379 7.213 (5) 7,303 7,365 7,330 7,380 7,476 7.530 * Per Capita Income (2) 20,096 21,239 22,584 23,705 25,353 27,177 28,080 29,900 29,900 ♦ 30,800 • Source: School Enrollment (3) 1,997 2,037 2,101 2,175 2,289 2,280 2,275 2,433 2,508 2,646 Table 12 (1) Metro Council (2) Federal Census Bureau data; Hennepin County average (3) Minnesota Department of Education, as reported by Orono School Distnct No 278 5 Flr^Ccn^r™"'"' "'""'P'" Estimate -120- Unemployment Rate (4) 4.1 % 3.3 3.6 4.1 4.3 4.1 4.2 3.2 2.8 3.0 1 S'SIPf ■ F;^l Year 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Commercial Construction (1) Number of Permits Value 28 23 26 18 7 5 4 9 13 9 S 2,555,700 3,920,090 162,700 1,537,750 489,050 322,200 12,300 52,900 500.467 3,319,657 Source: CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Property Value, Construction, and Bank Deposits Residential Construction (1) Number of Permits Value 343 330 360 333 233 272 300 308 335 375 15,836,267 17,416,288 14,283,828 6,641,399 14,242,621 20,916,290 16,489,721 20,695,799 18,853,407 Estimated Market Value (2) Industrial/ Commercial Residential 16,208,600 16.734.000 18,304,100 21.798.200 22.460.300 21.656.200 21.290,500 22.579.300 22.049.000 393,876,700 441,270,880 486,776,000 552,096,200 582,333,100 599,912,300 608,557,500 675,081,600 734,812,400 20,939,670 20,939,670 20.939.670 20.939.670 Table 13 Bank Non-Taxablc Deposits (3) S 19,824,845 S 15.652.600 S 387.243,800 S 22,325,430 S 25,215,095 25.353.000 27.693.000 29,031,945 30,796.880 33.624.000 33,3h9.000 31.923.000 38.819.000 36.389.000 (1) City Inspection Department (2) Hennepin County Assessing Department; Residential includes farms; Non-taxable is valued by the County once every six years. (3) As reported to Commercial West by First Bank of the Lakes. -121 \ I I » f • « I 'i 1 s f '4 ■ ->1r", ', W-. \ K' Fs- } I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Principal Taxpayers -122- Table 14 ..J Taxpayer Type of Business Assessed 1995 Payable 1996 Tax Capacity Percent of Total Tax Capacity Washington Scientific Manufacturing $ 128,198 0.85 % Wayzata Country Club Private Club 109,444 0.73 Private Residence Single Family Residence 101,280 0.67 Private Residence Single Family Residence 95,200 0.63 Van Dale, Inc.Manufacturing 70,633 0.47 'n Private Residence Single Family Residence 66,668 0.44 Private Residence Single Family Residence 64,418 0.43 Otten Brothers Nurser>'Nursery — Garden Center 63,177 0.42 r'Private Residence Single Family Residence 49,226 0.33 Private Residence Single Family Residence 49,023 0.33 $ 797,267 JAQ_ % i ] ib.W' P fkfetRJ Date of Incorporation Form of government Area Miles of streets City Private State and County Number of street lights Fire protection Number of cities providing contracted fire coverage Police protection Number of stations Number of police officers Fuli-tinic Part-time Number of cities seized Education Attendance centers Number of student - Water and sewer operations Number of connections Water Sewer Table 15 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Miscellaneous Statistics December 31, 1996 December 17, 195<; effective January 1, 1955 Optional Plan "A"; Council-Administrator 24.5 square miles; 50% is open water or marshland 45.83 15.42 29.28 1 16 4 4 4 2,646 865 1,827 Recreation and culture Number of parks and nature preser\'es Number of swimming beaches 14 with 78.85 total acres 4 with 6.08 total acres Employees Classified service/full-time Pait-time/seasonal 21 -123- • ♦ ' t i L r* r 1 pimawi* "iW .i r » « I * ' • • I Table 16 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Tax Capacity, Tax Levies, and Tax Extension Rates Collectible in 1997 1996 1995 Tax capacity Real property Personal property Fiscal disparities contribution Fiscal disparities distribution $ 15,009,193 202,352 (336,726) 284,973 $ 13,942,213 200,133 (324,685) 282,659 $ 12,780,145 194,020 (319,388) 256,791 Total tax capacity $ 15,159,792 S 14.100.320 $ 12.911.568 1 ► ' : i Tax levies by County Auditor (1) General Fund $ 1,680,980 $1,647,940 $1,647,940 U'PIR Fund 85,500 40,000 — r i’-i S r' -sJ Debt Service Funds 1985 Improvement Bonds ——42,945 r 1995 (1985) Refunding Bonds 30,000 46,000 — f'i ^1 1982 Improvement Bonds 4,500 4,500 5,500 ! 1991 Public Facilities Bonds 225,000 228,400 221,785 1992 Improvement Bonds 30,000 24,000 18,000 -1995 (1989) Refunding Revenue Bonds 105,650 90,000 80,000 Total tax levies $ 2.161,630 $2.080.840 $2.016.170 |£Tax extension rates by County Auditor General Fund 11.082 %11.674 %12.753 % W PIR Fund 0.564 0.284 — ~ Debt Service Funds 1985 Improvement Bonds —0.333 k 1995 (1985) Refunding Bonds 0.198 0.326 — 1982 Improvement Bonds 0.030 0.032 0.043 ' 1991 Public Facilities Bonds 1.483 1.618 1.717 1992 Improvement Bonds 0.198 0.170 0.139 r ; ■1995 (1989) Revenue Bonds 0.696 0.639 0.619 W Total tax extension rates 14.251 %14.743 %15.604 % (1) Tax levies include the state paid Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA). -124- iiniiminriulhi 4^ THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK alMfl yjiHfewM>uaiillfa ■iiiMii i; ri ■N « i .. I 4 ! *1 h ; J n 1 IlsinFPFNDEi ; ATTr>TTnR*S REPORT ON THE 1NTERN.\1 rONTROL <;TRlirTlJRF A>jT) OTHER REQU IRED REPORTS Zi ■?*V I ............................................ I I ♦ t ► « TfflS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK •>^1 m • lnd«pen(tont Auditor’s Rsport on Intsmal Control Structure and Otfier Required Reports ' —I 1 « • -' 4 • nil'll rtf III! in II c 6 f I 1 4 t p i ■ ■ ; . 1 r 1 ^ • ‘i I P|1 — PRINCIPALS M<^KiSfchSSuE KENNETH W MALLOY CPA THOMAS M MONTAGUE. CPA THOMAS A KARNOWSKI. CPA PAUL A RAOOSEVICH. CPA WILLIAM J LA'JER CPA INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON THE INTHRNAl. CONTROL STRUCTURE RASED ON AN AUDIT OF THE GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS City Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Orono, Minnesota, as of and for the year ended December 31, 1^6, and have issued our report thereon dated April 29, 1997. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. The management of the City of Orono is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of internal control structure policies and procedures. The objectives of an internal control structure are to provide management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in accordance with management’s authorization and recorded properly to permit the preparation of general purpose fmancial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Because of inherent limitations in any internal control structure, errors or irregularities may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, projection of any evaluation of the structure to future periods is subject to the risk that procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation of policies and procedures may deteriorate. In planning and performing our audit of the general purpose financial statements of the City of Orono for the year ended December 31, 1996, we obtained an understanding of the internal control structure. With respect to the internal control structure, we obtained an understanding of the design of relevant policies and procedures and whether they have been placed in operation, and we assessed control risk in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the general purpose fmancial statements and not to provide an opinion on the internal control structure. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. (continued) ocu Tir it.o !•» 410 PARK NATIONAL BANK BUILDING 5T53 WAV^ATA BOULEVARD MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55416 TELEPHONE 612 545^24 TELTFAX CI2 545 0569 -125- THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK »• 1, f» i B < p- > I ! I I >4 - W * •k Ki. Our consideration of the internal control structure would not necessarily disclose all matters in the internal control structure that might be material weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the specific internal control structure elements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation to the general purpose financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined above. We noted matters involving die internal control structure and its operation that we have reported to the management of the Ci»y of Orono in a separate report dated April 29, 1997. This report is intended for the information of the City Council and management of the City of Orono. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. April 29, 1997 pHai I THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK 1 f ! m .>! m I » f It ! ! P1 ^ I rt a a II 3 IMALLQY 5 PRINCIPALSKENNETH W MALLOY, CPA THOMAS M MONTAGUE. CPA THOMAS A KARNOWSKI. CPA PAUL A RADOSEVICH. CPA WILLIAM J LAUER. CPA INnFPFNnpNT AliniTOR’S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH MTNNE<;nTA STATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS City Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of ^ the year ended December 31, 1996, and have issued our report thereon dated April 29, 1997. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standar^ and the provisions of the ws___ 1 »„,1 rnmniiance Audit Guide forlxHal GovemmePt promulgated by the Legal Compliance Statutes § 6.65. Accordingly, the audit included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary m the circumstances. The Minn...ota Legal Cnn^pii.nce Audit Guide for I^cal GOYCnunSDl covers five main categories^ compliance to be tested: contracting and bidding, deposits and investments, co^icts of mterest, public indebtedness, and claims and disbursements. Our smdy included all of the listed categories. The results of our tests indicate that for the items tested the City of Orono complied with and conditions of applicable legal provisions, except as described in the Schedule of Fmdings and Questioned Cost. Further, for the items not tested, based on our audit and the procedures referred to above, nothing came to our attention to indicate that the City had not complied with such legal provisions. This report is intended for the information of the City Council and management of the City of Orono. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. April 29. 1997 or M » IFir o /^OOC^CI^4T /VISIT« 410 PARK NATIONAL BANK BUILDING 5353 WAYZATA BOULEVARD MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55416 TELEPHONE 612 545-0424 TELEFAX 612-545 0569 -128- MS i.4 CITY OF ORONOSchedule of Findings and Questioned Cost Year Ended December 31, 1996 i 1 i i L ■ r r t' : j . * 'I j This schedule summarizes findings and recommendations relating to compliance with Minnesota Statutes and requirements applicable to federal programs. The auditor, Malloy, Montague, Kamowski, Radosevich & Co^., P.A., is responsible for providing the information under the heading "Finding and Questioned Cost." The City of Orono is responsible for providing the information under the heading "Corrective Action Plan (CAP)." FINDING AND QUESTIONED COST 1. Program/1 .aw Minnesota Statutes § 574.26. 2. Finding Minnesota Statutes § 574.26 requires that the City receive a performance bond in an amount not less than the contract price for construction projects which are let on sealed bids or direct quotes. For one project tested, the performance bond was not on file. 3. Type of Finding This is a current year finding. 4. Questioned Cost Not Applicable. CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP) L Explanation of Disagreement With Audit Finding There is no disagreement with the audit finding. 2. Actions Planned in Re.sponse to Finding The City will ensure that a performance bond is on file for all required projects. 3. Official Responsible for Ensuring CAP Thomas Kuehn, Finance Director. 4. Planned Completion Date for CAP The City will complete the CAP during fiscal 1997. 5. Plan to Monitor Completion of CAP The City will continue to retain required records. -129- f 'a \ , ^ ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 27,1997 '7 7 ROLL The Council met on the above mentioned date with the follo^^g monbers nresent: 9 j. M^or Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members J. Diann Goetten, Charles KeU^^^^Wduu’cT'V Flint. Barbara Peterson was absem. Representing StafiFwere City AdministratorKl9j)y|^ Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Assistant Planiung and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaf&on, Planner/Zoning Administrator Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. (*#1) CONSENT AGENDA Items #8,9,10,15,16,17,19,20, and 22 were added to the Consent Agenda. Goetten nK)ved, Flint seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (•#2) ASSESSMENT HEARING OF MAY 6,1997 - NORTH LONG LAKE/LONG LAKE COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION SEWER PROJECT Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Assessment Hearing of May 6, 1997 regarding the North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club Addition Sewer Project. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (•#3) REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 12,1997 Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of May 12,1997. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (*#4) RECONVENED 1997 BOARD OF REVIEW MAY 12,1997 Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to approve the Meeting of the Reconvened 1997 Board ofReviewofMay 12, 1997. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS There was no member of the Park Commission in attendance. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Commission Chair Dale Lindquist had no comments at this time. r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 PUBUC COMMENTS Maury Taylor, 550 Old Long Lake Road, asked the Council to consider improvements to the intersection of Old Long Lake Road and Highway 12. He reported that the intersection has become dangerous. Taylor said there have been a number of changes on East Long Lake Road from Spring Hill Road down to Highway 12 resulting in increased trafiBc, lakeshore erosion, and safety issues. Taylor said he has seen more speeding in the evening hours and racing on *he east side of the lake. He reported that a car went off the road last month into the lake. Taylor asked the Council to consider prohibiting parking along the roadway, noting the limited roadway width, which he believes will aid in reducing congestion and litter. He suggested speed bumps be placed on the roadway to eliminate racing noting the road currently functions as a cut off. He also suggested eliminating access from Highway 12 to Old Long Lake Road. The Council asked Moorse to investigate the^e issues. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#5) ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS AND ANTENNAS - ORDINANCE NO. 161,2ND SERIES Van Zomeren referenced a letter from U.S. West concerning amending the proposed ordinance to include their ability to have a telecommunications tower as an extension of thw business at their building at 3601 Shoreline Drive in Navarre. A representative of that company appeared before the Council at their last meeting. Van Zomeren reported that the propos^ ordinance would allow for PCS antennas as secondary uses on municipal structures such as water towers in the RR-IB Zoning District. Van Zomeren noted that the Planning Commission has held two public hearings on this issue and recommends approval of the ordinance with the caveat that a work session with industry representatives may be required if the need for more capacity is shown. Van Zomeren said the moratorium on telecommunication towers will expire on June 10. Moorse indicated the telecommunications engineering consultant, John DuBois, was in attendance to answer any questions. The meeting was opened to public comments. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#5 - Telecommunications Towers and Antennas Ordiriance Amendment - Continued) Donald Currier, 60 Cygnet Place, said he is an amateur radio operator. He is concerned with the maximum height change for amateur radio operator towers from 65 to 55 . He feels this is too restrictive based on information regarding his particular use. Moorsc informed the Council that this change was recommended based on discussions with DuBois. Moorse said the City is attempting to minimize the number and hei^ of antennas, but the portion of the ordinance relating to this amateur use is minimal. Jabbour noted that the discussions relating to this issue wU continue into the future. He indicated that topography and other criteria enter into determining the height of antennas. Goetten reported that a similar problem occurred regarding an amateur radio operator tower on Fox Street. Currier reported how the antennas operate and believes 70' would be a r^onablc height for the need. His particular equipment would extend 5* beyond the 65' high antenna. He asked for reconsideration. Moorse said this portion of the ordinance would be changed or amended if the Council recommended. Kelley suggested leaving the height at 65' and asked how the figure was derived. Moorse indicated it was not clear how the current 65 foot height restrirtion was first determined. Goetten said the amateur radio operators should be notified of any change to the height restriction. Goetten and Jabbour both recommended maintaining the 65' height requirement. Greg Korstad of Larkin-Hoffinan Law Firm was present representmg APT, a PCS service provider. He opined that the two water towers would not be able to serve the entire City. His client is under operation and unable to service Orono due to the moratorium. He would like to see the moratorium end so providers may determine their service needs in this community. He asked the Council to keep the issue open if the ordmance is passed so the industry can move quickly and effectively in developing ant^a sites. Korstad noted that the PCS providers are not in the buriness of constructing antennas and would prefer to use structures currently in place. Jabbour informed Korstad that Tom Alexander of his firm has previously addressed the Council on this issue. He noted the ordinance was drafted with advice from a telecommunications consultant. Jabbour indicated that Orono encompasses as well as surrounds other cities where other antennas sites are available. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#5 - Telecommunications Towers and Antennas Ordinance Amendment - Continued) Korstad said that the water tower in Long Lake was structurally inadequate. He asked that Orono do their part in providing for this need. Jabbour said Alexander informed the Council of the grid system used for establishing service. He feh the Council would need additional information to show that the proposed sites are inadequate to provide the service. Flint moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Ordinance No. 161,2nd Series, amending the City's telecommunications regulations, with the retention of the 65 foot height restriction for amateur radio antennas. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. («16) #2209 SPRING HILL GOLF CLUB - 700 SPRING HILL ROAD - CUPA^ARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3902 The ^plicant was present. Gaf&on reported that Staff was directed to redraft the resolution approving the CUP and variances with findings and conditions relating to discussions held at the May 12 Council meeting. He noted that a number ofissues have been resolved. These issues are as shown in the May 27 Staff memo, numbers 1-6. Gafiron indicated there are three remaining issues requiring resolution. Th^ pertain to access fi’om CoRd 6, upgrade of Spring Hill Road, and the proposed trail. A letter was recdved from Hennepin County accepting the existing CoRd 6 access subject to construction of a westbound bypass lane, an eastbound right turn lane (and possible acceleration lane), and closure of all existing field entrances. Council is being asked to determine whether the applicant shall be required to participate in any upgrade to Spring Hill Road. The final version of the trail agreement was also provided. Council was asked to provide any additions, subtractions, or revisions to the resolution as presented. Jabbour inquired how the applicant's use will affect Spring Hill Road. Gafiron said he felt there would be few, if any, impacts. Jabbour said he thought this was a moot issue with access fi'om CoRd 6. Kelley inquired if closing all accesses to Spring Hill Road before construction would present any problem. Tim Johnson said it would be used during tree removal, for demolition of the existing house, and building of the pump station. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#6 - #2209 Spring Hill Golf Club - Continued) KeWey asked Staff to analyze and document the condition of Spring HiU Road prior to any cons^ction activities, and close the road to Spring Hill Golf Club traffic after the collection IS completed. The developer could then be required to pay the cost of repairing any damage to the road caused by the construction. Hunter agreed. ^Johnson smd a split rail fencing will be removed to access the septic site area if need be. Jabbour informed that the road can be used if maintenance is required. Flint supported the CoRd 6 access as preferred by the neighboring property owners. Goetten also said CoRd 6 was the best access location. Kehty informed the applicant to keep the load limitations in mind during the sprinn months suggesting the house be demolished this summer. Gaffion s^d a preconstruction analysis of Spring HUl Road can be done. Any damages made to the road from construction wUl then be paid for by the appUcant. ^pa indicated that the letter of credit can include the estimated cost of repairing the 1 accderation lanes, which will be paid for by the Tom Cro% said he sent a letter to Dave Zetterstrom of Hennepin County o®rina the bypaM t^ looted on the north side of the road. He noted that Henne^ County had romidered cutting into the hiU but that proposal would be expensive. He asked S ability to continue negotiauons with the County regarding road ■■ner..t^ ^bour smd the City has an interest in upgrades off of CoRd 6 and is in agreement with ^.n Coun^ reading the bypass lanes. which was a City request. S““'araUon lane. Ga»on said it would beleasonable forthf Ct^ty to request an acceleration lane suggesting details can be worked out He questioned whether the acceleration lane would be required. Goetten agreed with Gaffron noting most traffic will be westbound. Ji^ur indicated that the applicant will have to provide the upgrades required by the MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#6 - #2209 Spring HiU Golf Club - Continued) Kelley noted there is a benefit with the golf club traffic going against the peak traffic as traffic will be heavier westbound in the evenings. He felt if the County requires it, he would support the upgrade. Jabbour asked that the recommendation remain as noted. Tom Crosby referenced his &xed letter proposing changes in the resolution. He proceeded to list his requested changes as follows with Council response: Page 11 of 16,7C - change to "implement other safety devices as required by Hennepin County. Council agreed. Kelley asked the applicant if they understood the signage and lighting requirements. Hunter agreed to adhere to code requirements. Kelley informed the applicant that the lighted intersection must meet code. Applicant and Council discussed the construction hours allowed as noted under item 10 on pages 13 and 14. Hunter requested the general construction hours be extended from 7 am to 7 pm, Monday through Saturday. Tim Johnson said this would occur during the months of June through September, and possibly October, if inclement weather exists. The noise ordinance limits the construction hours. Richard Krueger, Willowbrook Drive, said he would prefer not to hear noise early on Saturday mornings. He thought the understanding was no heavy equipment or cluun saw use would be conducted on Saturdays. Jabbour indicated the restriction applied to Sundays with discretion allowed by Staff for Saturday construction operations. Krueger suggested the start time of 9 am for Saturday construction. Council agreed to Saturday 7 am to 7 pm with a two hour restriction from 7 am to 9 am against noisy equipment. Crosby requested that the amount of land alteration be increased from 350,000 cubic yards to 400,000 as noted on page 1 and page 8. The plans have not changed but this figure more accurately reflects the amount. Council was informed that it would have no other effect. Page 3, point #4 (unnumbered) under 8, regarding Wetland #15 - creates new wetland instead of expand. Page 5, 12 A, "selective trimming and tree removal" instead of hand trimming. Number 17 on page 6 - "..most appropriate to require that access to the golf course be via the present access (added) on County Road 6". - I t MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#6 - #2209 Spring Hill Golf Club - Continued) Page 8, #2, under Legal Combination. Prior to issuance to building permits was changed to "Prior to 1/1/98". Flint questioned how the selling of the portion of wetlands south of Spring Hill Road would be affected by the legal combination. Crosby indicated that this particular property is a separate tax parcel. Flint noted that this wetfand is used to clean water from the golf course and recommends that it be left unobstructed to ensure water quahty. Cro^ indicated that regardless of ownership, the wetland is protected as far as its function. He suggested a conservation easement be placed on the wetland in the future. Gaffron did not feel this property had to be legally combined with the golf club but did believe a conservation easement should be required before the property leaves the ownership of the golf club. The easement issue was discussed. Morrison suggested the wetland be City owned or an easement placed on it. Goetten asked why there was a change. She was informed that a neighbor has asked to purchase the property south of Spring Hill Road. Momson said the neighbor would want to control the dry portion of the property. Crosby indicat^ that it would be more beneficial for the new owner to provide the easement. Council agreed to the wording for this particular parcel that ^if conveyed, H is subject to standards of Orono wetlands easement". Gaffron will amend the resolution language regarding the legal combination of all parcels, an indication that this parcel is not included but requires granting of a conservation easement. Page 8, 3Aiii - Also includes "rest station". Crosby asked that "to greatest extent possible" be added to both sentences under 4B on page 9 noting the intention is to contain the runoff and grading. Kell^ questioned who would make the judgment of 'wliat is conadered practical. Gaffron said if a spill occurs, it would be difficult to enforce. Crosby said his concern was directed at mainteiiance of the golf course versus accidents, as all of the runoff from the course will not drain into^ the NURP pond as indicated by the statement. Gaffron supported this change. Flint did not. Tom Barrett noted that the issue is not defined as to enforcement. He questioned what would trigger the violation and what the remedy would be if such an event happened. The CUP process would be a remedy but felt the change to the language as suggerted by Crosby would lay grounds for dispute. He feels the language as originally drafted is ^orceable. Jabbour said he would defer to the City Attorney ’s recommendation. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (p6 - #2209 Spring Hill Golf Club - Continued) Crosby said the standard was unrealistic. He said the second sentence will not occur as all of the water will not drain into the treatment pond. Barrett suggested breaking the wording down into cases. Crosby said he was satisfied with the first sentence. He suggested the second sentence be changed to, "design subject to City approval to divert runoff to the extent topography pcnmts’'. Hunter said a qualifier was necessary for the plans. Marshal Braman noted that the majority of the runoff would enter the ponds but if any runs off onto the grass, h would be considered in violation. He said the design directs water to areas agreed to by the City Engineer and MCWD. Moorse suggested the place for enforcement is with the design plans themselves regarding final grading. He suggested the wording of "final grading and landscaping plans subject to City ^proval". Drainage would then run to where designed. Barrett agreed with this language. Council agreed with change. Item 5C, page 10, referencing membership in Audubon Program, Crosby asked th^ the last sentence be changed to "obuun memtership if accepted". When asked why this issue was included, Gaflfron said he has attempted to include all commitments made by the applicant during the review process. Page n, item 6, change "completely invisible" to "mostly invisible". Crosby suggested changes to items 7A and 7B. Kelley suggested eliminating these items but Goctten noted that County approval had not yet been obtained. Jabbour recommended eliminating A and B. Gaf&on suggested exchan^ng 7A with the information regarding applicant repairing Spring Hill Read if damag^ to pre construction condition. Staff would make a pre-construction analyris. 7C - "as agreed upon" was added regarding westbound traffic auxiliary lane. Page 12, Dii, Crosby suggested referencing the plans previously submitted to the City. Moorse asked that the date of the plans be noted. Gaffiron recommended referencing the exhibit. Under Diii, Crosby asked that the item state the fencing shall "generally be of low opaqueness and permit rustic but opaque fence for safety reasons or separation reasons . The separation refers to where the trj^ runs near the tee at hole #6. Crosby said the plans are not to fence the course. Jabbour said he would prefer wording prohibiting future fencing of the course. 8 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CTTF COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#6 - #2209 Spring Hill Golf Club - Continued) Flint noted that the concept was to maintain animal movement. Jabbour suggested adding "to maintain habitat". Crosby suggested the wording be placed under the trail section and adding another under accessoiy structure and under a general category. Moorse suggested the plans be referenced and show specifically where low opaque and opaque fencing will be located. Crosby indicated that the trail plans have not yet been developed. Jabbour agreed but noted that the reasons why fencing is or is not needed should be stated. Gafifron recommended adding Div stating "types of fencing which would restrict'i^dlife movement are not approved and require amendment to the conditional use pernut".^ Crod?y asked that the safety and separation issues be included to show legislative history. Kelley asked that "generally" be eliminated. Moorse said the language should include "subject to City approval". Cro^y agreed. Kelley noted that there may be a future problem with cars driving onto Ae course. Hunter said the Council could be approached if this occurred. Jabbour informed the applicant that the Council is stron^y against fencing the course. Page 13,9Bii, changed to "golf club related activities". Crosby asked that a 9Biii be added stating, "other recreational activities limited to members". Under Cv, Crosby suggested adding, "and not reasonably listed under golf course operation use". Jabbour questioned who would define what is reasonable and what are related items. Concern was expressed over the use of "etc" under Civ. The City would like to see protection written in prohibiting use for large presentations. Jabbour indicated that the by-laws can be filed on record to use as a benchmark. Gafifron said a copy of the by-laws would then be required. Crosby asked to eUminate the "etc" and add "involving primarily members and their guests". Jabbour asked *hat "primarily" be eliminated. Barrett asked if the Council's intention is to allow wedding receptions. Kelley said it was. Jabbour siud, while the kitchen is limited in its use, food could be brought to the premises, and intensity of use should be considered. Kelley noted that the building itself will inhibit the use. Crosby indicated Civ could remain with "etc" eliminated and as noted above. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997(#6 - #2209 Spring Hill Golf Club - Continued) Moorse said the parldng and building size arc a limitation in itself but could be a condition. He suggested auxiliary use be limited to uses that could be accommodated by the planned parking spaces. Crosby said the golf course use aUows 20 spaces for every 1000 s.f The club house requires 60 ^aces and 120 are proposed. Kelley said he would support that. Gaffron added under iv, "for members and thdr guests". Kelley asked why the City would limit the use. Moorse said it was due to increased traffic and size of an event. Kelley noted other places wtto the City that allow such use. Goetten indicated that the ^plicant has already placed liimts upon themselves. Jabbour noted changes could occur in the future changing the use to that similar to other golf courses vwth meetings, receptions, use by churches, weddings, etc. Kelley made note of the high use by the previous owner. Jabbour agreed with the resolution as written. Cro^ said he would provide a copy of the by-laws but did not want theni included in the CUP Hunter agreed with ^ving the City access to the by-laws but voiced concern with making the by-laws public record. Barrett said the by-laws would be required as a basis of documentation. Crosby said he would provide information from the by-laws reflective of the issues involved under Civ. Jabbour asked that any information from the by-laws regarding density and use of facility be provided. Moorse questioned the use referred to as golf-related clubhouse activities noted under 9B, Seasonal Use. Cross country skiing was supported but mowmobiling was not. Flint suggested the use of "other non-motorized activities". Applicant and Council agreed. Crosby indicated that the real estate closing would occur on Tuesday, 5/28. Movem^ of trees is scheduled to begin Thursday, 5/30. The appUcant hoped to have construction work h figin on June 2. Crosby asked what additional information was needed to formalize the application to allow this schedule to be met. Jabbour informed him that the Co uncil would make a determination at this meeting. Kelley asked what would happen if situations occurred other than presented during construction. Gaffron said modifications are expected. Any major changes would be brought to Council's attention. Kelley asked that in the future the golf club present major proposed improvement project plans before the Council early in the year. This would enable the Council to maintain an understanding of the golf club's comprehensive plan. Crosby concurred. I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997(#6 - #2209 Spring HiU Golf Club - Continued)Jabbour noted that the applicant is willing to proceed with a trail along the perimeter of the golf c.ub. The City will in turn be the agent for the tunnel project. The Park Commission provided a trail plan but the site is timhed by the wetlands. Council and Staff agree that filling of wetlands for a trail would be bad poliQT. The applicant will work with the Park Commission regarding the trail plan. Rint ^ work with the applicant r^arding the trail plan. Flint said he is satisfied with the general conceptual statements relating to the trail. Council reviewed provisions requiring further auction. Regarding wetland nutigation credits, Jabbour indicated that the applicant has asked for agreement to maintain a portion of the credits to allow for buUding on site if necessary. Council approved. Barrett asked to establish a date for the Developer's Agreement as noted under item 12 on page 15. Crosby deferred to Gaflfron. Gafifron said some discussion was required. It was noted that the Developer’s Agreement is required prior to grading. Crosby suggested the Developer’s Agreement be completed in portions noting they are bound by the use limitations. Barrett, Council and Applicant in agreement with providing Devdopefs Agreement prior to grading. Gafiiron said boilerplate is generally used as a guideline for the Developer’s Agreement. He asked for Council direction. Gaffron noted areas requiring further detiul, the weir for the Krueger wetland situation, road improvements, trail, construction damage to Spring Hill Road, easements for ponding, and public and private expectations. labour suggested Gaffron work wth City Attorney to draft the Developer's Agreement Gaffron concurred. He noted that internal grading is not as critical an area. Jabbour stated that the agreement is required before grading can begin. Crosby asked that grading be in one Developer’s Agreement and the other issues be in another. Jabbour asked that public improvements be taken care of immediately. Kruger voiced concern with details regarding the weir on Wetland 17. He has only viewed a letter from Braman on the subject. He would like to have a written agreement with the developer to eliminate future problems. Jabbour indicated that the permit is based on the plans submitted. Crosby and Braman said they would memorialize with Medina an agreement with Krueger and present a copy of said agreement to Kruger. Jabbour told Krueger to obtain a copy of the Council minutes for his record. TITTIT>TI m: 1 iTil I m • TOW 1 •loii ^;iin iT« uro iTcif] p.WiT*ri p.ii]#riTTT«.^Tri mvi •nmv/tiTi r« ■«ipWl I riMtVMcPUr W Vri I • VMU U fTiT^:T|Ti Iillliv • r« r»Tir« iwii re f)i«re m^^:Tirirc*ni icKi •Will I •TTtW:1 1 f f I^^tTTTi n rreiT:^ %ll¥« •llWniMI F;vre#f:i litre «¥vr«inWfi refill TKTT TTRT tiiiiciri •retp.wre iireire W/:1¥t ^jinnire i«re amTiW'.Tinif r^ii iTii ii^Lirenfre auiifre'1 fV/<i •}:rer« f¥V:T¥T:1 ^•¥reiT«:¥ii r«¥i^^re r«ii¥t ^iTi [ifiipi !• MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#7 - #2221 Sven Wasberg - Continued) Van Zomeren said the Planning Commission recommends approval as noted in items 1-7 in the Staff memo. Jabbour asked about the opinions of the neighbors. He was informed that Wasberg owns the property to the west. The neighbors on the east originally were concerned with the hdght of the structure but applicant has worked with the neighbor regarding landscaping and setback. Wasberg had no further comments to add. Kell^ was informed that the applicant also owns the property next door (to the west) and will move from that residence to the new residence. Goetten questioned the discrepancy in calculations and why the residence cannot be moved out of the 0-7S* setback. Van Zomeren indicated that due to the lakeshore and lagoon, there is no buildable pad. If the residence was moved behind the 75* setback, there would be no turnaround area. Goetten asked the square footage of the proposed residence. Van Zomeren said the projected footprint is approximately 1200 s.f. with an additional SOO s.f for garage. Wasberg indicated that the total square footage would be 2500. Jabbour voiced concern with the heightened profile from the lakeshore from its existing low profile. He noted the applicant's attempt to reduce hardcover but indicated there was an increase in hardcover. Van Zomeren reported that the proposed residence meets the height requirement for this zoning but recognized the major visual change. Jabbour indicated that the flavor of the community was changing. Goetten said she is concerned with substandard properties in the area adding additional structural coverage. She suggested the applicant be put on notice that no additional structural coverage be added in the future. Van Zomeren noted that the applicant did reduce the hardcover. Goetten agreed that the property presents a hardship but indicated larger lots are some times needed for such projects. Kelley was informed that the property is .439 (dry biuldable) acres in the 1 acre zoning district. Kelley noted the applicant owns the adjacent property; but due to the location of the lagoon, a combination of lots would not assist this application. Flint moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3903. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 #2230 GEORGIA HACKNEY, 2184 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3904 Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3904. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (*#9) #2231 EVAN ANDERSON, 1260 SPRUCE PLACE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3905 Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3905. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (•#10) #2232 WOODSMITH, LTD., 1520 FOX STREET - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3906 Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3906. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#11) #2234 DOUGLAS E. WALDOCH, 4215 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3907 The ^plicant was present. Van Zomercn reported that the applicant seek** lot area and lot width variances to remove the existing residence to construct a new residence. The lot is 90' wide requiring a 50' variance. The property is .664 acres in the 1 acre zoning district. The Planning Commission reviewed the application and recommended approval. Van Zomeren reviewed the survey not'mg the existing house sits near the north property line and the garage is located in the road right-of-way. More property is required for conformity. The applicant had no further comments. Goetten clarified that the lot size is 28,905 s.f She requested a breakdown be shown of any hardcover and structure in the 0-75' setback. She questioned a shed located in the 0- 75' setback. Van Zomeren was asked if the Planning Commission recommended removal of the shed. Van Zomeren said they did not. She reported that the property met the structural coverage allowance, and the Planning Commission did not discuss the hardcover in the 0-75' setback. Goetten recommended removal of the shed fi'om the 0-75' setback. The shed can be placed elsewhere on the property. Goetten explained to the applicant the reason for removal of hardcover m the 0-75 ’ setback not'mg stairways are allowed. 1 Celley and Flint agreed. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#11- #2234 Douglas Waldoch - Continued) Jabbour inquired about the property's elevation. Waldoch said the initial 75' is flat with the home located in the steeper grade. Jabbour noted there was no need for the shed to be located in the 75' setback. Waldoch said the distance from the house to the lake is far. Jabbour indicated that the City has been consistent with asking for removal of hardcover within the 75' setback. Waldoch noted the shed serves a function but would be willing to move it to another location to gain approval of the application. Van Zomeren clarified that the shed could remain elsewhere on the property. Kelley suggested the shed be placed behind the average lakeshore setback. Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3907 with removal of the shed out of the 0-75' setback. The shed can be placed elsewhere behind the average lakeshore setback on the property if hardcover requirements are met. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#12) #2235 MARTIN B. SCHNEIDER, 2180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT - RESOLUTION NO. 3908 The applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that the application is for rn amendment to a conditional use permit for the Old Hill Schoolhouse located in the RR-IB Zoning District. The property is 25,400 s.f The Lake Minnetonka Environmental School is requesting relocation to this property. The Planning Commission recommended approval subject to the building receiving a certificate of occupancy before the school relocates into the building, a future change in tenancy would require an amendment to the CUP, and review of the ^ appropriate use classification and required state building code rules and regulations for the proposed use. Goetten questioned the limiting of the occupancy to 56 when the prior usage occupMcy was 83. Van Zomeren indicated that the number was derived from the school's maximum enrollment. Goetten siud she would prefer the number be increased to allow a change in enrollment. Kelley inquired if the building code would require the building be sprinkled. Jabbour indicated that this issue was not in the Council's jurisdiction. Schneider reported that he would perform what is required for the given occupancy and accept code standards. For the record, Schneider said he did disagree with the assignment of the occupancy as the change in classification triggers meeting the building code regulations. He noted this is a separate issue and is willing to proceed with the application based on the Planmng Commission’s recommendation and according to the resolution as stated. He does, however, question the findings of the Staff. MDIUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#12 - #2235 Martin Schneider - Continued) Kelley inquired who makes the decision regarding classification. Schneider stud El classification allows for occupancy up to 50 children up to grade 12 and E2 allows more than SO. Schneider asked the application be moved forward pending code review and will comply with code. Kelley a^ed if the classification is determined by Staff. Moorse said the inspection staff rexiews it. Kelley asked if this has been done. Van Zomeren said an architect prepares the code compliance, and it is reviewed by Building Ciucial Lyle Oman for completion and appropriateness. Oman performed that review. Moorse noted that the El and E2 classification requires a fire suppression ^steni. He said the change in the building; code triggered the need for the fire suppression system but the code compliance has not yet been reviewed. Van Zomeren indicated th?.t this would be conducted by the building official, after an architect had prepared an analysis. Jabbour indicated that the process can be q)pealed citing an example when the inspector did not agree with the arclUtect's findings. Jabbour reported that Schneider suggested the City's clasrification of the property before as B2 and now as E2 caused him to lose his grandfather rights. Jabbour clarified for the record and in defense of the City that Staff had made every attempt to get the former occupant in compliance without success. Whether the building is sprinkled is not within the Council's jurisdiction. It is a subject of the building code. Schneider informed Jabbour that he will continue with the process noting he could appeal if necessaiy. Jabbour and Kelley both noted that regardless of what occurred in the past, the rules regarding children occupying the building have to be followed. Van Zomeren informed the Council that the prior occupant, the art school, had moved into the bu'lding without a certificate of occupancy. The City then had to make attempts to gtun compliance over 3-1/2 years. The B2 classification was for the art center. The Building Official did not observe children on the premises during his inspection. While the past classification may have been incorrect, the classification should be determined before am/ new use is allowed. Van Zomeren confirmed for Schneider that the building dies not have a certificate of occupancy. Schneider rqiorted that he is not affiliated with the art school. He gained possession of the property again when the art school defaulted on their contract for deed in Frfiruary, 1997. Jabbour said the Council would like to expedite and facilitate the application. He indicated that the building can be shown to people prior to receipt of the certificate of occupancy. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 {#\2 • U2235 Martin Schneider - Continued) Schneider indicated that he originally purchased the building in 1989 and maintained the current use. The building is currently for sale. He noted the problems with having to add a fire suppression system to the building, both structural and financially. He expressed concern that the City may not want to maintain the building as a school. Jabbour said the philosophy of the City is not to become involved in the use but indicated the Council is in support of the project. Van Zomeren said the resolution does not include a maximum number for occupancy. She recommended a number be included. Schndder noted that the building code is based on the building size and age of occupants. Van Zomeren said the number of occupants based on the building code is consistent with the resolution as drafted. Kdl^ moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resc* ation No. 3908. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#13) #2236 WILLIAM H. BOCKMANN, 1090 LOMA LINDA AVENUE- VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3909 The applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that the application is a request for side yard and hardcover variances for removal of an existing one-car garage and to install a two-car garage. It was noted that the Council had not been provided with the surv^ for their review. The property is .215 acres in the 1 acre zoning district. It does not meet lot area or width. Van Zomeren indicated that the location of the well limits the location for the new garage. She reported that the Planning Commission recommended approval for a 2.6* side yard variance and an increase fiom 37.2% to 38.98% hardcover in the 75-250* setback where 25% is allowed. The Commission asked that a caveat be included putting the applicant on notice that no future hardcover would be allowed. Mr. Bockmann said the garage would actually be 1* from the property line due to the well. KellQ^ noted that conceptually the garage is located in the roadway and needs to be moved. He understood the need for a 2 car garage and supported its placement due to the well location and approval by the neighboring properties. Goetten reported that it was not possible to make any determinations without having the surv^ available. MB4UTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCTL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#13 - #2236 William Bockmann - Continued) Van Zomcren sud the Staff report was completed from the survey submitted. She said the surv^ indicates the existing garage location is 3' from the north property line but is proposed at 2.6’. Acknowledgment letters from the neighbors we included. Van Zomeren said hardcover calculations need to be redone as required by the surveyor. Bockmann said there was a problem with the location of the nwghbor*s retaining wdl. The submitted survey is wrong and the garage will be built at 1'. Van Zomeren said the resolution would have to be revised to reflect this change. Jabbour asked how this could be feeflitated. Van Zomeren said the resolution can be amended but hardcover calculations need to be changed. Goetten voiced concern with the garage location at 1' from the property line. It was noted that the building inspector will require a fire wall. Van Zomeren indicated that the hardcover calculations will probably not change from those reflected in the memo, however, she indicated that the resolution will not be certified until a correct survey is received. Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3909 gituiilng a vjulaiice for 1090 Loma Linda Avenue for a side setback variance of 1' for the proposed garage addition with removal of the current garage out of the right-of-way per the re^lution as amended. The well separation was noted as the hardship. The City Clerk is directed not to sign the resolution until such time that the corrected survey has been submitted. Goetten asked that the she be provided a copy of the amended resolution. Barrett said the motion was satisfactory. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#14) #2237 JIM AND ROXANNE STASIK, 1270 WILDHURST TRAIL - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3910 Roxanne Stasik was present. Van Zomcren reported that the application is for a hardcover variance to replace an existing deck over non-structural hardcover. There will be no increase in hardcover but the variance allows the current 49.47% of hardcover to remain in the 75-250 setback. The deck is located on the second story. The lower level hardcover will not ^ removed. Van Zomeren noted that the deck replacement would not have required a variance if completed board by board. i i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#14 - #2237 Jim and Roxanne Stasik - Continued) Goetten inquired what hardcover was located in the 0-75' setback. Van Zomcren indicated that there is 480 s.f. of hardcover including blacktop and stairs. Goetten stat^ the hardcover amount on the property is about two times what is allowed and suggested some removal of hardcover to offset the requested deck replacement. Mrs. Stasik said the property has a steep incline requiring the blacktop trail to the lake. This enables them to move lawn equipment down to the lake. She said the pro^rty conformed to code when buUt in 1981. Stasik indicated that the pool was also bmlt at that same time but the permit would have been taken out by the pool company. She said the driveway was necessary due to the steep incline and need for a turnaround enabling them to egress and ingress their property. During the winter months, they have to park on the turnaround as the driveway is too difficult to traverse. Jabbour asked about the line of rock to the lake. Stasik said their home is located below Saga Hill and the rock prevents runoff from coming to the house. She has a number ot large gardens to lud erosion control. Jabbour questioned whether the proper permits were obtained resultmg m the large amount of hardcover. Jabbour asked Staff if a review ww conducted of hardcov^ and structural coverage in relation to previously issued permits. Van Zomeren said the review was not conducted. Jabbour asked that the facts be recorded as part of the record. Goetten said she could not support the application request without asking for a reduction in hardcover. Stasik questioned what coidd be eliminated. Goetten said no safety ns s should be taken. Stasik said while the gardens are old, there is plastic underneath but most likely docs not function. Van Zomeren indicated there was 3765 s.f. ot with plastic. Goetten asked that appUcam remove a like amount of plastic to offset the amount of additional hardcover. Jabbour suggested removal of an equal amount ot plastic for the size of the deck at 125 s.f Stasik agreed. Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3910 subject to removal of plastic underlayment of 125 s.f Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Mayor/CouncU Report foUows the City Administrator’s Report.) ENGINEER REPORT (*#15) PAY REQUEST #5 AND FINAL - LIFT STATION #28 RENOVATION Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to approve the Final Request for Payment of Uft Station #28 Renovation Project to Ford Construction Co., Inc., in the amount ot 51,9» /. /1. Vote: Ayes Nays 0. MDOITES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (*#16) APPROVE OFFERMAN EASEMENT - LONG LAKE SEWER PROJECT Gocttcn moved, Flint seconded, to approve a sewer easement for the North Long Lake Sewer project on property owned by Joseph H, and Lucille Oflferman including a payment of $1,600. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (•#17) AWARD BID FOR NORTH LONG LAKE/LONG LAKE COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION SEWER PROJECT Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to award the bid for the North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club Sewer Project to Barbarossa & Sons, Inc., in the low bid amount of $874,930.01. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#18) COUNTY ROAD 19/TONKAVIEW DRAINAGE SITUATION Moorse reported that the resolution involves a storm sewer project. Gappa presented an overview of the drainage problem. Water runs down Tonkaview causing water problems to the Bessesen and Sawicki properties. Staff proposes construction of a detention pond on the Kathleen Ash property to control the overflow by use of an existing culvert and catch ba»n. Gappa said the proposed location for the pond is on a 1 acre lot in the 1 acre zoning district created in 1966. The house was built in 1983. It is currently confonrang. The proposal is for a permanent easement for the pond and a temporary construction easement for installation of a culvert. The owner would like to add an addition to the home in the future and asks that this be approved without requiring a variance. An easement will not affect the ability to add an addition but limits that portion of the property. Gappa indicated that if the home were to be damaged beyond repair, the area meets the 80% requirement allowing for building without variances. Gappa said tlie owner was contacted. A written offer was made for $7500. The land is currently valued at $0.75/s.f The officer is at $1 .25/s.f due to tree removal and loss of area. A letter was received from Ash stating she would grant the easement for a settlement amount of $10,000. Goetten asked to ensure that the property owner, if impacted, would be allowed to m^e property improvements for an addition. She feels the Council should make that promise to the property owner. V. V ; J MINUTES OF TEIE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#18 > County Road 19/Tonkaview Drainage Situation - Continued) Kelley, noting the runoff problem having been created by homes built upstream, asked what position the City can make regarding this increase in flowage. Code states that construction of new or improved residences cannot alter the flow of runoff leaving their property. He suggested a pond be built on those properties or request assistance in building the pond fi-om those home owners. Gappa said the lots had been previously platted and have a steep incline that would prevent the construction of ponding areas. Kelley indicated that a stormwater management plan would enable the City to seek restitution fix>m owners of residences upstream creating additional runoff. Jabbour said the stormwater management plan shows how water is managed and how stormwater projects can be paid as well as fund accumulation. Goetten said the plan would also inform the City where ponds should be built. Kelley questioned whether the cost of the project can be assessed to these home owners. Barrett indicated that the City would have to demonstrate the benefit. Jabbour said if a stormwater plan had been in place, it could have informed the City where the pond should be built and how it would be assessed. The cost of the project is $51,780 and $10,000 proposed for the easement. Gappa said the stormwater fund would receive contributions fi’om all property owners. He views this project as the number one priority in viewpoint of stormwater management. Flint inquired what the triggering mechanism would be for a pond requirement if a stormwater management plan was in effect, whether a subdivision or building pemut. Gappa smd each home is currently evaluated and subdivisions are reviewed as a whole. Jabbour indicated that the City and water will be studied and re^onal ponding areas determined. Residents upstream can make contributions to a pond rather than build a NURP pond. Jabbour said developers would prefer that option. The fund would be levied by on-going fees and by new development. It is currently micro-managed by individual issues instead of proactively. Jabbour said building permits trigger the action. Gappa noted that if a pond cannot be built on the particular property, a contribution would be made to a pond downstream. Mr. Bessesen noted that if the homes upstream had been required to contain water on their properties and not add to flowage, there would not be the problem that is occurring today. He questioned how excess runoff is controlled. He was informed that while there are structural coverage limitations, there are no hardcover controls on non-Iakeshore properties. mb«jtes of the regular orono city council MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 (#18 - County Road 19/Tonkaview Drainage Situation - Continued) Kelley moved, Flint seconded, to approve payment of $10,000 to Kathleen Ash for a permanent easement and approve construction of the County Road 19/Tonkaview Lane Storm Drainage Improvement Project at an estimated cost of $51,780 less any cost sharing contributions provided by Hennepin County. The City Administrator is directed to administer the funding. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Kelley suggested the County be asked to contribute more money towards this project. Kelley was informed that the project would be constructed in about two months. Goctten asked Staff to keep Council informed of any updates. (*#19) SCHEDULING THE SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENT BONDS - RESOLUTION NO. 3912 Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3912 to issue and sell $1,760,000 general obligation sewer and water improvement bonds of 1997 and declaring official intent. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (*#20) MONITORING WELL SEALING AT OLD CITY HALL PROPERTY Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to authorize Braun Intertec to proceed with the well sealing, letter report and petro fond reimbursement application at a total cost of $1,633, and to amend the 1997 budget to reflect the expenditure from the Building Fund. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#21) PLANNING INTERN Moorse requested a student intern be hired to asrist with the work load and projects related to planning and zoning issues. Jabbour supported the idea. Kelley asked how revenues and expenses stand in regards to the budget. Moorse said they were as expected. Kelley asked if the fees were adequate to cover the cost of the planning reviews. Moorse said this has not been studied. Moorse v<as asked by Kelley to review whether the revenue generates enough to cover the work produced by each person. Jabbour not^ that the City is not a profit center. Kelley responded that the general tax payer should not have to support applications without benefit. \u MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997(#21 - Planning Intern - Continued) Van Zomeren said she feels the fees being charged are appropriate. She indicated that work flow problem lies not with the applications but rather the number of calls and personal visits of people with questions that require staff time for research. Jabbour suggested other surrounding communities be polled to determine fees. Gaffron smd this procedure has been followed for the past 15 years. The fees are regularly reviewed based on neighboring cities’ fees and what is appropriate. Increases aie made when need is shown. He indicated that the buUding permits generate revenue and pay for more than the salaries of the two building inspectors. Jabbour asked how many hours per week Van Zomeren and Gafifron work^. It was noted that no overtime pay is provided. He noted that while the amount of time spent on a project is charged back to the project, citi^ Spring Hill Golf Club as an example, the mon^ is paid to the City and not reflected in salary to the employee. Kelley suggested this topic be discussed in a work sesrion. Jabbour said he felt the City should provide financially for overtime work. Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the proposal of hiring a student intern to assist with planning and zoning projects at a rate of $8.00 per hour for a exceed $6,000 to be funded fi-om the contingency account. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays u. Jabbour expressed gratitude to Gaffron for his work achievements. He asked Gafifron to review street files for permit history with Van Zomeren. (*#22) ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS - GOLF COURSE IRRIGATION SYSTEM Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to authors: advertisement for bids for installation of an irrigation system for the Orono Municipal Golf Course. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCBL REPORT Moorse presented an update on the Fullerton Subdivision Application regard'mg Park Dedication Fee. 1 he City Attorney submitted the Coundl’s response to the applicant regarding the Park Dedication fee at the amount of $12,800 per lot. This fee was tosed on other Park Dedication fees found to be reasonable for subdivisions in Orono. The applicant's attorney rejected the offer recommendmg a fee ot $8,000 per lot. Jabbour said the fee of $12,800 per lot is consistent with fees charged to other . subdivisions. Coundl all agreed to retain the $12,800 per lot fee to maintain consistency. ♦ y MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CTTY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Tom Barrett gave a histoiy of the law firm and recent changes made. The corporation is being dissolved as of May 21 with service provided through May 31. Barrett and other colleagues are now attorneys ^mth Hinshaw & Culbertson. Barrett is currently the City's counsel with Tom Radio substituting when necessary. Jabbour suggested retaining the same attorney and schedule a meetiiig with staff and Barrett regarding issues and services provided. Moorse said this would be a temporary solution until an agreement can be reached. Fhnt asked that Barrett provide information regarding thdr team of municipal attorneys. Kc^ey moved, Goetten seconded, to authorize the City Administrator to sign authorization forms transferring the City's I. ^al files to Hinshaw & Culbertson. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Jabbour extended his appreciation for the work by Barrett and Radio. Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to approve the following license: Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Garbage & Refuse C<rilector*s License Goetten moved, Flint seconded, to approve payment of the AH Funds Account. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. r - F ■ 'I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MAY 27,1997 ADJOURNMENT Goctten moved, Jabbour seconded, to adjourn at 10:58 p.m. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: Gabrid Jabbour, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Cleric i ■• I 25 iiiiL r y CQt,.MINUTES OF THE WEST NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING CONCERNING THE HIGHWAY 12 DESIGN ^0^ MAY 27,1997 ^ 9 J99 O/?,Oa 'O ..The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Jabbour. Jabbour indicated the location of the corridor for an upgrade of Highway 12 has now been selected. The next step is to develop a preliminary design for the roadway within the selected corridor. This is being done with input from representatives of the cities and other governmental agencies affected by the project. These representatives are serving on a Preliminary Design Committee. The role of the committee is not to change the corridor but rather to minimize the impacts of the roadway on affected property owners. Jabbour indicated the Preliminary Design Committee and the City Council need the input of the property owners along the corridor to ensure the design process addresses the concerns of the affected property owners. Jabbour indicated the city has divided the corridor area into two neighborhood areas. The west neighborhood area includes all properties west of Willow Drive. The east neighborhood area includes all properties east of Willow Drive. The city would like to form a neighborhood committee frudi each of the two neighborhood areas to provide input to the Council and to the city's .5?"TCsentatives on the Preliminary Design Committee regarding the design of the roadway. There be approximately 5 representatives on each of the neighborhood committees. The purpose of v.ieAghborhood is to serve as a communication channel between the city and the neighborhood i; the neighborhood up-to-date on the progress of the Preliminary Design Co<"?'nittee. a-id to c4 ,in input from the neighborhood regarding the preliminary design. Allen Engleman asked why the corridor could not be moved to the north versus to the south since there are no houses to the north side of the corridor. Jabbour indicated the corridor has to stay south of the St. George cemetery. Because the rail road can only have minimum curves, it requires a long distance to move the corridor farther to the north on the west side of the cemetery. Chuck Guerin, of Flamingo Wire, asked for clarification of where the corridor is located. Jabbour indicated the corridor is located along the current Burlington Northern Rail Road corridor. He explained the current east/west road system including new Highway 12. He indicated the new Highway 12 v^ll be a two lane freeway which will be the most effective traffic mover in the State. Mr. Guerin asked what the time table for the Highway 12 project is. Goetten indicated the Preliminary Design Committee is working with Mn/DOT to complete the preliminary layout of the roadway by the 1997 but that the committee is scheduled to continue to meet for approxim .tely 3 to 4 years as the details of the design are finalized. Jabbour indicated that Mn/DOT is in the process of completing an environmental assessment on the project which is to be completed in early 1998. The EA process is to determine whether an environmental impact study is needed. Roberta Morrison asked how far south the new right-of-way will be from the current right-of-way. Moorse indicated that west of Willow the new right-of-way will generally be approximately 35 feet south of the current right-of-way. Morrison then asked when the new road will be built. Jabbour indicated in 2001 or 2002. Jabbour indicated it is the city’s goal not to trap a person in a property that is to be acquired by Mn/DOT for the roadway. Jabbour indicated that any resident who is interested in serving on the West Neighborhood Highway 12 Committee should contact the City Administrator. Morrison then asked whether the property owners should hire an attorney to assist them in working with Mn/DOT regarding the purchase of their property. Jabbour suggested this would be a good idea at a later point in the process. Kelley indicated the city needs input from the property owners regarding issues such as the type of screening along the proposed roadway, lighting, etc. as the preliminary design is developed. Goetten indicated the general corridor location has been set but there is still some flexibility m relation to the exact location of the roadway within that corridor. Donna Cause, who lives on Stubbs Bay Road, asked how the roadway will get past the wetlands. She is concerned that if the wetlands are filled it could have a negative impact on their property in terms of stormwater drainage. Jabbour indicated Mn/DOT is working with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to address those issues. Rod Johnson, of 3740 West Wayzata Boulevard, asked what the purpose of the neighborhood committee is. He indicated his property is being acquired. He assumed the purpose of the committee is to address the design of the roadway. Jabbour agreed that the purpose of the committee is to enable input from the neighborhood regarding the design of the roadway. The meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m. r SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 ^0, JSo'i. ROLL % The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Councilmembers J. Diann Goetten, Charles Kelley, Barbara Peterson and Richard Flint. Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Radio, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, Public Services Director Greg Gappa and Recorder Lin Vee. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. (#1) SPRING HILL GOLF COURSE EAW - RESOLUTION NO. 3901 Marshal Braman, Tim Johnson, Jack Morrison and Tom Crosby were present representing the Spring Hill Golf Course. Jabbour introduced this item as a continuation of the May 19,1997 Council meeting, and indicated discussion will center on whether or not the City should require an EIS. He reviewed the EAW process stating that the DNR had requested additional information before making a recommendation on the need for an EIS. Gaffron reported that the DNR and proposers had met to deteimine what additional infoimation should be provided to the City to make an informed decision regarding the need for an EIS. After a May 7 meeting, Braman defined five items that the proposers would provide to fill the information gap. These items include: 1. Documentation of the changes and impacts on the Big Woods. 2. Assessment of the habitat changes by cover type throughout the site. 3. Development of a tree protection plan. 4. Protected waters permit. 5. Development of an erosion control plan. The DNR had indicated that once this information is delivered to the City of Orono, it would be unlikely that an EIS would be required. At this point, Council needs to determine if the information provided for the five items is satisfactory. Braman stated that extra people were brought in to compile the additional information requested. This entire group met on . ite to characterize the existing species, both plant and wildlife, in the Big Woods. L ts of the affected species are included in the information packet. The DNR was also concerned about the DNR protected wetland. The DNR has established the Ordinary High Water Mark for the impacted DNR wetland. The proposers are no longer plaiming to install a weir on the outlet of the wetland because it is already close to the historic OHWM. Plans for tree protection and erosion control are also included. Braman listed the additional professionals who helped to compile the information. 1 SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 1. Lee Frelich - University of Minnesota, College of Natural Resources, Forest Resources Division - 5 years of work on Doctorate degree on the Big Woods in Michigan in the Savannah and Porcupine Mountain areas (70,000 acres of Big Woods). 2. Jane Shuttleworth, RUST Environment and Infrastructure - 15 years of work with botanical and biological issues. 3. Thomas Braman - Biologist with Summit Enviro Solutions - Background in plant biology. 4. 5. Terry Jeffrey > Schoell & Madson - Background in trees with a Natural Resources degree from the University of Minnesota with emphasis in tree management. Margaret O'Brien Jeffrey - Schoell & Madson - Degree in Natural Resources with broad range of experience. Jabbour asked if there were any public comments. There were none. Jabbour noted that the City has been very concerned over the Big Woods and much documentation is included in the EAW regarding the impacts and mitigation of the Big Woods. Jabbour asked if staff was comfortable with the information provided. Gaffron responded that it was very detailed and appeared to adequately provide the information agreed to. Radio agreed that the process had been comprehensive to this point. He asked Braman if, in his professional opinion, they have provided the type and amount of information a scientist or engineer would require to document both positive and negative changes in this area. Braman responded that the information provided is actually beyond what a standard EAW would require. In his professional opinion, the proposer has adequately provided the type and amount of information a scientist or engineer would require to document both positive and negative changes in the area. Radio added that the documentation provides a better understanding of what is being lost and how to preserve what is there in the future. Flint asked for clarification on the three dates the golf course concept plans were done. Morrison responded that January 12,1995 was the preliminary plan, September 11,1996 is the intermediate and the final plan is dated January, 1997. The basic elements are final in the January plan but there may be minor changes such as movement of a sand bunker. No structural changes are anticipated. Flint questioned placement of the access - Spring Hill Roaa vs. County SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 Road 6. Morrison responded that the access issue will not change the design of the actual golf course. If access is off of County Road 6, a road will run parallel to a fairway. The existing plan shows access from Spring Hill Road. Jabbour noted this issue will be part of the conditional use permit and does not affect the determination of the need for an EIS. Radio commented that if the Council approved a plan during their CUP/variance review that was substantially different from the current proposal that the EAW process would be repeated. Morrison explained how access from County Road 6 could be achieved noting that it would not affect any wetlands and is along a practice facility on high ground. Jabbour asked again if there were any public comments. Dick Krueger, 1175 Willowbrook Drive, asked if the DNR had reviewed Schoell and Madson's report. Jabbour responded that if the DNR has, they have not communicated so to the City. The DNR asked that the information be submitted to the City. Krueger questioned if the City had the expertise to determine if the DNR concerns had been sufficiently satisfied. He also felt that Schoell and Madson's opinion could be biased since they are hired by the proposers. Jabbour noted the DNR had been asked to assist the City in obtaining information. He did not necessarily agree that the DNR's idea of cataloging and documenting was parallel with the City's philosophy of preserving. Krueger reiterated that a professional opinion should be made by an unbiased scientist regarding the information provided. Jabbour responded that the City is the final decision-maker. Morrison noted the developer has been continuously working with the DNR. The DNR had been invited to attend this meeting but they did not feel it was necessary, and they had indicated that an EIS would not be required. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve the completed EAW and that an EIS is not required for this project. Discussion continued. Kelley noted that a key word, "not", was missing from the resolution, quoting from Page 1, "Whereas, the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Spring Hill Golf Course Project has been reviewed by the City Council of the City of Orono to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement is required for the Project". Flint asked if Kelley was proposing to adopt this resolution. Kelley agreed. Radio suggested a motion to adopt the proposed Record of Decision with the attached findings, conclusions and determinations. SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 Kelley amended his motion to adopt the proposed Record of Decision with the attached findings, conclusions and determinations. Radio recommended the following technical changes: Page 5 of 8 - Finding 4 (i) - add "both voluntarily and to be required as conditions by the City to the conditional use permit" following "efforts made to mitigate the impacts." The purpose is to assure the Council's ability to address any additional environmental concerns in the conditional use permit. Crosby suggested this may also be addressed on Page 7 of 8. Page 6 of 8 - Finding 9 (a) (iv) - In the middle of the paragraph concerning agricultural chemicals, the sentence beginning "The Proposer has indicated a commitment to sound environmental management ..." should be changed to read, "The Proposer has indicated, and the City will likely require, a commitment to sound environmental management ...." Page 7 of 8 - Finding 9 (c) (ii) - Regarding agencies with authority to deal with degradation of surface or groundwater, "the City" should be added; Flint recommended adding "the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District" as well. Page 7 of 8 - J under Conclusions and Determinations should read, "The proposed Project taken in its entirety as a 200-acre site and considering various mitigating factors, both those voluntarily undertaken and those required by the City Council and other agencies,..." Page 3 of 8 - #4 (d) - The word "no" should be changed to "minimal" legal protections. Flint agreed with these corrections. He questioned #4 (f) (iv) on Page 4 of 8. Gaffron responded that this is an attempt to protect the Big Woods, i.e. not being able to take 8% of the property. Crosby added that normally in a subdivision the City could designate wetlands and ask for conservation easements. Since this is not a subdivision, technically the City couldn't ask for these. However, these easements will be granted by the proposers. Radio indicated the statement was correct and agreed that a subdivision does give greater ability to the City to require trails, easements, etc. Flint suggested eliminating this item as it indicates an EIS might be necessary because subdivision provisions do not exist. Radio agreed this item was not critical to the Record of Decision. Flint amended the motion to adopt Resolution No. 3901 approving the proposed Record of Decision on the Spring Hill Golf Club Project Environmental Assessment Worksheet with i\e attached findings, conclusions and determinations eliminating Item #4 (f) (iv) on Page 4 of 8. Ayes 5, nays 0. I SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 Crosby continued discussion of the access issue. He noted there was initial objection from the County to have access off of County Road 6. They have since met with the County Engineer in charge of access and the Engineer w ould not recommend using Spring Hill Road unless the access was moved west 150'. The County cannot find the permit for access to the Conference Center, so the access probably existed prior to the Conference Center. Today there are different regulations regarding the permitting process. Crosby stated a turn lane would be constructed on County Road 6 and a permit submitted to the County for access off of County Road 6. He was reasonably sure the County would approve access off of County Road 6 in the existing location. A recess was called from 7:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. (#2) MEETING WITH HUNTINGTON FARM HOMEOWNERS REGARDING THE COUNTY ROAD 6 UPGRADE AND THE CITY'S COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Charles Kelley was not present for discussion of this item. Several residents were present including Larry and Jan McCartney of 755 Hunt Farm Road, Jeff and Robin Martin of 760 Hunt Farm Road, Dave Wilson of 840 Hunt Farm Road and Mark Sprenger of 870 Hunt Farm Road. Steve Theis and Jim Grube represented Hennepin County. Jabbour stated that discussion of this item was to address some of the issues raised in a letter received from some Huntington Farm residents affected by the County Road 6 upgrade. He explained some of the background and role of Orono's Comprehensive Plan which was developed in the mid-70's. McCulley Road was designated as a bypass route for Orono to encourage traffic to use Highway 12 versus County Road 15. Moorse provided excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1980 that refer to McCulley Road or Ring Route, and the Engineer’s report from October of 1977 regarding the Ring Route concept. A reporter from the Lakeshore Weekly News asked if this item was an action item. Jabbour responded that it was not since action had been taken some time ago, but this was a time to address the concerns of a group of residents. McCartney expressed appreciation for the opportunity to be heard by Council. He indicated one of the major issues was the decision process, not the actual need for the upgrade. It appeared to him that "the squeaky wheel got the grease" when the actual placement was decided. When the road was staked out, it was obvious that some properties received much more impact than others. The overpass at Highway 12 will be an eyesore. Current access from Hunt Farm Road to County [tMiM rirmir^Tfi itroK •iwti mOiTil •iiirti [• ■ (•X«(«Ti iriT¥ITiim^TiTi I F:Ttr*^1ir^l ^riTtiRiroTti rir«ni ^ KWiaCil mii VC sinrc •Hire rtiiiririTiivc r«X:liC^lTtl •v/^«i MtfcaiiTn ii KVi m viTiifl [•Hire liriTTC [•Hire ^iroc P.U^tViiTsIVsl rtvctxiiic •XTiTt mfi n VH4C1 • j (•■II If] raOili®r«x.vT«rc [•xiuir«(^ti ^Kf:l r^Hirt vimvi iTsi ^Tiivaiire ^TiViRlCiniTniT^[ilUiVC [•xx«rc [•Kriv«r^iijriviiiivc ^xiir«WMiiri ^•T•JlT•m■l•Bl ^riviic ^XiTC •JTOC nVTiTlIWTi SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 McCartney questioned the overpass and how it would affect the properties in Huntington Farms. Jabbour responded the overpass has been contemplated since 1989 and has been discussed at many meetings. Goetten added there were many variations discussed on the Highway 12 route with County Road 6 being involved in every route. Much information has been published. Jeff Martin asked what the process was for making the shifts. Jabbour stated a public hearing was held. At that time, the design was only a sketch plan. There was some opposition to the whole road being done but the County had plans to make some type of improvement. Some residents voiced their opposition to losing trees and other impacts to their property. Based on feedback at the initial meeting, Hennepin County presented revised drawings. Martin said it seemed Council was talking only to those affected by the changes. Jabbour responded they were talking to everyone who attended the meetings. McCartney noted that had they been at the meeting that the road was moved closer to the Martins, they may have been able to change that design. Jabbour commented that the City has signed a contract with Hennepin County and the working drawings are being developed. The affected properties have been identified. Theis stated he would be willing to go over the meaning of the stakes on site again with anyone who was interested. Robin Martin stated he did not know that information the last time he was on site. Theis responded that he was able to tell them where the property line and outlot lines were and the approximate location of the road. They also discussed the concerns of lowering the road and the affect it would have. McCartney asked to have the shoulder identified and the location of the pavement. Jeff Martin asked why the roadbed had to be moved over. Jabbour responded that it was to limit the amount of impact on several properties on the proposed curve that were substantially affected, and to make sure the wetlands were not affected. Theis stated the road needs to connect at Orchard Park Road. A curve needs to be in place because of the design speed. McCartney questioned the placement of the overpass. Theis felt that when the Highway 12 design was complete, there would be reconstruction of this intersection. Any design of the interchange and overpass at this time is only speculation. The current County Road 6 project has to end and merge with the existing pavement. SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 Martin asked why the road had to move 25'. Theis stated it was only 8.5', not 25'. Grube clarified that the Homeowners Association wanted to be "isolated" as much as possible from the road and that the residents felt they had to deal with a berm, fencing, etc. on their own. Theis suggested the Association get together to decide what they want. Grube suggested the County would work with the Association. Jabbour commented that the Association could ask the County to move dirt from one area to another to create a berm as the City has no right to be on their land and would need easements. McCartney thought lowering the road 3' would have a big impact. He felt the road needed to be lowered and a berm and fence would greatly reduce the impact and improve safety. Grube reiterated that lowering the road would be good news to the Association and working with them to move the dirt would resolve that issue. Council urged the Association to continue to work with Hennepin County to develop a workable solution. Theis commented that there is a constraint to stay within the outlot used as a common area. The County agreed to work with the Homeowners Association to do as much as possible to lessen the impact of the road in the Huntington Farms area. Jan McC: rtney asked if the whole road by three of the homes she indicated is to be lowered or just the entrance to Hunt Farm Road. Theis responded that there are some variables. Grube added that it may not be lower at each of the three spots. By lowering the intersection at Hunt Farm Road and County Road 6 by 3', the "hump" will be taken out of the road. Those areas at the low points, also called sag or trough, may come up a little. Mailin asked if there was any reason the road couldn't be moved back to the previous layout. Theis responded that Layout 02 was acceptable and the road could be moved back to that design, however, Council has approved Layout 03. Martin noted this change was approved at the meeting he did not attend. Mrs. Martin reiterated that she had been told by the City that it was not necessary to attend that meeting. Jabbour responded that staff cannot predict what Council will do. Mrs. Martin asked who she could call to find out such information if not the person who signed the letter. Jabbour thought it would be best to attend any meeting that involved their property. Flint agreed adding it would be difficult to know when any determination would be made regarding Highway 12. Jabbour explained that throughout the public process Layout 02 was preferred by the County and staff, but Council directed the County to develop another plan to "spread the pain" more equally and Layout 03 was designed. Mr. Martin noted that the property across the road actually gains property. ■ 8 SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 Wilson asked what the process would be to move the road. Jabbour responded that the whole road would have to be moved, not just a portion. Council would have to reconsider their decision. Jabbour was not in favor of this. Grube added that a contract had been entered into between Hennepin County and the City. He expressed his wish to continue with the currently approved layout adding that what appears to be a minor move in one location actually tilts the whole design and impacts other areas. Unexpected "kinks" in the road affect the motorist. He reiterated his offer to work with the Homeowners Association in moving dirt to accommodate the process. Wilson asked again what the process is to have the Council reconsider the road layout. Jabbour responded that they would have to convince the Council to do so. He did not think the Council would agree to reconsider. The City would not benefit by reconsideration and there would not be any new infonriation to present. The vote to approve this layout was 5-0. Wilson asked what the vote would have to be to reconsider. Jabbour responded it would be 3 votes which is the majority. Jan McCartney asked if the decision of a previous Council held to a new Council, Goetten responded that there were three people on the previous Council who voted for Layout 03 who are also on the current Council. This would indicate that the current Council's position would not change. Jabbour felt it was poor policy for a Council to change their decision unless there was new evidence to consider that would change the outcome. Wilson felt more meaningful input had been received from the constituents. Goetten responded that some of the concerns would be addressed by the County such as the elevations and berm. !: ■ Jabbour stated he woui J stand by his decision and felt Charles Kelley would also. Jeff Martin stated the Council did not hear their input because they were kept out of the meeting. Jabbour took exception to that comment. Jan McCartney asked if the road design could be moved 1' or 2' even .f Council did not change their position. Jabbour responded that the road has been designed and approved. No more changes could be made to the design but there is some flexibility in working wdth buffers, berms, curb and gutter, etc. , ► SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 21,1997 Larry McCartney asked to have the County come to the site and review the meaning of the stdces and discuss berm placement. Wilson asked to have acquisition and assessment information. Grube responded thi.t he would ch v . wuh the real estate division to see when they will be available and then let the President of the Association know so he can inform the others. Another resident asked what the estimated timeline is for the project. Grube stated the property owners should be in the process of being contacted about easements so they are a little behind in this aspect. Theis added they would start to build the road next spring. Flint stated that they had concurred on a couple issues including the road being lowered and the decision to berm. He encouraged the County to look at additional ways to help the neighbors when they are on the site. Wilson noted the decision to berm will be discussed by the Association along with other issues so that has not actually been agreed upon. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Jabbour adjourned the meeting at 9:08 p.m. Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Ill ◄! ifl O(0 0)c a Si ^ Xo s C C O 9^ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION '"n«j DATE: Jug^, 199^ J9$^ ITEM NO, Department Approval: Name Elizabeth Van Zomeren Title City Planncr/Zoning Administrator Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2216 Winston and Barbara Adams, 3195 Casco Circle - Withdrawal of Variance Application Overview WtoUonST m appHcanls removing the existing residence and constructmg a new residence. Staff has been informed that the applicants do not wish to proceed because they have purchased a lake front property in Shorewood. The property remains for sale. Attachments: -Minutes from 3/17/97 -Letter to Applicants COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To approve withdrawal of the application, , t>mt V I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 17, 1997 (#4 - #2209 Spring Hill Golf Club - Continued) Krueger asked about the effect on the oak trees from the construction noting oak trees should not be impacted from mid-April to July due to the ease in spreading oak wilt. Crosby said this issue can be dealt with noting the number of oak trees was small and the majority of the trees are maple. Crosby also addressed the concern regarding the DNR’s knowledge of the location of the Big Woods in terms of the project. The DNR did believe it ended at the Orono project. Crosby said they have treated both areas in Orono and Medina as being part of the Bjg Woods. Crosby said Braman haJ spoken with the DNR and gave them additional information dealing with the issue. Gaffron indicated the EAW included maps that related llic location of the Big Woods and what impact the club would have on the Big Woods. Stoddard questioned whether there was any information in the EAW regarding any threat to endangered species. He inquired when the inspection of the property was made and any effects found. Braman said inspections were conducted in September, October, and November. He said he did not find spring blooming plants. He said the DNR informed him that the deer have eaten the plants due to the lack of shrub canopy. Braman said the density of the trees was such that there was little under growth. Braman said the Big Woods does not house any endangered species. Braman said he looked at the overall value of the Big Woods as undisturbed land with wetlands as breaks. Braman said he does not anticipate any fiirther field work. Krueger commented that there were spring blooming plants found in the property. Smith moved, Berg seconded, to continue the application to the Planning Commission meeting of March 31. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (Items #5 and 6 follow Item #1.) (#7) #2216 WINSTON AND BARBARA ADAMS, 3195 CASCO CIRCLE - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 9:46-10: U P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailii g were noted. The Applicant was present with contractor, Steve Bocne. r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 17, 1997 ! (#7 - #2216 Wnston and Barbara Adams - Continued) Van Zomeren reported that the application is for variances to lot width, side yard setback, hardcover, structural coverage, and average iakeshore setback to remove the existing residence and construct s new residence. The property is located in the LR-IC Zoning District. The property meets the lot area standards. The lot width is 90' where 100' is required. A 7.14% hardcover variance is requested in the 0-75' setback and a 18.58% variance in the 75-250' setback. The pool area, which includes the deck and patio, is 1507 s.f. Since the pool is larger than 1000 s.f, a 30' side setback is required. The structural coverage is proposed to increase from 18.09% to 23.02%. Van Zomeren noted that the driveway encroaches into the 10' side yard setback and must be located at least 5' from the property line. The garage will include side facing doors. Van Zomeren indicated that the building inspector has recommended the removal of the boat house. She also noted that the applicant will maintain a 60' strip of land, a fire lane, adjacent to this property which consists of a treed grassy area. Steve Boone showed the layout of the property and the proposed improvements. He indicated the house and garage are wthin the code requirements. Boone said the driveway will be corrected to the 5' distance from the property lii.v. He noted the patio and deck area of the pool are what result in an encroachment. A hard, mechanically engineered maintenance cover will be installed over the pool resulting in no need for fencing. He indicated the neighbors have no problem with the location of the pool. Boone said he is willing to reconfigure the pool. Mr. Adams said the pool is required to treat his medical condition. He asked that his future maintenance of the fire lane be considered. Adams said the improvements will not change the existing grade of the property. McMillan inquired about the mechanical pool cover. Adams said the code does not require a fence. Lindquist asked if the applicant was willing to remove the boat house. Adams said he would be vnlling to do so. Lindquist asked that the hardcover be reduced to the 36% percentage now existing through a reduction in hardcover and structure. Lindquist informed the applicant that the 60' wide public property cannot be taken into consideration and informed the applicant that he is not requhed to maintain that property. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 17,1997 i, (#7 - #2216 Winston and Barbara Adams - Continued) Adams expressed his concern with the limitations placed on the property in relation to the expense of the land itself Lindquist explained the code in relation to lot size and structural coverage. Stoddard explained that when existing residences are tom down, the property is viewed as a vacant lot subject to zoning requirements. Adams said he was unable to accept the limitations placed on the property regarding allowable structure. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to deny Application #2216. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#8) #2217 JOHN TIMMESH, 1945 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 10:11-10:38 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported the property is located in the LR-IC Zoning District. The property is 0.39 acres and does not meet the 1/2 acre minimum. The applicant is proposing to add a 18'x31' storage addition to the existing garage. This proposal requires variances to hardcover, structural coverage, and rear yard. The structural coverage exists at 18.9% and would increase to 22.1% for a 7.15% variance. Van Zomeren noted that there are two separate parcels being considered and would require a combination for the credits shown to be given. Van Zomeren said Staff suggests the shed be removed. The shed currently encroaches into the side and rear yard. The pool exceeds the 1000 s.f limitation but was installed prior to the 1986 requirement for a 30' side yard. Van Zomeren noted that the property files show that no permit was taken out for the porch addition and would affect the rear yard setback. Since the garage addition is for storage, no driveway is proposed. Van Zomeren indicated that a future driveway would impact the hardcover amounts on the property. She also vuiced concerned that a future owner may want to add structure over the proposed storage area. Smith noted that the City has allowed garages to be built without driveways in the past. She indicated that there was still an increase in the lot coverage and hardcover and questioned what would preclude the storage area from being used as a garage in the future. ! 1 • CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Winston and Barbara Adams 7424 Candlewood Drive Brooklyn Park, MN 55445 RE: Application #2216 - Variances for 3195 Casco Circle Dear Mr. and Mrs. Adams: On March 17, 1997, the Planning Commission recommended denial of your application for variances at 3195 Casco Circle. This matter can be heard on April 14, 1997 before the City ,, -__ .__•. ^ inn'? Council. : will need to prepare a staff report for the City Council by April 9, 1997. If want to revise your application, I will need the new information by 4:30 p.m. on Apnl 8, 1997. If you want to withdraw your application, I vdW need a letter requesting withdrawal. You may also postpone your application if you choose. Please let me know what your intentions are regarding this application so that I can prepare the appropriate legal notices for public nearing purposes. You may contact me at 473-7357. Sincerely, U- ------- Elizabeth Van Zomeren Planner/Zoning Administrator LVZ/lsv cc:Joe St. Anthony, Independent Realty, Chanhassen Dinner Theatre Mall, 555 West 78th Street, P.O. Box 644, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Tracy Ingram, Remax, 2477 Shadywood Road, Orono, MN 55331 (Fax: 471-7427; Steve Boone Builders, 6712 Bryant Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 I r ^^NCi REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION J(Jl^ 'Nq DATE: May ITEM NO.; / Department Approval: Name Liz Van Zomeren Title City Planner Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: ^2241, Kyle Hunt and Partners of behalf of Cheryl and Gary Costley 1185 West Femdale Road Zoning District: LRl-A, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acres) Lot Area:38,634 sq. ft. (.887 acres) Overview:Applicant proposed to add a third stall garage to an existing two car garage that would reduce the side yard from 30' to 19.1' where 30' is required. The applicant also proposed to add an exercise room under an existing deck which would have encroached into the average lakeshore setback the same distance as the existing deck. The applicant also presented ideas to the Planning Commission to reduce hardcover so that no variance would be required. Planning Commission Recommendation:To approve: 1. The addition of an exercise room under an existing deck which would encroach 4' into the 75' lakeshore setback To deny: 1.The side yard variance to reduce an existing .side yard to 19.1' where 30' is required to allow for a third staii to be added to an existing, attached double garage. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; To amend or approve the attached resolution. TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator May 15,1997 r' ‘ i SUBJECT: #2241, Kyle Hunt and Partners on behalf of Cheryl and Gary Costley .1185 West Femdale Road Zoning District: LRl-A, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (2 acres) Lot Size:38,634 sq. ft. (.887 acres) Application:The applicant is requesting sideyard, hardcover, and lakeshore setback variances as follows: a. b. To reduce a sideyard ftom 30 ’ to 19.1' to add another stall to a double garage. To allow a 14' X 24' exercise room to be built under an existing deck which would encroach approximately 4' in the required 75' setback from the shoreline. c. To allow for an increase in hardcover in the 75'-250' setback area from 25% to 25.5% or 137.5 sq. ft. where 25% is allowed. Pertinent Ordinances • Section 10.23, LR-1 A, One Family Lakeshore Residential District, Subd. 6, Area, Height, Lot Width, and Yard Requirements • Section 10.22, Lakeshore Set Back Regulations, Subd. 1 and Subd.2, Lakeshore Hardcover U2241. Kyle Hunt 1185 West Ferndale Road Variances 5/19/97 page-1 Analysis LOT AREA AND YARDS % ! i \> f Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard 87,120 sq. ft. (2 acres) 200 feet 50 feet 30 feet 50 feet 1 • Subject Property Lot Area and Yards 1 Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Lakeside 1t \ 38,634 (.887 acres) 200 feet 245 ft. from Ferndale Rd. 47 ’ on west; 19.1 proposed from east 71’ from shoreline The lot does not meet the minimum lot size requirements. The lot further does not meet the 75' minimum from the shoreline. The proposed garage expansion would reduce the side yard from 30’to 19.1’. HARDCOVER Distance from Shoreline Total Area in Setback Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Variance Requested 0 ’-75 ’10,648 sq. ft.192 sq. ft. (1.8%) None 233 sq. ft. (2.2%) None 75’-250 ’27,986 sq. ft.6,931 sq. ft. (24.8%) 6,996.5 sq. ft. (25%) 7,134 sq.ft. (25.5%) 137.5 sq.ft. (.5%) 250 ’-500 ’21,032 sq.ft.101 sq.ft. (0.5%) 6,309.6 sq. ft. (30%) 101 sq. ft. (0.5%) None Statement of Hardship The applicant hdS indicated that there is no basement in the dwelling because of tlie high water table #2241, Kyle Hunt 1185 West Ferndale Road Variances 5/19/97 page~2 ele\ ation. Additionally, no more living space can be added to the structure without exceeding the eight limit. The building pad for the lot is limited by the lot width south of the pond and the required side yard setbacks which reduces the building pad to approximately 92 feet in width where a lot with 200 feet width and 60 ft. in side yards would have a building pad 140 ft. wide. The property is ftuther limited by the location of a well in the yard. The Building Code requires that no construction be within 3' of the well. The property does not have driveway access off of Femdale Road West. The property is reacheu by driving across the adjacent property to the east. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property can continue to be used as a resic’ *nce. 2. The plight of the larHowner ’. due to circumstatices unique to his property not created by the landowner The plight of the landowner is created by the relationship of the existing residence to the side lot lines and shoreline, the location of a well on the property, the existing height of the structure and no basement. The architect has concluded that the best plan to accommodate an exercise room is to go under an existing deck. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance will not alter change the character of the neighborhood. Both residences on either side of the subject property are approximately 12 ’ to 15' from the property line. The proposed exercise room will be under an exist- dr'-tk. 4. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an ur:: use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. Economic considerations are not a factor with this application. ihip if reasonable 5. Undue hardship -^Iso includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not an issue. U224I, Kyle Hunt 1185 IVest Ferndale Road Variances 5/19/9'' page-3 rty#:i [tlCi] Ltl«sl<[«niW liltW [•i^TtltJlTHniJ X Mirtivirmi f •^•M«irnK7Tsi IfltllTtl rtlttWTil [titpairtiivc Rnniii WfliniTO •liUWs^ rihivtililii Mflira •]iUiT«a«rtTtl rMMmMimLfiNi r the comfort of the neighbors to have the side yard reduced to allow the third stall. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The variance is not merely a convenience to the applicant given the limitations of the building pad created by the location of the driveway, the well, and the pond. Staff Recommendation To advise the applicant to reduce the number of variances by reducing the size of the exercise room which may eliminate the lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variances. Attachments A B C D E F G H I J K Application Plat Map Hardship Statement Description of Request Letter asking for Early consideratirMt by City Council Survey Building Pad Hardcover Calculations Floor Plans Acknowledgement Form Letter of Opposition re: garage addition from adjacent neighbor ^224 1, Kyle Hunt 1185 West Ferndale Road Variances 5/19/97 page~5 i t ! I A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 FILE #2241 WHEREAS, Kyle Hunt & Partners on behalf of owners, Cheryl J. Costley and Gary E. Costley (hereinafter "the applicant") of the property located at 1185 Femdale Road West within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: See Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to allow an exercise room to be added under an existing deck that encroaches 4’ into the required 75' lakeshore setback. Variances for encroachment into the required 75' lakeshore setback are required. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2241. The property is located in the LR-IA, One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District where the minimum lot area requirement is 2 acres. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 19, 1997, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A. A lakeshore setback of 71' where 71' is existing and 75' is required. Page 1 of 5 r 4.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5.The City Council has considered this application includ.'ng the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on ti;** health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a lakeshore setback variance of 4' per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to allow an exercise room to be added under an existing deck that encroaches 4' with the required 75' lakeshore setback, subject to the following conditions: 1.Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 9, 1998). 2.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 2 of 5 i ^ r.=i»»4 . '^, Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of June, 1997. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of June, 1997, by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 5 : STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this_______day of ss. , 199 ___, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. On this day of , 199 ___, before me a Notary Public withinand for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (tlieir) free act and deed. Notary Public r- ! Pag^ 4 of 5 3A i Application # | Date Received ^ Amount Paid a CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 . ($50.00 per each additional variance) // /C^^\ Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 ^ -’i* 'i - ^' *'* (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 AJfter-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) 1 f y X ; •• • • , r-:'*'. .;%T S I-PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Addres s llftg VifesT feg.t4c>At^ 0ex>Ka6 - M/d. Property Identification Number ff.LD.) gi2.- ;?.a . o a -» nr»^4r ^ Attach legal description to application if not Licluded on required survey. Date Propert>* Acquired 2.1^^ y<?q7 ______________________]^month/year) I not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential ___pother (specify)_____________ Zoning District: LR. - lA._____________________________________" APPLICANT Name Address: Phone (home ) . [i> Phone (work ) 0f 7- jScair/oA Zip: ■gg'-fSg OWNER (if different than applicant) Name dHgg»jL a £. C _________ Address: (oSU 1‘R.aakgKlCv^ * City: g.t>ELtA ‘RtAgiLCg Zip: Phone (home ) ^44 * 20 Phone (work ) 3^ 0 « z 2. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Constmction Cost $ 70|gC0.OQ Describe request in deteiil: C>_________________________ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width (attach additional sheets if necessary) . '• 4 *-..4.y 4 )C Hardcover Lot Coverage X Setback:Front Side ^ Rear Oj2- _X, Average Lakeshore Other (specify) • » «. ♦ hardship /description of UTrtJSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: __________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) r Application # | Date Received ^ 2^ ^f'1 Amount Paid a CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) . jf jf Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 " ’ “ (no change from original application) __ Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00" * "" ^ After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) * t"' 2PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Addres s Vi&bT feg»t4c>AL^ I^A.P Qg^»ao - MaI. Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^a. - Attach legal description to application if not Licluded on required survey. Date Propert}' Acquire d 2.1 I ^^(do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property: residential o ther (specify) Zoning District: LR. «■» lA ______________________ i _(month/year) APPLICANT Name Address: fr? Phone (home) /^/9 . Phone (work ) _____ /a-;arMA. Zii OWNER (if different than applicant) Name^gg»jL^. 4 E. ___________________________________ Address: (oSU 1 Kicv^ * City: PjeAgfeCg Zip: Phone (home) ^ 44 ^ /?i 10 Phone (work ) 3^ 0 * ^ z 2. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: O_________________________ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback:Front (attach additional sheets if necessary) . '• • .. . Lot Width ^ Hardcover Lot Coverage Side )C Rear OJ^ X Average Lakeshore Other (specify) • i ♦ HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAT, PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or tmusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements: __________ (attach additional sheets if necessary) 3 ^4 «•' *» REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the application deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete; 1. Completed Application Form 2. __^ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). . ^ Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover * * dalculatiohs’as required.”' In'addition''provide-onV‘(1)'copy 8 Vi" x 11" for reproduction." '• ** * •- ' Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing * grade are proposed. In addition, provide tine'(T) copy 8 '/a" x 11" for reproduction. 5. __^ Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views O^rovide one (1) copy 8'/j" x 11"). 6. __List of the legal names (include marital statu?)- of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of ’applicarit(s) if not current owner(s). 7. • tyA.' ■ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other r* ' • ‘ ” persons you wish notified of this application. 8. • 'Additional items as may.beTequested by City staff.'- , j • • * ' , • . • » 4. > • » « » The Applicant pnd Property Owner must sign this applica'tioh.' Please remember that your variance arinlieation is not complete if the above information has not been included. * • . % _ • • •*•APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE - * The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning /..dmihistrator’ ‘agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred'in r'eviovv of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date /9-Z Owner's Signature OWNER’S SIGNATURE ^ The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entr>- onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and y^^ication of this request. ______ Date Applicant must have all submittals into the offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 95 \- °®. 9 (1) y3><i \ Costley Residence 1185 West Femdale Road ^4^HARDSHIP •> ■ -) t:tv;V.V/tVJ The existing home was constructed on piles in 1981. It is crawl space type construction that is near the water table elevation thus not allowing for a basement like most homes have in the area. The existing home is also built within the city’s height restrictions, thus not allowing additional living space to be built above the existing living space. Based on these facts any additions that one may wish to pursue will have to enlarge the footprint of the structure. In reviewing the existing floor plan layout the obvious area to add space with the least impact on the current layout and structure is to add space under the existing deck at the southeast corner of the house. As for the garage, we would like to be able to conform to the city’s hardcover ordinance and not have to ask for a variance if we can prove, and the city will agree to, an exchange of hardcover from one location to another. Costlcy Residence 1185 West Ferndale Road b j) *o , ; / i iC‘ v23J^.1 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The owner would like to add a 14* x 24’ exercise room under an existing deck that is within the 75’ lake setback (a corner of the structure is within the setback by about 4’, but is not beyond the average lakeshore setback line of the two neighbors). The owner would like also to add a 3rd stall to the garage with no living structure above. This structure meets setback requirements, however it would require that the hardcover (existing) be reduced by 137 sq. ft. which the owner would be willing to do in possibly a couple of different ways. r.\ G. May 6,1997 K yle H unt & Partners incorporated Elizabeth Van Zomeren. A.I.C.P. City Planner, City of Orono , 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 . . Orono, MN. 55323 Re: Gary and Cheryl Cpstley Residence 1185 West Ferridale * ' / Dear Elizabeth, We would like to request that if this variance is granted by the Planning Commission that it be signed and forwarded to the City Council and put on their agenda for their May 27, 1997 meeting. ♦ • Thank you for your help and consideration. • ^ Please call me if you have any questions. Kyle H. Hunt, President Kyle I^nt cwPartners, Incorporate ) 3300 Edinborough VV'ay Suite 211 Edina, Minnesota 55435 PHONE 612.897.3555. F.AC5I.MILE 612.896.1192 BUILDERS UCE.NSE NUMBER: 0001967 AN EQUAL OrrORTUNrn* BUILDING CO.MPANT r / i; i i; SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) (6^^ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONT A. House ___________ X HARDCOVERJ^ALtULAXlON VVOKAiHJfctT 75-250’250-500’500-1000' Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X 192- F. Landscaoe* Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONEnz B /o,6ye X100 =i PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONT A. House _____ X Length Z3 Width X X X B. Garage C. Drivewav X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck Z.IO X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other X TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 2-S3 ^ B ID X 100 Z.33 z.z iilii liilBibi lin • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. __AS ?a S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. [I :■ - •• • » A B S.F. S.F. A B : 1 ■4^ r ■vl. HARDCOVER CALCULATJpJJi^ORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ (75-2^ 250-500’500-1000’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ____________ X Length Width X X X B. Garase C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^ B 27.91^x100-“-y- PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ X Length Width X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other LqyJscyt, iTtvJ x/:0 TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ~7^/iy - B 2.7xlOO =i- S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 37 0 S.F. S.F. IfiZl S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 6? ■ 93/ S.F. 9^6 S.F. ^ ZW.E % 'hpio S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 7>. OV9 S.F. S F. 370 S.F. S.F. 6 S3 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. It S.F. 7^ ;3V S.F. JL1]9S(> S.F. CT/O h a >1 : . •*. 7 . •? ii A B A B h i ; r HARDCOVER CALCULAliUiN VVOKKb^^Ja SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ 75-250’ ^Ho-SOO’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ X ______________ Length X X X Width 500-1000’ S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. B. Garage C. Driveway X X S.F, S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric G. Other X X X X X X X •"OTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE I'Ol /g/ lOt ■r B 7>lj OSZ. X100 =O.S S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F.' S.F. S.F. A S.F. B PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ Length B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic Or Fabric G. Other X X X X X X X X X X X X Width TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A /OI_ _ __ B ^ /o / 10 I 2.\^ 0^1.X 100 = Z.I . 03 Z. 0,3T S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B r il i! j . ph' If . I f.*ft ♦A.-•?/ 'i*.' ...ir*•fAdjacent Property Owners* Acknowledgement Form I (we) Afxrilt^h GtoLt^D^ [print name(s)] of /^ ^Qpy^any [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located kl. ^_____also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Coimcil that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor’s project or use requires Counpil approval. Property Owner Date --?7 Property ^vmer Date Y 97 ♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦*************^******^***^^^^^^^^^^^^^^jj,^^^j|j^^^^j|j^, I (we) /7\A-0if> [print name(s)] of Ub^> UJ v-ei^A «At-e. [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located /i£SiJtu -r also referred to as Land Use Application No.________. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. f ' I f I E- ■ ! U;i J' KmI^ •flcM'^"^y.nibi May 17, 1997 To: From: Mayor of Orono City Council Members Planning Commission Members Mary and Bradley Bowman 1165 West Femdale Road We welcome our new neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. Gary Costley, at 1185 West Femdale Road. They have kindly given us an opportunity to review their proposed remodeling plans which ai e on the agenda for your review. From our perspective, we have no objections to the addition of an exercise room on the lake side of the existing home. Though it will slightly impact our views, we feel it would be a nice amenity for them. Our concern is the proposed new garage. Though it seems a side setback variance has not been requested, it is our understanding that the current zoning requires that any new stmeture or addition must be within 30 feet of the side yard property line unless a hardship can be proven. The plans we have seen show a distance of only 19 feet between the new garage and the side property line. We strongly believe that it is important to maintain the appropriate distances between the homes along the lake in our area. A third garage would again be a nice amenity but we fail to see how a hardship exists. The owners of a new home recently completed just a few doors away were required to conform to the appropriate setbacks. Therefore, we would like to go on record as objecting to the granting of such a significant variance. ^4// REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUn ^^<3 DATE: ITEM NO 1997 i3$r Department Approral: Name Elizabeth A. Van Zomeren Title Planner/Zoning Administrator Administrator Re?iewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2182, Mr. and Mrs. (Jane) Herbert Terry Olson 3640 Bays'ie Road Conditonal Use Permit and Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District: LRl-A, One Family Lakesho?e Residential District (2 acres) 38,634 sq. ft.-t:S87T5?es)Lot Area: Oyerriew:Applicant originally proposed last fall to relocate the existing detached garage approximately 6' from its current location.. The Planning Commission recommended that other options be considered. The applicants have since decided to reconstruct the garage in its current location. Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommended on a 5 to 2 vote to approve the conditional use permit and variance from street setback from 50' to 9' where 9' is existing. The Planning Commission also directed the applicant to have the building plans reviewed by the City Engineer. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To amend or approve the enclosed resolution. C* '* !«r /. • ; { f i i ; : i r TO;Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members FROM: Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE: SUBJECT: May 12,1997 #2182 Herbert Terry Olson, 3640 Bayside Road Conditional Use PermitA^ariance Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1 A, One-Family Lakeshore Residential District, (2 Acres) Lot Size: 86,125 sq. ft. (1.97 acres) Application:Applicant seeks a conditional use permit and variance to reconstruct a 27.2 X 25.9 detached garage. A conditional use permit is required for an accessory structure on a through lot. A variance to reduce the street setback fi’om 50' to 9' is also required. Background This application was previously considered by the Planning Commission on 10/21/96. At the request of the applicant, the application was tabled to provide the applicants time to consider available options to relocate the garage. The applicant has since decided that they prefer to rebuild the garage in its existing location. Pertinent Ordinances • Section 10.02 (35) and (42), Definition of comer lot and through lot. • Section 10.03, Subd. 10, Conditional Use permit for all accessory structures on a through lot. • Section 10.23, Subd. 6(B), Street setback requirement of 50' for the garage. • Section 10.75, Subd. 4, Required front/street setback is required for each street line of a through lot. U2182 Herbert Terry Olson 3640 Bayside Road 5/19/97 pa^e~I , I statement of Hardship The applicant has provided a list of concerns that may be created if the garage was not replaced at the existing location and required to be located elsewhere on the property. Criteria for Determining Undue Hardship 1. 2. 4. 5. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The property can continue to be used for residential use without the replacement of the garage. A garage could be constructed elsewhere on the lot, however, it would increase hardcover and possibly impact views. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. i The property is unique due to the topography along the shoreline which originally allowed for a garage to be constructed into the steep slope. The property is also unique because it is a comer lot and a through lot which places additional setback requirements on the south, east, and north property lires. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Replacement of the garage will not change the character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this chapter. No cost estimates have been prepared to determine if replacement is more financially feasible than constmcting a garage elsewhere on the property. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Solar access is not an issue. 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance for any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for the property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. An accessory structure on a through lot is allowed as a conditional use. #2182 Herbert Terry Olson 3640 Bayside Road 5/19/97 page~2 I 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Not applicable. The special conditions applying to the structure of land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. Lakeshore properties in the vicinity of the subject property are unique due to the topography and existing accessory structures built into the slope. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Other properties along the lakeshore have accessory structures built into the steep slope, however, few if any other are considered both a through lot and a comer lot. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The property owner enjoys having a garage with access off of Bayside Road. The garage provides secure storage for boating equipment. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. The replacement of the garage in its current location will not impair health, comfort, or morals. Safety, in terms of traffic impact on Bayside Road, will remain the same. 1 r.e granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. The granting of the variance will allow the applicant to replace an existing accessory stmcture. It may be considered convenient to the applicant to rebuild in the existing location, however, the location of the garage for the purpose of passenger vehicle storage is not convenient respective of its location to the principal stmcture. #2182 Herbert Terry Olson 3640 Bayside Road 5/19/97 page~3 n ;. V- Issues 1.The applicant is requesting to replace an existing garage that encroaches 41' into the required setback from Bayside Road (County Rd. 84). 2.The lot is considered both a comer lot and through lot that requires street setbacks from Bayside Road, Stubbs Bay Road, and Eileen Street. 3. The proposal does not result in any additional hardcover. Options 1.To direct applicant to replace the garage in a location on the property that meets all setback requirements and grant the conditional use permit; or 2.To approve the conditional use permit with conditions regarding building plans and variance for a 41' encroachment into the required setbacK for Bayside Road. 3. To deny the conditional use permit and variance. Attachments A B C D E F G H I Plat Map Topographical Survey Applicant's letter Notice to Applicant re: Planning Commission on 10/21/96 Previous staff report from 10/21/96 meeting Previous application Minutes from 10/21/96 Engineer's letter Garage Drawings U2 182 Herbert Terry Olson 3640 Bayside Road 5/19/97 page-~4 r ft-.-. t A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 10 AND A VARIANCE TO SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B), AND SECTION 10.75, SUBDIVISION 4 FILE NO. 2182 WHEREAS, Herbert Terry Olson and Jane Olson (hereinafter the "applicants") are owners of the property located at 3640 Bayside Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Reidel Company Stubbs Bay Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a conditional use permit per Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 10, and a variance from Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) and Section 10.75, Subdivision 4 to reconstruct a 27.2'x25.9' detachea garage on a through lot where a variance is required for an accessory structure nront street setback of 9' where a 50' setback is normally required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2182. The property is located in the LR-1 A, One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District where the minimum lot area requirement is 2 acres. 3.The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 19, 1997 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following unique findings and hardships: a. The existing garage is 9’ from the property line. Page 1 of 4 I r b.The lot is considered both a comer lot and through lot that requires street setbacks from Bayside Road, Stubbs Bay Road and Eileen Street. 4. The Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the reconstruction of a garage will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of Ae City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances and a conditional use permit to allow the garage to be reconstructed 9' from the property line where 50' is required per Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.03, Subdivision 10; 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B); and 10.75, Subdivision 4 to reconstruct a 27.2'x25.9' detached garage on a through lot, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owners, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council's approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (June 9, 1998). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 2 of 4 ATTEST: 3. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of June, 1997. Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of June, 1997 by Gabriel Jabbour and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 ___, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared_____________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of ss. .. 199 ___, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, a^ acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Ti Notary Public i\ 1 \ Page 4 of 4 7. The view from the house would be blocked if the garage were located higher on the property. 8. Unless set back from the east/west driveway, there would be no close access to the house by the Fire Department. The contractor and myself feel we can build a garage that will not deteriorate as this one has. The heaving of the walls and floor has reached the point where it is becoming unsafe. The floor slab is only 2” thick, there appears to have been no footings under the slab and walls. The concrete block was not reinforced with steel. The outside walls were not coated for waterprotection or insulated and there is no rock or sand next to the outside walls. By providing all of these omissions for the new construction, the garage would last a normal life. I respectfully request permission to rebuild the garage in it's present location. Sincerely, H. Terry Olson Vice President ui. uuu I , I , oi.uiJu::> ody ^\uuxuxuiiHennepin County, Minnesota !•» • • «W«l M •• t « I • * w • • •••I • .$ •* > «•tt il I ' H $ *k • S + re «t £v.r»\ipil- c M %l . . . •• • • 1 •I . J • l» ^ 8C^^ • • • \ >6 / •* M •• •• \ / N . • I ** tt I* « IM I *' II • li • M ---------------------— \ / i:- -r. ' X I #'! w __^^I r wv. •• <!• /»*|| ^ I / ' 'll/ \ V *j60 -r-~-SS^9----- •*; Hcutf < • • • / ______05 ___ —. I m mmmmrn • • ^ IM • I •.«• # .# «l «• s _________ — :3 —________________________________• ' I _____I ,lv >- V99*Js*^/"t^ /3S.2€ • ~ ~ ---- .4-^ r •__ u ^ ■** **k 4* I • M I # 1*4^ • t , J • U •»* ^OaA /yo. 8^ • ••la 44 *•«• • \ * li ••» • «f >4 •• ♦*I * • •• • • • • * V - .K*/ • . - *. . .. ‘ --------93-t 14 • ••» X • • ••«• •.CTT •I • • •• • li < ■!* I “II f f •» I K% • I i‘. I i ’ i i # I It'* ♦! J I • '• ..•.it • ••• *•• Legal Description Lot 1, Block 1, Riedel Company Stubbs Bay Addition. o; iron marker _!l _nOL3 _OLJ3LJI^_5uf ________53L_^t_ r HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75* 75-250’ 250-500’500-1000' F.XISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______________S.F. Length 40 X Width 1i4e S.F. X Tl =S.F. X V =S.F. V‘-. B. Garage ^0*^X to.t.s S.F. • C. Driveway A7 X Xo S.F. “ Li ^ O X f3k S.F. —• ----------------' \\y D. Sidewalk X % /SO S.F. r X •r=*S.F. K::rrT'K\ ^ E. Patio/Deck X lO =too S.F. r->. a.o X to r=S.F. ••-) — '% U F. Landscape X =S.F. ■;.5> vl. Underlain X =S.F. 1 ^ Bv Plastic X «S.F. mi—55 14 •fto ‘r-1^ n. Other X sn *X =•7JX __ S.F. ---------------------— TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE SlHi-F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -ShiiJi S.F. A s<mL •r B X 100 =r?'% PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE C IT A. House X #• ^ fv* Length Width X MM S.F. X ss S.F. X S3 S.F. R nnrage _______8 S.F. f!- Driveway X 8 S.F. X =S.F. • D 5^idewalk X gg S.F. X 8 S.F. F Patio/Dcck X 8 S.F. X 8 S.F. F Landscaoe X 8 S.F. Underlain X s'S.F. Bv Plastic X =_ S.F. n Other X 8 S.F. TOTAL HAilTCOVER IN ZONE •0 —S.F. TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE _-S.F. A -5- B <A X 100 =P_% # A B to get enough room on the west side for a rock wall and to allow the Indh now. the frost heaves the walls and breaks them down over a period of time. This is why it now needs c-~. J (s y) vi-H / -• • / I . •• ■':«;< >lV . - .ic ;* . * V •. •.. • -. V . '.n’S >: v*/ ' ' ' • ^ .*’?!' f f'*! r r j M I :t I . •' ■: ' * •■ ?-;-» ^ '-V -L?-- - _ ■ r••'V ..................... •••* • • •'•* ^I'Uen * t < Street • • • •• #• -T.W,9k •# / // / 4'»3 Lt' \ i6 • • / • •I y *•• • * *a •it I It • •. • r«« * I # I •• u >.« • • • • / / «*l ' M ^ / <}6 / ^ ^ J 0^ . ., (^ I 'O / > j • i. •*».............> LtN| ^ — • *s • <* 1 t • •» • •t »^. ••I ••• '•».# • • 'V ^'ir :»*7 ’**; /-ifftiji i»^ y < Nj $.H ' ^''\i ‘ t ( M * I »«y»> 1 ./ I ' I >^^ . r ' ' / • . - ‘ 1 •■•I •» W •!•r t ^ 2tf*t * **> J?' /-., // •I • I /•I ^•••* » I**' ‘*'l V 1l. • t «t«* * * ""••s’/ ^ jp- CiCMA/a^r \ /9f,o/ C'Qir. ___7^717 __ * ^ • Oy ------ \ \ • (•#*• • •• • V -• /?o«^ Vo. 54, •••tee *••*•••• 'i- / — 9Ji ’ •« • •»«••• • • • #• # • ^J4> • 1 •• i •> •It >4 •......................... ' Legal Description Lot 1/ Block \, Ried.el Company Stubbg Bay Additiojj., o: -iron marker • •* ■ • Vih-^ contours from topographic map from previous preliminary plat. «.1 «* I M • n !•.>•• • . i». • • * *I . •» J • U • r ♦ ^ clf'<tu/yi /by’. Ooh • If {'f ^h\ C-^piff pj. Pintle P/ai^ , P^?H.ff^y9^ fU ^79- ynf^f Lu . ^ 3^ 90 Bay f ^ ^ . f^3 A> . f ) '’^CRueo CiTYo /yy/ '"o«0/vo ; 'r.! : --i^’ 1 ’ I ‘ ;ti ze* ictc^ &yc i f 9 ,\ip zo" ^ n C /r(f'/' hiffPs Q' 0.<-. TOP V<^vv/ &rrh \ f^p^tun( i/«A4 7''tt»<* *700^ fsjovrt* GAAAhG \ rhA^ /Vtcre^T uOCAVOei T?^ TO rc*..T,.. --- - -r«x4A 7X7 ^ 5*r**f r ocrrcfri. r Bonestroo. Rosene. Anderlik ^nd Associates, tnc. is Affirmative Action, '£qu<^i Opportunity Employer Principals: Otto G. Bonestroo. PE. • Joseph C. Anderlik. RE • Marvin L. SorvdM, PE • Richard E Turner. RE. • Glenn R Cook. PE. • Thomas E. Noyes. PE • Robert G. Schunicht. PE • Jerry A Bourdon. PE • Robert W Rosene, PE and Susan M Eberlin. C PA . Senior Consultants Assocuite Principalis Howard A Sanford. PE • Keith A Gordon. RE. • Robert R. Pfefferle. PE • Richard W. foster. PE. • David O Loskota. PE. • Robert C. Russek. A.I.A. • Mark A Hanson. PE • Michael T. Rautmann. PE. • Ted K Field. RE. • Kenneth P. Anderson. PE. • Mark R. Rolfs. PE. • Sidney P. Williamson, RE. L S. • Robert F Kotsmith Offices: St. Paul. Rochester. Willmar and St Cloud. MN • Mequon. Wl 1/ J Bonestroo Rosene ^5 Anderlik& |\ I Associates Engineers & Architects October 16,1996 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Herbert Olson Residence File No. 139-2182 Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the proposal to replace the existing gaiage and driveway at 3640 Bayside Road. The plan requires a two-tiered rock retaining wall. The topography provided with the application is missing a significant amount of detail at the location of the proposed work. In addition, no indication of the propo.sed elevation.s, contours or wall location has been provided. The plan . hows the location of the existing sanitary sewer service pipe. The pipe may need to be relocated if the retaining walls are proposed along the north side of the garage. More information must be provided to identify the specific wall cross section and location. The two walls must be placed at least as far apart as they are tall (1:1) or a surcharge loading must be used. If a boulder wall is proposed, the size of the boulders, wall batter and embedment dimensions should be specified. Please contact me at this office if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shawn D, Gustafson, P.E. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113-3898 ■ 612-636-4600 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 21, 1996 (#8 - #2182 Herbert Terry Olson - Continued) McMillan asked if there was any more detail on the retaining walls. Mabusth said no detail was known but the design would have to show how much excavation would take place. McMillan also asked if sewer lines can be moved. Mabusth said they could but would be at the expense of the applicant. Mabusth also noted that the sewer lines need clean outs located every so many feet. Schroeder asked Olson if they have thought through the cost involved in relocating the sewer line. Olson said no but did know what the sewer cost them initially. Schroeder s^d it was his opinion that the application should be tabled to allow for further consideration. Olson was informed of the proceedings whether the application would move on to the Council or tabled and brought back before the Planning Commission. Hawn asked if the Olsons w ere able to pull out from the garage onto Bayside Road. Olson said there is about 1-1/2 car lengths prior to entering Bayside, which enables them to look for any traffic. Stoddard said he struggles with relocating the garage in this area when there is room to move it elsewhere without requiring a variance. Berg added that the cost of moving the sewer line is on top of the relocation. Mabusth asked the Planning Commission for direction, whether they would allow the rebuilding of the garage in that location, to enable the Olsons to proceed. Hawn said she didn't understand why the applicant preferred the garage in that location but asked for consideration of safety and of other option.. Hawn also asked about any impact on the sewer, the cost involved to relocate the line, and whether the applicant was prepared to pay the cost. McMillan suggested building the garage to the north. She later said it would be a good exercise to consider such a change. Olson responded that it would require more excavation. McMillan asked what makes this garage handy. Olson said she's able to look across the street and stores items in the garage, though not her main reason. McMillan said she favored tabling the application and would like to see the design of the garage if it is to be rebuilt in that area or see a working plan for a garage oflf of the long driveway. Hawn moved, Berg seconded, to table Application #2182 for further review. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 21, 1996 (#8 - #2182 Herbert Terry Olson - Continued) Mabusth said the Olsons would like to locate the garage at the 9' street setback. The Staff was concerned and had the Engineer review it finding that two tiers of retaining walls will not fit in the existing elevation with the location of the private sewer line. There is also concern over backing out into the County roadway, especially in light of the steep elevations to immediate west. Mabusth said they also looked at the drve coming in fi-om the east (Stubbs Bay Road). When asked to comment by Schroeder, Olson said they have lived there for 20 years and have adjusted to where the garage is located and prefer that location. Olson said the slope and landscape is a big consideration, and they like the look of it as it now stands. McMillan asked about a concern with the garage being at the same elevation of the house and blocking the view. Olson said the prime view is to the south. She noted, if the Commissioners were concerned, guests, service, and emergency vehicles use the long driveway. During a recent remodel, the driveway was used to remove debris and access the home, which would not happen if the garage was relocated to the end of the driveway. McMillan asked Olson to consider the garage being tucked into the northwest area of the property adding that she understands there is a slope but there is one by the garage now. Olson said in front of the current garage, it is level now, and would have to excavate around it. Mabusth said the excavation would be close to 8' with 4' at the first tier of retaining walls, and then another 4'. Mabusth also said there is concern with drainage and not having enough room, and the possibility of relocating the sewer line. Hawn asked about shovelmg of the steps in the winter time. Olson said it was hard but she is used to it. Hawn noted this would not be the case if the garage was near the driveway, but Olson said the driveway was long. Stoddard asked why a CUP was required. Mabusth explained that it was due to the lot being a through lot requiring a 50' setback at both the front and rear setback lines. She noted that the lot being a comer lot also creates a hardship for the Olsons. Schroeder asked Olson if she understood that the sewer line would have to be relocated. Olson said she did but would rather relocate the sewer line than relocate the garage. Mrs. Olson asked if she was unable to move the garage, what requirements would be involved in repairing the garage. Mabusth said the garage was non-conforming and needs major repair which requires a variance. Mabusth added that the garage roof also needs replacement. Olson said the rebuilt garage would not serve as a retaining wall for the bank. Olson said when the property was sold, the house would probably be taken down. Mabusth asked Olson if she found the garage to be convenient. Olson said it was very convenient. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 21, 1996 (#7 - #2181 James Nystiom - Continued) Mabusth noted that the hardcover in the 75-250' setback would require a 10% variance and a 30% variance in the 250-500' setback, due to the limited area in the 250-500' setback area. The existing driveway at 1250 s.f. has a major impact. Mabusth informed McMillan that a new garage would be built in the street yard and would result in a reduction of hardcover for the driveway. Frazee added that the garage currently loads to the side and major removal of asphalt would result from the doors facing the street. Stoddard received confirmation fi’om Mabusth that the proposal is the same as what was approved in 1995. Stoddard moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2181 for variance renewal. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#8) #2182 HERBERT TERRY OLSON, 3640 BAYSIDE ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITA^ARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:59-9:23 P.M. The AfiBdavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Jane Olson was present. Mabusth reported that the application is for a conditional use permit and variance to construct a detached garage. The existing garage is currently located adjacent to CoRd 84, and the applicant proposes to rebuild at same substandard street setback 6' to the east. A private sewer clean out was located by Staff just to the northeast of existing garage. If retaining walls are proposed around newly located garage, the sewer line would be impacted. Mabusth said she received a call from Mrs. Olson on this date, who informed her that the purpose of rebuilding the garage was due to the fact that the walls of the existing garage serve as retaining walls of adjacent steep banks. The Olsons would like to rebuild the garage and excavate around the garage in order to have retaining walls. The property is considered a through lot as well as a comer lot requiring a 50' setback firom three sides of lot. There is also steep topography to contend with. There is an accessory structure at the northwest comer of the property. Mabusth said an application for a side setback variance in 1986 for a proposed addition was never proceeded with. Mrs. Olson said the addition was built but moved to the north side of the home where no variance was required. It had been requested at the Planning Commission during that review that with the large size of the property, another area not requiring variances could be founa where the addition could be built. The Olsons thought it over and made the change. minmi rtiimrti mil [%W.UT%\•1 i 1 11 1 (tX^TtTtKt] i»ro]t rtvsiirtivACi] rty*p.mr«Y:i«i WWtl TrrriCTTiBornmTr [iiirtrHtHtj rcKitMi rmimoiv;; ^TtyiTCtViliI*#«i iiTTiTt] A RESOLUTION APPROVING A METES AND BOUNDS SUBDIVISION OF TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY PINS NO. 07-117-23 23 0001 FILE NO. 2165 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a metes and bounds subdivision by the City of Orono (hereinafter "the subdivider") of property legally described as follows: (PINS #07-117-23 23 0001): That part of the Northwest quarter of Section 7, Township 117, Range 23 described as follows: Beginning at a point in the westerly line of "Tonkaview Gardens Hennepin County Minn." distant 1320 feet south as measured at right angles from the north line of said northwest quarter; thence west parallel with said north line to a point in a line running from a point in said north line of the northwest quarter distant 402.5 feet east from the nonhwest comer of said northwest quarter to a point in the south line of said northwest quarter distant 396.5 feet east from the southwest comer of said northwest quarter; thence southerly along the last-described line to the northerly line of that portion of the alley, as dedicated on and adjoining the northerly line of Lot 5 , in Bergquist and Wicklund's Addition to Bergquist and Wicklund's Park Hennepin County Minnesota; thence easterly along s ud northerly line a distance 137.24 feet to the angle point in said line; thence southeasterly along said northerly line of said alley a distance 169.39 feet to the most northerly comer of Lot 2, Bergquist and Wicklund's Addition to Bergquist and Wicklund's Park Hennepin County Minnesota; Page 1 of 3 thence southeasterly along the northeasterly lines of Lots 2 and 1, Bergquist and Wicklund's Addition to to Bergquist and Wicklund’s Park Hennepin County Minnesota a distance of 113.86 feet to said westerly line of "Tonkaview Gardens Hennepin County Minn."; thence northerly along said westerly line to the point of beginning (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the City is in the process of acquiring this 9.2 acre tax-forfeited property for park purposes; and WHEREAS, the City Council has agreed in concept to make a 1/2 acre portion of the property available for sale to ad>y'int owners at some future date; and WHEREAS, the proposed metes and bounds subd..ision is for the purpose of separating a 1/2 ncre parcel to make said future sale possible; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the City for a metes and bounds subdivision for the purposes noted above. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the rnetes and bounds subdivision as shown on the Certificate of Survey by Phillip A. Nelson of the Hf >uiepin County Surveyor's Office, dated June 26,1996 and attached to this resolution, subject - • the following conditions: 1.The City of Orono shall complete acquisition of both parcels created by this division, and shall retain both parcels under City ownership until such time that the City Council chooses to release the 1/2 acre parcel for purchase by adjacen* property owners. 2. 3. The aforesaid division shown on the attached Certificate of Survey shall be filed by the City of Orono with Hennepin County on or before December 9, 1997 together with a certified original copy of this resolution. The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the division has not been filed by the date specified above. Page 2 of 3 » • H 1 Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota this 9th day of June, 1997. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Cleric Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor . STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. h COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of June, 1997 by Gabriel Jabbour and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Cler'' o !**he City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public j Page 3 of3 m- To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator May 16, 1997 #2165 City of Orono, "4730" Tonkaview Lane - Metes & Bounds Class I Subdivision - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 Acre, Sewered Application: Subdivision to separate a half-acre tax parcel from the 9.2 acre tax forfeit Saga Hill Park parcel. The half-acre parcel is intended for future acquisition by adjacent property o'Amers, as previously indicated by the City Council. The City Council has requested thai this subdivision be completed so that the City can release the half-acre n-ircel to the County separately from the remaining park parcel. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Survey E - Area Site Map, Including Park Properties F - Council Minutes 11/28/94 G - Moorse Letter 12/28/94 and Resolution #3511 Discussion The City is in the process of acquiring a 9.2 acre tax forfeit parcel formerly owned by Mr. and Mrs. Valek of 4720 Tonkaview Lane. When this parcel went tax forfeit, due to a number of circumstances surrounding the nature of the forfeiture and the historic use by the Valeks for yard and drainage purposes of a small portion of the total parcel. City Council agreed in principle to allow for the eventual re-acquisition of a one-half acre tract by the Valeks. The current subdivision would separate for tax purposes such a half-acre parcel, which would for the time being remain under City control but which could be released to the County for sale to adjacent owners at the time the City chooses to do so. Such transfer would likely occur in conjunction with a future lot line rearrangement suggested by the Valeks involving their homestead parcel and properties to the immediate west along Tonkaview Lane. Such subdivision would ultimatelv result in one additional building site on Tonkaview Lane. The currently proposed metes and bounds division does not affect access to the Saga Hill Park area, and appears to follow the intent of the City Council as nc*. ^ in Exhibits F and G.. ?. i r i' "I ! Zoning File #2165 May 16, 1997 Page 2 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed metes and bounds subdivision to separate a half acre parcel for potential future acquisition by adjacent property owners. Options for Action 1. Approve per staff recommendation. 2. Table for further information. 3. Recommend denial (stats reasons). 4. Other. i i * o oI Application M ______ Date Received Auu*i' ZCoj /^7 6 Amount Pmd AIM______ A CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION ^ ^ ^ sit>^addrg.« "V7SC) ’7!>/ut^ i//a\j J-Ane._________ Property Identification Number (PID) ^ y- / /7~ ^3 Z~:!> OOP! Please check one - Property y abstract or Attach legal description to application. torrens? Zip5F^3Phone (work) APPLICANT n ■ . . Name 0^ UtZot^O A^VTh^ > ______ Address P. O. _____________________Phone (home) —^ City -6>/W OWNER (if ^prent than applic^t) Nam< Addr< City Zip Phone (home) _ Phone (work) (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present use (check) / ^Tf7 Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units__^ Other (specify) \lA^Ji40T~ Present Zoning District PROPOSAL X __ Division for Tax Purposes / _________Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new buildling sites) Subdivision for New Building SilvS Number of Building Sites __ O___Existing Units O New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Proposed Use (check) _ Units per___Acres —- Sq. Ft. Dry Buildable Land _____Residential ^ Other (specify) C^\rYx: r MINIMUM MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION A". Payment of fees (refer to "application fees" listed below. A^/v4 Completed application form. Preliminary plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin Coui.ty Department of Finance A-603 Govt. Center 348-3271). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Zoning Official’s Signature______________________________________Date ________________________________ MINIMUM MAT-'iRIAL REQUIRED FOR COMPLETE FINAL APPLICATION 1. Payment of fees (refer to Preliminary Subdivision Approval resolution and park fees if appicable). 2. Signed Certificate of Survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Zoning Official's Signature______________________________________ Date_____________________________ I. APPLICATION FEES (Zoning Administrator to check [X] tnose which apply) A. Application Base Fees: _____ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) $250.00 » Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangemem$15^0 Subdivision Application (Class I & ll)($3S0.0^!i> _____Preliminary Subdivision Application 5375.00 + $25.00/lot (Class III & all non-residential) _____ Final Plat Application (Class 111) $200.00 _____ Legal Review and Filing: _____Subdivision only $75.00 _____Subdivision w/easements and covenants min. $200.00 _____ Park Fees (to be determined per Section 11.62) _____ Legal and Engineering Review Fees (as incurred) _____ Renewal of Class I and II Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) _____ Renewal of Class III, Preliminary Subdivision Application $200.00 (No change from original application) _____ Renewal of Final Class 111 Subdivision Application $150.00 (No change from original application) Totals B. Special Improvement Fees: _____ Proposed Private Roads $600.00 + $.50/lineal ft.; _____ Proposed Public Roads $900.00 + $.50/lineal ft; _ _ lin. ft. X .50 = $. lin. ft. X .50 = $ _____ Request for City to Accept Existing Prvate Road $900.00 _____ Proposed Sanitary Sewer Main Extension $250.00 + $25/stub _____ Proposed Watermain Extension $250.00 + $25/stub _____ Proposed Storm Sewer System (excluding culverts) $200.00 _____ On-S'fe System, Site Evaluation Review (applicable to rural subdivision applications) $50.00/per lot x_____new lots C. Flexible Application Fees/Misc. Fees _____ Variance $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) _____ Easement Vacation Associated with Subdivision $100.00 _____ PRD Application with Subdivision $30.00/DweIling Unit The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information require^r requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission a^^id Council nectary to proce^ms application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. y\yZ Applicant's Signature f ~ — Date ' / Cg?____________ Owner's Signature ____________________________________________Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City Office 25 days before the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission meetings are held on the third Monday dfeach month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Platming Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise tne Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. I t; >;::;;;?<>:::;:;:x:;>:::;:::::::>v: :::;::i:;:x;|:::v^:::::;:;:ix t :*:: ::x>:::::::;:;::'r:::;:v:;.-: x:v-xv:*<:::::>::<::x:::::x::mmmmm • ••«••I • n m • \ 9 • •••••:-:-x-:;:-:-WWWtx:::xvxi::::>^;:<x:;:x;xx:: :;:xi::;:::x:::x:;:::x:x:x:;:<^ x-x-;‘>:;>^-x ‘::::::x-‘::::;X 4>x:S=;:_:x:::?:;::::::x:::x:::Sx;x:x: ::x:x<:x;::x:::;:;:x:;:v:^^^^^ ^x:x:x;x:v:xx.:xxx;x:x:Xv:;:x':<;^1:x::;;::XxX:;;X -?V, .1^ '* (?») 1-------- 61 (3<) ?» e A 62 i?5 <35> -.8 8 TA 4 — iO) 8.4- » I r*c OOC »c r»4432 (» « \ fT or £"T0ff?KAVIg2jf ’ » '^VV V ♦ 4«T. I .tf). 5 ■7 o7-;n-23-3Z- RUN DATE 07/2A/96 BATCH 507 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LISTPROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NANE/ADDR 38 07-117-23 22 0007 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED BARBARA SOLLNER-NEBB BARBARA SOLLNER-WEBB 17200 MELBOURNE DR UUREL ra 20707 PROP AODR OMNEk NAME TAXPAYER . NAME/ADDR 38 07-117-23 22 0017 04735 NEST BRANCH RD B 8 V VAN SLOUN BRUCE P 8 VIRVE L VAN SLOUN 12809 FOREST MEADOW DR MINNETONKA NN 55305 , V PROP ADDR i /: *;OWNER NAME : ^ NAME/ADDR 38 07-117-23 23 0003 01070 NORTH SHORE DR H THOMAS 0 WIENER ETAL THOMAS 6 WIENER 1070 NORTH SHORE DRIVE W MOUND MN 55364 PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 07-117-23 23 0006 01130 NORTH SHORE DR W WALTER HOLZER ET AL • WALTER HOLZER 1130 NORTH SHORE DR W MOUND MN 55364 I * PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 07-117-23 23 0011 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HAROLD G CANT RALPH WINTON PALMER 4750 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 07-117-23 23 0019 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED BARBARA SOLLNER-WEBB BARBARA SOLLNER-WEBB 17200 MELBOURNE DR LAUREL MD 20707 \ . ' .*• ^ H. II ' 38 07-117-23 22 000800038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED BARBARA SOLLNER-WEBB BARBARA SOLLNER-WEBB 17200 MELBOURNE DR LAUREL MD 2070738 07-117-23 23 0001 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND COWEYANCE PENDING CITY RESOLUTION i3511-ALSO: HENN CONSERVATION EASEMENT 38 07-117-23 23 0004 01100 NORTH SHORE DR W BRIAN E PETERSON BRIAN E PETERSON 1100 NORTH SHORE DR W MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 23 0007 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED FAIRVIEW COVENANT CH FAIRVIEW COVENANT CHURCH 1175 COUNTY RD 19 MOUND m 55364 38 07-117-23 23 0012 04750 TONKAVIEW LA HAROLD G CANT RALPH WINTOt4 PALMER 4750 TONKAVIEW MOUND HN 55364 38 07-117-23 23 0020 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 0 LARRY LE^ ATTNnACCTS PAYABLE midwaV><^tional bank 1578/UNlVERSITY AVE ST/PAUL MN 55104 •9 • 0REPORT NO. k’1435401 PAGE 1838 07-117-23 22 001300950 NORTH SHORE DR W KATHLEEN POLLOCK KATHLEEN POLLOCK 950 NORTH SHORE DR W MOUND MN 5536438 07-117-23 23 0002 01068 NORTH SHORE DR W D 8 K VON BANK DUANE 8 KATHLEEN VON BANK 1060 NORTH SHORE DR W MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 23 0005 01120 NORTH SHORE Sit W J A LEZER 8 J b LEZER JAY a LEZER . 1120 NORTH shore DR WEST MOUND MN 55364 ■,t, 38 07-117-23 23 0010 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED STEVEN F VALEK STEVEN VALEK BOX 386 SPRING PARK MN 55384 11 . i 38 07-117-23 23 0013 04760 TONKAVIEW LA FAIRVIEW COVENANT CHURCH FAIRVIEW COVENANT CHURCH 1175 CO RD 19 MOUND MN 55364 tend 38 O’^-117-rr 23 0021 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 0 LARRY Lrt ATTN Ab<^ PAYABLE MIDWAY ^lONAL BANK 1578 UNIVERSIT * AVE ST PAUL MN Bi.104 0 .1 RUN DATE 07/24/96 BATCH 507 HEf4NEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONhERS LIST REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 19r:PROP AODR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDRIv. I ■■ 38 07-117-23 23 002200038 ADDRESS UNASSIGTEO 0 LA^Y LEE ATTN aXcT^PAYABLE MIDNAY I^^ONAL BANK 1578 lAffyERSITY AVE ST ^L m 55104 38 07-117-23 23 0023UNASSIGNED OAe^td00038'0 LARRYATTN ACCT8 PAYABLE ^MIDMAY NfhlONAL BANK (J f) 1578 UNWERSITY AVE ST PAUL/MN 55104 38 07-117-23 23 002400980 NORTH SHCUE DR N PAUL A ALMA WARNER PAUL A ALMA WARNER 980 N SHORE DR W MOUND MN 55364 j ;^*^^^t^^\NAME/ADDI PROP ADDR (MER NAME NAME/ADDR 38 07-117-23 23 0025 01181 WILDHURST TR ARNOLD M SOSKIN ARNOLD H SOSKIN 802 EDGEMOOR DR HOPKINS MN 55305 38 07-117-23 23 0026 04720 TOTACAVIEW LA STEVEN F VALEK STEVEN F VALEK BOX 386 SPRING PAfDC MN 55384 38 07-117-23 23 0027 04765 TONKAVIEW U D A A P E AFFELDT DWIGHT A PATRICIA AFFELDT 4765 TONKAVIEW LA HOUND MN 55364 V* I ''i. PROP AODR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 07-117-23 32 0003 04725 TONKAVIEW LA EAT CHRISTIANSON EARL A TERRY CHRISTIANSON 4641 TONKA VIEW LANE HOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0004 047^5 TONKAVIEW LA 0 M A J K STANLEY DAVID M A JULIE M STANLEY 4735 TONKAVIEW LA ORONO MN* 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0029 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO DENNIS A MEYER DENNIS A MEYER 4680 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 • ^ PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 07-117-23 32 0045 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED J D DOLEZAL A J A ROSTAD J D DOLEZAL A J A ROSTAD 4650 TONKA VIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0047 04690 TONKAVIEW LA NAS BULL WILLIAM A BULL 4690 TONKAVIEW LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0057 04755 TONKAVIEW LA LELAND S MARTINEAU ET AL LELAND A PATRICIA MARTINEAU 4755 TONKAVIEW LANE MOUND MN 55364 : ' . « ^nOP ADDR dWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR TOTAL 8ATCH 507 00030 >- Qc: <o s LUu_cr:o U- h-4 l-Ha. >LU oc Z UJ Z CO LU > QC >- tU LUto > QC QC LU QC UJ >- < 9z LU O < h— I »"*S im !¥R|§f Jjj ii?*► « 11 Ks Q lb ?S8!“ O *se » A.C 52 3?^»X«|acl5f C»i im IM .•••I* •I**** V .o 8 9 ,•••*•••••* »»••••/r.••••• d3 s V-.« \-v. • ••••? 3NV1 tu*-''. XI A xn NIHON XI Nils uininrH xn f r li 3*»».S0.S0S SS'99£ fiNij XU «x WUMfSB iO tMl04- ■-----------------1 :v UJ 8 •••• *. .• m 8 Uo» M3IAH9IH ••II* .. I* • • • • • a lO iHrsjo % O' •n • O' • % 5s; |5|P|if r -s« \ (V \ 3.H).CS.( \ — irw s ATTIV S / Zfi'WZ %. •* : ... \» I « f >• j <::> .** *% *••••••* ••••!• • •• ...: P-. • • • f*ri * # • • .VIVI CO ii:..{ IJ..: r.i::; • •••• jii:: :.i..i •:i:: 8 <::> ..bbitfs 4t aS £3 ; S Urn a Hi “lit ^ii "S - S3@ 12 VI 40 § 8 m d d 5a. C uf I II I <- s & I*if 13 i I n iiS:jjj' 12 a J si tl I* I I .jfwiigcaL fl9H 3 *• R • 2 S • d • a 40 i> • —d /je^Ak/2-^1 V V, ^ te •0 ifioSI^"1 V iL67-63 y ey\^zr\t^i^ hoM ’S \/ i/A<LAwr Pac^c.^\—V/x [flail iiaHIlfil [tiafiiiMf:m« klAII IMS [fiirii nacti [fTaiiMi m (L CITYof ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55355 Mai'ins Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-C066 December 28, 1994 M. J. Berry Tax Processing Section Supervisor Department of Property Tax and Public Records A-607 Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0067 Dear Mr. Berry: Enclosed is a resolution adopted by the Orono City Council and an application requesting acquisition of a tax forfeit parcel (P.I.D. No. 07-117-23 23 0001) at no cost to the city for public use. It is the city’s understanding that the County is in agreement that a one-half acre portion of this property may be divided off to be acquired by the Valeks. This property is adjacent to the tax forfeit parcel. It is also the city’s understanding that the details of this transaction are yet to be worked out, and that the city will play a role in finalizing these details. The city is supportive of addressing the Valeks’ problem, as long as the city’s ownership of the remainder of the parcel is not affected. If you liave any questions regarding the resolution or the application, please call me. Sincerely, Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator Enclosures Telephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 I : 5 ' f ‘ nfio r IfVV <2.ol V.«» Wi p CKr^c. e.\ \-<r \IQ t ^ CoT\\; ;:_'^e.cJl r L MINUTES OT THE REGULAR ORONO CIT\’ COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 28. 1994 (Saga Hill Tax Forfeit Property - Continued) Moorsc reported that the potential development talks between the City and Bridgewood occurred at the same time as the tax forfeit parcel was under consideration for . acquisition. Staffs thinking during discussions with Bridgewood was that if there was to be residential development in the area, it is wise to see where the best location would be for a park. It made sense to keep all options open in terms of parkland vs. residential development. Moorse said some kind of land swap might be a viable alternative if the Council feels the area should have some type of residential development. Kell^ said he is a supporter of parkland and feds it is best to preserve land where we c.m Hurr also voiced her support of parkland, Hurr also supported the Valek's *m their effort to add the additional one-half acre to their property and would like to see the easement access moved to the side of the Valek property. Mayor Callahan asked whether any additional action needed to be taken by the Council. Moorse said a new resolution would need to be adopted. Callahan commented that all concerned feel the Valek’s should acquire the specified land. He noted the need to be sensitive to propert}' owners with land to be developed in that area. It was his opinion that the Park and Planning Commissions be involved in the study of a plan for the area. The other Council members did not feel a study %vas necessary at this time, only the acquisition of the parcel. During discussion, several neighbors in the Saga Hill area expressed their views on favoring the land as parkland. Callahan moved, Hurr seconded, to reaffirm the acquisition of 9.5 acres by the City, working with the County and the Valek's on the appropriate land amount to be adjoined to the Valek property, and obtaining an easement firom the Valek's to have access to the parcel. Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF Mimnxs (»#2) MEETING OF CANVASSING BOARD NOVTEIMBER 9, 1994 Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Canvassing Board Meeting held on November 9, 1994. Ayes 4, Nays 0. (*■#3) REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 1994 Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of November 14,1994. Ayes 4, Nays 0. L Y minutes of the regular orono city councilmeeting held on NOVEMBER 28. 1994fSaga Hni Tax Forfeit Property - Continued) iabbour was concerned with the property being for pubhc use, and yet, by a trade, the Cicv would, in his opimon, become an agent for the developer. The Bndgewood representative said they would not develop if the City keeps the ta.x forfeit parcel as there are too many environmental issues in developing the Soskin property. Council members said they could not be concerned with the end result of the developer but only the good of the puWic where this land is concerned. Hurr noted th^ this acquisition was resoK*ea in Januao' of 1994. and no negotiations have been done with the Council by Bndgewood on this property. The Saga Hill Preservation Sodety was represmted by Patricia brou^ to the Council's attention. The survey showed the (^bhe s concern with more natural land and passive park areas. 62% of those surveyed sard th^ would support higher taxes for nature preserves even though the roa)onty of those poUed noted the amount of their real estate ta.xes was their biggest concern. The Preservation Society said they were not to development of environmentally sensitive areas which they ^ Orono Management Plan was quoted as saying the preservauon ot L^e guidh^rinciple of the City. The Preservation Society feels any <'e«'PP[!“™ SagflEU wLid ^ect the lake. They also noted that the Orono Planning Pohaes indicate that rural development should be screened for environmental sensitivity. It was commemed by the Preservation Society that they approve of the Valek's obtaining the one-half acre of additional larvi for their property. fi K I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL meeting held on NOVEMBER 28. 1994 (Saga Hill Tax Forfeit Property - Continued) Steven Valek reported that he was the original owner of the tax forfeit parcel and when he sold the land to a developer, a lot-line rearrangement was to have been done to allow them to expand their rear yard. The developer lost the land and the rearrangement along whh it It was never their intent to sell all of the land. Valek said he was denied the right to reclaim the property as a result of the tax forfeiture. Valek asked the County to seU to them approximately a half-acre to relieve some hardship due to flooding. Without use of the property and the ability to maintain the drainage system, his property will flood. The Countv- has recently agreed to approve his request and Valek is now asking for City approval. Valek said this acquisition vnll not interfere with the rest of the land. Moorse said the County is looking at expanding the area which is now a pond. Even if the Valek’s acquire the requested property, an easement would be granted to the County. CaUahan indicated he understood the acquisition of the tax forfeit parcel was an all-or- nothine proposhion. Moorse said that although this was true, the County will allow the Valek-s to buy a portion of the property. This was worked out over the past two weeks. The Bridgewood Corporation is in the planning process of developing a 28-lot subdivision over a 30 acre area, which is proposed to include the 9 acre tax forfeit parcel. Mr Kiyzaniak of Bridgewood said their company is sensitive to the environmental issues and the need for parkland. Bridgewood’s proposal is to trade two acres of wetland and seven acres east of the tax forfeit parcel the Soskin property for the tax forfeit parcel. Kryzaniak said the topography of the parcel is flatter and more suited to a residential development. Another representative of Bridgewood reported on the layout of the development plan. He commented that the Soskin property is hilly , with a wetland area, trees. ^ a ravn^, and would be good park land. It would be their intent to enlarge the wetland for runoff and construct swales to maintain proper drainage. He also noted an accas if the Soslan property were to become a park, it would have very good access from Wildhurst. Also, the existing planed right-of-way is now located next to a sw’ale, and Bndgewood considered this not to be a good location for a road. MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 2S, 1994ROIXoKnvP date with the following members present: Mayor Edward The Council met ^ JoEllen Hurr Gabriel Jabbour, and Charles Kelley. 3. gr^ofnen abse-J.^rdf^S ^ Public Works Duector, Jo ^ Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator, Callahan called the meeting to order at 7.00 p.m. OATH OF OmCE - FAKT-TBIE POUCE omCERS Council Members. (»#1) CONSENT AGENDA Items #5. 7. 12. and 13 were added to the Consent Agenda. .ebbour moved. KeUey seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes 4. Nays 0. HILL TAX FORFEIT PROPERTY ______reponed that the City has a^ oppormni^ojcq^e^Sa^ property from the County, •, its November 14 meeting, direaed meeting. Mayor Callahan indicated t e t meeting was to StafFtfmovc ahc^ >o acquim pmpo^o ^ ^ Callahan -I . . • •t MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 28. 1994(Saga Hill Tax Forfeit Property - Continued)Steven Valek reponed that he was the original owner of the tax forfeit parcel and when he sold the land to a developer, a lot-line reanangemeait was to have been done to allow them to expand their rear yard. The developer lost the land and the rearrangement along withh. It was never thdr intent to sell all of the land. Valek said he was denied the right to reclaim the property as a result of the tax forfeiture. Valek asked the County to sell to them approximately a half-acre to relieve some hardship due to flooding. Without use of the property and the ability to maintain the drainage system, his property will flood. The County has recently agreed to approve his request and Valek is now asking for City approval. Valek said this acquisition will not interfere with the rest of the land. Moorse said the County is looking at expanding the area which is now a pond. Even if the Valek’s acquire the requested property, an easement would be granted to the County. Callahan indicated he understood the acquisition of the tax forfeit parcel was an all-or- nothing proposition. Moorse said that although this was true, the County will allow the Valek’s to buy a portion of the property. This was worked out over the past two weeks. The Bridgewood Corporation is in the planning process of developing a 28-lot subdivision over a 30 acre area, which is proposed to include the 9 acre tax forfeit parcel. Mr. Kryzaniak of Bridgewood said their company is sensitive to the environmental issues and the need for parkland. Bridgewood’s proposal is to trade two acres of wetland and seven acres east of the tax forfeit parcel, the Soskin property' for the tax forfeit parcel. Kryzaniak said the topography of the parcel is flatter and more suited to a residential development. Another representative of Bridgev/ood reported on the layout of the development plan. He commented that the Soskin property is hilly , with a wetland area, trees, and a ravine, and would be good park land. It would be their intent to enlarge the wetland for runoff and construct swales to maintain proper drainage. He also noted an access if the Soskin property were to become a park, it would have very good access from Wildhursi. Also, the existing platted right-of-way is now located next to a swale, and Bridgewood considered this not to be a good location for a road. To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator Mayor Jabbour and Council Members Michael P. Gaffron Co. % June 6,1997 Subject: Policy Discussion - Plumbing In Accessor)' Structures CfTV, Should Accessory Buildings Be Allowed Plumbing? The zoning code does not specifically prohibit plumbing in accessory buildings. Homeowners often wish to have plumbing in accessory buildings for typical single family residential uses such as potting sheds, yard maintenance equipment, workshops, art studios, home offices, washing cars, etc. as well as for other uses which require special permits (such as guest houses), or for uses which currently are not allowed in accessory buildings (such as home occupations). Because the incidence of plumbing in an accessory structure can lead to uses requiring special approval or which are not allowed, staff finds it difficult to respond to what seems like an ever- increasing number of requests for such plumbing, especially when it involves addition of a shower or toilet. In the past, the City has on a number of occasions forced the removal of plumbing from existing accessory buildings, allowing the homeowner to avoid paying a second sewer unit. This policy, when applied to new accessory buildings, suggests that such buildings should not have plumbing. Yet it may be perfectly reasonable to allow certain plumbing fixtures for certain residential uses, without such use constituting a second dwelling unit. Summary of Policy Issues 1 . What plumbing fixtures should be allowed in an accessory building without Council review? 2. At what level of plumbing does an accessory structure have the potential for secondary dwelling use or non-residential use? 3. 4. When is a restrictive covenant an appropriate alternative to a guest house CUP? Does Council wish to review/approve all restrictive covenant situations? (Separate but related issue) Sewer unit assessment policy related to accessory buildings with plumbing. Plumbing in Accessory Structures June 6,1997 Page 2 Accessory Structure Not To Be Used As Dwelling Except By CUP Zoning Code Section 10.03 Subd. 11 states: "Dwelling Use Prohibited. No cellar, basement, tent, trailer or accessory building shall at any time be used as an occupied dwelling". An accessory building with the potential to be used as separate dwelling unit creates a potential violation situation. However, Code Section 10.20 Subd. 3 (G)(1) provides for one special circumstance under which an accessory building mav be used for dwelling purposes via a Conditional Use Pemit in residential zoning districts: "Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings, including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house." What Constitutes a 'Separate Dwelling'? A primary issue for Building & Zoning staff is to determine whether or when a guest house CUP is required for a given accessory structure project . This determination relies on a definition of what factors make an accessory structure a dwelling. The zoning code definition of'dwelling' is: "Dwelling - A building or one or more portions thereof designed or intended to be occupied exclusively for residence purposes, but not including rooms in motels, hotels, nursing homes, boardinghouses, nor trailers, tents, cabins, or trailer coaches. A dwelling shall not be interpreted to include lodging rooms." The terms 'building', 'boardinghouse', 'motel' and 'hotel' are further defined in the zoning code. It is unfortunate, however, that the physical features that differentiate a building that is a dwelling from one that is not, are not defined. We then must turn to the Building Code, which indicates that a dwelling is characterized by containing facilities for "sleeping , eating , cooking and sanitation ." The building code also indicates a number of other features of a habitable dwelling: a separate closet, a kitchen sink, refiigeration, a cooking appliance, and plumbing to include as a minimum a toilet, a tub or shower, and a lavatory. One could also argue that in Minnesota, a source of heat is also necessary during a portion of the year. Permanent Fixtures vs. Personal Property The next difficulty is that many of the physical objects which would reasonably and normally be used for the activities of'sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation' are not fixtures, but can be •ims ^.liltl^i Ml WTiTi ninnri RTirnisi^^ ruilk)iKltJ ^s^innrtniT^ ^TiT«if«WnQy Fnruuii r^^Tfiiiif a-iKH-llJ® huum ^•ii iT¥«;mniTrn- •II i tit Wfk^M9]nitmHtj mm mnrtiti4i ^icftmtj iTtJtll itltJ RJsT¥t MkWtllJlClJ [ijiaiinimljl^Rr^irmR rtT«i [•WM9] F^ilMlltl Ruimno aliMiSw iKtmtlHnti minssi!^ M iMi miutHi] Plumbing in Accessory Structures June 6,1997 Page 4 that perhaps a shower or tub in combination with a toilet is necessary to comprise a functional, if not necessarily legal, dwelling unit... It may therefore be reasonable to define whether a structure or space is a (potential) dwelling unit by the presence or absence of a bathtub or shower in combination with a toilet. Restrictive Covenant: Alternative to CUP? Stall would welcome a clear policy statement on what fixtures can be allowed in an accessory building without requiring a Guest House CUP. The policy becomes more difficult to define now that the Council has in at least one case allowed an accessory building to contain a sho'ver and a toilet, with a covenant filed in the title stating that the building may not be used as "an alternative living space, guest house, secondary residential unit, mother-in-law apartment, rental structure, or the like". It is staffs impression that Council has taken the position that even though an accessory structure has the amenities to be used as a second dwelling unit (i.e. it looks and smells and feels and tastes like a guest house), the determinant of whether it needs a CUP is the owner’s intended use of the structure. And, if the owner does not intend to use it as a guest house even though it can easily function as one, a covenant filed in the title wherein the owner agrees to not use it as a dwelling presumably at lea.st gives the City the right to sue for breach of covenant, if it is subsequently used as a dwelling unit. ITie covenant also notifies future owners of the property that dwelling use is not allowed. But such a covenant does not result in physical traits of the structure being created in a manner non- conducive to dwelling use. It effectively allows all the necessary physical features for a dwelling to be put into place, then assumes the homeowner and all future homeowners will abide by the restrictions (similar to allowing the manufacture of cars that can go 120 miles an hour when the speed limit is 55). 'Sewer Connection Charge ’ Policy Has Been Implemented Inconsistently This is a separate but related issue. Council action regarding sewer connection charges for properties with guest houses has been inconsistent when viewed over the past 10-15 years. In the past, where sewer was available, approval of a guest house CUP was accompanied by a requirement that a sewer unit connection charge be paid, regardless whether the property conformed to lot area requirements. However, in the recent (1994) Stoddard request for a Guest House CUP on sewered property in which the lot did not meet the 'double area' standard. Council chose to not require a connection charge, apparently on the theory that charging one would provide a future basis for the property owner to demand lot area and width variances for a future subdivision. A clear policy must be established to avoid future inconsistencies. r i Plumbing in Accessory Structures June 6, 1997 Page 5 Policy Questions 1.What combination of fixtures or facilities is necessary to consider a structure as a potential guest house or accessory dwelling unit? 2.Given Council's recent action to allow, via covenant, all the physical improvements which make an accessory structure functional as a dwelling, is it Council's intent that staff take into consideration the intent of the owner (not just the physical improvements to the building) when reviewing accessory building plans? 3.Does Council wish to review each individual case, or should staff determine whether a CUP or covenant is most appropriate for a given application, and let staff deal with the covenant situations? 4.Does Council wish to review the assessment policy for secondary dwelling units? Note that the current policy approved by Council in 1984 came into play in determining the number of units for the Bracketts Point sewer. Staff Recommendation Council is requested to review the policy issues and provide staff with direction. Optionally, this could be referred to Planning Commission, tabled for more information (specify) or discussed at a work session. r COt/M REQUEST FOR councU ACTION JU^ _ ® J99T DATE: T^^oyvo ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Thie Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Administrator ’s Report Item Description: Project Engineering for Femdale Road Improvements The Cities of Orono and Plymouth are working on a joint project for the reconstruction of North Femdale Road in 1998. The City Council previously authorized obtaining a proposal for engineering services on this project from Bonestroo and Associates. This project is included in City's Capital Improvements Plan for Municipal State Aid funding. The City of Plymouth has agreed to act as the lead agency for this project and has obtained a proposal for engineering services on this project. The City of Plymouth has reviewed this proposal and indicated that the Scope of Services and fee are acceptable. We have also reviewed the proposal and find it acceptable. This item is on the agenda for approval at the June 9th Plymouth City Council meeting. My recommendation is for approval of the proposal for engineering services on this project. Pending approval of both the Cities of Orono and Plymouth, the next step is to have a neighborhood meeting for project area residents. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the May 1997 proposal for engineering services from Bonestroo and Associates for the North Femdale Road Improvement project. 1996 1997$61.00062,000 _ _ low Dr. to S. Brown Rd.’ .S.AJ1.6 (Right of Way) CSj UI. 15 (ROW East End) I CS.AJ1.15 (ROW Bracketts Pt) CITY OF ORONO MSA STREETS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PT.AM199819992000 Stubbs Bay Road (Ca Rd. 84 to TH 12', Willow Drive, induding overlay TH 12 to Co. Rd. 6] iFemdaleRoad •W I fCg Rd. 6 to 1-304)_____ wuiow Drive (Railroad Bridge) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 BEYOND 2005 600.000 TOTAL MSA Budget (Cany—ovcr) MSA Allotment BALANCE 557.000 764.000 731.000 430,000 256.000 255.000 $430,000 1 ($79.000 600.000 (79,000: 255,000 ($424,000; 0 (424,000; 255,000 [$169,000' (169,000; 255,000 $86,000 MSA-OP 341.000 255.000 $596,000 596.000 255.000 $851,000 0| 1.650.0000 01 0 1 $3,350W) 851,000 1 1,106,000 255,000 255,000 $1,106/XK)| $1,361 j OOO iQAmumi4«ciNN«minTfuitA.wio i ' Note; P.I.R. Fund Rad/Bridge contlroction account balanceatOIX)l/96 is $122330 ?c\hws tr N r r•a March 5,1997 CITY Of- PLYMOUTH m 0 6 C\TV OF ORONOMr. Shawn Gustafson BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLK AND ASSOC., INC. 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 SUBJECT: FERNDALE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CITY PROJECT NO. 607 Dear Shawn: The City of Plymouth and the City of Orono have both included in our construction program for 1998, the reconstruction of Femdale Road from County Road 6 to Highway 12. For most of this segment of road, the city limits line between the two cities is on the centerline of the street. About the southerly 1000-feet is totally within the City of Orono. This will be a joint project for both cities and Orono has requested that Plymouth be the lead agency. To allow ample time for the planning for this project, we are proposing to get imderway this Spring. During 1997, planning can be completed, plans prepared, approvals received, contract awarded, and construction can begin when weather permits in 1998. Since your firm has been a consultant for both cities, I am requesting a proposal for project engineering fron your firm. The proposal should defme a scope of services and cost estimate for the following three categories: • Preliminary Engineering Report. • Plans and specifications and award of contract. • Construction services. I would anticipate three public information meetings as part of the project. Two would be associated with the Preliminary Engineering Report and one at the completion of the construction plans. A presentation of the preliminary report would also need to be made to each City Council. r I C:\ENGU>R01ECTS\«77U.TRS\CUSTAFSN.D0CPLYMOUTH ^eautifuCTtace To Live 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447-1482 • TELEPHONE (612) 509-5000 Mr. Shawn Gustafson Page Two Both cities will be using MSA funding for the project, and therefore, the design will have to comply with State Aid standards. Plymouth will probably have some special assessments for the few properties which receive direct access from Femdale Road. I do not know if Orono will be using special assessments to finance any portion of the project. Femdale Road is classified as a “minor collector” street in the Plymouth Transportation Plan. The following are our preliminary design concepts for the project; . • The road would be a nine ton urban design standard. This means concrete curb and gutters with storm sewer system for drainage. • The road would be 36 feet wide. This would provide for two lanes of traffic, one in each direction, and one parking lane. Although this wouW be the standard, we would propose that the roadway be posted for “no parking” and this 36 foot width would then allow for one lane of traffic in each direction, with the other width used for turning vehicles at the numerous intersections and driveways. • The right-of-way would be 66 feet wide. • The road would be designed for a speed of 35 m.p.h. • There would be a separate walking trail in the right-of-way along the east side of the road. ^ & If you have any questions on the proposal for engineering services that I am requesting, please do not hesitate to contact me. Questions for Orono should be addressed to Greg Gappa, Director of Public Services. Sincerely, Fred G. Moore, P.E. Director of Public Works cc: Greg Gappa, Director of Public Services CITY OF ORONO PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 O:\ENGVPROJICTS\<07U,TRS\CWrARN.DOC i ! t > K'S L.' . A 'v Ic CITY OF ORONO HE @0^11 May 21,1997 ^ CUV Of PLYMOUm MAY t f • • I 2 2 1997 Mr. Greg Gappa Director of Public Services CITY OF ORONO PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 SUBJECT: FERNDALE ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CITY PROJECT NO. 607 Dear Greg: Attached are two copies of the Proposal for Engineering Services for the Femdale Road Improvement Project which I received from Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Assoc., Inc. I have reviewed the proposals and the Scope of Services and associated fees appear to be acceptable. After your review of the proposal, please let me know if it is acceptable to the City of Orono. If it is, we should then both present the proposal to our City Councils for formal approval to begin preliminary engineering services and information meetings on the project. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Fred G. Moore, P.E. Director of Public Works enclosures PLYMOUTH iT <Beautifu(Ttace To Live ''°«YJlx\vcll^EN(AFROlEC^^6a7^LTRs^ppp..^ 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447-1482 • TELEPHONE (612) 509-5000 Project Understanding Ferndale Road from County Road 6 to Highway 12 has been slated for reconstajctfon In 1998. The centerline for the majority of this approximately one-mile long segment marks the boundaries between the Cities of Orono and Plymouth. The City of Orono has requested that the Qty of Plymouth act as the lead agency on this reconstruction projea. Ferndale Road is classified as a minor colieaor street In the Plymouth Transportation Plan, its present width and Inadequate site distances present safety issues that need to be addressed in the new design. Ferndale will be reconstruaed as a nine-ton urban section roadway and designed using Municipal State Aid standards. The road width will provide for two lanes of traffic and a parking lane. A walking trail is to be inciuded in the right-of-way along the east side. Sanitary sewer will be fended from 12*^ Avenue to CSAH 6. A comprehensive drainage plan for the trunk storm sewer will be completed. The storm sewer system will be designed as part of this improvement project. We see several issues as key to this projea. These are: Transportation element — being able to accommodate traffic durina construction ^ residents (public awareness during consrruaionj ► Storm drainage ► Sight distance correalons Of these elements, communication with affeaed is a priority. Bonestroo has extensive experience in this area and has several ideas for keeping residents Informed of the project’s status. This pro-aaive approach often results In increased public consensus and projea support. This submittal provides a proposed scope of work for three distina projea elements. These are: ► Preliminary engineering ► Design plans and specifications; contract bid assistance ► Construaion services C/ly of Plymouth Scope of Services Our proposed Scope of Services presents 3 comprehensive work plsn that addresses the three major prq/ect elements: > Preliminary engineering ► Design plans and specifications ► Construction services The plan Is flexible enough to accommodate unforeseeable elements. Our proposed scope of work reflects the commitment of the projea team to give dally attenrion to the details that will result In a successful prefect. In addition, your project team will have the full support of the firm's professional resources to keep the project on schedule and within budget. □ Prelimfnaiy Design Phase Project Initiation During this phase, Bonestroo will establish contact with the affected residents and governmental units, and will finalize the scope of work. I. I — Meet with Project Management Personnel Key consultant team members will meet with projea management personnel from the cities of Plymouth and Orono (and Wa3^ta, If needed) to finalize the work plan and schedules. A revised work plan. If appropriate, will be submitted refiealng revisions made during the meeting. 1.2 — Meet with Mn/DOT We will meet with Mn/DOT State /\ld personnel to discuss the work plan, design elements, reporting elements and review process. I -3 — Physical/Transportatlon Conditions Data Gathering All available data relative to the physical and traffic conditions of the roadway will be obtained from Plymouth and Orono. Utility Information will also be Important. I — Convene Public Information Meeting A public Information meeting will be convened to Inform residents of the projea a. id to obtain their Input on issues and concerns. Prepare Prellmlnaiy Design All Information gathered to this point will be used to prepare the preliminary design. Additional field surveys and a geotechnical survey will be performed. Municipal State Aid criteria will be used to develop the preliminary layout. A public Information meeting will be held to provide an opportunity to community feedback on the preliminary design. A preliminary engineering report will be prepared and presented to both the Plymouth and Orono city councils. U Oty of Plymouth iJl Femd^fe Ro3d Reconstruction i 1.2 — 1.7 1.9 — 1.10 l.II — Field Survey After reviewing Information provided by both cities. Bonestroo will survey the project area to obtain any additional Information, Throughout the project, surveyors will be available to gather additional Information, delineate wetlands, or stake property or slope limits. Geotechnical Analysis A geotechnical exploration of the roadway soils will be performed to determine design and construalon limitations. ■ Review Existing RIght-of-Way Pr^ous plans and right-of-way maps will be reviewed so the existing 66-foot right-of-way can be Incorporated Into the base map. Develop Plan and Profile Using Mn/DOT State Aid design standards, Bonestroo will develop the horizontal and vertical alignment for Ferndale Road. A 35-mph design speed will be used. Sight distance corrections may be required to meet design standards. Retaining walls may be needed. Cross sections will be developed to address any issues regarding Impacts to adjacent land. Analyze Roadway Hydraulics and Stormwater Runoff The stormwater runoff from the roadway and surrounding land will be analyzed to determine the need for and spacing of catch basins and manholes. Analyze Sanitary Sewer System Needs The sanitary sewer system In the project area will be analyzed. At this time. It appears that sanitary sewer Improvements would consist of an extension from the Ferndale Place Development on the east side of Ferndale Road north to CSAH 6. Prepare Preliminary Geometric Layout A preliminary typical sealon and geometric layout will be prepared. This will Include a trail on the east side of the roadway. The layout will show the recommended lane widths. Intersection layouts and extent of work beyond the proposed curb lines. Prepare Preliminary Cost Estimate Based on the preliminary layout, we will develop a preliminary cost estimate using MrVDOT's Bid Analysis Management System (BAMS). a Review of Preliminary Layout and Cost Estimate The Department of Transportation and the cities of Plymouth and Orono will be given the opportunity to review and comment on the layout and estimate. Public Information Meeting Affeaed property owners will have the opportunity to review and comment on the plan at a public Information meeting. Revise Preliminary Layout The layout and cost estimate will be revised to reflect comments received at the public Information meeting. Approvals and signatures from affeaed agencies will be requested. Chy of Plymouth \ Femdah Road Reconstruction Environmental AssessmentIt Is unlikely that an environmental assessment will be needed for this project, however, a wetlands audit will be prepared to identify impacted wetlands, for which a mitigatlon/compensation plan and a permit application will be prepared. In the event an environmental assessment is needed, those additional services would be provided on an hourly basis. □ Detail Design Phase Detailed roadway design and specifications will be completed during this work phase. The approved preliminary layout will be developed Into construalon plans. Agency reviews will be provided. Specifications and a detailed cost estimate will be developed as the construction plans near completion. I • I — Prepare Hydraulic Design Based on the hydraulic analysis and the approved geometric layout, Bonestroo hydraulic engineers will refine the drainage ^tem and erosion control measures needed for the prcyect. 1 .2 — Request Utilify Relocation An inventory of utilities will be completed. Based on the construction limits map, we will determine which utilities are likely to require relocation. I -3 — Establish Detour Routes Bonestroo, In conjunction with the cities of Plymouth, Orono and Wayzata, will determine where detours need to be established. Local access will be provided at all times. Each CIfy will review any necessary detours recommended by Bonestroo. 1-4 — Prepare Plans Bonestroo will prepare construalon plans In metric and In accordance with State Aid standards. Although other sheets and seaions may be necessary, the plans delivered will include: ► Title sheet ► General layout sheet ► Statement of estimated quantities *• Standard plates ► Quantify tabulations ► Intersealon and entrance details ► Standard plans ► Typical seaions ► Striping plans and pavement markings ► Roadway plan sheets ► Storm/sanitary sewer profiles ► Traffic control plans and tabulations ► Drainage and temporary erosiorVsediment control plans ► Permanent erosiorVsediment control ► 1 .5 — Submit plans for 60 percent Review to MrVDOT I i C/ey of Plymouth 1.1 FemMe Ko*i Uxonstmaion When the plans are approximately 60 percent complete, Bonestroo will provide the MrVDOT State Aid office with a plan set to review. This submittal will give Mn/DOT the opportunity to review the plan format and some of the major design work. 1.6 — Prepare Specifications The specifications and special provisions for the projea will be writt en following the Mn/DOT standard format. Specifications will refer to the Mn/DOT's Standard Specifications for Construaion, 1 995 Edition (Metric) and augmented with special provisions. 1.7 — Prepare Cost Estimate Using the previously developed cost estimates and format. Bonestroo will refine the cost estimate for the project. This cost estimate will be cross-referenced with tables In the plan sheets, the summary of quantities, and back-up documentation. 1 .8 — Submit Plans and Specifications for 90 Percent Review to Plymouth and Orono Once the Cities' concerns and comments are addresses, the plans, specifications and special provisions will be submitted to the Mn/DOT public Input meeting and receipt of the agency reviews. State Aid office for review. We will also submit a set to each city for review. 1 .9 — Public Input Meeting A public Input meeting will be scheduled before final submittal of the plans for review. At this meeting, Bonestroo representatives will provide the public with details on the project design, scheduling and traffic controls. They will also address Individual property owner concerns. 1 .1 0 — Request Agency Permit With the construaion plans close to completion and approval, all necessary permits will be requested. The early Involvement of the agencies will speed the permit process and eliminate the potential for surprises. 1 .1 1 — Revise Plans and Specifications The plans, specifications and cost estimate will be completed following the public input meeting and receipt of the agency reviews. 1.12 — Submit Final Plans, Specifications and Estimates The bid documentation and proposal will be completed and Included In the contraa documentation. The document will be bound and will Include the Itemized proposal. 1.13 — Prepare Contraa Documentation and Proposal The completed plans, specifications, cost estimate and bid documents will be submitted to the cities of Plymouth and Orono and to MrVDOT for approval. of Plymouth emJsle Ro^ Rtconstrvaion Project LettfngBonestroo will advertise the projea for bids, handle the distribution of the contract plans and bid documents, and coordinate the bid opening with each City. Following the bid opening, Bonestroo will help review the bids and select a contractor . Bonestroo will be available to the Cities and the contractor to answer questions the plans or specifications.I. I — Advertise Projea Bonestroo will prepare the bid and appropriate advertisements. J -2 — Distribute Plans/BId Documents Bonestroo will distribute construalon plans to all interested bldde. s and will address questions that arise during the advertising period. I -3 — Open Bids/Award Projea Bonestroo personnel will be present at the bid opening and will help determine the low bidder. We will review the opened bids for math errors, prepare post-bid tabulations and provide the Cities with an award recommendation. □ Construction Services Bonestroo will provide construalon services for this projea. Major elements of these services include contraa administration, Inspeaion, staking and surveying. Construction Contract Administration Shawn Gustafson will funalon as a central contaa person between the Cities and the construalon Inspeaors. Regular meetings will provide an opportunity to discuss what's coming next and to defuse any foreseeable week-to-week problems. 1.3 — 1.4 — Hold Pre-construaion Conference A preconstrualon conference will be held to discuss the project's schedule and plans and specification review, and to establish contaa persons for all Involved parties. Review Projea Progress Through site visits, the projea engineer will maintain communication with the Inspeaors to ensure the project Is proceeding as planned. Financial Considerations The projea engineer will be responsible for preparation and submission of partial payment vouchers, preparing supplemental agreements, justifying additional funding needs and preparing final estimates. Record Plans The projea engineer will be responsible for completing record plans when the project Is finished. >* 8 Constructfon Inspection Projea Inspeaors provide on-sIte observation of all construction activities to monitor compliance with projea specifications and requirements. 1.1 — Review Plans and Specifications and Attend Pre-construaion Conference 1.2— Construaion AaMties The projea Inspeaor will observe all construaion activities, review contraaor claims for work quantities completed, collea documentation for work quantities completed, coordinate survev i at and material testing, prepare weekly reports, document all a * _,-s to plans a. id specs, prepare punch list and condua final inspection. It may be desirable to prepare a newsletter that desalbes upcoming aaivities to affeaed residents. Construction Staking and Surveying I. I — Construaion Staking Bonestroo survey aews will provide construaion surveying and staking of alignment and grade for construaion elements. I -2 — Final Alignment Documentation Survey crews will provide documentation of final alignment. Material Testing A material testing firm will be contracted to verify that specifications for furnished and installed materials are met during construaion. ^ C/(y of Plymouth_____ J ftrrxUle Ro*d/hconstmaiin r Cost Estimate ! i ’i Oty of Plymouth 1 Ftmddlc Rodd Peconstruafon As a fee for design services, we propose to complete the design elements of the project on a lump-sum basis. Assuming a project construction cost range of $800,000 to S1.2 million, our proposed fee for preliminary engineering and final design Is based on a project construction cost of $ 1 million. Phase I — Preliminary Engineering (Feasibility Study) = $25,200 If an environmental assessment Is required, those services would be provided for additonal compensation on an hourly basis. Phase II — Design Plans/Bid Assistance = $47,000 These costs do not Include materials testing or geotechnical analysis. We would use subconsultants for these tasks or use a firm chosen by the City. The estimated cost for these services Is $ 1 1,000. We propose to complete the construction phase (Phase III) on an hourly basis. Our experience Indicates that costs may range from $75,000 to $ 1 1 0,000 for a project of this type and complexity, based on full-time Inspection. Our billing rate schedule Is attached. 11 i ' fi 1997 Billing Rate Schedule CtBSstfIcation Hourly Rate Senior PrindpaJ Principal/Project Manager/Sr. Scientist Registered Engineer/Architect; Sr. GIS Specialist Project Engineer/Architect/Scientist; Sr. Field Supen/isor Graduate Engineer/Architect/Scientist; Reid Supervisor Senior Drafter. GIS Specialist Senior Technician; Inspector/Drafler Technician Word Processor Clerical / Printing Total Station Equipment GIS Workstation Equipment $89.50 80.00 69.00 60.50 55.C0 49.50 46.50 33.00 32.50 25.50 20.00 20.00 These rates are adjusted annually in accordance witii the normal review procedures of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates. Inc. Reimbursable Expenses * Reproduction, printing, duplicating * Field supplies, delivery charges, cellular telephone service * Mileage * Out-of-pocket expenses i \97RATES.WB3 fc.-. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^Uj'^C/c DATE; June ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Services Item Description: Easement for North Long Lake Sewer Project We need to obtain Permanent and Temporary Sewer Easements from Troy and Catherine Anderson for installation of a sewer line to serve the adjoining property to the north (see attached map). The Andersons installed a new septic system four years ago and are appealing the sewer assessment. I have contacted them about obtaining the required easements. They are reluctant to sign any easement agreements because of their pending assessment appeal. I explained that the City can obtain an easement through Eminent Domain proceedings if necessary. My recommendation is to begin the Eminent Domain proceedings for the acquisition of the required easements. This procedure requires 90 days for obtaming the easements. These easements impact a sewer line that is a branch line from the main sewer line to serve two houses. The contractor can install the main sewer line in Long Lake Boulevard and then install the branch line at a later date. The impacts to the construction schedule should be minor. In order to begin Eminent Domain proceedings a written offer needs to be presented to the property owner. Use of directional boring techniques should result in very minimal disturbance to the property. My recommendation is that an offer of $1.00/s.f. be made to the owner for this easement. An easement area of 1,800 s.f. results in a cost of $1,800 for the permanent easement. A temporary easement will also be required. A total offer of $2,000 will provide compensation for both the permanent and temporary easements. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the resolution authorizing Eminent Domain proceedings for easement acquisition on property located at 1490 Long Lake Boulevard owned by Troy and Catherine Anderson. Approve a written offer of $2,000 to the property owners for the permanent and temporary easements. r J } A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY TAKING OF LAND BY EMINENT DOMAIN FOR SANITARY SEWER PURPOSES FOR THE NORTH LONG LAKE SANITARY SEWER PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered preparation of a resolution authorizing taking of land by eminent domain for sanitary sewer purposes at the location hereinafter specified, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Orono: 1. That it is hereby determined that the taking of the parcels of land at 1490 Long Lake Boulevard is necessary for the public good in order that said parcel shall be devoted to sanitary sewer purposes. 2. That the City shall take by right of eminent domain for sanitary sewer purposes, the land described below, and the City Attorney be hereby authorized and directed to commence proceedings in the District Court of Hennepin County for appointment of Commissioners to determine the damages, if any, sustained by the respective owner and interests of the parcel affected by such taking, as authorized by law. That the land above referred to is more particularly described as follows: TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT A temporary easement for construction purposes over, under and across the west fifteen (15) feet of the east twenty-five (25) feet of the property described as the east 60 feet of west 735 feet of south 175 feet of southwest quarter of section 26 and lots 3 and 4, Albee's Long Lake Addition according to the map or plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Said temporary easement shall expire automatically on December 31, 1997, without the need of further recording. Page 1 of2 r PERMANENT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT A permanent, non-exclusive easement over, across, under and upon that portion of the Property legally described as follows: A corridor ten (10) feet wide centered on a line parallel to and five (5) feet west of the east line of the east sixty (60) feet of west seven hundred thirty five (735) feet of south one hundred seventy five (175) feet of southwest quarter of Section 26 and Lots 3 and 4 Albee's Long Lake Addition according to the map or plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Said line originates on the north line and terminates on the south line of said property. Adopted by the Orono City Council at a regular meeting on the 9th day of June, 1997. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Mayor Page 2 of2 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator DATE: Jun^}^997 ' ITEM NO.: / ^ Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Request for Municipal Sewer Service Outside of the MUSA \\ I When the on-site septic system rules changed to make many systems non-conforming, the City identified ten "hot spot" areas with the greatest incidence of non-conforming and failing systems, along with a lack of alternative septic sites, as potential candidates for mumcipal sewer projects. As the City has moved ahead to plan sewer projects, a significant number of additional property owners, mostly near planned sewer projects, have expressed interest in obtaining municipal sewer service as an alternative to installing new septic systems. Most or all of these properties have alternate septic sites. These property owners want to avoid the major impacts to their properties that would occur if a new septic system was installed. Most of those property owners expressing an interest in sewer service are in the Shoreland Zone, which means that at the time their septic systems were found to be non-conforming they were given a two-year period within which to replace the non-conforming septic systems. For many of these, the two-year period is almost expired. They do not want to install new septic systems if there is a chance of obtaining municipal sewer. There are several issues to be addressed regarding the requests for sewer service. 1. Should municipal sewer service be extended to these properties? 2. How does the extension of sewer service to 2 acre lots relate to the City's long-term land use plan? 3.If these properties are not directly adjacent to a sewer line, how does the City obtain permission from the Metropolitan Council to provide sewer to the properties? This may require a MUSA amendment or a change to the current agreement between the City and Metropolitan Council regarding the provision of sewer to individual lots outside of the MUSA. Should the properties that are non-conforming be given an extension of the two-year time period for the replacement of their septic systems while the City addresses the issues related to the extension of sewer service? Request for Council Action continued Page 2 June 4, 1997 Request for Municipal Sewer Service Outside of the MUSA 5. Because the major sewer project currently underway is in the North Long Lake area, most of the properties who are requesting the extension of sewer service are in that area. An issue specific to this area is the lack of sewer capacity to accommodate additional sewer units until the Highway 12 project is completed. 6. The City's current general policy provides that when a property is added to the sewer system outside of a specific sewer project, the property pays the cost of the sewer unit as a one-time connection charge vs. as a special assessment. There have been requests to allow this connection charge to be paid over a number of years similar to a special assessment. At this time, staff is requesting direction from the Council regarding two issues: 1. Does the Council want to consider the issues related to providing sewer service to additional properties outside of the MUSA? If so, staff will move ahead to prepare information to assist the Council in considering those issues. 2. Should those properties with non-conforming septic systems who have indicated an interest in municipal sewer be provided with an extension of the time period for replacing their septic systems? Staff recommends that if the Council is going to consider the issues related to providing sewer service to those properties, they should be given an extension of the time period for replacing their septic systems until the Council completes its review process. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; Motion to indicate whether the Council wants to consider the issues related to providing sewer service to additional properties outside of the MUSA line, and to authorize the extension of time periods for septic system replacement for those properties that have indicated an interest in municipal sewer service. V REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 5,199 ITEM NO: 9 % Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Report Item Description: Selection of a Date for a Work Session to Discuss Tax Increment Financing The Council had scheduled a work session to discuss Tax Increment Financing for June 2, this work session was cancelled because the TIF consultant was not available. It is now necessary to select a new date and time for a TIF work session. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to select a date and time for a work session to discuss Tax Increment Financing. Department Approval:Adminbtrat^ Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name RonMoorse City Administrator ’s Title City Administrator Report Item Description: Lin Vee Position Reclassification Updated 06/08/97V ■CITY OF ORONONON-UNION EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION PLAN POSITION/POINT GROUPINGS FOR 1997 1 44-47 45.5 Community Service Officer 2 48-51 49.5 Laborer, Clerical I 3 52-55 53.5 Clerical II 4 56-59 57.5 Secretary 5 60-64 62 Police Office Manager, Public Works Maintenance Worker 6 65-68 66.5 On-Site Septic Manager (E) Deputy Clerk/IS Assistant 7 69-73 71 City Clerk (E), Golf Course Supervisor (E), Building Inspector 8 74-78 76 Asst. Finance Director/MIS Coord (E), Accountant/Management Analyst (E) 9 79-83 81 Building Official (E) Assistant Zoning Administrator (E) 10 84-88 86 City Planner/Zoning Administrator (E), Public Works Supervisor II (E) 11 89-100 95 12 101-110 105 Police Chief (E), Finance Director (E), Public Services Director (E) 13 111 - 124 117.5 City Administrator (E) (E) - Exempt r " , ir:.' nif- fc-i j i i • t-v % Increase 1.03 Level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Level Step I 10.08 10.67 11.36 12.06 12.88 13.98 15.08 16.23 17.51 19.15 21.93 25.76 30.52 Step I City of Orono Non-Union Compensation Plan Pay Ranges For 1997 Step II 10.68 11.30 12.03 12.76 13.63 14.79 15.97 17.19 18.54 20.28 23.22 27.27 32.32 Step III 11.28 11.93 12.70 13.47 14.39 15.63 16.86 18.15 19.57 21.40 24.50 28.79 34.11 Step IV 11.87 12.56 13.37 14.18 15.14 16.44 17.75 19.11 20.60 22.54 25.80 30.30 35.91 Comments Part Time Regular Positions Step II Step III Step IV Comments 2 9.61 10.18 10.74 11.30 Clerical I, L-2 S-II max. 4 10.25 10.86 11.45 12.06 Police Secaretary, L-4 S—I max. 6 11.88 12.58 13.28 13.98 Patrol Officer, L-6 S-I max. ; » h \l C0(- REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ ^99/ DATE: June 5, ITEM NO: J Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name Ron Moorse City Administrator's Title City Administrator Report Item Description:/ Greg Gappa Salary Adjustment When Greg Gappa was hired on December 1,1996 the city was in the process of reorganising the Public Works and Planning and Zoning Departments to ciecte a Department of Public Services. At that time, a final decision regarding the full scope of the responsibilities of the Director of Public Services had not been made. Because of the uncertainty regarding the scope of responsibilities, Greg's starting salary was set at a very conservative level. Since then Greg has assumed full responsibility for all activities in the Public Services Department and has demonstrated strong capabilities throughout the range of his responsibilities. Based on his scope of responsibilities and strong performance, it is recommended his pay be increased to a point mid-way between step 1 and step 2 of the four step Public Services Director pay range. This amount is $54,800. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve a pay increase for Greg Gappa to an annual salary of $54,800. w ^ > REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION \ 4^ ''Vr DATE: June%J 997 ^ ITEM NO: \1 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Local Perfonnance Aid Certification Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report In 1996 the State Legislature took a portion of the Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA) received by cities and placed it into a new program called the Local Performance Aid (LPA) program. For Orono the Local Performance Aid in 1996 was approximately $8,400. It appears the amount of the LPA revenue for next year will be approximately the same. The LPA program, as its name implies, is a program to encourage cities to develop performance standards or measures related to the delivery of various city services. This involves first developing basic units of measurement for each service. The next step is to develop performance standards to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of the delivery of each of these services. In order to be eligible for the LPA aid, the city needs to begin a process to develop performance measures. Although the relatively small amount of the LPA aid is not a substantial incentive to Orono, there has been some discussion at the Legislature about expanding the LPA program to increase the amount of aid available. Several groups of City Managers and Administrators around the Metro area are involved in discussions regarding the development of performance measures for city service delivery. The one caution is that it is important the time, effort and resources required to develop and carry out a performance measurement program do not exceed the benefits provided by the program. In order to continue participation in the LPA program for the next year, the city needs to sign a certification of local performance measures to indicate that the city is in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance measures. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends continuing to participate in the LPA program and moving ahead with efforts to develop performance measures. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to authorize the Mayor and one Councilmember to sign the LPA certification to indicate the city is in the process of de: eloping and implementing a system of performance measures. r APPLICATION FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE CITY OF ORONO RECEIVED 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 3 0 W97 NAME:. dn___________ Qll : 9^^ l0t(V>lKars4- ^VajJADDRESS: . ________________________________ street ; city/state businessname : Eb kH (k or djjxcure ClTV OF OROMO _______ PHONE: ^ fi-TCAO M fO______65.^1^^ TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: Number of Employees Within Operation: I (Provide names of employees on back of application) Check One: Initial Review Fee $50.00 X Annual Review Fee $30.00____ License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investisate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Mumcipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the review time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices ^ . 1. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage in operation without proper licenses. 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling. 3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in the residential zone. 4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional conditions the Ciy may requirev n ^ ^ Signature of Annlieani:Cjf^A£/ ______________Dale: FO r'q Ity '^EONLV*^ After review of application, staff recommends the following: _____^ Approval of application __________Denial of application Application Date:Date License Approved:Date License Expired: 8 8' If 8 ir. r . • -I. , /9 ^0,A/ X. % i m-^ r ) i 30 May 1997 Fri 10:49 AM Check Register City of Orono Qieck Number Date Name Check Number 53S10 53610 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 30-May-97 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION Totals Check Number 53610 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION Check Number 53747 J-CRAFT INC. 53747 30-May-97 J-CRAFT INC Totals Check Number 53747 J-CRAFT INC, Check Number 53748 ONIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 53748 30-May-97 UNIVERSITY OP MINNESOTA Totals Check Number 53748 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Check Number 53749 MENARDS 53749 30-May-97 MENARDS Totals Check Number*53749 MENARDS Check Number 53750 MENARDS 53750 30-May-97 MENARDS Totals Check Number 53750 MENARDS Check Number 53751 TARGET STORES 53751 30-May-97 TARGET STORES Totals Check Number 53751 TARGET STORES Check Number 53876 RED APRON CATERING 53876 30-May-97 RED APRON CATERING Totals Check Number 53876 RED APRON CATERING Check Number 53877 DEPUTY REGISTRAR 53877 30-May-97 DEPUTY REGISTRAR Totals Check Number 53877 DEPUTY REGISTRAR Check Number 53078 POSTMASTER 53078 30-May-97 POSTMASTER Totals Check Number 53878 POSTMASTER Transaction Amount -45.10 -45.10 20,178.17 20,178.17 40.00 40.00 158.68 158.68 493.11 493.11 1,047.44 1,047.44 79.88 79.88 1,337.13 1,337.13 900.00 900.00 Page 1 Comments VOID CK #53610 DUMP TRUCK SETUP GREGORY, SKREEN REGISTRAT PIOIIC TABLE FOR POLICE ROOFING-BEDERWOOD PARK GOLF BALLS FOR RESALE MEALS-SPECIAL MIO B & Z TRUCK REGISTRATION PCSTAGri ‘ r* MV>"'ER j *1 IT'• * V * —f r L'* !•. ? ?■' 30 Hay 1997 Fri 10:49 AM Check Register City of Orono Page 2 Check Number Date Name Tremsaction Amount Comments /' :heck Number Jrand Total 53878 POSTWASTER 24,189.31 3 Jun 1997 rue 11:45 AM Check Number Check Number 53968 Check Register City of Orono Date Name 53968 MN STATE RETIRO!ENT-DEF COMP 03-Jun-97 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Totals Check Number 53968 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Check Number 53969 53969 PEBSCO/OBRA 03-uun-97 Totals Check Nui\ber PEBSCO/OBRA 53969 PEBSCO/OBRA Check Number 53970 53970 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 03-Jun-97 Totals Check Number PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 53970 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS Check Number 53971 53971 53971 PERA 03-Jun-97 03-Jun-97 PERA PERA Totals Check Number 53971 PERA Check Number 53972 53972 UNITED WAY 03-JUn-97 Totals Check Number UNITED WAY 53972 UNITED WAY Grand Total Transaction Amount 265.00 265.00 202.74 202.74 1,789.86 1,789.86 4,037.45 5,332.59 9,370.04 23.00 23.00 38,785.86 Page 2 Comments DEFERRED COMP W/H OBRA DEFERRED COMP W/H USCM DEFERRED COMP W/H PERA EMPLOYEE W/K PERA CITY SHARE CHARITY DONATIONS W/H 5 Jun 1997 Thu 2:05 PMCheck Number Qieck Number 53981 53981 Check Register City of Orono Date Name 53981 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF 09-Jun-97 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF 09-Jun-97 AUGIES MOBILE CHEF Total* Check Number S3981 AOGIES MOBILE CHEF Check Number 53982 BAYSIDB FLORAL 53982 09-Jua-97 BAYSIDB FLORAL Totals Check Number 53982 BAYSIDE FLORAL 3»eck Number 53983 benefits niaio* QROOP 53983 09-Jun-97 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP Totals Check Number $3983 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP 53984 BIFFS INC.Check Number 53984 53984 53984 53984 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 BIFFS INC. BIFFS INC. BIFFS INC. BIFFS INC. Totals Check Number 53984 BIFFS INC Check Number 53985 BLACKOWIAK & SON 53985 53985 53985 53985 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 BLACKOWIAK k SON BLACKOWIAK k SON BLACKOWIAK & SON BLACKOWIAK k SON Totals Check Number 53985 BLACKOWIAK k SON Check Number 53986 BLACKOWIAK k SON 53986 09-Jun-97 BLACKOWIAK k SON Totals Check Number 53986 BLACKOWIAK k SON Check Number 53988 53988 53988 53988 53988 53988 53988 3J988 53988 BONESTROO ROSENE k ASSOC. 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENF ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE k ASSOC. k ASSOC. 6 ASSOC. k ASSOC. k ASSOC. k ASSOC. k ASSOC. k ASSOC. Transaction Amount 39.50 43.38 82.88 18.05 !8.05 1*751.37 1*751.37 130.52 130.52 130.52 65.26 456.82 993.75 161.50 965.25 160.00 788.75 7,914.70 41.00 66.98 Page 2 Comments COFFEE FOOD FOR RESALE FLOWERS FOR QUAST SERVICE JUNE BILLING JUNE SERVICE-BEDERWOOD PK JUNE SERVICE-SUMMITT BEAC JUNE SERVICB-HACKBERRY JUNE SaiVICE-GOLF COURSE 152.99 MAY SERVICE 70.46 MAY SERVICE 134.18 MAY SERVICE 168.58 MAY SERVICE 526.21 LEAF PICKUP PREPARE QUOTES WELL #2 BRKTS PT/BAY RIDGE-MARCH NLL/LL CC EASEMENTS-MARCH NAV/CASCO PT I&I MARCH KELLY AVE SWR-MARCH L.S. 86 PLANS/SPECS PREP L.S. #7 REHAB-RECORD PLAN OCB RD TRAIL ASSIST-FEB ■aw* I < 5 Jun 1997 Check Register Pa Thu 2:05 PM City of Orono Check Transaction Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number S3988 BONESTROO ROSENE k ASSOC. 53988 09-Jun-97 BONESTROO ROSENE & ASSOC.16,230.00 RFP #4 WTR MGT PLAN 53988 09-Jun-97 BONESTROO ROSENE & ASSOC.2,443.15 CLOSE OUT WILLOW DR 53988 0^ . .1-9/BONESTROO ROSENE & ASSOC.339.75 WILLOW DRIVE FINTUi MSA 53988 09-vTun-97 BONESTROO ROSENE 6 ASSOC.1,970.00 OCB RD BRIDGE - MARCH 53988 09-Jun-97 BONESTROO ROSENE & ASSOC.971.19 REVIEW MSA PROJECTS 53988 09-Jun-97 BONESiROO ROSENE & ASSOC.3,020.14 MARCH CC MTGS Totals Check Number 53988 BONESTROO POSENB & ASSOC.36,086.16 Check Number 53989 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. 53989 09-Jun-97 BRYAN RCXnC PRODUCTS INC.428.29 REPAIRS-WTR BREAK Totals Check Number 53989 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC.428.29 Check Number 53990 BUDGET PRINTING 53990 09-Jun-97 BUDGET PRINTING 55.53 BALANCE DUB 53990 09-Jun-9T BUDGET PRINTING 4.62 PACKAGE TO STREICHERS Totals Check Number 53990 BUDGET PRINTING 60.15 Chsck Number 53991 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS 53991 09-Jun-97 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS 4,971.46 COPIER MAINTENANCE Totals Check Number 53991 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS 4,971.46 Check Number 53992 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO • 53992 09-Jun-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 264.03 #172 TRAILER HITCH 53992 09-Jun-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 42.89 «X78 OIL CHG, TUNE UP 53992 09-Jun-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 527.38 «176 MANIFOLD, GASKET 53992 09-Jun-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 108.19 #175 FUEL SAFETY SWITCH 53992 09-JU1-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 368.06 #174 IDLER ARM, OIL CHG 53992 09-Jun-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 102.68 #177 SETUP 53992 09-Jun-97 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 131.10 #178 SETUP Totals Check Number 53992 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 1,544.33 Check Number 53993 53993 CITY OF LONG LAKE 09-Jun-97 CITY OF LONG LAKE Totals Oieck Number 53993 CITY OF LONG LAKE Check Number 53994 CLARK, BRUCE 53994 09-Jun-97 CLARK, BRUCE Totals Check Number 53994 CLARK. BRUCE Check Number 53995 CON-MIX 25,592.48 25,592.48 3RD QTR FIRE PROTECTION 1575 LONG LAKE BLVD r 5 Jun 1997 Thu 2:05 PM Check Register City of Orono Page 4 Check Number Date Name Check Number 53995 53995 CON-MIX 09-Jun-97 CON-MIX Totals Check Number 53995 CON-MIX Check Number 53996 CORNICK, JAMES 53996 09-Jun-97 CORNICK, JAhES Totals Check Number 53996 CORNICK, JAMES Check Number 53997 CROHN MARKING INC. 53997 53997 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 CROWN MARKING INC. CROHN MARKING INC. Totals Check Number 53997 CROWN MARKING INC. Check Number 53998 D.M.J. CORPORATION Totals Check Number 54001 EMERY'S TREE SERVICE INC. Check Number 54002 FROST, SHERRY R. 54002 03 Jun-96 FROST, SHERRY R. Totals Check Number 54002 FROST, SHERRY R. Check Number 54003 Q k K SERVICES 54003 09-Jun-97 0 & K SERVICES Transaction Amount Comments 321.31 321.31 CONCRETE-WTR MAIN BREAK 20.66 20.66 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 32.01 42.34 EMBOSSING SEAL PARK COMM NAMEPLATES 74.35 53998 53998 53998 09-JUA-97 09-Juri-97 09-Jun-97 D.M.J. CORPORATICRI D.M.J. CORPORATIC D.M.J. CORPORATION 189.14 322.06 •73.90 SLACK DIRT - KELLY AVE SW BLACK DIRT - PARKS BLACK DIRT Totals Check Number S3998 D.M.J. CORPORATION 585.10 Check Number 53999 DEPT OF ADMINISTRATT'" 53999 53999 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION 125.37 989.07 COUNCIL MINUTES ZONING PILES Totals Check Number 53999 DEPT OP ADMINISTRATION 1.114.44 Check Number 54000 B-Z RECYCLING 54000 03-Jun-96 E-Z RECYCLING 5,422.92 MAY SERVICES Totals Check .Number 54000 B-Z RECYCLING 5,422.92 Check Number 54001 EMBRY’S TREE SERVICE INC. 54001 54001 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 EMERY'S TREE SERVICE INC. EMERY'S TREE SERVICE INC. 1,384.50 1,384.50 REMOVE TREE 9 ANTOINE PK TREE REMOVAL - ANTOINE PK 2,769.00 820.00 820.00 PARK COmiSSION MIG 54.69 FLOOR MATS 5 JUn 1997 Thu 2:05 PM Check Register City oi Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 54003 54003 54003 54003 54003 54003 54003 54003 54003 G a K SERVICES 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-JUH-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES Totals Check Number 54003 G a K SERVICES Check Number 54004 GALL'S INC. 54004 09-Jun-97 GALL'S INC, Totals Check 54004 GALL'S INC. Check Number 54C/05 GARDNER, JOHN 54005 09-Jun-97 GARDNER, JOHN Totals Check Number 54005 GARDNER, JOHN Check Number 54006 QAWRON, LECH 54006 09-JUU-97 GAWRON, LECH Totals Check Number 54006 GAWRON* LECH Check Nuaber 54007 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. 54007 54007 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Totals Check Number 54007 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC. Check Number 54008 GREENLEY, KURTIS 54008 09-Jun-97 GREENLEY, KURTIS Totals Check Number 54008 GREENLEY, KURTIS Check Number 54009 KENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE 54009 09-Jun-97 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE Totals Check Number 54009 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE Check Number 54010 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN ..4010 09-Jun-97 HEN:JEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN Totals Oieck Number 54010 HENNEPIN COUNTY TP^'ASURER-GEN Transaction Amount 70.07 54.69 12.15 88.43 5.93 12.15 62.23 5.93 366.27 618.95 618.95 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 >4.25 54.25 108.50 10.00 10.00 124.45 124.45 120.00 120.00 Page 5 Comments FLOOR MATS FLOOR MATS RA-nffiDN STKEET EMPLOYEES STEFFENHAGEN RATHBUN STREET EMPLOYEES STEFFENHAGEN REMOTE STROBES* POWER SUP 1486 LONG LAKE BLVD 920 DAKOTA AVE APRIL SERVICE APRIL SERVICE 1485 LONG LAKE BLVD GRASS SEED ROOM a BOARD - APRIL r 5 Jun 1997 *.hu 2:05 PM Check Register City of Crono Check Number Date Name Check Number 54011 54011 HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE Q9-Jun-97 HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE Totals Check Number 54011 HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE Jheck Number 54012 IMS/MN » I 54012 09-Jun-97 IMS/MN Totals Check Number 54012 IMS/MN Check Number 54013 J-CRAFT INC. 54013 09-Jun-97 J-CRAPT INC. Totals Check Number 54013 J-CRAFT INC. Check Number 54014 KOEHNEN'S AMOCO i 54014 05-Jun-96 KOBHNEN'S AMOCO Totals Check Number 54014 KOEHNEN'S AMOCO Check Number 54015 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC 54015 09-Jun-97 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Totals Check Number 54015 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Check Number 54016 LAND CARE EQUIPMENT 54016 09-Jun-97 LAND CARE EQUIPMENT Totals Check Number 54016 LAND CARE EQUIPMENT Check Number 54017 LAWN DETAILERS INC. 54017 09-Jun-97 LAWN DETAILERS INC. Totals Check Number 54017 LAWN DETAILERS INC. Check Number 54018 LUND, DONALD 54018 09-Jun-97 LUND, DONALD Totals Check Number 54018 LUND, DONALD Check Number 54019 M & P UTILITIES INC. 54019 54019 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 MAP UTILITIES INC, MAP UTILITIES INC. Totals Check NUnJber 54019 MAP UTILITIES INC. Transaction Amount 20.97 20.97 610.00 610.00 37.28 37.28 1.07 1.07 85.50 85.50 92.12 92.12 2,145.22 2,145.22 10.00 10.00 47.50 47.50 95.00 Page 6 Comments FLOOR MATS 97 MAILING MACi:iNE SVC 8426 97 DUMP TRUCK SETUP GASOLINE PURCHASES D/A BOX MISC PARTS MAY SERVICES 1465 LONG LAKE BLVD LOCATE-WTR MMN BREAK LOCATE-WTR MAIN BREAK « r1 ii * I 5 Jun 1997 Thu 2:05 PM Check Register City of Orono Oieck Number Check Number Date Name 54020 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI k CO Check Number 54021 MCFOA 54021 54021 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 MCFOA MCFOA Totals Check Number 54021 MCFOA Check Number 54022 MERNIK« WILLIAM 54022 09-Jun-97 MERNIK, WILLIAM Totals Check Number 54022 MERNIK, WILLIAM Check Number 54023 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS 54023 09-Jun-97 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS Totals Check Number 54023 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS Check Number 54024 MIDWEST ASPHALT 54024 09-Jun-97 MIDWEST ASPHALT Totals Check Number 54024 MIDWEST ASPHALT Check Number 54025 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO 54025 09-Jun-97 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Totals Check Number 54025 MIDWE^,: COCA COLA BOTTLING CO Check Number 54C. MILLER, CHRIS 54026 09-Jun-97 MILLER, OmiS Totals Check Number 54026 MILLER, CHRIS Check Number 54027 MINNEGASCO Check Number 54028 MN DEPT OP HEALTH Transaction Amount 30.00 30.00 60.00 10.00 10.00 20,320.00 20,320.00 96.52 96.52 2^1.15 211.15 81.34 81.34 Page 7 Comments 54020 09-Jun-97 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI &CO 1,800.00 AUDIT PAYMENT 12 54020 09-Jun-97 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI &CO 2,600.00 AUDIT PAYMENT 12 54020 09-Jun-97 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI k CO 2,200.00 AUDIT PAYMENT i2 5402U 09-Jun-97 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI k CO 634.00 AUDIT PAYMENT 12 Totals Check Number 54020 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI k CO 7,234.00 VEE-MEMBERSHIP HALLIN-MEMBERSHIP 1840 LAKEVIEW TERRACE JULY DISPOSAL SVCS ASPHALT PATCHING POP FOR RE.\LB EXPOISE REIMBURSOCEHT 54027 09-Jun-97 MINNEC\SCO 24.16 GAS CHARGES 54027 09-Jun-97 MINNEGASCO 207.88 GAS CHARGES 54027 09-Jun-97 MINNEGASCO 375.09 GAS CHARGES Totals Check Number 54027 MINNEGASCO 607.13 r 5 Jun 1997 Thu 2:05 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 5402S 54028 MN DEPT OF ISALTH 03-Jun-96 MN DEPT OF HEALTH Totals Check Number 54028 MN DEPT OF HEALTH Check Number 54029 MN DEPT OP REVENUE 54029 54029 54029 54029 54029 05-Jun-96 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 05-Jun-96 14-Apr-97 MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE MN DEPT OF REVENUE Totals Check NUnO>er 54029 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Check Number 54030 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 54030 09-Jun-97 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION Totals Check Number 54030 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 2heck Number 54031 MPLS CO^t^UNITY COLLEGE 54031 04-Feb-97 MPLS COMMUNITY COLLEGE Totals Check Number 54031 MPLS COMMUNITY COLLEGE Check Number 54032 MSP COMMUNICATIONS 54032 09-Jun-97 MSP COmUNICATIONS Totals Check Number 54032 MSP COMMUNICATIONS Check Number 54033 MTI DIST CO. 54033 09-Jun-97 MTI DIST CO Totals Check Number 54033 MTI DIST CO Ctieck Number £4034 NSP 54034 54034 54034 54034 12-May-97 12-May-97 12-May-97 12-May-97 NSP NSP NSP NSP Totals Check Number 54034 NSP Check Number 54035 OFFICE DEPOT 54035 09-Jun-97 OFFICE DEPOT Totals Check Number 54035 OFFICE DEPOT m Transaction Amount 1«126.00 1.126.00 2.296.00 28.05 6.00 1.263.95 51.00 3.645.00 25.00 25.00 175.00 175.00 221.00 221.00 6.07 6.07 111.95 743.68 2.023.01 1.479.72 4.358.36 240.95 240.95 Page 8 Comments 2ND QTR HTR TESTING FEE MAY SALES TAX MAY SALES TAX MAY SALES TAX MAY SALES TAX AMENDED RETURN SIGN PERMIT-Q.C. JOHNSON-FIREARMS INSTR, ADVERTISEMENT BfiLhNQE DUB NSP CHARGES NSP CHARGES NSP CHARGES NSP CHARGES MISC SUPPLIES f- I 5 Jun 1997 Thu 2:05 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 54036 54036 OMAN, LYLE 09-Jun-97 OMAN, LYLE Totals Check Number 54036 OMAN, LYLE Chtck Number 54037 0PM INFORMATION SYSTEMS 54037 09-Jun-97 0PM INFORMATION SYSTEMS Totals Check Number 54037 0PM INFORMATKm SYSTEMS Check Number 54038 OTTEN BROTHERS 54038 54038 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 OTTEN BROTHERS OTTEN BROTHERS Totals Check Number 54038 OTTEN BROTHERS Check Number 54039 PERA LIFE INSURANCE 54039 06-Jun-96 PERA MFE INSURANCE Totals Check Number 54039 PERA LIFE INSURANCE Cieck Number 54040 PHEOLL 54040 09-Jun-97 PHEOLL Totals Check Number 54040 PHEOLL Check Number 54041 PICTURE THIS... FRAMED 54041 09-Jun-97 PICTURE THIS...FRAMED Totals Check Number 54041 PICTURE THIS... FRAMED Check Number 54042 PIONEER 54042 54042 54042 54042 54042 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER Totals Check Number 54042 PIONEER Check Number 54043 POPHAM HAIK & ASSOC 54043 09-Jun-97 POPHAM HAIK & ASSOC Totals Check Number 54043 POPHAM HAIK 6 ASSOC Check Number 54044 PONERCLEAN COMPANY INC. 54044 09-Jun-97 POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC, Transaction Amount 33.17 33.17 200.00 200.00 25.14 205.02 230.16 156.00 156.00 49.69 49.69 40.66 40.66 59.50 21.00 35.00 115.50 59.50 290.50 6,080.88 6,080.88 1,693.35 Page 9 Comments EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE CALL-PRINTER SOD-KELLY AVB SWR KELLY AVB SWR-SOD JULY INSURANCE MISC NUTS AND BOLTS PARK AWARD PLAQUE 8159 SECOND SERIES HOME OCCUPATION REGS 8160 SECOND SERIES 8158 SECOND SERIES LAND USE APPLICATIONS APRIL SERVICES MAY JANITORIAL SERVICE r S Jun 1997 Thu 2:05 FH Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 54044 PONERCLEAN COMPANY IMC. Totals Check Number 54044 POWERCLEAN COMPANY INC, Check Number 54045 PRAIRIE OFFSET 54045 09-Jun-97 PRAIRIE OFFSET Totals Check Number 54045 PRAIRIE OFFSET Check Number 54046 RED APRON CATERING 54046 09-Jun-97 RED APRON CATERING Totals Check Number 54046 RED APRON CATERING Check Number 54047 REED VENDING 54047 54047 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 REED VENDING REED VENDING Totals Check Number 54047 REED VENDING Check Number 54048 ROLLINS OIL CO. 54048 09-Jun-97 ROLLINS OIL CO. Totals Check Number 54048 ROLLINS OIL CO. Check Number 54049 ROWEKAMP ASSOCIATES INC, 54049 09-Jun-97 ROWEKAMP ASSOCIATES INC. Totals Check Number 54049 ROWEKAMP ASSOCIATES INC Theck Number 54050 STREICH^ 54050 54050 54*50 54050 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-37 09-Jun-97 STREICHERS STREICHERS STREICHERS STREICHERS Totals Check Number 54050 STREICHERS Check Number 54051 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. 54051 09-Jun-97 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. Totals Check Number 54051 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. Check Number 54052 TWIN CITIES FLAG SOURCE 54052 09-Jun-97 twin CITIES FLAG SOURCE Totals Check Number 54052 TWIN CITIES FLAG SOURCE Transaction Amount 1.693.35 314.81 314.81 146.77 146.77 60.30 54.30 114.60 560.45 560.45 50.00 50.00 52.72 185.15 25.19 15.55 278.61 453.69 453.69 1.437.75 1.437.75 Page 10 Comments BUSINES** CARDS LUNCHES FOR TIF MTO CANDY FOR RESALE FOOD FOR RESALE OIL AND LUBRICANTS VEB-REGISTRATICN 9MM DUTY BORIS. MOROWCZYNSKI SQUADS SETUP #178 SETUP SQUAD CAR TIRES INSTALL FLAGPOLE - » I k 5 Jun 1997 Thu 2:05 PM Check Check Register City of Orono Page 11 Check Number 54056 54056 54056 54056 54056 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 12-May-97 12-May-97 12-May-97 12-May-97 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Totals Check Number 54056 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Check Number 54057 VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH 54057 09-Jun-97 VAN ZO*EKEN, ELIZABETH Totals Check Number 54057 VAN ZOMEREN, ELIZABETH Check Number 54058 VILLAGE CHEVROLET 54058 09-Jun-97 VILLAGE CHEVROLET Totals Check Number 54058 VILLAGE CHEVROLET Check Number 54059 W.W. GRAINGER INC. 54059 54059 09-Jun-97 09-Jun-97 W.W. GRAINGER INC. W.W. GRAINGER INC. **'otals Check Number 54059 W.W. GRAINGER INC. Check Number 54060 WARNING LITES OP MN 54060 09-Jun-97 WARNING LITES OP KN Transaction 294.26 29.34 12.58 687.08 1,023.26 28.93 28.93 57.86 57.86 41.76 41.76 83.52 56.87 Number Date Name Amount Comments Check Number 54053 TWIN CITIES SERVICE CENTER INC 54053 09-Jun-97 TWIN CITIES SERVICE CENTER INC 176.54 INSTALL RADIO Totals Check Number 54053 TWIN CITIES SERVICE CENTER INC 176.54 Check Number 54054 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE - LIFE 54054 09-JUn-97 UNUM LIFE INSUPJUICB -LIFE 0.70 JUNE INSURANCE 54054 09-Jun-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 2.97 JUNE INSURANCE 54054 09-Jun-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 1.27 JUNE INSURANCE 54054 09-Jun-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 354.10 JUNE INSURANCE Totals Check Number 54054 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -LIFE 359.04 Check Number 34055 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE - AD a D 54055 09-Jun-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE .AD a D 0.15 JUNE INSURANCE 54055 09-Jun-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -AD a D 0.64 JUNE INSURANCE 54055 09-Jun-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -AD a D 0.27 JUNE INSURANCE 54055 09-Jun-97 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE -AD a D 65.79 JUNE INSURANCE Totals Check Number 54055 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE AD a D 66.85 US WEST CHARGES US WEST CHARGES US WEST CHARGES US WEST CHARGES EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT #427 ADAPTER VOLTAGE METER VOLTAGE METER SIGNS-Wm MAIN BREAK r 5 JUn 1997 Thu 2:05 PM Check Register City of Orono Check Humber Date Kama Check Humber 54060 54060 fCARNIHQ LITES OP MN 09-Jun-97 WARNING LITES OF MN Totals Check Humber 54060 WARNING LITES OF KN Check Humber 54061 WATERPRO 54061 54061 54061 09-Jun-97 09-JUI1-97 09-Jun-97 WATERPRO WATERPRO WATERPRO Totals Check Humber 54061 WATERPRO Check Humber 54062 WEYKB« JAMBS 54062 09-Jun-97 WEYHE, JAMES Totals Check Humber 54062 WEYHB, JAMBS Check Number 54061 WRIGHT ISNNBPIN ELECTRIC 54063 54063 09-JUII-97 09-Jun-97 WKIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Totals Check Number 54063 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Grand Total Transaction Amount 105.44 162.31 409.34 30.37 81.92 521.63 10.00 10.00 7.99 8.00 15.99 154,096.22 Page 12 Comments SIGNS-WTR MAIN BREAK REMOTE READERS SOLDER SWIVEL CLAMP 1505 LONG LAKE BLVD SECURITY LIGHT SECURITY LIGHT r f 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS ^0, BLUE PAPER ■%iVt> FRONT OF AGENDA ITEM Reminder - East Neighborhood Area Meeting Highway 12 Preliminary Design - 6:30 p.m. Monday, June 9, 1997 BACK OF AGENDA ITEMS Grand Opening Ceremony for DNR Maxwell Bay Access memo June 1997 Calendar of meetings/events Lame Minnetonka Communications Commission letter dated 5/28/97 WHITE PAPER BACK OF AGENDA ITEMS Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission letter dated 5/28/97 Home Occupations memo to Council from Liz Van Zomeren Orono Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for May 19, 1997 Miscellaneous mail June 9,1997 Agenda Packet TO:Mayor i ai City Council FROM:Ron Moorse, City Administrator DATE:June 5,1997 1997 June 1997SundayMondayTuesdayWednesdayThursdayFridaySaturday1PARKT0UR6P.H. 2 PARK COMMISSION MEETING 8.30 P.M. 3 PLANNING 4COMMISSION WORK SESSION 7:45 A.M. HIGHWAY 12 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING 5 JO P.M. 5 Mn/DOT 6STORMWATER MEETING 8J0-I0J0A.M. • 7 8 PUBUC 9 INFORMAHON MEETING 6 JO P.M. (RESIDEmSEASTOF WILLOW DR. AHWV12 CORRIOOR) COUNCIL MTG 7P.M. 10 II 12 D H • IS PLANNING COMMISSION 7 P.M. 17 18 19 20 21 % 22 COUNCIL MTG 7 23 P.M. 24 DNR* MAXWELL BAY GRAND 25 OPENING IOA.H.-NOON 26 DEADUNE for 27 LAND USE APPUCATIONS 28 29 30 (MCCLAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION DEEPHAVEN EXCELSIOR GREENWOOD LONG LAKE MEDINA 540 SECOND STREET ■ RO. BOX 473 - EXCELSIOR, MN 55331-0473 612. 474-5539 ■ FAX 612. 474-0430 neceweo JUNO 4'’’’ Mayor Gabriel Jabbour ^ City Council Members * City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 Dear Mayor Jabbour and Council Members: Sometimes important information can "slip” through the cracks, and a city council is not made aware of a signiflcant occurrence that may be important to them and the residents of their city. MINNETONKA BEACH So that doesn’t happen. I’m sending you this official notification that Timothy Pattrin, your LMCC Commissioner, was elected Chair of the full Lake Minnetonka MiNNETRisTA Communications Commission. ORONO Chair Pattrin has a great history of being involved in all vital issues that may effect communications to the residents of Orono, and the other thirteen cities. The LMCC ST. BONiFAcius jjjjj recognized that dedicated effort by electing him Chair for 1997-98. sHOREwooD j jjjg q|.q|jq couHcil will also acknowledge this significant achievement, in whatever manner you think appropriate. If 1 can be of assistance or supply you with SPRING PARK TONKA BAY VICTORIA any detailed information, please call me at the LMCC office (474.5539). Sincerely, Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission OiCCLAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 540 SECOND STREET ■ RO. BOX 473 - EXCELSIOR. MN 55331-0473 612. 474-5539 ■ FAX 612. 474-0430 RECEIVED MAY 2 8 1997 Cl I'Y OF ORONO OEEPHAVEN EXCELSIOR CREENWOOO LONG LAKE MEDINA MINNETONKA BEACH MINNETRISTA ORONO ST. BONIFACIUS SHOREWOOD SPRING PARK TONKA BAY WOODLAND May 28,1997 Mayor Gabriel Jabbour and City Council Members City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mayor Jabbour and Council Members: Newly elected Chair of the LMCC, Tim Pattrin, asked that I send you a copy of the final "revised" 1997 budget As you recall, the LMCC created and presented to you, the 1997 budget in the fall of last year (1996). These numbers were based on projected figures for the franchise fee paid by Triax Cablevision. Once that payment has been received, the budget committee actually prepares this "revised" and final budget As you supported the original Commission 1997 efforts/budget this final process of listing actual dollars does not represent any significant change and will not necessitate any further city council action. Your LMCC has so far experienced a very intense 1997. The challenge of city rights-of- way control, that has successfully been resolved at the 1997 Minnesota State Legislature, the implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that was passed by Congress to open the market to competition in providing communication services, plus the continued effort of the Needs Assessment Committee on analyzing current state of the art technology resulting in an early system re-build, will remain vitally important for the second half of 1997. On behalf of the LMCC, I want to thank you for your continued support and the excellent representation you have on the Commission. VICTORIA Sincerely, Administrator T. Pattrin, LMCC Chair-elect Frederick Blanch, Alternate Commissioner LAKE MINNETONKA CO^’ TJNICATIONS COMMISSION1997 UUUGETAIM’KOVEI) B\ LMCC 8/6/96-«*■-• ♦Approved Budget for 1996 Approved Budgetfor 1997 (Hiifil RrvHifin)Change %ChangeINCOME Franchise Fees $137,079.64 $147,283.28 <$10,203.64 Back Advertising 0.00 2,0(M).00 2,(M)0.00 Interest 3.500.00 4.(MH).00 +500.00 $140,579.64 $15.3,283.28 + $12,703.64 OPERATING EXPENSES • Administrator, Access ft Qflioe Stair 75,200.00 81,100.00 + 5,9(K).(M)7.2% Secretarial Sciricc 750.00 800.00 ('25.00)+ 50.00 3.2% Payroll Taxes/PERA 9,450.00 10,140.00 + 690.00 6.7% Travel Expenses 2,100.00 2,175.00 + 75.00 3.5% Health Insurance 5,150.00 5,4(H).(K)^ 250.00 4.6% Legal Fees 6,000.00 8,000.00 •< 2.(M)0.00 14.2% Insurancc/Bonds 5,400.00 5,670.00 + 270.00 4.7% LMCC Accounting/ Annual Review 1,950.00 2,000.00 + 50.00 2.5% ConT, Schools ft Conventions 6,300.00 74)00.00 + 7(H).()0 3.0% Oflioe/Studio Supply Janitor Ser>7Supply 4,000.00 4.000.00 0.00 0% Membership Dues/ Subscriptions 1,500.00 1..500.00 0.00 0% DESCRIPTION => Payroll for Admin., Prod. Coord., Studio Coord., PT Prod. Assl.'s & Admin. AssL => Payroll Ser\'iccs => PERA ft employer w/liolding contribution =^ LMCC visibility at all cities, MACTA, North Studio ft errands Amt. nllributcd to employee licnlth ins. =i* Rate rcg./rranchisc rcncw'al/lcgal counsel => Workers Comp., Dishonesty Bond, Property Liability Bookkeeping ft annual oudit NATOA. MACTA, NFLCP Normal ofTicc/studio supplies, copy machine agree< ment @ $30/mo. ft janitor service and supplies NATOA. MACTA, magazines and 3 local Chambers of Commerce I; ■Approv Budge for 19STcicphoiic/Voice Mail $ 2,21 Postage/PO Box 1.41 Miscellaneous 95 Advertising/Promo • Four Quailerly Newsletters 4,20< Oflioe Equipment ( Office Rent 8,7(8 Equipment Maint. ARqpair 1,61^ Sales Tax 1,50( OPERATING EXPENSES $138,39^ SUB-TOTAL . i Approi Budgt for 19!SPECIAL FUNDSCapilal Funds Franchise Renewal Fund l,oi: Tape Stock K Technical/Financial . Rate Audit 2,01 Studio Equipment Legal Fund Id Office Equipment 1,50 Access Equipment 5,00 Aoce8S/De\elopmcnt Contingency 11,00 Sales Tax 60 SPECIAL FUNDS SUB-TOTAL S 21,30< OPERATING FUNDS SUB-TOTAL $138,39 GRAND TOTAL $159.89- •AGE 3LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION1997 IIUDGET - CONTINUED « • Approved Budget for 1996 Approved Budget fur 1997(Fiiml Revblon)Change %ChangeSPECIAL FUNDS Capital Funds o.uo 0.(K)0.00 0% Franchise Rene^vai Fund 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 0% Tape Stock 300.00 300.(KI 1 0.00 0% Technical/Financial . Rate Audit 2,000.00 2,500.00 + 500.00 20.% Studio Equipment 0.00 2,500.(K) •2.000.00)2,500.(8)1(K).()% Legal Fund 100.00 lOO.(M)0.00 0% OflDoe Equipment 1,500.00 1,500.00 (+I.W000)0.00 - Access Equipment 5,000.00 5,000.00 0.00 0% Aoccss/De\'ciopmcnl I1,0(K).00 11,000.00 0.00 0% Contingency 0.00 708.28 ('708.28)+ 708.28 0% • Sales Tax 600.00 300.00 (-300.00)- SPECIAL FUNDS SUU-TOTAL $ 21,500.00 $ 24,908.28 $ M08.38 OPERATING FUNDS SUB-TOTAL $138,394.64 $144,915.(8)$ 6.520.36 + 3.4% GRAND TOTAL $l.‘»9.894.64 $169,823.28 $ 9.928.64 + 2.6% DESCRIPTION Expenses involved in ‘Tutnre"* Needs Assessment and Renewal Replacement of videotape for production => Future audit if needed => Replace cquipmciil / Ihirchasc North Studio Future unrorcsccn legal expenses Replace / purchase new oflioe equipment Cameras, porUi-pack, misc. for another city council meeting Coverage of 8 city council mtgs., film development and DeWoir Audio => Based on 6.5% of taxable purchases Budgc(96.pub I:-;' 0Z( ch Assessment ent r development Mayor Jabbour and Orono City Coimcilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Liz A^an Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator DATE:June 5, 1997 SUBJECT: Home Occupations On June 4,1997 at 7:45 a.m. the Planning Commission held a work session to discuss amending the zoning code regarding home occupations. The Commissioners reviewed the enclosed information. Another work session on this topic is scheduled for: Monday, June 23 rd 7:45 a.m. Council Chambers You will receive a written summary of the meeting when they are available. I ! PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION TOPIC: Home Occupations June 4, 1997 7:45 a.m. AGENDA 7:45 a.m.CofiFee, Juice & Rolls 7:55 a.m.Introductions of Participants 8:00 a.m.Overview of Topic-Liz Van Zomeren 8:20 a.m.Discussion 1. What are the goals of Orono regarding home occupations? r 2.Would the community like to encourage home occupations in some or all zoning districts? 8:30 a.m. Regulatory Elements Worksheet 9:00 a.m. Summary and Wrap Up Issui Opc Resi< or Allov or Allov Loc Resti or Allov build Allov Allov Allov S/2C No III or Limit by sc or perc( Equ Prohi equip Cons m m t«':- ■ ■ . .'vS :•■ r:^> I' REGULATORY WORKSHEET IIssue:Yes No Don’t Know CommentsOperator:Resident and household only orAllow one employee or Allow more than one employee * Location of occupation: Restrict to residence only or Allow in separate accessory building Allow water Allow toilet Allow shower Size: No limit or Limit gross floor area by sq. ft. or percentage Equipment: Prohibit or restrict types of equipment Consider indoor/outdoor % 6/3/97 '•■^ -si Issue:Outdoor Storage: Prohibit or Allow subject to screening fencing landscaping sq. ft. or % of lot area type of equipment or Sales: Prohibit retail sales or Restrict to certain typr Structural Alteration Prohibit or Allow for handicap ac( building code requiren or Allow additions Separate Entrance Issue:Traffic Impact:Limit number of custo at one time Allow all types of deli> restriction on type or r or Restrict the number a vehicle trips Consider private road: driveways Parking: No special requiremer or Restrict number of off parking spaces requin Consider hardcover, e open lot, screening Hours of Operation: No restrictions on hou or Restrict hours Start time End time Consider weekdays, vt • i REGULATORY WORKSHEETIssue:Yes No Don't Know CommentsSignage:Street Number and Name of Business Only Size in Sq. Ft. Prohibit Advertisi'’ n • Registration or Licensing ............. .................' No city record or Registration (no fee or inspection) or Registration (fee & inspection) or License (fee & inspection) Notification of Neighbors Public Hearing % ________A 6/3/97 ■ '■, • ■ .*v. a TO: FROM: DATE Chair Lindquist and Orono Planning Conunissioners Liz Van Zomeren, City Planner/Zoning Administrator May 30,1997 Jxt^ SUBJECT: Home Occupation Regulation OVERVIEW Although the ability to work at home offers many advantages to workers, home occupations sometimes present problems for the local community. Home-based businesses can generate heavy traffic or demands for parking. Some businesses may use noisy machinery or bright lights at late hours. Offenses can range from unattractive advertising signs to the housing of pigeons. Most communities regulate home occupations. The American Planning Association (APA) has found that ordinances typically contain the following elements: 1. A definition of home occupations; 2. The background or history preceding the ordinance enactment or amendment; 3. An intent and purpose or policy statement describing why home occupations are being regulated; 4. A listing of permitted and prohibited home occupations; 5.A series of conditions or set of performance standards that home occupations must meet; 6. A statement of review procedures applied to home occupations; and 7. Enforcement procedures. DEFINITION The Orono Zoning Code currently defines "home occupation" as: Any gainful occupation meeting all of the following requirements when engaged in only by fVork Session on Home Occupations June 4, 1997 page-1 persons residing in their dwelling, when that occupation is conducted within the principal structure only, when evidence of the occupation is not visible from the street. No signs other than those permitted in "R" Districts are present, no excessive stock in trade is stored on the premises, over the counter retail sales are not involved, and entrance to the home occupation is gained from within the structure. A professional person ma^ use his residence for consultation, emergency treatment or performance of religious rites but not for the general practice of his profession when such general practice will involve the need for more than three off-street parking spaces for the occupant and visitors. The above definition includes performance standards and parking requirements. Definitions should define only. By having the performance standards in the definition, one could argue that a use is not a home occupation if it does not comply with one or more of the criteria and is therefore, not prohibited. A definition should not be an abstract of the entire ordinance. It should not include regulatory fragments that properly belong in the ordinance. The definition needs to be amended to remove the performance standards and the parking requirements. They should be located elsewhere in the Zoning Code. ANALYSIS "Customary ” Uses Some definitions include die limitation that a home occupation be a "customary ” use in the community, that it be carried out by a "professional" or that only family members can be employed in a home occupation. These particular regulations make enforcement difficult and should be avoided. A substantial amount of case law has considered the requirement that home occupations be "customary", but only a few courts have laid out a test for determining whether a use is customary. Realizing that home occupations change over time and var>' between aieas and groups of people, courts have not been very restrictive in their interpretation of customary uses. For example, a music school that operated 110 hours a week was held to be a customary home occupation. [FarAy V. Board of Adjustment of City of Killeen, 566 S. W. 2d 365 (Tex.Civ. App. 1978)]. If a community adopts the standard that a home occupation has to be customary or traditional, another problem arises. How do new uses become customary and traditional? The customary use requirement of home occupation regulations has probably been retained in ordinances as the easiest way to control the effect of a home occupation on the surrounding neighborhood. "Customary" uses seem acceptable because they appear to be compatible with the residential character of the neighborhood. It has not been demonstrated, however, that allowing Work Session on Home Occupations June 4. 1997 page~2 V •\ ’■ ■: ? other noncustomary uses will interfere with the peace and quiet of a neighborhood. An ordinance that allows only customary home occupations may be discriminatory. *'Professional*' vs. Other Services There is also a great potential for litigation in trying to make a distinction between professional and nonprofessionals in an ordinance. The term is ambiguous and can be construed as being discriminatory against technical or service workers. Ordinance preferences that are based on personal traits or lifestyles can be scrutinized severely by courts as unequal treatment of individuals. Family Members Only In many ordinances, employment in home occupations is limited to "family" members residing in the dwelling. This wording presents problems. As it has become more common for unrelated individuals to share a household and its expenses, restricting employees by relationship has become challengeable. Instead, some communities require that home occupations be carried out by "the occupant of the dwelling" or that "there shall be no on-site employment or use of labor from persons who are not bona fide residents of the dwelling". A simple definition that avoids words that are easy to misinterpret or are ambiguous terms is desired. A concise definition might also indicate that a home occupation is for financial gain to distinguish it from hobbies. Possible Definitions Below are some examples of possible definitions: 1. 2. 3. Any activity carried out for gain by an occupant conducted as an accessory use in the resident's dwelling unit. Any business or commercial activity that is conducted from property that is zoned for residential use. An occupation or business activity which results in a product or service and is conducted in whole or in part in the dwelling unit, and is clearly subordinate to the residential use of the dwelling unit. In the work session, the Planning Commission should discuss whether there should be a restriction on family members and outside employees as well as whether the use should be restricted to the dwelling unit. Work Session on Home Occupations June 4, 1997 page-3 ORDINANCE HISTORY Any amendment that is adopted regarding home occupations should include in the ordinance resolution information that provides a short history as to the intent and purpose of the amendment. The background of the ordinance provides residents, elected officials, and enforcement officers, with the information about the circumstances that existed when the ordinance was first adopted. Policy Statements Policy statements or "purpose and intent" statements are also helpful. The policy statement can capture the intent and philosophy of the Planning Commission and City Coimcil regarding home occupations. An example of a purpose statement is: Purpose. The conduct of business in residential units may be permitted under the provisions of this section. It is the intent of this section to: a.Ensure the compatibility of home occupations with other uses permitted in the residential districts; b. Maintain and preserve the character of residential neighborhoods. Before staff can complete an intent and purpose section for the home occupation ordinance, the Planning Commission should consider: 1. What are the goals of Orono regarding home occupations? 2.Would the community like to encourage home occupations in some or all zoning districts? Permitted and Prohibited Home Occupations Many communities attempt to list the home occupations that are acceptable or prohibited. Such a list may be helpful if it is intended only to provide examples. When an ordinance lists permitted and prohibited home occupations, those home occupations that might otherwise meet the regulations are jeopardized simply because they are not listed. Long Beach, California handles this issue by listing what is permitted and what is prohibited. Future home occupations that are not on the list require a Confirmation of Zoning letter. (See attachments). CONDITIONS AND CRITERIA Another element of home occupation ordinances is a list of conditions or criteria that applies Work Session on Home Occupations June 4, 1997 page~4 t. It e to the operation of the home occupation. These conditions are used to carry out the policy statement and to provide guidance for both the administrator and the home business operator. The current Zoning Code conditions and criteria presented in a list format are: 1. The home occupation shall be engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling. 2. The home occupation shall be conducted within the principal structure only. 3. The home occupation shall not be visible from the street. 4. No signs other than those permitted in the "R” district shall be allowed. 5. No excessive stock in trade shall be stored on the premises. 6. Over the counter retail sales are prohibited. 7. The entrance to the home occupation shall be from within the structure. 8. i. ts le is n ;s The general practice of the profession shall not generate more than three (3) off-street parking spaces for occupants and visitors. Under its zoning power, Orono has the authority to entirely prohibit all business enterprises from operating in residential districts. Most ordinances reasonably restrict business activities in residential districts to ensure that the business remains incidental to the principal, residential use. Courts have consistently prohibited home occupations when the commercial activity became the dominant use of the dwelling. Various conditions are placed on home occupations to ensure that they remain secondary or incidental to the residential use. Some communities have limited the amount of floor space within the dwelling that can be used for the home occupation or limited the number of nonresident employees. Other ordinances prohibit the storage and or sale of merchandise on the premises. Several communities place all of these restrictions on home occupations. Umitations on Floor Area Ordinances that attempt to limit the expansion of home occupations into full-fledged commercial enterprises restrict the gross floor area within a home. Limits range from 10% to 33% of the gross floor area or to one room in the dwelling. Most ordinances do not allow accessory structures such as garages to be used for home occupations. Typical language that limits the size of home occupations is: Work Session on Home Occupations June 4, 1997 page-5 It It 1.Said use shall be conducted solely within the confines of the main dwelling and shall not exceed 10% of the floor area. 2.Garages or carports, whether attached or detached, shall not be used for home occupations other than the storage of automobiles. 3.There shall be no entrance or exit way specifically provided in the dwelling or on the premises for the conduct of the home occupation. T.imitation on Employees Limiting the number of employees who can be employed in a home is an effective way to prevent home occupations from taking over as the primary use of a structure. Generally, the employees are restricted to either residents or to one employee in addition to the residents. The need for additional employees is usually an indication that the home occupation has grown to such an extent that it should no longer be considered incidental to the residential use but rather has become a commercial business. Some examples of limitation on employees are: 1.There shall be no on-site employment or use of labor from persons who are not bona fide residents of the dwelling. 2.Permitted home occupations shall not include the employment of any persons not residing on the premises in the performance of the occupation. 3.No one other than the residents of the dwelling shall be employed in the conduct of a home occupation. T.imitations on Nonresidents Ordinances also usually require that the individual primarily responsible for the home occupation live in the dwelling. This requirement ensures that the home occupation remains the incidental use and that the operator does not become an absentee landlord. Limitation on Storage and Sales Limitations on the storage of goods within a dwelling and restrictions on sales from the dwelling were other means of controlling the size of the home occupation within the dwelling. Restricting sales from the premises also ensures that additional pedestrian and vehicle traffic will not flow into the neighborhood. Work Session on Home Occupations June 4. 1997 page--6 \ Some examples of this type of restriction are: 1. 2. There shall be no outdoor storage of materials or products on the premises. Indoor storage of materials or products shall not exceed the limitations imposed by the provisions of the building, fire, health and housing codes.\ No stock-in-trade shall be displayed or maintained on the premise and no retail sales on the premise shall occur. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Currently the Zoning Code allows home occupations as a permitted accessory use in residential districts. A home occupation license, however, is also required, although it is not referenced in the Zoning Code. APA has prepared a thorough analysis of the permitting and licensing process. This information is attached for your review. Staff would prefer eliminating the licensing process and regulating home occupations by zoning regulations only. If a home occupation did not comply with the performance standards, it would be enforced in the same manner as other zoning violations. SUMMARY Before staff can proceed any farther in drafting an actual ordinance, a discussion with Planning Commission is needed to determine the community's standard and intent with regard to home occupations. Please review the above memorandum and attachments. If you have any questions before the meeting, please call me at 473-7357. Work Session on Home Occupations June 4, 1997 page-7 \ y it ig le IS application for annual home occupation license CITY OF ORONO 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 6« CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 NAME; ADDRESS: PHONE: Street BUSINESSNAME: TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: Number of Employees Within Operation: city/state Check One: Initial Review Fee $50.00 *(Provide names of employees on back of application) _ Annual Review Fee $30.00 ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20. SUBDIVISION 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices ‘ ■ •“ *"**>8« without 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling 4 N« permitted other than signs permitted in the residential 4. No excesstve stock m trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. zone. any Signature of Applicant: Date: Denial of application Signature of Zoning Official:__ Signature of Building Official: Application Date: Date:_ Date: Date License Approved:Date License Expired: NAME Allstar Electric Small Parts Manufacturing, Inc D & R Contracting Danby Associates Fit2q)atrick Enterprises John Halson Heliotrope Garden Design Julie LaVere Marmet Services D.J. Mac Sales Tayor Moor ««« k:.y. . 11 NAME AD Nails by Ginger 2620 Ke North Shore Roofing 3980 Nc Nonim & Pearson, PA 3264 Nc LeRoy A. Pilgram, D.C. 1795 Sh Priority Management Franchise 1680 Nc Ross Repke FFC 3380 W Small Engine Machine Shop 1830 La Terrace Ten Tec Corp 2760 W te? lelp also j \ i ckupat )ending- e I out icks up NAME ADDRESS ZNGDIST BUSINESSTYPE TOT#EMP #OUTSIDEEMP CONFORMTOLICENSE VARUNCEGRANTED(OUTSIDEEMP)ACTIVELICENSE COMMENTSNails by Ginger 2620 Kelly Ave LR-IB Nail service 1 0 Y • North Shore Roofing 3980 North Shore Dr LR-IC Roofing 1 0 N Norum & Pearson, PA 3264 North Shore Dr LR-IC-1 Law office 2 1 • «Y LeRoy A. Pilgram, D.C. 1795 Shadywood Rd LR-IC Chiropractic office 2 0 Y Priority Management Franchise 1680 North Farm Rd LR-IA Management training 1 0 N ^ r* Ross Repke FFC 3380 Watertown Rd RR-IB Firearms 1 0 Y Federal Firearms License Renewal-10 years Small Engine Machine Shop 1830Lakeview . Terrace LR-IA Small engine shop-mail order & for dealers 2 0 N Ten Tec Corp 2760 White Oak Cir RR-IB Marketing 1 0 N S (■ • It: ■. ! '*<'■ ■- f"'b,r V- :• i [■ • <k i* ' * 3. All businesses being conducted at property zones for residential use on the effective date of this ordi nance shall have thirty (30) days thereafter to apply for the necessary permit or conditional use permit. 4. Persons who were conducting, a business from prop erly zoned for residential use on the effective date of this ordinance must make application under Sec tion 33.11 but may continue to conduct such busi ness pending final determination of their applica tion. Should the city council deny the petition for conditional use permit, all such persons shall im mediately cease their business activities from such residential premises. SECTION 21.75.060 HOME OCCUPATIONS In any building rated for residential occupancy in any dis trict, small and unobstructive businesses may be con ducted within a dwelling unit provided that: A. The primary use of the unit is a dwelling; B. The following standards are complied with in full at all times: 1. No person other than a resident of the dwelling unit is engaged or employed in the home occu pation, and the number of residents employed in the home occupation shall not exceed two; 2. No sign is displayed which would be visible from outside the dwelling unit, and no vehicle with the business name on it is parked so as to be vis ible from the public right-of-way; 3. No mechanical equipment is to be utilized except that which is necessarily, customarily, or ordi narily used for household or leisure purposes; 4. No toxic, explosive, flammable, combustible, corrosive, eliologic radioactive, or other re stricted materials are used or stored on the site; 5. There are no outside operations, storage, or dis play of materials or products; 6. Total storage of materials or products used in the business shall not exceed 128 cubic feet; 7. No alteration of the residential appearance of the premises occurs, including creation of a separate entrance to the dwelling or utilization of an exist ing entrance exclusively for the business; 8. No process is used which is hazardous to public health, safely, nriorals, or welfare; 9. Visitors, customers, or deliveries shall not exceed that normally and reasonably occurring for a residence including not more than two business visitors an hour and eight a day and not more than two deliveries of products or materials a week; 10. The home occupation shall not displace or impede use of parking spaces required by this title, including any business storage in required garage parking areas; 11. No advertisement shall be placed in any media containing the address of the property; and Long Beach, California 12. Not more than two vehicles shall be utilized in the business ?.nd no commercially licensed vehi cles shall be utilized in the business. C. The folio ■ uses shall be allowed home occupa tions (unless listed as prohibited in Sec 21.75.060 D); 1. Architectural service; 2. Art restoration; 3. Art studio; 4. Baby sitting (including small- and large-family day care homes as specified m Section 21.12.030); 5. Consulting services; 6. Contracting (except as specifically prohibited); 7. Data processing; 8. Dental technician with laboratory; 9. Direct sale product distribution (Amway, Avon, Jaffra, Tupperware, Herbalife); 10. Drafting and graphic services; 11. Dressmaking, sewing, tailoring, contract sewing (one machine); 12. Electronic assembly; 13. Engineering service; 14. Financial planning, investment services; 15. Flower arranging; 16. Gardening, landscape maintenance; 17. Home crafts (including ceramics with kiln up to six cubic feet); 18. House cleaning service; 19. Insurance sales or broker; 20. Interior design; 21. Jewelry making; jeweler; 22. Laundry, ironing service; 23. Locksmith; 24. Mail order (not including retail sales from site); 25. Millinery; 26. Real estate sales or broker; ■Sec- busi- >lica- n for I im- such id in «hi- jpa- ID): nily 30); d); on. 27. Sales representative (office only); 28. Security service, security systems, auto security systems; 29. Swimming pool cleaning; 30. Telephone answering, switchboard, call for warding; 31. Tutoring; 32. Typing, word-processing service; 33. Wallpapering; 34. Watch repair; and 35. Writing, computer programming. D. The following uses shall be prohibited as home occupations: 1. Ambulance service; 2. Appliance repair; 3. Automobile repair; parts sales, upholstery, or detailing; washing service (including businesses working at customers homes); 4. Beauty salons and barber shops; 5. Boarding house, bed and breakfast hotel, time share condominium; 6. Carpentry, cabinet makers; 7. Ceramics, (kiln of sbc cubic feet or more); 8. Churches, religious instruction; 9. Contracting, masonry, plumbing, or painting; 10. Health salons, gyms, dance studios, aerobic exer cise studios, massage; 11. Helium balloons; 12. House painter; 13. Limousine or pedicabs serv*Cw. 14. Medical or dental office; 15. Mortician, hearse service; 16. Palm reading, fortune telling; 17. Private clubs; 18. Restaurants, taverns, food preparation; 19. Retail sale from site (except direct distribution); 20. Skin care; 21. Tow truck services; 22. Upholstery; and 23. Veterinary uses (including care, grooming, or boarding). E. All uses not listed in C or D shall require a Letter of Confirmation of Zoning. Such letter shall address a specific use. The Zoning Administrator shall decide requests for a Letter of Confirmation of Zoning based upon the intent of the home occupation provisions and experience wim similar uses. Anyone aggrieved by a decision ^ the Letter of Confirmation of 2k>nmg may appeal by fil ing for a Classification of Use request. Each use decision shall be used to create a supple mental list of approved and denied home occupa tion uses. Once a use is listed on either the approved or denied list, a Letter of Confirmation of Zoning shall not be required for that use, but the use sh^P either be approved or denied based on the classifi cation on the supplemental list. F. The home occupation shall not be corisidered a non- conforming use in the event of revisions to the appli cable provisions of this title. Washington County, Oregon »)• ! ! SECTION 430-63 HOME OCCUPATION A home occupation is a lawful activity commonly car ried Oil within a dwelling by a member or members of the family who occupy the dwelling where the occupa tion is secondary to the use of the dwelling for living pur poses and the residential character of the dwelling is main tained. 430-63.1 Home Occupation (Type I) A Type I occupation shall: A. Require the applicant to obtain a permit, which shall be renewed annually; B. Be operated entirely within the applicant's dwelling; C. Use not more than twenty-five (25) percent of the floor area used for human occupancy (may include the basement); D. Not display any external evidence of an occupation outside the structure except as permitted in the res idential district; E. Not involve the use or storage of tractor trailers, semi-trucks, or heavy equipment such as construc tion equipment used in a business; F. Include no retail sales other than telephone sales; G. Involve fewer than six (6) customers daily entering the premises; Produce no noise or obnoxious odors, vibrations, glare, fumes, or elecric interference detectable to normal sensory perception outside the structure; and on); g, or Letter aning ter of >nt of j with )n the by fil- ipple- «upa- >roved. ioning i shall assifi- a non- appli- pation heres- railers, tistruc- i sales; ntering ations, able to ucture; City of Edina Land Use, Platting and Zoning 850.07 refuse containers which existed as of the effective date of this Code shaU not be eliminated or reduced in size. C. Single Dwelling Unit and Double Dwelling Unit Buildings. All r.efuse, as defin^ in Section 705 of this Code, or similar materials shall be kept within closed containers designed for such purpose. Such containers shall not be located in the front yard and shall not be visable from the front lot line except as allowed by Section 705 of this Code. Subd. 3 Dwelling Units Prohibited in Accessory Buildings, Temporary Buildings, Trailers and Recreational Vehicles. No accessory building, temporary building, trailer or recreational vehicle in any district shall be used in whole or in part for a dwelling unit or umts, except for accessory buildings which are specifically allowed for residential use by this Section. Subd. 4 Customary Home Occupatkns as an Accessory Use. A. Customary home occupations which are permitted as an accessory use by thi<; Section shall comply with the following conditions: 1. Only the residents of the dwelling unit shall be employed on the lot or within the dwelling unit. 2. No exterior structural modifications shall be made to change the residential character and appearance of the lot or any buildings or structures on the lot. 3. No loading, unloading, outdoor storage of equipment or materials, or other outdoor activities, except parking of automobiles shall occur. 4. No signs of any kind shall be used to identify the use. 5. All parking demands generated by the use shall be accommodated within the accessory garage and the normal driveway area and shall not at any one time occupy more than two parking spaces in parking areas required for multiple residential buildings. 6. No more than ten automobile trips weekly by individuals other than the residents of the dwelling unit shall be generated to the dwelling unit as a result of the use. 7. No sale of products or merchandise shall occur on the lot or within any structures or buildings on the lot. J 850 - 43 \ s 850.07 il not be fuse, as n closed d in the wed by ildings, trailer ing unit itial use by this e lot or ige the uctures ials, or > within iny one red for tian the lit as a un any \ City of Edina Land Use, Platting and Zoning 850.07 B. Penned customary home occupations include the following and similar ccupations if, and only during such times as, they comply with aU of the conditions of paragraph A. of this Subd. 4: ^ ^ au ot the 1. Dressmakers, tailors and seamstresses. 2. In single dwelling unit and double dwelling unit buddings only, music and d^ce teachers providing instruction to not more than five indwEaTj 3. Artists, sculptors and authors. L- *«*“'*• •’rokers. architects and similar professionals who typically conduct client meetings outside of the dweiling Lt. 5. Ministers, rabbis and priests. 6. Photographers providing service to one customer at a time. In in trade is maintained on the lot orm the buildmg or structure on the lot. 8. In smgle dwelling unit and double dwelling unit buildings onlv rental of umt m addition to the permanent residents of the dwelling unit. permitted as customary home occupations: ^ 1. Barber shops and beauty parlors. 4. Medical and dental offices. 5. Upholstering. 6. Mortuaries. 850-44 / f ■ • ri - 6 %» ^ *■ •* •' m — '- n ......... I , , .... > " - City of Edina •ATm, .1 Land Use, Platting and Zoning 850.07 7. Commercial kennels as defined by Subsection 300.01 of the City Code 8. Tourist homes, boarding houses or rooming houses, and other kinds of transient occupancies. ^ • 9. Commercial food preparation or catering. 10. Automobile and equipment sales. 11. Landscaping and lawn maintenance service where landscaping materials and equipment are stored or parked on the premises. D, Permitted customary home occupations by residents who are physically unable to be employed full time outside their residence may be allowed as a temporary conditional use, with variances from the conditions of paragraph A. of Subd. 4 of this Subsection 850.07, pursuant to the provisions of Subd. 5 of Subsection 850.04. Subd. 5 Fences in the R-1 and R-2 Districts. Fences erected in the R-1 District and R-2 District shall conform to the following: A. Fences exceeding four feet in height shall not be erected within a required front street setback or side street setback, pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 2. of Subd. 7 of Subsection 850.11. I b*. * 111.». •> ■ • *'• ■A ‘ » if** y ' ^ r X ri * i B. No fence shall exceed eight feet in height. C. Fences shall be installed with the finished side facing neighboring properties. D. No fence shall be installed so as to obstruct a required clear view at street intersections as required by Section 1405 of this Code. Subd. 6 Exceptions to Setback Requirements. The following shall not be considered as encroachments into required setbacks: A. Overhanging eaves not supported by posts or pillars, and bay windows not extending to the floor, which do not project more than three feet into the required setback and which are not within three feet of a lot line. B. Sidewalks and driveways, but not patios. C. Fences which do not exceed the height limitations imposed by this Subsection 850.07. 850 - 45 )Ie ry int of s. ed id 15*' RgAOiNC: I RSnSRReo TO (NAME OF) COMMITTEE. : fVBUC HEAR IMG: I niAOlNQ AND PINAL I AN ORDINANCE of the CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS __________Scolt_________ STAFF ALTERNATIVE presents the following ordinance: Amending Title 20, Chapter 522 of the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances relating to Zoning Code: In General. The City Council of The City of Minreapolis do ordain as follows: Section 1. That Section 522.40 of the above-entitled ordinance be amended by amending definitions in alphabetical sequence to read as follows: 522.40. Definitions. As used in the zoning code, the follosving words and phrases shall mean: Home occupation. Any occupation or-profession-oanied on by a member-of the innwedlate-family residing on the promiseij, in oonnection with which thefe-4frU5 ed no oign Qthep4ltQn a nameplate not more than uv€»- (2) oquaro feet in area, or ne-disploy -that will indicote iVom-4he ext erior that the building is being utilized in whole or in port for any purpose other than^hot-of a dwelling; there- is-no conimedity sold upon tite-premioes; no person is employ ed other than-a-member of tlie iinmedinte family-residing on the premises; and nG-n>echanical or electrical equipment is used-exe ept such as is normaHy-us ed for purely domestic or-firofessionQl- purposes;—A professional person may Hso-hts- residenee for conflultation, treatment^ or performance of roligious-Fites.—No accessory building shall-be used for such home oecupaiioft;—The sole, lease, trade or other transfer of firearms or ammunition by a fireamis dealer is prohibited as a home occupationi An occupation or profe«;5;ion carried on by a member (d’the household fpsiding on the premises, conducted as a customary, incidental, and acccssor\' use of a dwelling. Section 2. That Chapter 522 of the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances be amended by adding thereto a new Section 522.205 to read us follows: 522.205. Home occupations. Home occupations shall be allowed acce.s.sorv to a dwelling, subject to the following: {11 £21 Purpose Mome occupation regulations are establi.shed to ensure that home occupations will not adversely affect the character and livability of the surrounding neighborhood and that a home occupation remains acce.<;<;or\^ and subordinate rn the principal re5>idential use of the dwelling. The regulations recognize that many types of home occiipntion.s can be conduc’ied with little or nn effect on the .surrounding nei{>hhnrhood. Home occupation stamlard.^. Home occupations shall be allowed accessoiy to a dwelling, subject to the following standards: CK.3006 Raw. 2/95 £ /£ #:0I£0C£fSI9 OMI.mU SldlV AU : KVCI:0l: AG-£ -fi :9c:Z.6-GA9 (619) :A9 i\'3S nee: ly K m h vt 4s us id ss be LS!3S SE\T BY:(612I 673-^28 = 5- 5-97 :10:11AM : CTY »PLS PLANA'ING- 6I-M730510 # 3/ 5-------Ht> hoiiK- wtuuation :<hall lie vaihic- Im... ^..y puM,,. ,ialii ol w.-,v ^wtp, E”'* \ ^ -II-----j signage. \ 1.-the hours QPgn to the public shall be limited hf;Kvff(^n 8 a in rmd X p ni instmetion. cfinsultinp. anks. or other service .shall he to nr. five /:>1 customers or clients at n tiinp n.■Slupiwnl and d^llivgrv of products, merchandise or simnUes ^l.all be litniterf to 1a -A A a a • ^ K1 __________ 4 A llgbYggn 8 a iR?- end.$ p.m. and shall occur only in single rear axir sfraif .»]it tm.;),;*; ^ijjaUer vehicles normally used to .«;erve residential ne?phho^1^^^.^^^Tc ax £iQfubifcdJwme QL'amtn?ns, Recognizing that there are some uses whirh hnve .^.^nn.|c atu.g^;ipnab]c opcratit>nnl ghflract cristies and thereby adversely the .s.mni.nHiMn ng iBhborhood. the following shall he prohibited as hnm^Qcciip^th^n.A- a.Motor vehicle repair, .service or painting b.Barber shop or b^avtty $ak»n whkh iy desig ned to serve more than nni- fn client at a um£ c.■The sak . jga se. trndiL.Qr other transfer of firearms or m-nmimUioH Hv dealer. iicg ulflted lisg s-a s defned in Chapter S4n. RiisinY»<;^: nistr.Vrc Unlicensed mnssnge therapy £41 -^f>pipfw>Kc Eoia g .ocQnpation? not in compliance with subsections abovfi. shal l be p^miitted p;> n lawf ul, nonconforming use in accordance with th>. pm.yisions of Chapter 5'^L.Nonc<>nfonning Uses a nd Structures nntii an 10Q7 a:hen such nonconforming status shall beL..me imT^Ayfi,| PASSED OAT£APPROVED — NOT APPROVED - VETOED DATE MAYQA ATTEST CK.3011 Rev. 12V93 CITY CLERK 0;# 3/ 5 s % an five ilfidjfl icks or LSIiflUS ilildlllS nt at a carm^ ih-llis 1<)Q7, VOTE TO sustun SENT BY: (612) 673-2728 j f i I a. b. d. c. f. i. I J 5- 5-97 :10:12AM : CTY MPLS PLANNING- 6124730510:# 4/ 5' staff ALTERNATIVE -LI.\Q hoiUS OCCUnation shall he an activity vvhirh is ciissfnmMrily with the use of a dwe11in<j ft ihg residents of the dwelling shall be employed bv or ent»njTt»H conduct of ihc home occiip.-^dQn> except for licensed family dav care nr amnr. family dav care bTitgrior aU<?r«aiionS or modifications that change the residential charat^tcr or a P.PC3rancc_of the dwelling, a nv accessory biiildint?s or iho ypn jnp lot shnil pfQlilbitgd. IniSfiQf a ltcratlPng..Ql modifications that eliminate the kitchen, living mom, all of lh.C bathrooms^ or all of the bedrooms of the dwelling shall he prohibited. ■Tllg -homg occupation shall be conducted only within an enclosed area of cbvg lling. except .that bccinnimz in the R4 7oning district, in mnltiplf family dwellings of five T51 or more units fiome occupation mav hf> allowed vvirhin a specific area thLJmiciDal building designated for such home occupation bv conditional use pcrmiL a s provid ed in Chapter 525. Admini«^trafion and Enforcem^nr.-----In. addition to the conditional use standards, the planning commission shall con<;icler. hut not he limited to ih(‘ following fflotor<;> E--------Nature of the home occupation and its impacts of nni^e, nrl^r vibration and traftlo.. IE-------Conformance with a pplicable zoning requirements, includin;^ bur nnt lunited iQ. yards, gross floor ar ea, and specific devginpmt>ni <standard<; ilE------llistorv ’ of complaints related to the property. -----Q^lldgpr Sloragg or dignlav of materials, good.s. .supplies, or eouipment relatrti in conduct of a home occupation shall he prohihirt-^l, ^-------Ih# required QffrSlrcct narking are a provided for the principal use ^haW not be reduced or madg unusable bv the home occupation ?bal l be restricted to one non.illuminated. flat wall idemiflrntjon si^n not iQ.exceed Oiie-U) sotiare foot in area. On a comer zoning lot, two kuc H siy nc. one facing each street, shall he allowed. N.ft..m.e.chanical. electrical or communication equipment, machinery or materials QlheribafL Q£a_tvpe normally found in a dwelling .shall be allowed .N.a ieta il sale and delive ry of nroducts or merchandise to the customer or client shall occur on the premises except where a cce.ssorv to anv services provided rsiich a g hytir care prcidlicts sold_accessor\> to hair cutting, or computer di<;k«; acre<i<nrv accountin g ser\ ice<;^, 4/ 5 IVE h the 5-30-1997 S:2SAM FROn CITY OF WAYZATA 404. 531S P. 1 SECTION 23 HOME OCCUPATIONS Fbx NOU Fa<^ _ ---------------------------- /in ^ ^ ^ P«^JV9 3 Section 801 ^3: 801.23.1: 801.23.2: 801.23.3: 801.23.4; 801.23,5: 801.23.6: From Purpose Application Procedures and Permits Requirement-General Provisions Non-Conforming Use Inspection Phoncf? 801.23.1:PURPOSE: The purpose of this Section Is to maintain the character and Integrity of residential areas and to provide a means through the establishment of specific standards and procedures by which home occupatioris can be conducted in residential neighborhoods without jeopardizing the health, safety and genera) welfare of the surrounding neighborhood. In addition, this Section is intended to provide a mechanism enabling the distinction between permitted home occupations and special or customarily •more sensitive* home occupations, so that permitted home occupations may be allowed through an administrative process rather than a legislative hearing process. 801.23.3: APPLICATION: Subject to the non-conforming use provision of this Section, all occupations conducted in the home shall corrpty with the provisions of this Section. 801.23.3: PROCEDURES AND PERMHTS: A. Permitted Home Occupation. Any permitted home occupation as defirred in this Ordinance shall require a •permitted home occupation permit*. Such permits shall be issued subject to the conditions of this Section, other applicable City Ordinances and State law. This permit may be issued by the Zoning Administrator or his agent based upon proof of compliance with the provi^ns of this Section. Application for the •permitted home ocoipetion permit* shall be aooompanied by a fee as adt^ed by the City Council. If the Zoning Administrator denies a permitted home occupation permit to an applicant, the applicant may appeal the decision to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council, which shall make the final decision. The pennft shall remain in force and effect until such tii as there has been a change in conditions or until such time as the provbions of this Section have been breached. At such time as the City has reason to believe that either event has taken place, a public hearing shall be held before the Planning Commission. The City Council shall make a final decision on whether or not the permit holder is entitled to the permit. 6. Special Home Occupation. Any home occupation which does not meet the specific requirements for a permitted home occupation as defined in this Section shall require a 'special home occupation permit* which shall be applied for, reviewed and disposed of in accordance wfth the procedural provisions of Section 801.04 of this Ordir^r>ce. C. Declaration of Conditions. The Planning Commission and City Council may impose such conditions on the granting of a special home occupation permit as may be necessary to cany out the purpose and provisions of this Section. D. Effect of Permit. A "special home occupation permit* may be issued for a period of one (1) year after which the permit may be reissued for periods of up to three (3) years each. Each application for permit renewal shall, however, be processed in accordance with the procedural requirements of the initial “spectai home occupation permit*. £. Transferability. Permits shall not run with the land and shall TK>t be transferable. F. Lapse of Special Home Occupation Permit by Non-Use. Whenever within one (1) year after granting a permit the use as permitted by the permit shall not have been initiated, then such permit shall become null and void unless a petition for extension of time in which to complete the work has been granted by April 1992 23.1 B-30-1997 8:29AM FROM CITf OF WAYZATA dOd 5318 G. H. 01.23.4: A. B. «h. riiu CfMincil Such extension shall be requested in writing and tiled with the Zoning Administrator at the ot the original pencil. There shall be no charge tor the tiling of h MWiof T^S^rewest tor exlTnsion shall state taclsVhowing a good taith attenvlto initate the use. StSi^^S sh^ £1 pr^ented to the Panning Commission lor a recommendation and to the C«y Council for a decision. ^ ^ .i w »u Reconsideration. Whenever an application tor a pennit has SeVidiSaa ^ m”pannm|cS2ton^^^^^^ lls^^l unless a decision to reconsider such matters is made by not less than four-titths (4/5) vole ot the entire City Council. . Renewal ot Permits. An applicant shall not have a vested right to a pennit renewal by teason of ^ng 2 or^us oermit 111 applying lor and accepting a permit, the permit holder agrees that his monetatv investment in the home occupation will be fully amortized over the life of the permit and tha a HArmit renewal will not be needed to amortize the investment. Each application for the renewal of a will be considered de novo without taking into cor^sideration that a previous permit has bron granted. The previous granting or renewal of a permit shall not constitute a precedent or basis for e renewal of a permit. REQUIREMENT-GENERAL PROVISIONS: All home occupations shall comply with the following general provisions and according to detinition. the applicable requirement provisions. General Provisions. No home occupation shall produce light glare, noise, odor or vibration that will in any way have an objectionable effect upon adjacent or neaiby property. No equipment shall be used In the home occupation which will create electrical interference to surrounding properties. Any home occupation shall be clearty irtcidental and secondary to the residemial use of the premises, should not change the residential character thereof. and shall result m no irxsompatibility or disturbance to the surrounding residential uses. No home occupation shall require internal or external alterations or involve consti^ton not customarily found in dwellings except where required to comply with k)cal and state tire ana police recommendations. There shall be no exterior storage of equipment or materials used in the hoii^ occupation, except personal automobiles used In the home occupation may be parked on the site. The home occupation shall meet all applicable lire and building codes. There shall be no exterior display or exterior signs or Interior display or Interior slg^ '^«r«fcT.rvQ vfeiblo from outside the dweOirtg wtth the exception of directional and identification/business signs to the extent authorized by Scctiori 801.27 of this OrdIrtance. All home occupations shall comply with the provisions of the City Nuisance Ordinartce. No home occupation shall be conducted between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM unless said occupation is contained entirely within the principal building and will not require any on»s parking facilities. No commodity snail be sold on the premises. Not over twenty-five (25) percent of any one story can be used for a home occupation. Requlrements-Permltted Home Occupations. 1 No person other than those who customarily reside on the premises shall be employed. The general public shall not come to the premises in question for purposes pertaining to the conduct of the home occupation. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. €. 7. 8. 9.Street 10. 11. 2. April 1992 23.2 rator at i filing of the use. ;tty City e date of /ote of having it his id that a of a »en tor the Ion, the ly have >nceto the t features t fire and tion. except hichare iness signs unless ny on*street I. d. I to the 23.2 I / O : CStlMM l-ROM CITY OF WAYZATA 404 53IS 3. AM permitted home occupations shall be conducted entirely within the principal dwelling and may not be conducted in accessory building. C. RequirementS'Special Home Occupation. 1. No person other than a resident shall conduct the home occupation. 2. Sp^ial home (pupations shall be limited to only those activities of a non-residential nature which are specified as allowed by state statute or regulation such as day care group nursery. 3. Sp^ial home occupations rray be allowed to accommodate their parking demand through utflization of on-street parking. In such cases where on-street parking facilities are necessary, however, the City Council shall maintain the right to establish the maximum number of on-str^t spaces permitted and increase or decrease that maximum number when jind where changing conditions require additional review. 801^.5: NON-CONFORMING USE; Existing home occupations lawfully existing on the date of this Ordinance may continue as norvconforming uses. They shall, however, be required to obtain permits for their continued operation. existing home occt^ation that is discontinued for a period of more than thirty (30) days, or is In violation of the Ordinance provisions under which it was initially established, shall be brought into conformity with the provisions of this Section. 801^.6: INSPECTION: reserves the right upon issuing any home occupation permit to inspect the praises m which the occupation Is being conducted to insure complicince with the provisions of this Section or any conditions additionally irr^wsed. p April 19d2 23.3 fy. Ireet ^9 SiMM M * y ,... ,■ ■■:v ‘ *^'7 ■ ■• ■ ■ . • ■•' ;# ' IS* .1 ■/■: ■ .-^ rC' • --' ,. /jW ‘■-V. aT-'»- * >*** • ■:-•:.;: v^' -•'■•' -' •* ■ vit.'izf . • 1 -_<y' Wil/sMS iit^\i ir«kkr lil' :/;x Vifjfi <» rW . * '•» »*,.«.«. ■;;v •«> ■ '‘.t; ';c f • <‘r' • &: ^ .■ • '*. ‘W ••. .• .-—- *' '^Z # Chapter 3. Administration and Enforcement A common complaint among potential resident- proprietors is that home occupations are treated arbitrar ily. Such complaints often stem from the fact that the resident-proprietor has little idea about the review proce dures that will be used to determine whether the home occupation should be allowed. A home occupation ordi nance, therefore, should include a thorough statement of these review procedures. PERMITS A few of the survey respondents allow all home occu pations by right in residential districts, and a few com munities go to the other extreme and do not allow them at all. But most of the respondents reported that they regulate home occupations through the use of special per mits.^® Most communities specify home occupations as accessory uses in residential dist'-icts subject to conditions such as those identified in the previous chapter and to 20. Special permits are called by difterent names, e.g., conditional use permits, special use permits, special exception permits, or more par ticularly "home occupation" permits. For simplicity's sake, all permits are referred to here as special permits. Home occupations, or cottage industries, in sparsely populated rural areas are unlikely to disturb neighbors. administrative revietv. Several of the repondent comrnu- nities require a current business license as well as zoning approval: a few communities regulate home occupations solely through licensing procedures. A permit for a home occupation is usually issued as long as the conditions spelled out in the zoning ordinance are met. The conditions must be explicit enough, however, to make it easy to determine if the permit applicant has com plied; compliance is difficult to assess when the conditions are broad and v'ague. Furthermore, denial of a home occu pation permit may be overturned by the courts if the zon ing ordinance only vaguely defines "home occupation and the condUions attached to home occupations.^* Respondents reported that special permits for home occupations were usually granted by the local planning board or zoning administrator. Although a few comrnu- nities delegated the authority to grant special permits for home occupations directly to the governing body (e.g.. the town council), the local elected legislative body usually only hears appeals following the denial of a home occu pation permit by the administrative body. Respondent communities were split on whether they required special permit applicants to go through a public hearing before the permit is granted. Most required published or posted 21. See. for example, Sanborn v. Town of Eliot. 425 A.2d 629 (Me. 1951). ommu- zoning pations as long ince are ’ever, to as com- iditions le occu- the zon- lon" and ir home •lanning commu- mits for iy (e.g.. r usually ne occu- pondenl J special g before r posted i 629 (Me. '' ;>.• notice of a public hearing so that adjacent property owners could voice their opinions. Letters announcing the hearing are often sent to community organizations and adjacent property owners. When special permits are authorized by the local zon ing or planning officer and without public notice, the procedure is very quick. A saving of staff time and money is, of course, very important to local governments. As long as the conditions set out in the ordinance are clear, the quick approval by an administrator should pose no prob lem, especially when the permit applicant can appeal a denial. Many communities felt strongly that, because home occupations have the potential to interfere with the residential character of a neighborhood, there should always be a public hearing before the grant of a permit. Such a process, however, adds not only a great deal of time to the home occupation permitting process but, according to some respondents, encourages clandestine home-based businesses. Some respondents, in an effort to streamline the per mitting process, divide home occupations into those that can be issued a special permit without a public hearing and those that require a hearing. For example, the city clerk of Blaine, Minneiota, will directly issue a special permit for the following home occupations: dressmaking, sewing, and tailoring; painting, sculpturing, or writing; telephone answering; home crafts, such as model mak ing, rug weaving, lapidary work, and cabinet making; tutoring, limited to one student at a time; home cooking and preserving; computer programming; and secretarial service. Other home occupations require a public hear ing before a special permit can be issued, and all home occupations, including those listed above, have to con form to the conditions stipulated by the zoning ordinance. Port Angeles, Washington, goes even further: certain home occupations (e.g., composers; writers; building con tractors; landscaping service; and commercial loggers) are not required to go through either administrative review or a public hearing as long as the operation of the busi ness conforms to ordinance conditions. Port Angeles is also one of the few respondents that allow a special review for persons with demonstrated physical handicaps who want to run a home-based business. Handicapped persons in Port Angeles (unless engaging in one of the occupa tions listed above) have to go through a public hearing but can request a waiver of some of the home occupa tion ordinance conditions. For example, the Port Angeles ordinance does not allow the on-premises sale of goods not produced on the premises. However, the planning commission can waive this condition for a handicapped person working at home as long as the basic residential character of the dwelling or the neighborhood is not changed. An ordinance such as this helps prevent harsh decisions that have not allowed exceptions for handi capped persons. For example, in Szmigiel v. Kranker, 298 A.2d 629 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1972), the court held that, because a part-time printing business was not a customary home occupation, the handicapped resident could not carry out the business in his basement, even though the resident "did not advertise and made little noise." LICENSING Licensing systems for home occupations also provide the pl'^nning and/or zoning administrator a relatively Some employers hire the handicapped to work at home, and some ordinances have fewer restrictions on home occupations run by the handicapped. IS t V ■ . ■ ■ • \ ^ ■#* . 11 . .. ----------- : :,y quick meai.s for authorizing home occupations in resi dential districts. Discretion for granting the home occu pation a business license may reside with the city clerk or the building inspector. There is no public hearing, but the applicant can appeal a license denial. The benefit to the local government in licensing the home occupation is that the license is temporary and subject to periodic review. Each time a license is up for renewal, the effect of the home occupation on neighbors and the residential character of the neighborhood can be reassessed. Further more, license fees can help defray administration, inspec tion, and enforament costs. However, licensing systems can be abused; if a zoning board is inclined to automati cally issue home occupation licenses, the basic rationale of establishing zoning districts can be undermined. Very few of the survey respondents used only a licens ing procedure for regulating home occupations; several used the more comprehensive regulatory system that incor porates both licensing procedures and zoning approval of the home occupation based on conditions laid down in the ordinance. Whereas licensing alone may only involve the city clerk or the building inspector, licensing and zoning approval involves the planning department as well and usually results in more effective and fair regulation. To ensure that administrative approval does not super sede the zoning ordinance restrictions on home occupa tions and that the license applicant understands what is required under the ordinance, business license application forms generally incorporate the language of the zoning ordinance. For instance, license application forms in Gresham, Oregon, and Chesapeake, Virginia, list the re strictions placed on home occupations in the community. The applicant signs the form indicating that he or she understands what aspects of the operation will be sub ject to inspection by local agencies. Although zoning regulations together with a licensing procedure provide a more comprehensive regulatory scheme, some communities regulate home occupations solely under the zoning ordinance or solely under a licens- ing procedure to avoid problems in coordinating depart ments. Simple interoffice procedures, however, have been used successfully in some communities. For example, the city of Roseville, California, requires anyone starting a home-based business to obtain a special home occupa tion permit on which he or she must indicate that the activity conforms to conditions within the ordinance. It also requires that the applicant obtain a city business license following approval of the special permit by the planning department. Fire department approval is also necessary if the home occupation invr*1ves the storage of flammable or hazardous materials. The planning depart ment requires the applicant to fill out a "home occupa tion clearance form" to ensure that the applicant knows of these business license and fire department reviews. Once home occupation applicants have passed through the special permit process or been granted a business license, a home occupation permit (or, in some communi- ties, a certificate of occupancy) will be issued. Most com munities pul a time limit on the permit. For example, it may be issued for one year and, thereafter, for two-year periods upon review. Some communities issue permits good for the life of the busir jss (as long as there is com pliance with zoning regulations). The permit is not trans- terable to subsequent occupants of a residence, and the per mit holder annol take the permit along to a new residence. In communities that grant business licenses as well as home occupation permits, the permit is usually good for as long as there is an active business license maintained. HOME OCCUPATION CLASSIFICATIONS Several communities over the last few years have amended their definition of a home occupation to include a classification system for home occupations. These defi nitions, for example, might classify major vs. minor home occupations; high-intensity vs. low-intensity home occu pations; or even urban vs. rural home occupations. Falls Church, Virginia, has divided its home occupation defi nition ir.lo major and minor categories. Minor Home Occupation. A home occupation in which no persons other than members of the family residing on the premises are engaged in the occupation, which has no visible exterior evidence of the conduct of the occupation, which does not create need for off-street parking beyond normal dwelling needs, which does not generate additional traffic and in which no equipment is used other than that normally used in household, domestic or general office use. Major Home Occupation. A home occupation in which not more than one person other than members of the fam- ily residing on the premises is employed on the premises, which has not more than one unilluminated sign not exceeding one square foot: i area as visible exterior evi- dence of conduct of the occupation, and which accommo* dates both dwelling and home occupation parking needs off the street. The division of home occupations into major and minor occupations helps simplify administrative procedural lines. Minor home occupations do not usually require a per mit or, if a permit is required, no public hearing may be required. Elkhart, Indiana, requires a special permit for home-based businesses employing people other than resi dents of the dwelling and for businesses that are likely to store materials and finished products (within an enclosed building). Washington County, Oregon, divides home occupations into those that require only an adminis trative permit and those that are likely to have a greater effect on the residential character of an neighborhood and, therefore, require that some notice of the permit be given to adjacent property owners. Livermore, California, allows some home occupations by right that is^ home occupations ^that would be almost impossible to regulate" (e.g., artists; babysitters; house cleaners; telephone solicitors), and "are customarily func tions of the home and are not normally detrimental to the neighborhood." Other home occupations are allowed by permit granted by the zoning administrator. Home occupations found in this ^cond category are thought not likely to have a negative effect on the residential charac ter of a neighborhood and, as such, do not warrant a pub lic hearing. These occupations include accounting, pho tography, typing services, day care, mail orders, and off-premises appliance repair. Still other home occupa tions are granted permits by the planning commission (for example, pest control services and gunsmiths), with or without a public hearing. The planning commission may 19 t trans- the per- lidence. s home as long 5 have nclude •e defi- rhome ; occu- 5. Falls n defi- hich gon s no ion, 'ond onal that use. ‘tich am- ses, not evi- no- leds minor lines. I per- ay be lit for iresi- likely n an ivides ninis- ■eater and, given tions most louse Func- al to )wed [ome tnot arac- pul>- pho- and upa- 1 (for h or may 19 ■ I ‘lllHifite «». . •* /V 't* "• ■" C3C^ - '#11MM i:'r IS V r symwmmrn^m^^ . _____ —^ ‘l^v- * : ^7t;- , .' iVv' Jr rr::s jj ‘ •--«i pml tew i f'.s 'Z^ • S';ri m 85W _ 7» > "’TV-.'a v V-‘ Taxes may be foT certain, but the effect of a rural home occupation on its surroundings is likely to vary. hold a public hearing to determine the nature of the pro posed home occupation; to determine if the home occu pation will be detrimental to the neighborhood: to alert adjacent property owners; and to hear explanations by the applicant that may counter the objections of neigh bors. The commission regularly denies permits for some home occupations, including printing, wholesale or retail sales, catering services, the practice of psychology, bar ber/beauty shops, and small-engine repair. St. Petersburg Beach, Florida, permits "low-intensity" home occupations in any residential district as long as the home occupation meets several conditions stated in the ordinance (see the appendix). Examples of low-intensity home occupations include those run by artists, tailors, secretaries, telephone solicitors, and consultants. High- intensity home occupations in St. Petersburg Beach are permitted in residential districts but are subject to specific review and approval by the Board of Adjustment. The ordin nee also states that, "by the nature of the capital investment required or scope of operation, certain uses.. .shall not be permitted as home occupations." These uses include automobile repair, beauty shops, medical offices, real estate brokerages, upholstering, art studios, dance or music studios wich more than four students, and kennels. A few county government home occupation ordinances have categorized home occupations as rural or urban. This classification recognizes that in sparsely populated areas of a county, home occupations are unlikely to disturb the residential peace of adjacent property owners. King County, Washington, in addition to distinguishing between rural and urban home occupations, has estab lished a third category for the "cottage industry." Cottage industries are permitted (with a conditional use permit) in the agricultural, suburban estate, and suburban clus ter districts of the county. 21.04.096 COTTAGE I.NDUSTRY "Cottage Industry" means any activity undertaken for gain or profit and carried on in a dwelling, or building accessory to a dwelling, by members of the family residing in the dwelling and up to three additional unrelated people. P. Cottage Industries, only in the following zones: G-5, G, A, S-E, S-C, GR-5, and GR-2.5, provided the follow ing conditions are conformed to: 1. The site shall have a minimum area of 35,000 square feet and meet the lot size requirements of the applica ble zone; 2. The cottage industry shall be incidental to the use of the property for dwelling purposes and shall be less than 50 percent of the living area of the dwelling. This 50 . percent square footage limitation includes outdoor assembly and storage areas but not required parking areas; 3. The following uses shall not be allowed: a. Any activity that might result in excessive noise, smoke, dust, odors, heat, or glare beyond that which is common to a residential area. The proposed use shall conform to the maximum permissible sound levels under K.C.C. Chapter 12.88. The zoning adjus tor may require an applicant to provide sound level tests demonstrating such conformance. b. Use or manufacture of products or operations that are dangerous in terms of risk of fire, explosion, or »ge lit) is- hazardous emissions. c Any other use deemed incompatible with a residen tial and/or agricultural area, subject to the review of the zoning adjustor; 4. Landscaping shall be required to screen parking areas and outside storage from the view of adjacent landown ers and county roads; 5. Increased setbacks or additional screening may be estab lished by the zoning adjustor to ensure that any pro posed structure is compatible with the surrounding res idential or agricultural area; 6. Required zoning setbacks may be increased subject to the review of the zoning adjustor for any activity that could potentially detract from a residential area but '!iat is not deemed incompatible with the neighb^.hood. Such activities include but are not limi ed tc. employee parking areas, loading zones, outdoor storage, and out door work areas; 7. Any display or sign shall be subject to the review of the zoning adjustor; 8. All sales shall be an incidental use; 9. The allowable size of equipment used by the cottage industry shall be subject to the review of the zoning adjustor. Those communities that have adopted a division of home occupations into major and minor categories have found the division most useful. Distinguishing between major and minor home occupations is intuitively obvi ous. The ordinances that use such distinctions clearly make the point that there is a difference between a cos metics salesperson who works out of the home, uses the telephone, and stores some merchandise in the top of a closet, and an automobile repair shop that operates out of an attached garage with 10 customers a day. ENFORCEMENT Of the home occupation ordinances received from sur vey respondents, only a few included the sixth and final element of a home occupation ordinance, an enforcement and/or penalty section. However, many zoning codes do contain these elements as general provisions that apply to the code as a whole, so that it is unnecessary to repeat these provisions within the home occupations portion of the ordinance. Enforcing regulations controlling home occupations is a major problem for most planning departments or zon ing administrators. The home occupation ordinance may be too strict or too vague, or it may be riddled with loop holes. A common occurrence is to find the planning staff acting as the first line of defense against the complaints of neighbors, while elected city officials stand back because they consider tampering with home occupations political dynamite. Althou^ home occupations very often go undetected, this is not a problem, practically speak ing, to many ordinance enforcement agencies simply because the agency doesn't have enough staff members to worry about it. The unwritten rule in enforcement of home occupations for most communities is that if no one complains, there is no problem. Almost 50 percent of the respondeuts to APA's home occupations questionnaire specifically reported that they rely on the complaints of neighbors to follow up on home occupations violations. A common comment was that the neighbors are in the area 24 hours a day and can police the neighborhood better than the enforcing department could ever hope to. Other than responding to complaints, the most frequently used method used to monitor home occupations (as reported by 49 percent of the respondents) is inspection of the home occupation based on the infor mation obtained through a permitting and/or licensing procedure. Many respondents (30 percent) make periodic inspections, or even spot inspections, on home occupa tions, especially when there are obvious violations of the permit or license such as obtrusive signs or storage of materials on the lot. When all else fails, a few enforcing agencies (three per cent of the respondents) said that they monitor home occupations by making windshield surveys of neighbor hoods in an attempt to discover egregious violators, or they scrutinize newspaper and yellow pages advertise ments to find home occupation addresses. Generally, any violation of the conditions set forth in the zoning ordinance, such as a change in the extent of use, area of the dwelling unit being used, outdoor storage, hours of operation, etc, is grounds for the revocation of a home occupation permit, unless the change was first cleared and approved by the planning department or zon ing administrator. Failure to renew an annual or periodic business license often involves the payment of a late fee within a set period (e.g., 30 days) after the due date or the revocation of the license if it has not been renewed within that period. Many respondents reported that once a per mit and/or license has been revoked, they would not allow the home-based business proprietor to reapply for a period of up to one year. Failure to allow inspections of a home occupation at reasonable times may also result in termi nation of a permit. Revocation of permits is usual where the applicant is found to have given false statements in the permit application. Some ordinances provide for very strict fines and penal ties for violation of the conditions stipulated in the zon ing ordinance. The Marquette, Michigan, ordinance pro vides that any violation of the ordinance is declared to be a public nuisance per se, and the violator is guilty of a mis demeanor. If convicted, that person will be fined by not more than SlOO or spend up to 30 days in the county jail; every day that the violation is committed constitutes a sep arate offense. Port Angeles, Washington, punishes with a fine up to S500 for each misdemeanor offense. However, any ordinance that is to be enforced through criminal law must be very clear and provide fixed standards as to what is permitted and prohibited in any particular instance. Otherwise, "[i]f an ordinance can be construed to create a criminal offense, not by its definite language, but merely according to a zoning administrator's interpretation of that ordinance, we become a state governed not by laws but by administrators."^^ With regard to penalty provisions, drafters should refer 22. Trice v. City of Pine Bluffs. 649 S.VV.2d 179. (Ark. 1983). A.S home that they on home s that the an police partment nplaints, tor home (ondents) he infor- licensing periodic occupa- >ns of the torage of hree per- or home leighbor- ators, or dvertise- ; forth in nt of use, storage, cation of was first It or zon- periodic a late fee ite or the id within ice a per- aot allow a period f a home in termi- al where nts in the td penal- the zon- ince pro- red to be of a mis- d by not inty jail; tes a sep- es with a lowever, unal law s to what instance, to create it merely in of that vs but by luld refer 1983). to city or county and state law to determine if there is a limit on the penalty that may be imposed. Typical penal ties incurred for the violation of a home occupation ordi nance include revocation of a home occupation permit and/or business license. Regulations from Pico Rivera, California, and Rockford, Illinois, provide good examples. G. Issuance, Terms, Revocation, and Expiration of Permits. The zoning administrator may issue a home occu pation permit that complies with the provisions of this section, on forms prescribed by him, and may require additional terms and conditions considered necessary to assure the integrity of such permit and the zone in which it is proposed to be located. Should, at any time during the period which a home occupation permit is in effect, the zoning administrator find, after conduct ing an investigation, that the operation of such home occupation is in violation of the provisions of this sec tion and/or the terms and conditions subject thereto, he shall by declaration serve notice of revocation of the home occupation permit. In any case a home occupa tion permit shall expire at the same time a business license issued therefor expires and shall not remain in effect unless and/or until such business license has been renewed by the city clerk, provided such renewal takes place within 30 days after such expiration of business license comes due. (Pico Rivera, Calif.) IV. Enforcement and Revocation of Home Occupation Per mit. The following shall be considered as grounds for the revoca tion of a home occupation permit or for the assessment of fines as specified. A. Any change in use or any change in extent of use. area of the dwelling unit being used, or mechanical or elec trical equipment being used that is different from that specified in the granted home occupation permit form that is not first cleared and approved by the building official shall be grounds for the revocation of a home occupation permit. B. Any change in use, extent of use, area of the dwelling unit being used, or mechanical or electrical equipment being used that results in conditions not in accordance with the provisions of the "required conditions" subsec tion (II), shall result in immediate revocation of the home occuf :(ion permit. C. Failure to allow periodic inspections by representatives of the building division at any reasonable time when an adult member of the family is present shall result in the immediate revocation of the home occupation permit. D. Failure to pay the annual renewal fee shall result in the assessment of an additional ten dollars (SlO.OO) process ing fee if paid within thirty (30) days after the due date; or revocation of the home occupation permit if not paid withing thirty (30) days after the due date. E. Home occupation permits which have been revoked may not be applied for again until a period of one year has lapsed from the date of revocation. (Rockford, 111.) Pullman, Washington, establishes elaborate enforce ment procedures within its home occupation ordinance. Such provisions give adequate guidance both to the local citizen who would bring a complaint against a home- based business and to the local planner who must deter mine whether there has been an ordinance violation. 7.2 SECTION 5.17.34.050-ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES 1. Any aggrieved person believing that a violation or vio lations of this chapter is occurring and who desires that action be taken by the city shall notify the city plan ner of such written allegation(s). Within 30 calendar days after receipt by the city planner of such written allegation(s), the city planner shall complete an inves tigation of the alleged allegation(s) to determine the merits thereof. Within 10 calendar days after the city planner has completed the investigation(s), he shall notify in writing the following persons: (a) If the city planner determines that no violation as alleged or otherwise is occurring, then notification of that decision shall be given to the complaining person or a spokesperson for complaining person by certified mail, return requested. (b) If the city planner determines that a violation is occurring or has occurred as alleged, then notifi cation of that decision and a time for compliance shall be sent by certified mail, return requested, to both the violator and the complaining person or a spokesperson for the complaining person. The notification shall also state what action, if any, will be taken if compliance is not timely effected. LEGAL ISSUES Only four percent of the survey respondents indicated that they had experienced legal challenges. Several respon dents, however, indicated that they saw legal challenges looming on the horizon. Legal challenges encountered by respondents tended to be based on neighborhood impacts caused by high-intensity home occupations, including an automobile body shop, a bakery, and a beauty shop. In general, courts have upheld zoning ordinances deal ing with home occupations as long as the homeowner/ business operator has not been subject to unreasonable restrictions on the use of the residence. However, for a zoning regulation to be considered unreasonable, appli cation of the regulation would have to render a person's property almost worthless; an ordinance is not invalid or contradictory in nature because it does not allow a per son to put his or her property to its most profitable use. With regard to home occupations, an ordinance regulat ing home occupations will not be considered invalid unless, because of the regulation, the property cannot yield a reasonable return if used only for the purposes allowed in the district. Any home, used as a home in a residential district, is presumed to yield a reasonable return upon resale. Advocates for home-based businesses have argued that to restrict the use of a home so as not to allow a home occu pation will reduce the value of the prop rty and that, if the ability to develop a home occupation was part and parcel of owning the house, an owner could get a greater return on his or hei' investment. With regard to zoning law, the limitations of profits as a consequence of the zoning restric tion c.nd the highest and best use of the property involved are factors that a court would consider in its determina tion of the validity of a home occupation ordinance. Other factors, however, would also be considered —for example, the depreciation of value to adjoining properties that may be caused by allowing home occupations. my)URES or vio- es that r plan- lendar vritten inves- ne the le city i shall lion as cation aining person tion is notifi- >liance ted, to son or i. The y, will id. idicated respon- allenges tered by impacts ding an shop. es deal- owner/ sonable r, for a , appli- jcrson's v^Iid or f a per- ble use. regulat- invalid cannot Lirposes me in a sonable ted that te occu lt, if the 1 parcel ■return aw, the restric- ivolved irmina- . Other tample, lat may In determining the validity of any zoning ordinance, including one that regulates home occupations, the com- balanced against the property rights of individual owners. A zoning ordinance is not going to be held invalid if individual rights are restricted for the ^ater good of the public The welfare of the com- rnunity is not going to be subordinated to the profit motive of a smgle individual. On the other hand, there is no basis ^ercise of a local government's zoning power if the public pin is small compared with an individual's loss and hardship. A local government, through the use of its zoning power can easily permit or provide for incidental, accessory uses such as home occupations in a residential district. A local goveminent can just as easily exclude all or some home ojxupations from residential districts. Again, restricting all or some home occupations from a residential district will not be valid when the restriction would seem to be capricious or without relation to the public welfare. The exclusion of places of business from residential dis tricts is not a declaration by the local government that such businesses are nuisances, or that they are to be suppressed as such. But occupations that are not nuisances per se, but which are liable to become such, or which may become nuisan<xs by reason of the inappropriateness of the places m which they are conducted, may be legally excluded from particular localities. Whether a zoning ordinance is arbitrary in prohibiting the use of the property for such an occupation in certain districts is a question for the courts to answer. CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS As long as a zoning regulation is valid, its enforcement will be a proper exercise of a local government's police power, even if that means that private interests are to some extent hindered, or an owner is deprived of the right to use his or her property in some specific manner. Simply staled, a valid zoning regulation conforms to slate and federal con stitutional requirements and is designed to promote and/or protect the public health, safety, morals, or welfare. Due Process If a zoning ordinance is not designed to promote or pro- twt the general welfare, or if the ordinance is unreason- able in that the public benefit conferred is small compared to the burden placed on a private properly owner, then the ordinance will not be a valid exercise of the local police power, and the ordinance enforcement amounts to a tak ing of property right(s) without due process of law, A deci sion that an ordinance is unconstitutional because it vio lates the due process clause of the constitution is based both on the owner's loss of properly value and the fact that the public wefare does not require the zoning regulation. It seems unlikely that a home occupation ordinance would ever be challenged as a violation of constitutional ue process rights, A person challenging would have to show that his or her house could not be put to a reason able and lawful use under the ordinance, and, thus, the property is being taken without due process of law. Even IT a homeowner is not allowed to conduct a particular home occupation, the building can still be reasonably used as a residence. Equal Protection ^ Zoning regulations must also guarantee equal protec tion of the law to the entire community. This guarantee requires that zoning powers be exercised reasonably and that the er^orcement methods of zoning ordinances have a substantial relationship to implementing zoning policy. This means that zoning authority may not go beyond public need nor place unnecessary restrictions on private property use. The zoning ordinance must also have a ra tional system for classifying persons or property so that no arbitrary discrimination results. There must be a rea sonable basis for differentiating between a class of peo ple or properly to which an ordinance applies and the class to which it does not. Without this basis the ordi nance may prove to be discriminatory. to a home occupation ordinance would ikely be based on a violation of the equal protection clause. In fact, some legal commentators have argued that many home occupation ordinances could be constitution ally invalid under the equal protection clause. However, home occupation ordinances are probably not deliberately discriminatory; any invalidity seems to stem from overly broad, vague language. (Notwithstanding the fact that at least one court has found that the term "home occupa tion" in a zoning ordinance is not rendered vague by the absence of a definition or examples in the ordinance. See Town of Milford u. Bottazzi. 443 A.2d 1269 (N.H.1981).) Such ordinances can be improved through better ordi nance drafting. There have not been many legal challenges to home occupation ordinances in the past. Yet, as home occupa tions have become more prevalent throughout the coun try, zoning ordinances that regulate them are often viewed as regulations that unduly restrict personal liberty. Several home-based work groups have been building challenges to local zoning ordinances that :hey believe to be vague, inconsistent, or discriminatory. The International Associ ation for Home Business has been soliciting support from its members for a class action suit on "the right to choose the workplace." In order to prevent legal challenges to an ordinance, •j niust indicatv ‘.'early how their ordinance pro vides for the general It is only within the text of the zoning ordina;v.i; - s'he intent can be made clear and the ordinance madv ’ legally defensible. >titutionaI d have to a reason- thus, the law. Even particular ably used ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 19,1997 ROLL il protec- ;uarantee ably and ices have ig policy. > beyond n private lave a ra- y so that be a rea- s of peo- and the the ordi- e would otection ued that titution- owever, iberately n overly t that at occupa- e by the nee. See .1981 .) er ordi- 0 home occupa- e coun- viewed Several illenges vague, Associ- rtfrom choose [nance, ce pro be text le clear The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Dale Lindquist, Charles Schroeder, Sandra Smith, Janice Berg, Elizabeth Hawn, William Stoddard, and Lili McMillan. The following represented the City Staff; Assistant Zoning and Planning Administrator Michael Gafiron, Public Services Director Gr^ Gappa, City Planner Elizabeth Van Zomeren, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Chair Lindquist called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS/PUBUC INFORMATION REVIEWS {»!) #2165 CITY OF ORONO - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION NORTH OF TONKAVIEW LANE • 7:01-7:08 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Gaffion reported that the application is for a metes and bounds division of property west of unimproved Garden Lane with park parcels to the east. The subdivision is in response to a request fi'om the Valek's who previously owned the tax forfeit parcel. A portion of the property is used as a yard and for their drainage system. The Valek's asked the City to separate this 1/2 acre parcel from the tax forfeit parcel so they may reacquire the property. This division will not affect the park property as the City plans to access the park property from Garden Lane in the future. The City fek this request was appropriate and Staff recommends approval. The Valek's were not present. There were no public comments. McMillan inquired about vacation of the right-of-way. Gaffron informed her that a vacation is not part of the application. The Valek's have proposed to acquire some neighboring property and will likely ask for the vacation at the time of subdivision. She was also informed that the Valek's will most Ukely create one new building site in the future. Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to approve the proposed metes and bounds subdivision to separate a half-acre parcel for potential fiiture acquisition by adjacent property owners. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ZONING AMENDMENTS (#2) TELECOMMUNICATIONS ORDINANCE - ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOR ANTENNA TOWERS AND LOCATIONS - 7:08-7:56 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The application had been tabled at the April Planning Conunission Meeting to allow for the City Attorney to advise the Planning Commission regarding this issue. A letter is included in the package firom City Attorney Radio. Van Zomeren noted that the City expert retained by the City in this field, John DuBois, was unable to attend. Van Zomeren reviewed the ordinance which is the same as previously reviewed with some new language added. Van Zomeren informed the Commission of what is included in telecommunication services, why there is such a demand for antenna placement, and the t)rpes of antenna structures. Telecommunications is a line of sight technology. Vendors may co-locate on an antenna structure but each subs^uent vendor must meet cert^ criteria to show that the structure can handle the additional antenna without affecting the other antennas on the structure. Van Zomeren said industry companies would prefer to use existing structures rather than erect their own structures due to the high cost. The ordinance would allow PCS wireless placed on municipal structures as a secondary use in the RR-IB Zoning District under administrative permit. The ordinance would generally not allow such use in residential areas. The commercial and industrial areas would allow secondary use on municipal structures only. The structures meeting such criteria include the two water towers, one by the City Offices and the other in Navarre. Each water tower could hold up to three vendor's anteimas. The ordinance would be a start in providing such services in Orono. Van Zomeren said additional sites can be addressed in the future. The draft minutes firom the Council meeting regarding this issue was given to the Planning Commission members. Representatives firom several PCS companies were present. Van Zomeren said Staff recommends approval of the ordinance noting the moratorium expires on June 10,1997. The meeting was opened to public comment. Michelle Johnson, zoning coordinator for APT, 1701 East 79 St., asked to address the Commission. Johnson said she believes the ordinance is problematic due to the limiting of antennas to the two municipal structures. While indicating her company is not currently seeking location for antennas in Orono, they will probably require one site m the City in the near future. Johnson indicated the City may not act so as to prohibit antenna placement within the City. She said the towers only allow limited space and questioned whether they can actually accommodate antenna usage. minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON MAY 19,1997 (#2 - Telecommunications Ordinance - Continued) Johnson said she feh it would be reasonable for the City to aUow antenna M a <^(Monal use in industrial and commercial zones. She asked to meet with St^ and **^8 Commission to discuss her company's viewpoint in a work session m order for the City to gain a better understanding of the industry needs. Hawn indicated that the moratorium is ending on June 10. She ^d the ordinance could be further reviewed aner passage and amended if necessary. Jotawn smd she the moratorium be extended to allow for further consideratton of the noted that the ordinance has also been extended. Van Zomeren said the City needs to act in a tim^ manner. Schroeder referred to comments made by City Attorney Radio in his letter responding to this issue. It is Radio's legal opinion that the ordinance is satisfactoiy. Van Zomeren said the City's expert, John DuBois, who is a radio frequwq^ the ordinance as phase one. Van Zomeren said she understood the need for a work session but feh the process should be allowed to begin. Van Zomeren noted she and Greg Gappa have attended a training session regarding this issue Discussion included the need to start acting on this issue immediately. Van Zomeren said the demand for the services is not yet known and a work session could jfurther review the uses and needs. 1 noted that both the City Attorney and consultant r^mmended approval of the ordinance. He felt the issues could be refuted at a work session. Schroeder noted that Radio indicated the City could probably prohibit antenim in residential zoning. He noted the industry would like to have maximum flexibility but the City does not want antennas placed in certain areas of the City. He ^so indicated that service can be provided from towers in other surrounding communities as well. Van Zomeren said she felt the ordinance will work. She noted that it may not be adequate in the future but this could be addressed later. Stoddard asked to schedule a work session with the Council. Lindquist suggested recommending approval and scheduling the work session for June. Michelle Johnson saw the passage of the ordinance as a drawback. She questioned if an application is made and the antennas cannot be placed on the noted structures, the issue would require litigation. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#2 - Telecommunications Ordinance - Continued) Schroeder informed her that this was not necessarily true. He said he felt the water towers would be adequate for antennas for the time being. He also indicated other communities could provide the service. McMillan asked if any assessment has been made of the water towers. Van Zomeren indicated ti^at while no analysis has been made, the consultant was aware of the height and location of the water antennas. Gappa said the consultant based his use recommendation on data indicating the four mile distance separation between the water towers and on areas of heavy telecommunication usage and high topography. Gappa said, while the structures were not personally reviewed, there was no reason to believe antennas would not operate from these locations. McMillan noted that the City, which is primarily residential, is concerned with the proper placement of antennas. Steve Mangold, US West Wireless, 426 North Fairview, St Paul, said his company has a central office located south of the water tower by City Offices. A switch has been located there since the 1950’s, which will provide for PCS services to Orono, Wayzata, Ix)ng Lake, and Spring Park. This switching station is an extension of their business and servi^, and Mangold was of the opinion that the location for providing such service should be from this central office of US West. Mangold indicated that all calls come through this switch regardless of the company. He said it is a secure location with adequate protection from major calamities. Mangold said he would like to work with the City. He would like to see a co-location pole on the switch station for overflow. He indicated his company does not anticipate further growth until later in the year. Van Zomeren inquired of Mangold how tall the tower would be required. Mangold said 90-120’ depending on co-location. He indicated that drive tests have not been completed. McMillan inquired what the zoning was for the switch station. Gaffion indicated B-1. Ron Gunderson, Sprint, said he is in favor of the ordinance with the caveat that the City would be willing to enter into further discussion in the future. He felt the ordinance would not provide for all carriers. He noted other communities which he has worked with regarding this issue and where antennas are allowed. He indicated that Sprint will be requesting location on the City Offices water tower. Smith noted that the industry is in the current stage of locating towers for antennas. Van Zomeren said the FCC has auctioned off licenses; A and B licenses were sold in the early 1990's and C, D, and E licenses were recently made available. She noted it would be a violation of the anti-trust law to master plan locations and grid the City for best locations; co-location may occur on a site-by-site basis but companies may not work together. V MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#2 - Telecommunications Ordinance - Continued) Lindquist inquired of Commission members whether they would prefer tabling the ordinance or passing the ordinance and scheduling a work session. Schroeder preferred to pass the ordinance. Van Zomeren referenced response #2 of the telecommunications act, noted in section 704 on page 3. She indicated there is a risk of prohibiting antenna location if the water towers prove inadequate but noted that the City Forney and consultant were of the opinion that the ordinance was not prohibiting the service and in fact, making the service initially available. Van Zomeren did note liuti the ^tch station location would not be allowed under the ordinance. Stoddard suggested passing the ordinance and then reviewing the subject. He said he is relying on the advice of the City Attorney. Stoddard moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval of the ordinance and scheduling of a work session with members cf Council, Planning Commission, Staff and industry representatives with the understanding that the ordinance may require amending. McMillan questioned the zoning of the water tower on Hwy 12. Van Zomeren indicated the zoning is RR-IB. She questioned whether there were other locations that could be opportunities for such antenna placement in the RR-IB. Van Zomeren smd there were no other municipal structures. McMillan questioned what is considered a municipal structure. Schroeder suggested tabling the issue. McMillan suggested these concerns regarding definition be expressed to the Council. Hawn suggested the wording of the ordinance be changed to "water tower" instead of municipal structure. Stoddard amended his motion. Smith seconded, to reflect this change. Schroeder inquired why the members would like to move the ordinance forward to the Council. Lindquist noted the documentation from the City Attorney and consultant regarding the ordinance being acceptable. Schroeder agreed that the Council has the option to schedule the work session and extend the moratorium if need be. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#3) HOME OCCUPATIONS - AMENDING DEFINITION AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR HOME OCCUPATIONS - 7:56-8:00 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Van Zomeren suggested to Lindquist that this item be tabled due to the need for additional information. She noted agenda item #9 is affected by the home occupation licensing. Lindquist informed Mr. Holzer that his application would likely be tabled due to the for the Conurassion to further discuss this issue. He asked that Mr. Holzer present his comments at that time. Van Zomeren said she would like to present the benefits of home occupation licensing, use of accessoiy structures, employees, and zoning ordinance list of allow^ occupations. This item includes many issues that will require further discussion. Lindquist suggested a work session be scheduled later in the meeting. ACTION ITEMS (#4) #2182 HERBERT TERRY OLSON, 3640 BAYSIDE ROAD - VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - 8:01-8:21 P.M. The Applicant was present. Jane Olson ri^orted that the anplication is for variances and conditional use pemut to rebuild the existing two car detached garage in the same location. Van Zomeren indicated the accessory structure is located on a thru-lot with roads on both sides. Maintaining the garage in this locatioii requires a CUP. The variance is for reducing the street setback from 50' to 9'. The discussion from previous Planning Commisrion review is included. The garage was at that time proposed for location 6' to the east but presented a problem with the sewer. Van Zomeren reviewed the three options available as well as the previous recommendation. It was noted that this proposal presents a different replacement situation but does not meet the hardship criteria. Lake views would be impacted if the garage was located elsewhere on the property. The length of the driveway is not considered a hardship. Mrs. Olson had no additional comments at this time. Smith clarified that the intention of the applicant is to rebuild the garage as is currently stands. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#4 - #2182 Hert>ert Terry Olson - Continued) Stoddard inquired of the garage’s distance from the roadway. Van Zomeren indicated h is 9' from the lot line. Mrs. Olson said there is an additional 6-7' past the back-out area from the road itself. There were no public comments. Hawn stated she was supportive of the replacement of the unsafe garage noting it wc^d have created problems to change the location. Hawn noted the applicwt does not wish to move the garage to the north. Mrs. Olson indicated that it would require excavation to locate the garage and turn-around to the longer driveway off of Stubbs Bay ^ad. A paved driveway would also create an added expense. Olson said the garage is also used for boat equipment storage. McMillan asked if there were any drainage problems. Mrs. Olson said water will occasionally pool ■ hen it runs down and around Stubbs Bay Road but does not present a problem. Schroeder *'.4 ^’*fed why the garage needs to be replaced. Mrs. Olson said the concrete blocks are cracked and floor is heaved. The garage is at least 50 years old. She believes current construction methods will create a more stable garage. The Olson’s are contracting the work out. The walls will be replaced. Lindquist asked that the plans be submitted. Van Zomeren indicated the plans will be a condition of the CUP. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve the replacement of the garage in the exact location with a 9' street setback and submission of plans as ^proved by building inspector and coinciding w'th current footprint and height. Smith inquired vfhy the Commissioners are taking a different position than that previously taken. Schroeder responded that the concerns were attempted to be met. Lindquist indicated tliat the Commission usually allows replacement of a detached garage. Smith said this does not always occur. McMillan noted the need to review the hardship issue. She indicated the circumstances do not satisfy the criteria. McMillan said tear-downs are usually required to be placed in conformity with setback requirements if adequate space is available. Stoddard asked the applicant about the cost to move the garage and sewer line 6'. Mrs. Olson said they felt the cost would be substantial. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#4 - #2182 Herbert Terry Olson - Continued) McMillan questioned whether cost estimates should be gathered for placement of the garage near the home. Mrs. Olson said it possibly would involve moving the well depending on location and disturbing the landscaping and sidewalk. Smith asked if there was an acceptable location where the well would not be t Tected. Mrs. Olson said there was but it would require further excavation. McMillaii asked if there were other garages located along Bayside Road similar to the applicant's. Van Zomeren said there were no large garages but some storage structures. McMillan questioned whether this replacement is in keeping with the neighborhood. Sherokee Use, 3613 Eileen Street, said she lives on the back side of the applicant’s ;i!!roperty and has a dock on Bayside. She noted the quaintness of the house in its picturesque setting on the hillside. She felt the garage was tucked into the hill and fit its siirroundings. A change would alter the look. She noted a neighbor removed trees to enjoy the lake view. Use said the neighborhood supports the garage replacement and prefers its location. Hawn asked that the City Engineer review the plans for drainage and structural integrity. Hawn said she would have preferred to see the plans. Schroeder asked Hawn what her concerns were. Hawn said the cement block has cracked indicating a possible water problem firom the hillside and is concerned with the same problems reoccurring. Mrs. Olson said the problems are due to the age of the garage and settling. Schroc/.wr amended his motion to include City En^neer review of structural and drainage issues. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 2, Stoddard, Smith. Smith noted the proposal presents a difficult decirion but felt the applicant had been asked to consider a more desirable location. A location change would not affect the well or lake views. Smith does not feel the proposal is much different than that previously proposed. Stoddard said the hardships are not convincing and no attempt was made to obtain cost estimates for moving the garage 6 as requested. Mrs. Olson said her husband may have done so but determined the cost was too high. Smith indicated this information would have aided the applicant. Schroeder suggested the information be available for Council review. Van Zomeren noted the application will be presented to Council on June 9 and asked applicant to have requested information submitted by June 1. McMillan asVed what would occur if the City En^neer found a problem with drainage or structure. Van Zomeren said the application would go to the Council with that additional information and possibly may need fiirther Planning C<^mmission review. 8 minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 AND^ENE DECANDU, 3115 NORTH ------ The Applicant was present along with Architect, Michael Sharratt. ’’'f^'“''® ^ residence wll berented ^erently. She indicated there is some calculation information still requited. w ^ P**''®* *e residence back Binher on the lot but stUI encroaches the e ac . Side yard, lurdcover, and average lakeshore setback variances are required M well as lot area, lot width, and a CUP for excavation in the 0-75' setback Van “'f ">« Staff regarding concerns As a result. tL m hardcover and the residence wiU be located 16' further back from the lakeshore. A smaller turnaround area is planned. ““ ^ 1200 s.£ Mike Sharratt corrected that t^^^ew "®‘8’’'’0""8 home to the east is located 54' away with trees ai^ a '* “‘1 "“Shoot's home is ® f from at 1800 s f located ShSve 32l^/tJ Pf««"‘«d Proposal A There were no public comments. review the drivLey. ^ “"Sgested the City Engineer L •*- MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19,1997 (#5 - #2221 Sven Wasberg - Continued) 'Jndquist noted that the applicant is allowed 1500 s.f minimum for principal structure and garage. Sharratt noted this amount is determined by lot area which will allow for 2500 s.f meeting structural coverage requirements. Schroeder noted the lot configuration as the hardship. Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2221 with conditions as noted subject to submission of large set of plans. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#6) #2230 GEORGINA HACKNEY, 2184 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:37-8:39 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zom^en reported that the application was sent back before the Planning Commisaon due to an additional variance required for a porch. The Planning Commission previously approved the variance for the kitchen with interior staircase. The hardcover will increase from 25.1% to 25.8% in the 75-250’ setback to allow for a fi*ont entry and kitchen addition to the existing residence. A side yard variance is also required. The plans for the improvements are part of the package. The applicant had no further comments. There were no pubLv conunents. Stoddard clarified that the only difference in this request is the porch. Smith moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2230. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#7) #2231 EVAN ANDERSON, 1260 SPRUCE PLACE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:39-8:42 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that it was difficult to determine whether a variance was required. The 75-250' hardcover variance is for a fi’ont porch over an existing concrete slab. The applicam clarified that it was actually a roof over the front entry stoop and wording was chwged to reflect that notation. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19,1997 (#7 - #2231 Evan Anderson - Continued) There were no public comments. Stoddard noted the necessity of having a covered entry during the winter months. Stoddard moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2231. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#8) #2232 WOODSMITH, LTD., 1520 FOX STREET - VARIANCES - PUBUC HEARING • 8:42-8:45 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mmling were noted. The Applicants, Allegra and Paul Parker, were present. Woodsmith, LTD., is the contractor for the application. Van Zomeren reported that the property address is Fox Street but access is gained from a private road. She indicated the property is an unusual shaped lot. The proposal is for enlargement of the master bedroom for additional closet space and rearrangement of bathrooms. The floor plans and elevations were shown. Tlie proposal requires a side yard variance from the 30* requirement in the RR -IB Zoning District. The existing stiuc iUre does not meet that requirement, and the improvements cannot be located elsewhere. Van Zomeren indicated Staff recommends approval noting acknowledgment letters received from the neighbors supporting the improvement. The applicants reported that they recently purchased this property but have lived in Orono for 34 years. There were no public comments. Smith moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2232. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#9) #2233 WALTER HOLZER, 1130 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WEST - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:45-8:59 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mfuling were noted. The Applicant was present. h \ A. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#9 - #2233 Walter Holzer - Continued) Van Zomeren reported that the applicant is seeking a height variance to allow for construction of an accessory structure that would provide storage for his business, an office, and bathroom. There is considerable distance between the residence and proposed accessory structure. The applicant has also applied for a home occupation license. Code requires an accessory structure to be the same height or lower than the principal structure. The residence was built in the late 1800's and is short in stature. Van Zomeren noted that the principal structure does not have an attached garage. Van Zomeren agreed that the height variance makes sense but resolution of the home occupation license must first occur. Lindquist informed the applicant that no action will be taken on this application due to the home occupation licensing issue. He asked for applicant's comments. Holzer said the (fistance between the two structures is to maintain the character of the house winch has a shallow pitched roof He would like to add on to the home at some time in the future. Lindquist noted that a bathroom is also not allowed in an accessory structure. Holzer S2ud he is self-employed and would also use the space for displaying of a collection and office. The main purpose is to store his plumbing equipment. Lindquist informed Holzer that he would probably have a problem with running ihe business fi*om his home. Holzer question^ where the line is drawn fi^om that of a sales person using garage for storage of business items. Lindquist advised Holzer to attend the work session regarding home occupation. Smith noted that if the applicant was using the space for storing cars it would not present a problem. She noted the number of oversized garages and guest houses in Orono. McMillan noted that economic hardship is not a valid reason for requesting a variance. Stoddard indicated that the work session will review the differences in how people now conduct business. He noted that aesthetics and use are key issues. He asked how large the accessory structure would be. When informed of the size, 1200 s.f, Stoddard stated a variance would be required from the 1000 s.f allowable. Lindquist reported that the two issues are the size of the accessory structure requiring a CUP and home occupation license. Van Zomeren said the application requested a variance approval only and the CUP would have to be reviewed. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#9 - #2233 Walter Holzer - Continued) Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to table Application #2233 to gather additional information and further discuss the home occupation licensing. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Van Zomeren will notify applicant of time and date of work session. (#10) #2234 DOUGLAS £. WALDOCH, 4215 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE - PUBUC HEARING - 8:59-9:02 P.M The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that the property is located in the LR-IB Zoning District requiring one acre lots. The property is substandard at .664 acres and at a lot width of 56' at lakeshore and 9S* at front setback, where 140' is required. The applicant proposes to remove and reconstruct a new residence which will require a lot area and width variance. The location will improve the garage location, street setback, and structure's proximity to side lot line. Van Zomeren indicated that Staff recommends approval. The applicant had no comments. Schroeder asked if the new residence is the same size. Van Zomeren smd it was not calculated as no variance is required. Sn^ noted that the proposal is for a two-story residence in contrast to the current one stoiy. Van Zomeren indicated the neighbors have voiced their support of the proposal. Smith questioned whether the property will be landscaped between the driveway and property line. She was informed that this is not required. McMillan iK>ted the driveway and curb cut was ap}. oved. Smith moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2234. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#11) #2235 MARTIN B. SCHNEIDER, 2180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT - PUBLIC HEARING - 9:02-9:33 P.M, The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#11 - #2235 Martin Schneider - Continued) Van Zomeren reported that the application is for an amendment to a conditional use permit originally issued in 1984 to allow for a non-conforming use of the structure as an arts school. The current proposal is a change from one non-conforming use to another use by the Lake Miimetoiika Environmental School. The change of occupancy changes the Building Code classification from B2 to E2 which requires improvements to the building for handicap access and life safety standards. Van Zomeren ask^ the Commission to review hours of operation and parking that would result in any new impacts. Van Zomeren said Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the CUP subject to standards and coiKlitions 1 and 2 r^arding certificate of occupancy and amendment if any changes occur to the CUP. Review of the plans are also required. Martin Schneider informed the Commission that the building is the Old Hill Schoolhouse. He explained the background of the building and its use by the art center. He sold the building in 1994 but gained it back in February, 1997. Schneider said he does not b^eve there is any change in the occupancy. He indicated the age group had not been previously specified. B2 allowed for adult education but children were the majority attendants. Schneider said the change in occupancy will require the fire code regulations to go into effect requiring a fire suppression system. The property does not have city water and would require pressure tanks. While he supports the need to provide hancficap access ramps and bathroom, he objects to the fire code regulation due to major expense and what he feels is not a change in occupancy. Lindquist informed him that the Planning Comnussion has no authority over these requirements. Van Zomeren said no variances are allowed from the Building Code. The code requires a 2-story structure in the E2 classification to meet certain standards including a sprinkler ^stem. Van Zomeren referenced a letter from Building Inspector, Lyle Oman, regarding this issue. Schroeder informed the applicant that the Planning Commission is only to consider what the future use will be. If the E2 requires fire suppression equipment, children cannot put at risk. What has occurred in the past, whether right or wrong, does not affect this application. Stoddard noted that the fire suppression system involves building code requirements beyond that required by the City. Van Zomeren noted that the art school had moved into the building wthout a certificate of occupancy. Letters from the BuUding Official had been sent to the art school regarding required improvements that were not made over a three year period. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#11 - #2235 Martin Schneider - Continued) Smith a^ed what the building inspector required. Van Zomeren said the building would require interior steps and a fire escape under the B2, which is not as extensive as the requirements under the E-2. Lindqmst noted that the applicant questioned the classification change fi-om B2 to E2. Schneider asked the Commission to proceed with the application as recommended, and he would work with the building inspector. Smith informed him that if the building was classified E2, there would be areas where compliance with regulations would be required. Schneider said he did not know if he could make those improvements and might possibly have to sell the property. The tank and heated building for the tank would be prohibitivelv expenave. During public comments. Van Erickson informed the Commission that the building is old and felt the number of fire exits was adequate for safety. He did not believe the building should be required to have a sprinkler system. There were no additional comments. Lindquist asked the applicant if he had reviewed the recommendation and conditions. Schneider said he had some disagreement but asked the Commission to move forward, and he would work to resolve those issues. Berg inquiry of Schneider if the issue was the code or occupancy. Schneider said it was the code as it changed the occupancy. Van Zomeren said the change to the CUP triggers the need for an amendment regarding occupancy and building codes. A member of the Lake Minnetonka Environmental School Board asked that the certificate of occupancy be supplied without all of the work completed as parents of the children will performing some of the required work. Lindquist informed her that the Planning Commission does not have this authority, and the matter would have to be taken up with the Building Inspector. Van Zomeren indicated that it was a liability issue. Sherokw Use asked if this request was not possible, if the school could hold open houses L^quist again related that the Commission does not have the authority to waive Building Code requirements. Smith indicated that the interpretation of the code would be by the State. Schneider disagreed in that he felt the issue was the adult '/ersus children occupancy. He believed the issue will have to be reviewed by the City Attorney. He informed Stoddard that the recommendation could be subject to building codes. Schroeder said he was in support of the use itself He asked if there were any significant changes to hours or otherwise. Schneider said there would be no change to hours and people in attendance. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#11 - #2235 Martin Schneider - Continued) Snuth asked if there would be any effect on the neighborhood. Sclineider said the use would not be increased and amount of parking stalls is excellent. He said he has not received any neighborhood complaints. Smith asked if the second story was net used, if the code would still apply regarding a fire suppression system. Van Zomeren said it would. \; i Zomeren reported that if the application was approved, the comprehensive plan would need to be amended to reflect the change in use. Stoddard moved. Smith seconded, to approve the amending and continuation of the conditional use permit to provide for class instruction for the Lake Minnetonka Environmental School as outlined in application, subject to Staff recommendations and review of appropriate use classification and required building and State rules and regulations for appropriate use. The Staff recommendations subject the approval to the following standards: The ilding shall have a certificate of occupancy before the school relocates into the building. A future change in tenancy shall require an amendment to the conditional use permit. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (The meeting was recessed for ten minutes.) (#12) #2236 WILLUM H. BOCKMANN, 1090 LOMA LINDA AVENUE - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 9:43-9:50 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that the applicant is seeking a ices to street setback, side yard, and hardcover for removal of a one-car garage and replacement by a two-car garage. A lot area variance of 78.5% is required. Hardcover in the 75-250' setback would increase from 37.2% to 38.98%. The street setback would remain the same. Van Zomeren indicated that the lot area, width, and well location, which limits the location of the garage, are the hardships. Other homes in the area also have two-car garages. Stafif recommends approval. Acknowledgment form has been received from adjacent neighbor at 1082 Loma Linda Avenue supporting the propo.sal. The applicant provided a letter from his neighoor indicating support for the garage to be located 1' from the north property line There were no public comments. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#12 - #2236 WUliam Bockmann - Continued) Smith suggested that the Planning Comi.dssion would not recommend any further structural coverage on the property. Stoddard questioned how the overhang on the garage would affect the garage location to the property line. Bockmaim said he spoke with t^ie Building Inspector and a well company who supported the 6' separation. The overhang would resuh in the garage being 6" from the lot line. The applicant said he would be required to install a fire wall. Hawn moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2236 subject to requirements of Building Inspector with construction of a fire w^l, removal of driveway, and a notation that no additional structural coverage would be allowed or recommended by this Planning Commission. The applicant inquired whether he could maintain the driveway. He was informed that it would have to be removed. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#13) #2237 JIM AND ROXANNE STASIK, 1270 WILDHURST TRAIL - VARIANCE - VVM.iC HEARING - 9:50-9:54 P.M. The Affidavit of Pu li^’ation and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that the application is for a hardcover variance to replace an existing deck replacing structural hardcover over non-structural hardcover. Staff recommends approval. The applicant stud she has worked with the building inspectors and was unaware of the requirement for a variance. The deck replacement had been stopped in progress. The deck had deteriorated and is in a dangerous coadition. The deck will be replaced as it existed. There were no public comments. Smith noted the large amount of hardcover. The applicant said the residence met code when it was built. Smith noted that any additions to the home would be difficult in the future. The applicant said she has no plans to do so. Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #223 / . Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#13 - #2237 Jim and Roxanne Stasik - Continued) The applicant requested the application be presented to Council at their May 27 meeting. (#14) #2238 CmC DWIGHT AND FRED GUTTORMSON, 1220 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCE - PUBUC HEARING - 9:56-10:27 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Fred Guttormson was present. Gaf&on reported that the application was a two-part request. The first request was for an afier-the-fact lakeshore setback and 0-75' hardcover variances for an enclosure of a room below the pre-existing deck. The applicant received approval for this enclosure last year with the condition that particular bedcover be remov^; the condition was not met. The second request is for a 75-250' hardcover variance for construction of a detached 30‘x32' garage. The garage will be located to meet the 15' side setback. The garage meets the 10' street setback with side facing doors Hardcover exists at 36.4% in the 75-250' setback where 25% is allowed. The proposal would result in 35.9% hardcover with removal of a shed and portion of the driveway. A portion of the garage is over gravel. The 0-75' hardcover exists at 10.9% which includes an 8' gravel driveway which exhibits new gravel, and a 4*x9' shed. Another shed appears to have been removed. Gafiron noted there is a loop driveway located in the 0-75' setback. The deck exists at 34' from the shoreline. The enclosure did not meet building code standards and was completed without a permit. If it is approved, the enclosure would require rebuilding. A hardship statement was provided for the garage. No hardship statement was presented for the deck enclosure, but the enclosure had been approved previously but expired because the resolution was not signed and no permit was issued. Gaffiron pointed out that the lakeshore deck and gravel driveway are still present on the property. Their removal was required in the previous resolution. Gaffion asked the Commission to consider whether hardship is demonstrated and if other removals should be required to reduce the hardcover. He questioned whether the loop driveway thould be in the 0-75' setback. He asked the Commission to verify that condiiic^fi^i of Resolution 3611 should be applied. Ke suggested the possibility of allowing the applicant five years in which to remove the lakeside deck. Gaffion said Staff does not necessarily recommend approval of such an amortization period but recommended conditions 1-4 as outlined in the packet. Guttormson said he had added windows placed on the existing r^lroad ties to ^iclose the deck. He believed this would not be considered permanent as the windows are removed in the summer months. He then found he needed an approval and the work performed to building standards. Guttormson said he would like to maintain the lakeshore deck. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#14 - #2238 Chic Dwight and Fred Guttormson - Continue^ Schroeder was informed that Guttormson has owned the property for three years. Smith questioned why the ori^al resolution was not signed and the gravel was not removed. Guttormson said he parks his motor home on the gravel driveway but would have removed it if the enclosure was made permanent. Lindquist asked if the applicant intends to finish the enclosure and remove the gravel driveway noting the need for a building permit. Guttormson said he would if allowed. He would also remove the driveway and reseed to the lakeshore. Undquist inquired if the lakeshore deck would be removed. Smith noted it was a condition of the prior resolution. The applicant stated he did not complete the proposed improvements and would like to maintain the deck. Hawn suggested removal and sodding of the loop portion of the driveway with a back-out area behind the garage. Tuc parking location of the RV was discussed. The applicant said the garage doors would have to be heightened. He would prefer to park the RV in the loop of the dnveway. Lindquist informed Guttormson that the intention is to eliminate hardcovCT m the 0-75 setback. Guttormson said he would store the RV elsewhere during Ae winter months but park it on the property the two weeks each month that it was not being used. Smith inquired of the time frame if the applicant were to remove the driveway to the lake. The applicant said he would request 60 days. There were no public comments. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2238 subject to Staff recommendation #1, elimination of the loop driveway in the 0-75' setback noting sufficient spacing for a turnaround elsewhere, conditions #2 and #3. Guttormson said he would like to remove the proposal for the garage and maintain the loop driveway. Guttormson was informed that he could present that request to the Council. Gaffron indicated the garage request could be removed from the application. Smith moved, Schroeder seconded, to eliminate the loop, with conditions 1, 2, 3, and 4. If the applicant chooses to eliminate condition #4, a permit would be required to reconstruct the garage. The applicant said he wanted to maintain the loop driveway. minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON MAY 19,1997 (#14 - #2238 Chic Dwight and Fred Guttormson - Continued) and sheds removed. He noted the loop driveway cannot be seen. Hawn said she fdt the applicant wants the loop drivway to park Ae said he would park it elsewhere. Schroeder suggested the garage house the RV. The appUcant said this could be done. Hawn said she felt it was inappropriate to house the RV on the driveway. Lindquist infotmed the appUcant that the loop driveway would have to be eliminated before any further improvements are allowed. The applicant suggested tabling the application. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #2238 consider the loop driveway, garage, and deck enclosure, and working with Staff on options. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#15) #2241 KYLE HUNT AND PARTNERS, INC, 1185 FERNDALE ROAD WEST - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING - 10:28-11:00 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The AppUcants, Cheryl and Gary Costley, were represented by Kyle Hunt. Van Zomeren reported that the .887 acre property is located in the LR-l/L one faitfly hkeshore. Zoning District requiring two acres. The proposal r^uires vard hardcover, and lakeshore setback for construction of an addition to the resid^ mdw the existing deck for an exercise room, a third stall addition to the gar^e r^ua g the ride yard setback to 19.V, and increasing the 75-250’hardcover 137.5 s.f t Lindquist read a letter from the neighbors, Bradley and Mary Bowman, expres^g objection to the garage location. It was noted that the adjacent properues are located closer to the side property lines than that proposed by the appUcant. Van Zomeren reported that the lot width measures 200' at the setba^ Road. 45’ from the west, 14 from east, and 71' from the lakeshore. The buddmg pad is Lited by the 26' separation requirement from the pond reducing the pad to awfo™“»e'y 92’ in width The property is further Umited by the location of a well m the yard. minutes of the oronogoj^ssion meeting HEID ON MAY 19,1997 (#15 - #2241 Kyle Hunt and Partners - Continued) Hunt questioned the lot aea. 100 s.f. less He not^ ttot ‘I*® BiwminoSs todcover and patio pavers would be Hunt noted the 0-75' setback f P’ that the average lakeshwe setback^ ^;«,ing footprint and the tWrd staU LdLver for the tttrd stall is included in the calcuUtions. Hunt explained that the house is P^^ S^te'vSrrflo'l^o^rdrhS ;^^^^ He noted the placement of large evergreens that don't inhibit sight lines in his opinion. Schroeder was informed that the Bowman's side encroachment is at 12' and 15' and other nci^boring property is at 15. i:ssi'SS':3SE ■ two-car, tuck-under garage. Lindquist said he supports the exercise room addition but questioned the need for the third Stall as no hardships exists. property line as well where the garage is intended to be placed, the pond. Stoddard said he usuaUy places value on the "eigh^^jj^tf ^b»Tk*" neighbors have the same circumstances as the applicant m terms of set Bo»».«■ ^Van Zonteren said this only applied to one side of the property. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 (#15 - #2241 Kyle Hunt and Partners - Continued) Hunt informed McMillan that the 14'x24' garage stall would be set back somewhat from the other two stalls. Other remodeling is currently underway. Hunt said he could be flexible with the location of the garage stall. Mr. Bowman indicated that the current garage is 36'x23' and could provide for tandem vehicle spacing. He noted there is also a shed on the property. Hunt indicated that the tandem area is a tornado shelter where the applicant plans on adding a 3/4 bath. Stoddard moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2241 for lakeshore s^back for construction of an exercise room under the existing deck. The third garage stall is not recommended for approval. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. SKETCH PLANS (#16) #2239 JIM WATERS, LGA INVESTMENT GROUP, INC., WILDHURST TRAIL - SUBDIVISION/SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Tim Waters was present. Gafifron reported that the proposed seven lot subdivision under sketch plan review is comprised of two parcels, 7 acres and 1-1/2 acres in size and located in the Saga Hill park area. The properties are owned by Soskin and Sollner. Access is proposed from the undeveloped platted right-of-way known as Garden Lane. The topograplqf of the lots favors access to the west. Building Mtes include two rear walk-outs. Lot 2 requires 1/2 acre dry contiguous on the southeast side of the ravine. Access to the park areas is required to the north and west. A cul-de-sac as shown would present a problem with primary access to the Saga Hill park. The City will require access to the 9 acre park pared to the west from Garden Lane and to the open space park property which straddles Garden Lane to the east. Gaffi-on indicated that the City Engineer expressed concern with drainageways impacting the neighboring properties. He suggested drainage be directed to the northerly ravine for less crodon potentid and potential development of a NURP pond. Gafiron said the City would not be served if Garden Lane is vacated and presented options in the Staff memo. The property is one acre sewered with sewer possible from Tonkaview Lane but most likely from Wildhurst Trail. minutes of the orono planning commission meeting held on may 19,1997 (#16 - #22'19 Tun Waters - Continued) KSJSISX »«» »■‘rrthe road extend to the Hennessey property and the other to a parking lot f p Wat^ sStepXs Garden uAe for He noted aU lots meet muunnun reouirements the development would have minimum impacts, and provide access to the ^"w^rs said the development meets the desire of the property owners. Lindquist noted that the proposed access would include a cul-de-sac between lots 1,2. and 3 with the Garden Lane easement remaimng. During pubUc comments, Ctois Morgart, 1003 Wildhurst T|^ said this most ^se of aU ideas that have been presented for the properties while solving access to the park land. He supports the subdivision. Ctnith noted sketch F-1 refers to direct park access, F-2 shows a teroporap/ wl ^ sac, L F-3 r^tes to potential park dedication. These plans were gt^ed by Gaffion assist in addressing adjacent or nearby lots of record requiring access. Gaffron asked Commission to consider whether Ae the subdivision and whether sewer should come from Wildhurst Tr^ xyn A the lots outside of the sewer system noting the proposed lots are wi South sMd she supported Gaffrorfs suggestions regarding access and temporaiy cul-de- sac. McMillan said she would like to see the park access developed “ lots win know that the road will extend into the park. Waters agreed that it would be to accompUsh tins up front. McMillan inquired of the time line for the stormwater management plan. Gaf&on indicated that it would require another 4-6 months. <Jchrocder Questioned whether the Park Commission should recommend taking land instead of a fee. McMiUan noted the ravine would be protected anyways as there wo be a drainage easement over the ravine. Waters indicated he would review the lots for size. Lindquist noted the cul-de-sac could extend to the edge of Lot 1. McMillan agreed that this would allow for a turnaround. minutes of the orono planning commission meeting held on may 19,1997 (#16 - #2239 Tim Waters - Continued) Gaffron noted the following areas of-way so would becom' T,» IO.S ^ .?■, -n« ^ ‘ ' lnt«i in addition to connection charges. Drainage casemems • j UAnno«c^ has ^ suggested as a way to solve the Hennessey lot problem. McMillan asked that the sketch plan be reviewed by the Paik Commission. Gafiron was informed that the Planning Commission had no concerns with the subdivision as proposed. (#17) #2240 JIM WATERS, LGA INVESTMENT GROUP, INC., WILDHURST trail - SUBDIVISION/SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Jim Waters was present. Gaffion reported that this proposal includes three groups of property, Ae Van Slou^ two Ser lotrand Morgart property, totaling follows zoned LR-IB one acre, and a portion is zoned RR-IB, two acre. Tl» MUSA the zoninc boundary This presents an issue with possibly chan^ng the ^ SSeSo acre'o one acm zoning and the need for a Jr Lwerinc the two acre properties. The proposal calls for a 17 lot sub*viwn wtth 1-1 r^ej^e per lot s^rv^by an extension road from Wildhur« T^^ Tlie proposed Gafiron indicated it could be argued that this would result m throu^ lots roadways and requiring a conditional use permit for acceswiy structurra^ ^ Mghwood Lane to Garden Lane and Wildhurst is not a safe access option due to steep slopes. Gaffron indicated that the lots generally meet the 200’ lot width zoning. At an average of 1-1/2 acre lots, this would place a large . area where homes have not previously been located. They would also be locat park land and might possibly change the nature of the park. (#17 - #2240 Jim Waters - Continued) Ai^tter issue is the length of the road systm. o^ with no addiUonal way out <=^f to issues to consider. Lindqiust qu^oned f^^^l^’STwtul^^^ritedL^ ^‘^ouid^so give the impression of two acre zomng according to Waters. the development accessing Waters savs drawing C-1 addresses these issues issue of the passive park and low tr^ V Wildhurst access would ^ers smd it could become a service lane only. A gravel road could be Garden Lane to serve the Hennessey lot. Lindquist noted the problem with both one acre and ,11 one acre zoning might not be accepted by the McMfflan said she would consider possibly exch^ging lots but did not Sod policy to do as suggested She inquired f,*?, aST lain would be the ability to develop the He tmt^lo« 12-n^» assumes the Met Council will agree with changing the MUSA line. (#17 - #2240 Jim Waters - Continued) Waters indicated that drawii« C-1 Waters that becomes sevrer. He suggested a communal septic system, uam ^d not believe the City would approve that scenario. would recommend adding the property to the to the MUSA- would increase the dr^age to the ravine. Gaf&on stated that the key to this appUcation is a change to the MUSA. JohnHassdbalch, Realtor. logical to make the lots oiw ™uire ^ndemnation and there are no north because of wetlands. McMillan asked if the sewer units are available. Ciaffion said the capacity or number of umts is not the issue if the MUSA change is approved. Berg questioned whether there is the potentW f^the Met Council to approve such a Oaffron indicated there was as it is based on merit. make that arrangement. Schroeder and Smith said they both would Uke to see clustered housing. The appV^ation wilt be reviewed by the Park Commission on June 2. Stoddard asked for additional information regarding history of the MUSA. TO .h. “ agenda. 1 minutes of the orono planning commission MEETING HELD ON MAY 19, 1997 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#19) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION A Woric Session was scheduled to discuss the Home Occupation Licensing for Wednesday, June 4, at 7:45 a.m. Gaffron noted that there wiB be a meeting regarding the Spring ^.Xy. May 21.1997 m 6:30 p.m. The CUP and variances wUl be docussed at the Coundl Meeting of Tuesday, May 27,1997. («20) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE APIUI 1997 MEETING Schroeder moved, Berg seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of April 21,1997. Vote; Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#21) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT^J^®^^^^^ ATreND THE COUNCIL MEETINGS OF MAY 26,1997 AND JUNE 9,1997 May 27 > Lindquist June 9 - Schroder adjournment Sclvoeder moved, Berg seconded, to adjourn at 12:11 a.m. Vote. Ayes 7, Nays 0. ^21, Dale Lindquist, Chair Person REMINDER EAST NEIGHBORHOOD AREA MEETING HIGHWAY 12 PRELIMINARY DESIGN 6:30 P.M., MONDAY, JUNE 9,1997 Property owners within 500’ of the proposed Highway 12 corridor EAST of Willow Dnve Dear Property Owner: The process of developing the preliminary design for the upgrade of Highway 12 along the Burlington Northern RaU Road corridor has now begun. A Design Review Committee has been se up to ^vide input to Mn/DOT regarding the preliminary design. Tte Committre representatives from the cities of Orono. Long Lake and Wayzata as well as other interested agencies such as Hennepin County and the DNR. The represratatives fro ty of Orono are former Mayor Ed Callahan, current Councilmember Diann Goetten, resident and affected property owner Jim Murphy, and City Administrator Ron Moorse. It is important that, as the preliminaiy design process proceeds, the property owners affect^ by the highway project have opportunities to provide input and obtain iirfonnatton regarding *e project design. This requires putting in place a plan, process, and sWcture to LiimunicatiOT between the affected property owners and the Design Review Co^ttw. As a fet step in accomplishing this, the City Council has divided the area affected by the "neighborhood" areas. One neighborhood area includes all affected property owners west of Willo Drive. The other includes all affected property owners east of Willow Drive. The Council has scheduled an organizational meeting with each of Ae two neighborhood areas. The meeting for the neighborhood area east of Willow Drive will be P;.”’ 9,1997 in the City Council Chambers prior to the regular City Council meetmg. This mi g is* scheduled for 30 minutes. The purpose of the meeting is as follows: To explain the Highway 12 preliminary design process and the functiomng of the Design Review Committee. 2 To determine how best to keep the affected property owners informed about *e project design process, and how best to facilitate input from the affected property owners. 1. he ty ••■v - 3. To identify a subcommittee of property owners to serve as a liaison group between the neighborhood area and the Design Review Committee. Sincerely, Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator A > i e e it 0 N wvhi* j. V./. 'I.,'*: 4 —m*.t* J m ' ■ ’^.7 . d le ig p .01 0un-06-97 03:55P ^onka ^aij 4901 Manitou RoaH, Tonka Bay, Minnesota 55331 MEMO (612) 474-7991 FAX 474-6533 mayor D0U9 Keller COUNCIL Guy Sasanfar Wtiiiarr) LaOellu Judd Movwry John Sene'5cali TO: FROM; Lake Minnetonka Area Cities Patrick Wussow, Tonka Bay City Administrator ADMINISTRATOR Patnck Wussow Uf\ I fc.June 6, 1997 SUBJECT: Vem Haug Dedication The TonKa Bay City rnTroSa^^ Ihhin^teh lha Oty ^acil SSSy SS.S sr .xSLt r.-hrii .a adjacent to the fishing pier. s;»„ry i,rr., o.y «... « y.. »a.a .ay questions please call 474-7 994a