Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-08-1996 Council Packet
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JULY 8, 1996, 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 one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each Qf the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheetP^Cji^v^ ROLL CALL 1. CONSENT AGENDA i' .-/V 0^ 2. Representative Tom Workman - Discussion of Legislative Issues b 3. 1995 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report - Presentation by Auditor APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 4 Regular Meeting of June 24, 1996 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS, PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Stephen Peterson Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S KLPORT * 5. #2029 William Smith, 2580 Fox Street - Final Subdivision - Resolution 6. #2134 Rob Albrecht, 1810 Shadyuood Road - Variance - Resolution 7. #2136 Greenfield Corporation, 180 North Shore Drive West - Preliminary Subdivision - Review of Amended Plan - Resolution 8. #2137 William Dunkley, 2709 Walters Port Lane - Variance - Resolution i{^9. #2142 Angela Woodhouse, 2625 North Shore Drive - Variances - Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT . / . ti OC£t^\laCkV!£LC. C.K“re.KitiVlOCo UuiN 12. MoltA.'Tr?R\oM ENGINEER REPORT CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 10. Saga Hill Park Land Acquisition 11. Permanent Appointment of Police Chief 12. Watertown Road Overlay ^3. Preparations for the Sale of McCuIley Road Property A #14. Contract for Computerized Mapping T 5 Scheduling of Work Sessions Jo. C'ld Crystal Bay Road Bike Trail Update 1 7. <'dd Crystal Bay Road "No Parking" - Resolution 18. Highway 12 Safety Improvement Project Payment CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT 19. Executive Session (*20.) LICENSES (*21.) BILLS AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JULY 8, 1996, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA *» UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 07/04 - Holutey 07/05 :• Holiday 07/08 - Council meeting 7:00 p.m. 07/15 - Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. 07/22 - Council meting 7:00 p.m. Public Attendance Meetog D ate 1' 2- C ouncil Planning C ommission Park Commission Other Please fill out the information requested below for our city RECORIkS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1. C_ / L'h'JP't'i!2 3 // // A Lji.(AkI m 6. ^ ^ 1 > 1 # • 7.. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. «*UH.4 *<« REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUl 8 DATE: July 9?)^ ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Tom Kuehn Title Finance Director " Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended December 31, 1995 Attachment: Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, and Management Report for the Vear Ended December 31, 1995. The attached reports are presented for your information. The City's audit firm of Malloy, Montague, Kamowski, Radosevich & Co.will have a representative at the council meeting on Monday, July 8, 1996 to discuss the report and answer any questions Council may have. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: No action required. PROPOSED MOTION: - Moved by,____, seconded by,____, Ayes___, Nays Management Report City of Orono, Minnesota December 31, 1995 _ M<^lAi I nv •:>Tj¥7r.^r PRINCIPALS KENNETH W MAUOV. CWA THOMAS M MONTAGUE. CPA THOMAS A KARNOWSKI. CRA PAUL A RAOOSEVICH. CRA WILLIAM J LAUER. CPA To the City Council City of Orono Orono, Minnesota We have prepared this management repon in conjunction with our audit of the City's financial records for the year ending December 31, 1995. 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 repon into the following sections: * City Finance in Minnesota * Financial Trends and Conditions of the City of Orono * Accounting and Reporting Comments * Formal Required Conununications 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. May 29. 1996 <: • M T ir^it r> • »E ICZ 410 PARK national BANK BUILDING 5353 AAVZATA boulevard MINNEAPOLIS Minnesota 55416 TELEPHONE 6'? 545 0424 TELEFAX 612 545 0569 CiTV Finance In Mcs -ntsota There were a number of hotly debated issues during the 1995 legislative session with potentially negative consequences for city government. The issues debated included reverse referenda requirement for city levy increases, salary caps for local officials, a property tax freeze, taxation of municipal bond interest, further restrictions on use of tax increment financing, tax redistribution, and like measures. For the most part, these proposals did not make it into law but they reflect the mood of state legislators and give insight into future legislative initiatives. A recent report entitled “Within Our Means", issued by Minnesota Plattning also sounds an alarm that warns many more tough choices are ahead for all levels of Minnesota government in the foreseeable future. To quote from this report, “The painful truth is that budget cuts and spending freezes will be necessary begiiuting in fiscal year 1998, and these cuts will not be available for fixing future budgets. The outlook for at least the next six years after 1999 is cut, upon cut, upon cut.” Add to that the general skepticism the public seems to have with anything related to “government", and the management of city finances becomes more challenging than ever. It is more important than ever that cities plan for an uncertain future. Having access to good financial planning skills and data will be critical. The following topics highlight a few issues which may assist you in managing your city. Legislath -e ACTIMTY The following is a brief summary of the current legislative issues and changes relating to city government in Minnesota. Corporate Welfare - Compani s receiving tax breaks through a tax increment financing district must show a net job growth within two years regardless of the dollar value of the tax break. The agency that provides the assistance will negotiate job and wage goals with the company which must be met within two years of receiving the assistance. Summary’ Budget Publication Requirements - Cities in the metro area now have the option of publishing their sum/nary budget statement in a city newsletter or other city mailing sent to all households in the city, instead of the official newspaper or qualified newspaper of general circulation. Aid Reduction to Local Govermnents - Cities, counties, towns, and special taxing districts will share in a cne-time $16 million cut in HACA in 1996. Economic Development - Tax Increment Financing - Development authorities will be able to exempt districts from the LG/A/HACA penalty’ by making an election at the time they approve the TIF plan. The exemption is made possible by making a local contribution to the district equal to a specified percentage of the annual increment revenue, depending on the type of district. Such contributions need to be made out of the development authority’s unrestricted money, and cannot be made, directly or indirectly, with tax increments or cenain developer payments. The maximum contribution by the development authority is limited to 2% of the adjusted net capacity of the city. Development authorities may also request contributions from the county, school district, or other units of government. -1- 1 1 1 1 1 ] ] 1 ] ] ^‘But-for” Test Modifled - Tax Increment Financing - Municipalities are required to show that the use of a TIF district would increase the taxable market value of a site over what would have occurred without TIF. The present value of the tax increment subsidies is deducted from the projected market value of the TIF development in making this determination. Housing districts providing assistance to low-income rental projects are exempt from the “but-for” test. Pooling of Tax Increment Revenues - Up to 20% of increment revenue collections within a TIF district may be spent outside of a non-development TIF district. However, redevelopment districts will continue to have a 25% limitation. Green Acres, Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves, and Open Space - Properties that were enrolled in a deferred assessment program within the last five years may not be included within a TIF district. Newspaper Disclosure - Additional details about TIF districts must now be included in the legal sections of newspapers: the amount of tax increment paid to other governmental units, the amount paid for administrative costs, the amount of incremen. spent outside the TIF district, and the effect on property taxes due to the election to pay the fiscal disparities contribution out of a general tax on the municipality. “Targeting” Refund Program - A state property tax refund program once scheduled to end after the tax year w ill be made permanent and fully funded by the state. This “targeting” refund program helps property owners whose taxes go up more than 12% and increase by at least SI00 over the previous year. The maximum refund under the targeting program is $1,000. Liquor Store Sales - Liquor stores can now sell food products that contain more than 0.5% of alcohol by volume (such as ice cream blended with liqueur), home brewing equipment, and magazines “published primarily for information and education on alcoholic beverages”. Temporar>’ Liquor Licenses - Cities can now issue four-day on-sale intoxicating liquor licenses to non-profit organizations and to registered political comminees. Before the law change, the temporary licenses were only good for three consecutive days. Pension Funds - Communities receiving more than enough aid to pay police and salaried firefighter pensions will see half of the excess money redistributed to other such community pension funds. Because the 2% automobile insurance tax that partially funds this aid raises more money than is needed for the pension funds in some communities, the excess funds will be redistributed to municipalities in need of the extra aid, rather than depositing such amounts into the state’s general fund. Workers’ Compensation Reform - Changes designed lo reduce workers’ compensation insurance premiums were passed by the 1995 legislanire. The three main changes include: a cut in the automatic cost-of-living increases in the benefits paid to injured workers, regulation changes making it more difficult to qualify for permanent total disability benefits, and limited regulation of the workers’ compensation insurance industr}’. -2- 3 3 J 3 3 3 1 3 ] 3 1 1 ] 1 1 1 3 3 J S tatewtoe 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, 1994 and prior years. Governmental Funds Sources of Revenue Governmental funds include General, Special Revenue, Debt Service, and Capital Project Funds. The following per capita revenue by class illustrates recent revenue trends; Population Class 1991 Per Capita 1992 Per Capita 1993 Per Capita 1994 Per Capita 20,0001' 100,000 $ 586.32 $ 610.33 $ 636.21 $ 641.64 10,000 to 20,000 608.32 633.01 645.47 650.26 2,500 to 10,000 531.31 577.03 591.01 579.69 2,0C0 to 2,500 575.91 585.93 574.75 606.11 1,5C0 to 2,000 684.73 661.88 642.60 631.94 City of Orono I (Class 2,500 to 10,000)468.52 570.21 591.26 676.56 1 For the City of Orono, 1995 per capita revenue is approximately $627.43 based on an estimated population of 7,476. The components of revenue in the governmental funds by class is useful to compare the reliance on certain revenue sources. City of Statewide for Year Ending December 31. 1994 Orono 20.000-100.000 10.000-20.000 2.500-10.000 2.000-2.500 1,500-2.000 1994 1995 Property uxes 26.6%22.0%24.4%24.8%21.7%38.5%41.2% Tix iiKrcmems 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 5.5 4.0 Licenses and permits 3.2 2.7 2.6 1.8 1.3 3.0 4.3 Intergovernmental 25.0 32.9 36.1 40.8 45.3 24.5 18.3 Charges for sen ices 7.0 6.3 7.6 8.3 7.6 17.0 19.7 Other 15.0 12.5 11.5 12.3 11.7 11.5 12.4 TottI revenue 100.0%100 0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0% -3- 3 I 1 ] I I ] 1 ] 1 ] ] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Tax Rates Some economists believe that from a statewide perspective, the 1995 tax year may indicate a turnaround in the sluggish tax base growth experienced in Minnesota the last few years. Overall, real and personal property market values within cities increased by 4.7% from 1994 to 1995. Residential homestead value increased by 7.5%, the Martment property class decreased by 3.3%, and commercial and industrial increased by a minor 0.3%. 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: Average City Tax Rate Average County Tax Rate Average School Tax Rate 1995 1994 1995 1994 1995 1994 Taxes collectible All cities statewide Metro area cities 26.6 23.9 26.4 23.2 37.5 36.9 37.6 36.3 65.0 67.5 62.6 64.2 City of Orono 15.6 16.3 37.5 37.4 65.6 65.0 For the City of Orono, '995 and 1994, average special ux rates were 8.69% and 7.38%, respectively. As the above table indicates, the City of Orono ’s average tax rate remains well below both the statewide and metro area average. 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 individua. cities. However, for your information, we have provided a five-year statewide trend which portrays ti e typical level of expenditures by f<jnction for cities over 2,500 in population and a similar comparison to the City of Orono ’s 1994 and 1995 expendinires. 1991 1992 1993 1994 City of Orono 1994 1995 Expenditures (excluding debt principal) General government 9.8%10.3%11.3% 11.0%16.0% 19.0% Public safety 21.7 23.7 23.3 23.4 37.9 38.6 Streets and highways 23.6 22.1 21.9 23.9 28.0 26.0 Sanitation 1.7 1.8 1.6 0.5 1.6 1.6 Health 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 - - Libraries 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.4 -- Parks and recreation 8.5 8.5 8.^9.1 1.8 3.3 HRA and economic development 13.7 11.9 12.5 10.5 -- Airports and transit 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.8 -- interest and fiscal charges 9.7 9.4 8.7 8.6 8.7 8.0 Miscellaneous expenditures 4.4 4.5 3.9 4.1 4.5 3.3 Capital outlay 3.3 4.2 4.9 4.7 1.5 0.2 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. -4- J I Financial Trends and Conditions of the C ity of Orono General Fund The General Fund had an excess of revenue over expenditures and other financing uses of S226.143 in 1995, bringing the total fund balance up to SI,656,701 at December 31, 1995, which is the highest it has been since December 31, 1988. Meanwhile, the General Fund cash and investments balance was $1,730,921 at December 31, 1995, increasing 29% from the previous year. The following graph shows the fmancial position of the General Fund over the last ten years. General Fund Financial Position Yean Ended December 3 1 1M«1tt> 1MO 1M1 1t92 IM) Fund balance Cash balance Revenue The significant drop in cash and fund balances in 1989 reflects the planned transfer of funds to finance a portion of the City’s facilities construction. These monies were accumulated in the General Fund until the Capital Project Fund was established for the project. -5- A key a^>ect 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 points throughout the year caused by the timing of tax and state revenues. The graph below shows that wWlc 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 I99S and 1994 1100 j 1 12M Ml 13 1000 1995 1994 .1 1 1 ] 1 1 1 1 The following chart reflects the City's General Fund reliance on its revenue sources General Fund Revenue By Source Year Ended December 31,1995 Sotf 12.994-^ fiwi 2.4X licenses 4 permits 5.9% All other 3.6% Charges for services 27.1% 1 -6- I I I 1 J I 1 I J ] I I 1 I I I I I I i The following table presents the City’s General Fund revenue sources for the past ten years. Taxes Sute Other Year Amount Percent Amount Percent Amount Percent Total Revenue 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 976.946 1.072.390 1.139.509 1.179.747 1.581.776 1.620.232 1.561.034 1.346.814 1.645.133 1.644.440 41.7 % $ 41.8 41.4 41.2 53.6 58.9 53.8 48.7 50.1 48.1 362.580 434.497 438.303 465.510 111.626 140.448 219.667 398,903 442.512 442.460 15.5 % 16.9 15.9 16.3 3.8 5.1 7.6 12.7 13.5 12.9 $ 1.003.590 1.061,027 1.173.420 1.218.640 1.258.069 988.932 1.122.004 1,227.792 1.195.950 1.335.507 42 8 % 41.3 42.7 42 6 42.6 36.0 38 6 38.6 36.4 39.0 2.343.116 2.567,914 2.751.232 2.863.897 2.951.471 2.749.612 2.902.705 3.173.509 3.283.595 3.422.407 Total acnial revenue in the General Fund exceeded the budgeted amount by $177,392 or approximately 5.5% for 1995. Much of the additional revenue is attributable to permit revenue which resulted from the State allowed increase in building permit fee rates. Another area with a significant increase was charges for services which related to increases in plan checlc/site exam fees and recycling program fees. Toul Geneidl Fund revenues have increased 46% since 1986. The amount collected from uxes has increased 68% while state revenue had only increased 22% over the same period. As a result, the City continues to become more dependent on taxes and other revenue sources (primarily charges for services, licenses and permits) to finance its General Fund Operations. 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 uxpayers since 1990 have increased just 4% during that time period. The City’s tax rate actually decreased from 1994 to 1995. General Fund Revenue By Source Years Ended December 31 tm mo - 1000 1M1 1M2 IMS LU State All Other -7- The following graphs illustrate the components of the City’s General Fund spending for 1995 and for the past six years. General Fund Expenditures By Function Tear Ended DKtmbtr 31. WS riUku(etrSS.4X Gmril lo*! ll(crdM|2JX Public «rkil3i% \ Parks UX Motb(r2.7X J 1 J Total General Fund expenditures for 1995 were $3,111,364, which represents a 3% increase over 1994, General Fund expenditures w'ere held under budget in ever>' department for 1995. General Fund Expenditures By Function Yean Ended December 31 I7H ftM 12M 1000 1000 1M2 itn 1M4 IF*General gov’t Streets Public safety _I Parks/rKyclin^all other -8- I J 1 I 1 I I 1 -1 I I I ■l Enterprise Funds The Enterprise Fun^s comprise a considerable portion of the Cit) '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 a rate increase which was effective during 1995. Enterprise Funds Operating Revenues Years Ended December 31 I a.IMM 1M0 1MI 1M3 im Ljij Waur Golf count Q Sewtr •9 r .m1 1 J J 1 1 1 J 1 ] J I I I 1 1 ] 11 1 Water Operating Fund The table below shows a summary of the Water Operating Fund financial results for the past six years. Metered water sales increased 11 % over 1994 amounts, due mainly to a rate increase implemented during 1995. Even though the City increased water rates during 1995, the City still had a net loss, which has been the simation in all but one of the last six years. During 1995, the Water Operating Fund received $26,326 of residual equity from the 1980 Improvement Bonds Debt Service Fund. This transfer was directly recorded to contributed equity and it is intended to be used to help finance the revenue bond debt. Water 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Metered water sales S 159,289 $ 153,199 $ 169,470 $ 151,798 $ 199,208 $ 220,848 Total operating revenue $ 161,565 $ 157,152 $ 171,376 $ 155,126 $ 202,446 223,638 Total operating expenses 202,068 200,912 219,277 198,527 231,518 243.378 Operating loss (40,503)(43,760)(47.901)(43,401)(29,072)(19.740) Nonoperating revenue 103,503 77,691 50,315 10,252 40,975 47.894 Nonoperating expenses (76,299)(77,013)(74,808)(70,143) (64,691) (58,871) Operating transfers in .mm 142,088 Net income (loss)$(13,299)$ (43,082)$ (72,394)$ 38,796 $ (52,788)(30.717) Depreciation on contributed assets charged to operations $ 33,329 $ 33,329 $ 33,329 $ 33,329 $ 34,872 $ 32.886 Net income (loss) as a percentage of operating revenue (8.2)% (27.4)% (42.2)% 25.0% (26.1)%(13.7)% Statewide average **8.6% 6.7% 7.7% 5.4% 10.8%N/A * Per report of the State 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 ty^jically were financed by special assessments or taxes. In some cases, it is not the intent of the City to entirely recover this depreciation through user charges. -10- Se^^~er Operating Fiind Sewer revenue increased slightly in 1995, mainly due to an increase in sewer rates. This increase in revenues disappeared from the bottom line since expenses (mainly sewer disposal charges) continued to increase at a much faster rate during 1995. Sewer 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 User charges $ 401,342 $ 396,378 $ 397.159 $ 397,993 S 544,471 $ 578,149 Total operating revenue $ 423,592 $ 446,776 $ 402,475 $ 441,255 $ 551,963 $ 579,310 Total operating expenses 438,066 475.109 588,328 655.835 647,610 771.112 Operating loss (14,474)(28,333)(185,853)(214,580) (95,647)(191,722) Nonoperating revenue 160,406 166,253 141,412 116,744 151,670 167,138 Nonoperating expenses (72,777)(74,730)(72,843)(68,531)(63,160) (67,721) Net operating traiufers in ---98,912 — Net income (loss)$ 73,155 $ 63,190 $ (117,284)$ (67.455)$ (7,137)$ (92,305) Depreciation on contributed assets charged to operations $ 127,582 $ 127,264 $ 122,905 $ 122.905 $ 127,582 $124.052 Net income (loss) as a percentage of operating revenue Slalewide average ' 17.3%14.1%(29.1)% (15.3)%(1.3)% (15.9)% 8.5%4.3%(0.2)%0.7%4.1%N/A • Per report of the State Auditor on Revenue, Expenditures, and Debt of Minnesota Cities over 2,500 in population. Beginning in 1995, the City initiated an effort to lower its sewage treatment costs by reducing the amount of ground water and storm water entering the sanitary sewer system. It is anticipated that these efforts will limit the growth of the City’s sewage treatment costs beginning in 1997 and subsequent years. -11- ] ] Golf C qltlse Qpfbating Fltvd The City's Golf Course Operating Fund operating profits have remained fairly consistent and have continued to bring the fund's retained earnings balance to a healthy position. Golf Course 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Gross profit from sales $ 7,828 Total operating revenue 127,281 Total operating expenses Operating income Nonoperating revenue Nonoperating expenses $ 3,783 $ 5,623 $ 5,750 127,649 142,320 136,620 $ 8,349 S 7,261 169,934 166,673 102.825 107.973 115,814 123,616 130,461 142,170 32,284 1,026 23,459 2,942 (798) 32,129 5,854 18,754 4,581 47,822 5,582 (8,774) 31,764 8,150 Net income S 33,310 S 25,603 $ 37,983 $ 23,335 $ 44,630 $ 39,914 Depreciation on contributed assets charged to operations S 254 $ 254 $254 $709 Operating income as a percentage of operating revenue 25.4%18.4%22.6%13.7%28.1%19.1% Statewide average *4.3% 6.1%3.7%3.5% 5.4%N/A * Per report of the State Auditor on Revenue, Expendimres, and Debt of Minnesota Cities over 2,500 in population. -12- s-i 1 1 1 ] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A ccounting and Reporting COi\LMENTS Broker A cknowxedgment C ertihcate Minnesota Statute § 475.66 requires that Cities receive a written broker acknowledgment certification prior to investment transactions occurring. Effective January 1, 1997 municipalities will be required to update the broker acknowledgment certificates annually. Lvstallation of Banyo .n D ata Systems The City implemented an on-site financial applications s>stem during 1995. This new system should save the City approximately $11,000 annually in comparison with the previous system that was in place. The City should be commended for implementing a system which will better serve its needs and save money at the same time. Although the City staff performed the transition effectively, the audit took place later than desired and required more effort on our part due to the fact that two accounting systems were used during the year. In our experience such consequences are not unusual and are to be expected with significant changes in systems. There were also insunces where large flucniations in account balances took additional time for City staff to investigate and explain. The City staff is anticipating that next year’s audit will go much smoother and timelier since the new system will have been in place during all of fiscal year 1996. -13- i 1 Formal Required Communications Statement on Auditing Sundards Number 61, "Communication With Audit Committees." requires the auditor to ensure that certain matters related to the conduct of an audit are communicated to those who have responsibiIit}>’ for oversight of the fuiancial reporting process. The following constitutes our communication of such matters. The A uditor 's R espo.nsibility U nder Generally A ccepted A iditing Standards Our audit, conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance about whether the rinancial statements are free of material misstatement. These financial statements are the responsibility of management and it is our responsibility to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit results. Significant A ccounting Policies There were no changes in significant accounting policies or their application during the year audited. Significant A udit A djustme .nts Our audit of the 1995 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: O o o o o 0 Accounting estimates and management Judgments Other information in documents containing audited fmancial statements Disagreements with management Consultations w'ith 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. -14- ’3 i City of Orono, Minnesota Hennepin County Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year Ended December 31,1995 I I I I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Year Ended December 3 i 1995 Prepared by Department of Finance Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Repon Table of Contents INTRODUCTORY SECTION CITY COUNCIL AND OTHER OFnCIALS ORGANIZATIONAL CHART TRANSMITTAL LETTER CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT AWARD FINANCIAL SECTION INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (LIFTABLE STATEMENTS) Exhibit Page 1 2 3-14 15 Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups A-1 17-20 Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - All Governmental Fund Types and Expendable Trust Fund A-2 21-22 Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) - General and Special Revenue Funds A-3 23-24 Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings - Pioprietar}’ Fund Type A^25 Statement of Cash Flows - Proprietary Fund Type A-5 26-27 Notes to Financial Statements 28-53 MBINING AND INDIVIDUAL FUND STATEMENTS General Fund 54 Comparative Balance Sheet B-1 55 Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis)B-2 56-60 Special Revenue Funds 61 Combining Balance Sheet C-1 62 Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance C-2 63 Park Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis)C-3 64 Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis)C-4 65 Building Capital Outlay Fund Statement of Revenue, Expendimres, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Acmal (GAAP Basis)C-5 66 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Compreh“nsive Annual Financial Report Table of Contents (continued) I COMBINING AND INDIVIDUAL FUND STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) Debt Service Funds Combining Balance Sheet Combining Statement of Revenue. Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Capital Project Funds Combining Balance Sheet Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, 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 Comparative 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, Expendimres, and Changes in Fund Balance Agency Funds Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities FINANCUL 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 Future Propeny Tax Levies to Retire Bonds Exhibit Page D-1 67 68-69 D-2 70-71 E-1 72 73-74 E-2 75-76 F-1 77 78-79 F-2 80-81 F-3 82-83 F-4 84 - 85 F-5 86 F-6 87 F-7 88-89 F-8 90 F-9 91-92 F-IO 93 F-11 94 F-12 95 G-1 96 97 G-2 98 G-3 99- 100 Schedule 1 101 2 102 3 103 4 104 CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Table of Contents (continued) STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) General Revenue by Source General Expenditi-es by Function Property Tax Levies and Collections .Assessed 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, arid 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 Questioned Cost Table Page 1 105 - 106 2 107 - 108 3 109-110 4 111 - 112 5 113-114 6 115-116 7 117 8 118- 119 9 120 10 121 11 122 12 123 13 124 14 125 15 126 16 127 128 - 129 130 131 132 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I INTRODUCTORY SECTION I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I Ronald J. Moorse Thomas M. Kuehn Dorothy M. Hallin CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA Ml*r COUNCIL AND OTHFR OFFiriAl A Year Ended December 31, 1995 City Coandl City Officials City Administrator Finance Director - Treasurer City Clerk -1- Term of Office From To Edward Callahan Mayor 1/1/95 12/31/96 J. Diann Goetten Councilmember 1/1/95 12/31/98 Gabriel Jabbour Councilmember 1/1/95 12/31/98 Charles Kelley Councilmember 1/1/93 12/31/96 JoEIlen Hurr Councilmember 1/1/93 12/31/96 CITY OF ORONO ORGANIZATIONAL CHART -2- r \ I I ii I I I 1 o o A V GITYof ORONO \v’^ ,i .Af/Municipal OfTkes Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mailing Address: P.O Bo* 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0066 May 29, 1996 To the City Courxil and Citizens of the City of Orono The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report of the City of Orono for the fiscal year ending December 31. 1995 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 reponed in a manner designed to p.esent fairly the financial position and results of operations of the various funds and account groups of the City. All disclosures necessary ’ to enable the reader to gain an uiKlerstanding 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 1994 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 financial and demographic information, generally presented on a multi-year basis. The Internal Control Structure and Other Required Reports Section contains various Independent Auditor's repon 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. There are no other organizations that when considered w'ould be included in the general purpose financial statements. The City provides a variety of municipal services. These include police protection, street maintenance, building 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 sers ices and/or animal control services to the cities of Long Lake, Spring Park, and Minnetonka Beach. -3- Tclephone (612) 473-7357 • FAX 473-0510 To the Cit> Council and Citizens of the City of Orono May 29, 1996 Econo .nuc 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 toul 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 t>pes 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 aiuicipated that the positive appeal of the community, together 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 1995 to have a tax capacity rate that is one of the lowest in the county for communities over 1,000 in population, ranking sixili lowest of 40 communities. The strength of the City’s financial condition is reflected in its bond rating of Aal since 1989. In 1995, 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 60-unit subdivision, approved in 1994, generated a high level of residemial development activity in 1995. C ooperative Efforts With Other Juusdictions The City continues to pursue opportunities for reducing the cost of City services. In 1992, Orono joined with three other cities fcr 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, and $31,823 for 1995. As indicated earlier, the City is involved in cooperative arrangements for both police and fire service. The 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 serv ices. 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 construct 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 will be shared equally between the City and Hennepin Parks. -4- < To the City Council and Citizens of the Cit> of Orono May 29, 1996 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 prov ision of public access. Orono urged the DNR to take a wider and longer range view of this issue to prevent a piecemeal approach 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 effon between two governmental jurisdictions to find a mutually beneficial solution to a difficult problem. 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 improvement project on Long Lake, a lake contiguous to both the cities of Long Lake and Orono. This project is to be funded 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 administrative and counseling staff, and builds positive relationships w ith 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 identif)’ new opportunities for cooperative serv ice delivery to enable improved services and increased efficiency. Water and Sewer FX tsd 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 a sump pump inspection program to ensure that residential sump pumps are not discharging into the sanitary sewer system, and a manhole and lift station sealing program. The initial goal of the program is to address those problems that are both significant and relatively inexpensive to address. The savings generated by these elforts will then be put toward addressing the next level of problems. This program will be ongoing. The City is planning a multi-year rehabilitation of the Navarre water plant. This project will address maintenance 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. Labor Relations Labor relations are continuing on a positive path. In 1995, the police officers agreed to a two-year contract for 1995 and 19% with wage increases of 2.75% and 2.85%, respectively. The police lieutenant unit also agreed to a two-year agreement with similar wage increases. Infrastructure A major infrastruemre project completed in 1995 was a reconstruction of State Trunk Highway 12 dirough the cities of Orono and Long Lake. Although this was a Minnesota Department of Transportation (MN/DOT) project, the cities of Orono and Long Lake had requested the project to address safety and access concerns, particularly the need for a semaphore at Willow Drive and Highway 12. The project was very successful in addressing safety concerns and in providing an upgraded roadway serving the commercial/industrial areas of Orono and Long l^ke. -5- To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono May 29, 1996 Park Planning I I The City continued efforts toward developing a parks and open space master plan. The Parks and Planning Commissions panicipated in a process to identify priority open space preservation objectives to guide the development of the plan. Highway 12 C orridor The major east/west transportation route in Orono is State Highway 12. Orono's community management plan anticipates this corridor as Orono's commercial/industrial corridor, with the remainder of the City (with the exception of a small historical commercial area near Lake Minnetonka) maintaining a rural residential character. The MN/DOT is currently in the process of planning for the future upgrade of Highway 12. As part of this process, several new potential corridors for an upgrade of Hignway 12 were identified These new corridors would have substantial negative impacts on the rural areas of Orono. Through a mediation process, the cities of Orono and Long Lake agreed to consider the concept of a corridor alternative that could potentially eliminate consideration of new corridors while addressing the major concerns of both cities. Land U se Plantsing In 1995, the City placed a moratorium on development on both sides of Highway 12 in central Orono. During the moratorium period, a committee is conducting a land use study of the area. The purpose of the snidy is to develop guidelines for the t>pes 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. MANAGE.MENT INF0R.\UTI0N SYSTEMS During 1995, the fmance staff completed a study of the City ’s information systems, which had been provided by LCX jIS (Local 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 City is currently seeking alternatives to the permit tracking system and the police records management system, and anticipates conversion by January 1, 1997. The cost projection comparison between the two systems for the period 1995-20(X) indicates that the City should experience an average savings of $11,000 per year, plus additional savings related to the conversion of the police records systems. Refunding Bonds In December 1995, the City issued $1,910,(X)0 of General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 1995 to provide funds for the purpose of refunding $360,000 of principal outstanding on the $900,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1985 and $1,550,000 of principal outstanding on the $2,300,000 G.O. Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 1989. The refunding bonds, sold at a net interest rate of 4.086%, replaced net interest rates of 6.503% on the 1989 bonds, and 8.206% on the 1985 bonds. The present value savings on the combined issues is $168,262. -6- I I I I I I I I I I To the City Council are! Citizens of the City of Orono May 29, 19% Financial Information The management of the City is responsible for establishing and maintaining a system of internal accounting control. Internal accounting controls are designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance regarding the safeguarding of assets against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and the reliability of financial records for preparing financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles and maintaining accountability for assets. The concept of benefits likely to be derived, and the evaluation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management. All internal control evaluations occur within this framework for the purpose of adequately safeguarding assets and providing reasonable assurance in the proper recording of fmancial transactions. The City maintains budgetary controls to aid in compliance with the annual budget as adopted by the City Council. Formal budgeury integration is employed as a management control device during the year for the General Fund and Special Revenue Funds. Budgetary control for Debt Sen ice Funds is achieved through general obligation bond provisions. Budgetary control for Capital Project Funds is accomplished through the use of project controls. Budgetary control is maintained at the department level through the issuance of purchase orders. Expenditures are monitored during the year, and any recommended adjustments to the budget are presented to the Council for approval by City management. Unused appropriations lapse at year-end; however, the Council may approve carryover of specific items. The financial statements and schedules included in the Financial Section of this report reflect the City’s continued adherence to sound financial management. General Fund The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City and is used to account for all fmancial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. General fund revenues for 1995, totaled $3,422,407, an increase of $138,812 or 4.2% over the prior year. Expenditures, including transfers, totaled $3,196,264, an increase of $93,669 or 3.0% over 1994 levels. The undesignated fund balance of the General Fund increased from $1,248,592 at December 31, 1994, to $1,515,788 at December 31, 1995, or 21.4%. The 1995 ending undesignated fund balance provides 45.3% coverage of the 1996 adopted budget of $3,347,755. -7- To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono May 29. 19% The following table presents a comparative analysis of General Fund Revenues for 1995 and 1994, respectively; Function Property taxes Special assessments Licenses and permits Intergovernmental revenue Charges for services Fines and forfeits Interest Other revenue 1995 1994 % of % of Amount Total Amount Total $ 1,644,440 48.0%$ 1,645,133 50.1% 460 -624 - 202,195 5.9 147,888 4.5 464,061 13.6 494,619 15.1 928,121 27.1 851,165 25.9 80,610 2.4 58,158 1.8 62,347 1.8 49,065 1.5 40.173 1.2 36,943 1.1 $ 3,422,407 100.0% $ 3,283,595 100.0% License and permit revenues increased $54,307, or 36.79f from 1994 due to a 40.0% increase in the building permit fee rates. Intergovernmental revenue in 1995 decreased 6.2% from the 1994 amount due to a reduction in the recycling grant from Hennepin County. The 1995 net increase in charges for services revenue totaled $76,956, or 9.0% over the 1994 amount. This resulted mainly from increases in plan check/site exam fees, and recycling program fees. The 1995 fines and forfeits revenue increased $22,452, or 38.6% frt a the prior year and was the first increase since 1988. The increase in interest revenue of 27.1% over the prior year reflects the effects of higher levels of investment and interest rates. Other revenues increased 8.7% from the prior year. The amount of expenditures from the General Fund for 1995 and 1994, respectively, are presented in the following table: 1995 1994 Function Amount % of Total Amount % of Total Current and capital outlay General government $ 759,673 24.4%$ 667,018 22.1% Public satety 1,724.200 55.4 1,646,168 54.6 Streets 423,610 13.6 485,491 16.1 Parks and recreation 50.449 1.6 55,739 1.8 Recycling 7(! 682 2.3 72,137 2.4 Miscellaneous 82,750 2.7 91,142 3.0 $ 3,111,364 100.0%$ 3,017,695 100.0% The General Fund Expenditures increased $93,669, or 3.1 % over the previous year. The major portion of this increase is within the general government area which resulted from the consolidation of common operating supplies and maintenance, general insurance, utilities, and information systems into the Central Services Department. This department was created by action authorized by the City Council to consolidate certain expenditure items previously allocated to various General Fund Departments (excluding the Police Department). The 1995 decrease in street department expenditures of $61,881, or 12.7% reflects reduced levels of contracted street overlay and sealcoat projects. -8- I I I n To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono May 29, 1996 Speoal R ev ’ente 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 ma ntenance of "ublic 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, 1995 was $267,352. Improvt -Ment and Equipment C apital Qittlav Ft^-n The Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund was established to provide a source of funds for equipment purchases and improvements. 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 panicipating departments for certain office equipment. Expenditures are for non-Enterprise Fund purposes. The fund balance as of December 31, 1995 was $380,871. Birn.niN'f; C apital 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 w ill be used to partially pay the debt service of the 1991 Public Facilities Revenue Bonds. The Building Capital Outlay Fund balance at December 31, 1995 was $2,486,079. 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, 1995 was $1,367,973, an increase of 1.0% from 1994. C apital Project Funds Capital Project Funds are used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities. -9- To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono May 29, 1996 Minnf ,sota State -A id Sthefts Constri ^ction Fi?nd 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 within the City. The deficit fund balance as of December 31, 1995 was $265,543, a decrease of $307,380 from the prior year. The deficit fund balance will be eliminated through reimbursements of project costs from state-aid construction revenues or transfers from other funds. Perma -N ent Improvement Rfv ol \tsg Fl'nd The Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund provides financing for construction costs prior to obtaining permanent financing or levying of assessments against benefitied 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. 1995 was $471,439, a decrease of $37,367 from 1994. 1992 STfBB.s Bay Se\\t.r Constrlctiqn Fund The 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Fund was created to account for the majority of the $2,000,000 in bond proceeds from the 1992 Improvement Bonds and the costs of construction of the 1992 Stubbs Bay area sanitary sewer project consisting of sewer mains, lateral.'. and lift stations necessary to provide sewer serxice to the Stubbs Bay area. The fund balance at December 31. 1995 was $185,430. Enterprise Elts-ds Enterprise Funds are used to account for financial resources used in providing self-supporting public services in which most of the costs involved are paid in the form of charges by the users of the services. Except for ownership. Enterprise Funds bear a close resemblance to privately-owned utility or service enterprises. The City owns and operates a water utility, sewer utility, and a public golf course. -10- I To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono May 29. 1996 I Water Operating FL’ND 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 1995 and 1994 is as follows; December 31 Operating revenue Operating expenses Operating loss 1995 1994 $223,638 $202,446 243,378 231,518 $(19,740)$(29,072) The operating loss for 1995 docs not include nonoperating re^'enue of $47,894 or nonoperating expenses of $58,871. The operating loss for 1994 also does not include nonoperating revenue of $40,975 or nonoperating expenses of $64,691. Retained earnings as of December 31 , 1995 were $156,238, which represents an increase of $2,169 from 1994, net of the effects of depreciation on contributed assets, and nonoperating items. During 1995, the 1980 Improvement Boird Debt Servir- Fund transferred $26,326 of residual equity to the Water Operating Fund to assist in financ. ,-, revenue bond debt. Sev ? ^ Fl^sT) The Sev . >perating Fund accounts for the provision of sewer services to the residents of the Citv who ha' sanitary’ sewer service available. All activities necessary to provide such services accounted for in this fund, including administration, operations, maintenance, billing, and collection. The summary of operations for 1995 and 1994 is as follows: December 31 1995 1994 Operating revenue $ 579,390 $ 551,963 Operating expenses 771,112 647,610 Operating loss S (191,722)$ (95.647) The operating expenses in 1995 increased $123,502 from the previous year. This increase was due primarily to increases in sewer treatment charges from the Metropolitan Council Wastewater Services (M.C.W.S.) of $46,944; engineering services related to the reduction of ground water infiltration and inflow to the sewer sys: ,n of $15,033; engineering services related to sewer line and lift station rehabilitation projects of $14,247; refunding bond costs of $10,724; and payments of $28,000 to the M.C.W.S. for reconveyance of certain sewer lines to the City from the M.C.W.S. -11- To ihe City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono May 29. 19% The operating loss for 1995 does not include nonoperating revenue of $167,138 or nonoperating expenses of $67,721. The operating loss for 1994 also does not include nonoperating revenue of $156,067 or nonoperating expenses of $63,160. Retained earnings as of December 31, 1995 were $1,711,219, which represents an increase of $31,747 from 1994, net of the effects of depreciation on contributed assets, and nonoperating items. Golf C oiitsf Operating Find The Golf Course Operating Fund accounts for the operation of the City-owned and operated golf course sales and expenses necessary to provide this ser\ ice. The summary of operations for 1995 and 1994 ts as follows: December 31 1995 1994 Gross profit and operating revenue $ 173,934 $ 178.283 Operating expenses 142,170 130,461 Operating income $31,764 $ 47,822 The operating income for 1995 does not include nonoperating revenue of $8,150. The operating income for 1994 Jso does not include nonoperating revenue of $5,582 or nonoperating expenses of $8,774. Retained earnings as of December 31, 1995 were $268,844, which represents an increase of $40,623 from 1994, net of the elfects of depreciation on contributed assets and nonoperating items. Debt A dministration At December 31, 1995, the City had five 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, 1995 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. -12- ... j _ ! I To the City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono May 29. 1996 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 expendimre needs, and thira to diversity 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, 1995, the City had an investment portfolio of $9,832,592, at cost, (exclusive of the assets held by deferred compensation trustees), diversified as shown in the following table; Type of Investment Cost Percent Investment Pool - Money Market Funds $14,171 0.14% Certificates of Deposit 278.718 2.84 U.S. Federal Agencies 5.767.100 58.65 U.S. Treasury Obligations 398,938 4.06 City of Goodview, Minnesota 50,000 0.51 State of Minnesota 235,000 2.39 Commercial Paper 3,088,665 31.41 $9,832,592 100.00% For the year ended December 31, 1995, the City had cash and investment interest earnings of $456,382, at an average yield of 6.03%. R isk Management The City participates in the liability, property, and workers' compensation programs sponsored by the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. In addition, the City appoints an agent of record to assist with the administration, loss prevention, and risk management. Other Information Independent Audit Minnesota State Statutes require that the City have an annual audit performed by a certified public accountant or the State Auditor. The City appointed the certified public accounting firm of Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A., to perform the audit for the year ended December 31, 1995. The Independent Auditor's Report on the general purpose financial statements is included in the Financial Section of this report. -13- To thff City Council and Citizens of the City of Orono May 29. 19% Award The Govenuneni Finance Officers' Association (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City for its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended December 31. 1994. TlJs was tlK eighth consecutive year that the City received this prestigious award. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, the City published an easily readable and efficiently organized Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. This report satisfied both generally accepted accounting principles arxl aji^licable legal requirements. A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only. We believe that our current Comprehensive Annual Financial Report continues to meet the Certificate 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 staff for their individual contributions in assisting with the preparation of this report and to the outside agencies who assisted with essential information foi this rqwrt. We also would like to express appreciation to the Mayor and City Councilmembers for their interest and support in planning and conducting the financial operations of the City. Sincerely, Ronald J. Moorse Administrator Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director -14- I Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Presented to City of Orono, Minnesota For its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 1994 A Cntificatc 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 comprehensive annual financial reports (CAFRs) achieve the highest standards in government accounting and financial reporting. President Executive Director -15- f E r r r r i I I I i i I 1 I f I I I FINANCIAL SECTION r I I PRINCIPALS MAtXOV MONTAOU6 KEMNETM VK MAU.OV. CP(^ THOMAS M MONTAGUE. CM THOMAS A KARNOWSKt. CPA RAUL A RAOOSEVICH. CPA william J LAUER. CPA INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT 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. 1995, 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 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. 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 os erall general purpose financial statement presenution. 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, 1995, arid 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. In accordance w ith Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued a report on our consideration of the City of Omno’s internal control structure and a report on its compliance with laws and regulations, both dated May 29, 1996. 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 puiposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the general purpose financial statements. 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 stated in all material respects in relation to the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. The statistical information as listed in the table of contents are not necessary for a fair presentation of the general purpose financial statements, but are presented as additional analytical data. This information is unaudited and we do not express an opinion on it. May 29. 1996 AOCOCJN T AfsiTS 410 PAHK national BANK BUILDING 5353 WAYZAIA BOULEVARD MINNLAPOI.IS MINNESOTA 654Pi TEIFP»K>NE 612 545 0424 TEIFEAX 612 545 0569 -16- I I I I I GENERAL PURPOSE HNANCIAL STATEMENTS n IFTABLE STATEMENTS^ I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Combined Balance Sheet All Fund Types and Account Groups 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 Advances to 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 als as of December 31, 1994) Governmental Fund Types General Special Revenue Debt Service Capital Project $ 1,730,921 $ 2.996,000 $ 898,684$ 495,361 -—413,109 — 16,770 102.292 158,825 54,074 52,157 41,516 —6,429 — 5,195 -17,882 2.552 --762,703 74,881 10,025 -—— --15,375 135,000 ———— 42,020 -9,163 202,750 ——— 35,603 ——— 15,375 —-— ——— 1,163 —-— -——— --—- ———— ——— ———- $ 2,000,880 % 3,154.825 $ 2,177,419 S 962,701 II I I I 1 1 3 —j See notes to flnancial statements -17- i Exhibit A-1 I Proprietary Fiduciary Fund Type Account Groups Totals (Memorandum Only) Enterprise Trust and Agency General Fixed Assets General Long-Term Debt 1995 1994 S 1,129.699 $$S $ 7,250.665 S 7.267.549 —776.874 -—1.189.983 1.029.867 288,831 *_305.601 289,415 54.499 ———421.847 320,224 1,341 ———49,286 81.796 19,976 ———45.605 55,159 317,’33 —-—1,154,717 972,298 ————10,025 13.358 ————150.375 18,455 ——-——10,043 284,185 ———538,118 401,280 2,289 ———2,289 3.599 3,950 ———39,553 66,073 ————15.‘»75 18,455 10.416 —-—10 »l6 11,941 ————1,163 2.040 2,324,845 2,324,845 806.734 37,626 ———37,626 30,258 6,560,222 5,811,375 12.371.597 12,470.086 ———1,367,973 1.367,973 1,354,259 140,913 140,913 137,421 ———4.537,027 4,537,027 4,890.741 $ 11,035,012 $ 776.874 $ 5,811,375 $ 6.045.913 $ 31.964.999 $ 30,251.051 (continued) -18- CITV' OF ORONO. NfTNNESOTA Combined Balance Sheet All Fund T>'pes and Account Groups (continued) As of December 31,1V>5 (with Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1994) Governmental Fund Tvpes See notes to financial statements -19- General Special Revenue Debt Service Capital Project Liabilities, Equit>\ and Other Credits Liabilities Accounts and contracts payable $ 90,262 $ 20,523 $ 7,057 $ 358.942 Accrued salaries and compensated absences payable 74,961 —-— Due to other funds 15,375 ——135.000 Advances from other funds ——— Due to other governmental units 106,845 —-— Deferred credits ——— Deferred revenue 56,736 —802,389 77,433 Deferred compensation payable to employees ———— Liabilities related to restricted assets Acerjed interest payable —-—— Deferred developer advances ———— Long-term debt -—-— Total liabilities 344,179 20,523 809,446 571.375 Equity and other credits Investment in general fixed assets ——-- Contributed capital ———- Retained earnings Unreserved ———- Fund balance (deficit) Reserved for prepaid items —--— Reserved for advances to other funds — — —— Reserved for debt sen’ice ——413,109 — Umeserv'ed Designated for emergency contingencies ———325,000 Designated for road/bridge projects ———122,830 Designated for capital outlay —3,134,302 —— Designated for debt service ——954,864 — Designated for vacation/severance benefits 140,913 - - — Undesignated 1,515,788 ——(56,504) Total equity and other credits 1,656,701 3,134,302 1,367,973 391.326 Total liabilities, equity, and other credits $ 2,000,880 $ 3,154,825 $ 2,177.419 $ 962,701 ' i t A ! If I I I I I I I I I I Proprietary Fund Type Exhibit A-1 Fiduciary Totals Account Groups General Trust and General Long-Term Enterprise Agency Fixed Assets Deb.1995 1994 $ 64.037 $$$$ 540.821 $ 335,288 36.852 ———111.813 96,149 —--—150.375 18.455 -—-—-10.043 33.338 —-—140.183 48,931 102.479 ———102.479 112.009 -—-—936,558 1.047,513 —776,874 ——776,874 616.600 47,756 __47.756 52,094 ——-——89,800 3,300,000 ——6.045.913 9.345.913 8,332.421 3,584,462 776,874 —6,045,913 12.152.772 10.759.303 5,811,375 5,811,375 5.748.055 5,314,249 ——-5.314,249 5.1-3 8,63 7 2,136,301 ———2,136 2,061,762 ——34.502 -—--—10,043 ———-413.109 413,267 .._325.000 320.969 ————122,830 187,837 ————3,134,302 3.125,751 ——-—954,864 940,992 ————140.913 137,421 ———-1,459,284 1,472,512 7,450,550 —5.811.375 —19,812,227 19,491,748 $ h,035,012 $ 776.874 $5,811,375 $ 6,045.913 $ 31.964.999 $ 30,251,051 -20- CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance All Govcmnental Fund Tvpes anu Expendable Trust Fund Year Ended Lktcmbcr 31, 1995 (with Compan^tive Touls for Year Ended December 31, 1994) 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 See notes to financial statements General Governmental Fund Type^ Special Debt Revenue Service Capital Project Property taxes $ I.644.44U $S 288.931 S Special assessments 460 —173.983 15.102 Licenses and permits 202.193 —— Intergovernmental 464.061 18.658 35.270 338,601 Charges for services 928.121 Fines and forfeits 80.610 Other Interest earned on investments 62.347 174.056 77,044 37,566 Rems and refunds 29,456 _ Miscellaneous 10.717 5K.338 50,375 372 Total revenue 3.422.407 251.052 625.603 391.641 759,673 l,o93,420 423,610 50,449 70,6X2 82,750 30.780 37,092 167,309 733,041 340,000 353.121 13,341 I1 Total expenditures 3.111.364 204.401 706.462 733.041 Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures 311.043 46.651 (80.859)(341,400) Other financing sources (uses) Bond proceeds (net)——357.899 — Payment to refund bond issue ——(360.000)- Operating transfers in -84.900 123.000 -• Operating transfers (out)(S4,900)(123.000)—- Total other financing sources (uses)(84,900)(38.100)120,899 - Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other financing sources over expen ditures and other financing uses 226,143 8,551 40,040 (341,4(K)) — Fund balance Beginning of year 1,430,558 3,125.751 1,354.259 732.726 — Residual equity transfer (out)-—(26.326)- End of year $ I.656.V01 $ 3,134.302 S 1.367,973 $ 391.326 -21- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Fiduciary Fund Type Exiiibit A-2 Totals Expendable Trust Fund 1995 1994 $S 1,933.371 S 1,923,005 —189,545 274.943 —202.195 147,888 -856,5^0 1.223,040 ~928.121 851.165 -80,610 58.158 351,013 328.050 —29,456 32,680 56,646 176,448 205.595 56.646 4,747.349 5,044,524 759,673 667,018 —1.693.420 1,616.087 —423,610 485,491 —50,449 55,739 —70,682 72,137 56.646 176,488 151,083 —931,130 943,178 340,(XK)550,(XK) —353,121 379,635 —13,341 9.356 56,646 4.811.914 4.929,724 -(64.565)114,800 .357,899 -(360,000)— -207,900 270,413 -(207.900) (270,413) —(2.101)— -(66.666)114,800 6,643.294 6,599.977 —(26.326) (71.483) $$ 6,550,302 S 6.643,294 -22- CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GA.^P Basis) General and Special Revenue Funds Year Ended December 31, 1995 End of year See notes to financial statements -23- General Fund $ 1,656,701 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget Revenue Property taxes S 1,647,940 $ 1.644 410 S (3,500) Special asscssmeats —460 460 Licenses and permits 133,000 202,195 69,195 Intergovenimental 441,935 464,061 22,126 Charges for services 880,140 928,121 47,981 Fines and forfeits 66,000 80.610 14.610 Other Intere >t earned on investments 41,000 62,347 21,347 Rents and refunds 28.000 29.456 1,456 Miscellaneous 7,000 10,717 3.717 Total revenue 3,245,015 "3,422,407 177,392 Expenditures Current General government 764.144 759,673 (4,471) Public safety 1,699,484 1,693.420 (6,064) Streets 437,369 423,610 (13.759) Parks and recreation 50,508 50.449 (59) Recycling 76,160 70,682 (5,478) Miscdlaneous 97,950 82,750 (15.200) Capital outlay 34,500 30,780 (3.720) Total expenditures 3,160,115 3,111,364 (48,751) Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures 84,900 311,043 226,143 Other financing sources (uses) Operating transfers in ——— Operating transfers (out)(84,900)(84,900)- Total other financing sources (uses)(84,900) (84,900) — Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other financing sources over expen- ditures and other financing uses $226,143 $ 226,143 Fund balance Beginning of year 1,430,558 1 I I I J I I I Exhibit A-3 Special Revenue Funds Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget $$S 18,658 18,658 129,000 174,056 45,056 13,000 58,338 45.338 142,000 251,052 109,052 37,800 18,423 (19.377) 203.588 185,978 (17,610) 241,388 204,401 (36,987) (99,388)46,651 146,039 84,900 84.900 (123,000)(123,000)— (38,100) (38,100) — $ (137,488)8,551 $ 146,039 3,125,751 $ 3,134,302 .24- Exhibit A-4 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Statement of Revenue. Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Proprietar) Fund T)^* Years Ended December 31.1993 and 1994 See notes to financial statements -25- Enterprise Funds 1995 1994 Sales and cost of sales Sales $ 17,7:8 S 16,158 Cost of sales 10,467 7,809 Gross profit 7.261 8.349 Operating revenue Metered water sales 220.848 199.208 User charges 578.149 544.471 Green fees 136.809 136,532 Equipment rental 29.084 31.594 Other 4.811 12.538 Total operating revenue 969,701 924.343 Total gross profit and operating revenue 976.962 932,692 Operating expenses Personal services 2''1.3 56 263.931 Purchased water 10.878 6,985 Sewer disposal charges 329,536 282,592 Professional services 76.262 11.716 Operating and maintenance supplies 25,780 20.363 Heat, light, and power 45,496 45,812 Depreciation 222.246 217,320 Rent and equipment 5,456 7,336 Maintenance and repairs 49,270 50,588 Administrative and other expense 93,293 91,520 Other expenses 37,087 11.426 Total operating expenses 1,156,660 1.009.589 Operating loss (179,698) (76,897) Nonoperating revenue (expense) Propert)^ tax revenue 83,794 71,973 Interest income 128,797 121,121 Amortization of deferred credits 9,530 9.530 Interest expense (115,962)(127,416) Revenue bond expense (405)(435) Gaia^loss) on sale of assets (9.164)(8,774) Total nonoperating revenue (expense)96.590 65.999 Net loss (83,108)(10.898) Credit for depreciation on contributed assets 157.647 156,882 Net increase in retained earnings 74,539 145,984 Retained earnings Beginning of year 2,061,762 1.915.778 End of year S 2.136.301 $2,061,762 1..1 1 I I 1 1 I I J I I I I I I I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit A-5 Sialement of Cash Flows Propnetaiy Fund T>pe Years Ended December 31, 1995 and 1994 Cash flows from operating activities Op-rating loss Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash provided by operating activities Depreciation 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 Compensated absences Accounts payable Salaries payable Due to other governmental units Net cash orovided by operating activities Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Residual equity transfer Taxes collected for revenue bond debt Special assessments f^r revenue bond debt Acquisition or construction of capital assets Proceeds from sale of capital assets MWee current value credit Principal paid on revenue bonds Interest paid on revenue bonds Proceeds received from revenue bonds issued Other charges on revenue bonds Net cash provided (used) by capital and related financing activities See notes to financial statements -26- Enterprise Funds 1,357,627 1995 1994 $ (179,698)S (76,897) 222,246 217,320 1,525 1,461 (14,137)(69,255) (7,106)(846) 1,310 487 27,621 (31,571) 1,720 2,096 54,443 (7,487) 1,885 1,405 30,462 2,627 140,271 39,340 26,326 71,483 83,504 70,922 52,733 61,998 (76,900)(103,440) 7,299 — 35,370 35,569 (200,000)(175,000) (120,300)(131,911) 1,550,000 — (405)(435) (170,814) (continued) Exhibit A-5 CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Statement of Cash Flows Propnetary Fund Type (continued) Years Ended December 31, 1995 and 1994 Enterprise Funds 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 Cash and cash equivalents Unrestricted cash and temporary' investments Restricted cash and temporary investments Total cash and cash equivalents Noncash operating items (golf course) During the year ended December 31, 1995, the City traded in equipment with an adjusted book value of $1,020. 1995 1994 82,699 67,707 1,580,597 (63,767) 1,873,947 1,937,714 $ 3,454.544 $ 1,873,947 $ 1,129,699 2,324,845 $ 1,067,213 806,734 $ 3.454,544 $ 1,873,947 Equipment Original price Accumulated depreciation Adjusted book value Less trade-in value Loss on sale of equipment 1,700 680 1,020 (L020) I I I I i 1 1 I I I I I I I See notes to financial statements •27. 1 j CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements December 31, 1995 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES I 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 councilmembcrs, exercises legislative authority and determines all maners of policy. The City Administrator, appointed 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 statements 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 component 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 unit'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. Fhe HRA is fiscally dependent upon the City of Orono, and its governing boird consists of tfie City ’s mayor and councilmembcrs. Therefore, the HRA has been reported as a blended component unit of the City, with its funds reported as though they arc 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 The 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: -28- r CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31. 1995 NOTE 1 - SIGNmCANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) 1. Governmental Fund Types a. General Fund - The General Fund is the general operating fund of the City. It is used to account for all Financial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. b. Special Revenue Funds - The Special Revenue Funds are used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than expendable trusts or major capital projects'^ that are restricted to expendimres 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 financial 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 operation': that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private business enterprises — where 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 § 125). 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. -29- ^ i I I CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ' COUNTING POLICIES (CONTINLTD) D. Measumnent Focus and Basis of Accounting The accounting and financial reporting treatment applied to a fund is determined by its measurement focus and its basis of accounting. Measurement Focus The measurement focus of a fund determines what the fund measures All governmental funds and the Expendable Trust Fund are accounted for using a current financial resources measurement focus. With this measurement focus, only current assets and current liabilities generally are included on the balance sheet. Operating statemen'*' of these funds present increases (revenue and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in net current assets. Proprieury Funds are accounted for on a flow of economic resources measurement focus. With this measurement focus, all assets and liabilities associated with the operation of these funds are included on the balance sheet. Fund equity (net total assets) is segregated into contributed capital and retained earnings components. Proprieury fund type operating statements present increases (revenues) and decreases (expenses) in net total assets. Agency Funds are custodial in nature (assets equal liabilities) and do not involve measurement of results of operations. Fixed assets used in govemmenul fund type operations and long-term liabilities expected to be financed from governmental fimds are accounted for in two account groups, as they ire concerned only with the measurement of financial position, and are not involved with measurement of resttifs of operations. Basis of Accounting A fund’s basis of accounting determines when a transaction or event is lecognized in the fund’s operating statement. The modified accrual basis of accounting is used by all governmental fund types. Expendable Tnist Funds, and Agency Funds. Under this basis of accounting, transactions are recorded in the following manner: -30- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31. 1995 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) 1. Revenue Recognition - Revenue is recognized when it becomes measurable 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, special assessments, intergovemmenMil 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 - Expenditures 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 arc 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 acce unting 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 applicible 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 as 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 restiicted assets on the balance sheet bec'’nse their use is limited by bond covenant. Investments are stated at cost or amonized cost. Assets held by deferred compensation trustees are carried at market value. F. Property Taxes Property tax levies are set up by the "ity Council in October of each year, and are certified to Hennepin County for collection in the follow ing year. In Minnesota, counties act as collection agents for all property taxes. A portion of the property taxes levied is pi. J by the State of Minnesota through Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA), which is included in intergovernmental revenue in the financial statements. -31- -I I I I I I I I I I I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31. 1995 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) The county spreads all levies over taxable propeny. 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 Ma>’ 15 and October 15. The county provides tax settlements to cities and other taxing districts several times a 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 tlie 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 ccsi. 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 expenditures of the governmental fund 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. -32- CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31. 1995 NOTE 1 - SIGNinCANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) J. Liability for Compensated Absences Vacation and sick leave expected to be liquidated with expendable available financial resources is reported as an expenditure and a fund 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 t>pes, 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' budget 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 table: -33- n I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) Adopted Net Budget Amended Budget Amendment Budget General Fund Expenditures Administration $ 180,957 $ 4,000 $ 184,957 Finance 135,587 (5,000)130,587 Legal 86,964 18,450 105,414 Central Services 193,331 1,730 195,061 Police Protection 1,205,459 31,500 1,236,959 Fire Protection 206,479 (20,000>186,479 Emergency Preparedness 1,852 400 2,252 Streets 472,279 (34,910)437,369 Engineering 13,460 10,600 24,060 Special services - consulting/police 28,741 11,230 39,971 Contingency 71,919 (38,000)33,919 Operating transfer out 64,900 20,000 84,900 Net amendments 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. * Finance - The budget was decreased to reflect a reallocation of appropriations to other departments. ® Legal - The budget was increased to reflect higher than anticipated consulting services. “ Central Services - The budget was increased to reflect higher than anticipated building maintenance costs. ® Police Protection - The budget was increased to reflect higher then anticipated personal services costs. ® Fire Protection - The budget was decreased to reflect a reallocation from expenditures to an operating transfer out to the Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund for fire capital outlay. -34- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) “ Emergency Preparedne» - The budget was increased to reflect higher then anticipated equipment maintenance costs. ® Streets - The budget was decreased to reflect a reallocation of appropriations to other departments. ® Engineering - The budget was increased to reflect increased use of the consulting engineer. ° Special Services - consulting/police - The budget was increased for higher than anticipated legal and engineering services related to land use applications. “ Contingency - The budget was decreased to reflect a reallocation of appropriations to other departments. Operating Transfer Out - The budget was increased to provide additional funds needed in the Improvement and Equipmeiu Outlay Fund to cover fire capital outlay. Special Revenue Funds Revenue Park Fund Interest earned on investments Park dedication fees Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund Interest earned on investments User fees Operating transfers in Building Capital Outlay Fund Interest earned on investments Expenditures Park Fund Capital outlay Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund Capital outlay Building Capital Outlay Fund Miscellaneous Capital outlay Adopted Budget Net Budget Amendment Amended Budget $ 14.000 10,000 15,000 3,000 84,900 100,000 14.000 10.000 15,000 3,000 84,900 100.000 32,250 99,682 51,230 17,800 20.426 99,682 83,480 17,800 20,426 I 1 I I I 1 -35- CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 I NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTIM jTD) The revenue budget amendments in the Special Revenue Funds were for the following purposes: ® Park Fund - The revenue budget was established to reflect investment earnings and park dedication fees from developers. ° Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund - The rev enue budget was established to reflect equipment use charges, investment earnings, and operating transfers in. * Building Capital Outlay Fund - The revenue budget was established to reflect investment earnings. The expenditure budget amendments in the Special Revenue Funds were for the following purposes: ® Park Fund - The budget was increased to provide for landscaping, fencing, pathways, benches, and equipment at the Crystal Bay Park playground, parking lot improvements, picnic table, and signage at Highwood Nature Trails, partial construction and tree planting along the Old Crystal Bay Road bike/hike trail, and tree planting at French Creek Preserve. “ Improvement and Elqiiipment Capita] Outlay Fund - The budget was increased to provide for the network equipment, printers, computer equipment, and software related to the establishment of a stand alone record keeping system. ® Building Capital Outlay Fund - The budget was increased to provide for clean-up of contaminated soils at the old public works site, and for miscellaneous equipment and landscaping costs related to the 1991 public facilities capital project. M. Memorandum Onlv 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 mu 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 certain 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 Flow^ For purposes of the Statement of Cash Flows, tfe 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’ ponion in the City'wide cash and investment management pool is considered to be cash equivalent. -36- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Sutements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 1 - SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) 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 League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMC Trust), a public entity risk pool for its general property and casualty, workers ’ con^nsation, 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 will reinsure through commercial companies for claims in excess of certain limits. The major reinsurance points are generally $200,000 per occurrence for property loss or damage and $450,0(X) per occurrence for workers ’ compensation. 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 IN’$’ESTMENTS A. Deposits In accordance with applicable Minnesota Statutes, the City maintains deposits at depository banks authorized by the City Council. Minnesota Statutes require that all 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 Statutes 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 institution. At year-end, the cariying amount of the City's deposits was $433,985, while the balance on the bank records was $507,779. At December 31, 1995, 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 $760. -37- » J J CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 I I NOTE 2 - DEPOSITS AP^ INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED) C. Investments The City may also invest idle funds as authorized by Miruiesota Statutes, as follows: direct obligations or obligations guaranteed by the 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 maturing in 270 days or less; repurchase or reverse purchase agreements with banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System with capitalization exceeding $10,(X)0,000, a primary reporting dealer in U.S. government securities to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, or certain Minnesota securities broker-dealers; and futures contracts sold under authority of Minnesota Statutes § 471.56, Subd. 5. 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, 1995 are as follows: CustcxJial Credit Risk Category U.S. government securities State and local government securities Commercial paper 1 3 $5.115.141 s - $1,050.897 285,000 -- 3.088.665 -- s 8.488.806 $- $1.050.897 Carrying Value 6.166,038 285,000 3,088.665 9.539.703 Investment ptH>ls - unclassified Money market funds Held by deferred compensation trustees Total investments 14,171 776.874 Market Value 6.540.835 297.533 3.092.258 9,930.626 14.171 776,874 10.330.748 $ 10,721.671 Deposits Cash on hand Total deposits, investments and cash on hand 433.985 760 $ 10.765.493 Deposits, investments, and cash on hand are reported on the City's combined balance sheet as follows: Cash and temporar> investments Cash and investments held by trustee Restricted assets - cash and temporary investments Total cash and invesimenis $ 7,250,665 1,189.983 2,324,845 $ 10.765.493 -38- CITY OF ORONO, MINNF SOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 3 - PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT A. Changes in General Fixed Assets Balance Balance Beginning End of Year Additions Deletions of Year Land and improvements $ 1,239,796 $ 10,884 S $1.250,680 Buildings and improvements 3,205,130 --3,205,130 Equipment 1,303,129 147,291 94,855 1,355,565 $ 5,748.055 $ 158,175 $ 94,855 $5,811,375 B. Proprietary Fund Type Property, Plant, and Equipment Golf Water Sewer Course Operating Operating Operating Total Land and improvements $ 57,132 $16,210 $ 127,977 S 201,319 Buildings and improvements 786,594 31,014 48,722 866,330 Equipment 48,837 74,047 101,968 224,852 Distribution/collection system 2,083,577 6,780,600 -8,864,177 2,976,140 6,901,871 278,667 10,156,678 Less accumulated depreciation 903.548 2,627,014 65,894 3,596,456 $ 2,072,592 $4,274,857 $ 212,773 $6,560,222 NOTE 4 - DEFERRED CREDITS AM) RE\T:NUE 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 $1(X).000 will be received in equal quarterly payments over a 15-year period, without interest. At December 31, 1995, the remaining balance of $10,025 on the contract for deed is recorded as deferred revenue in the General Fund until collected and available to finance current operations. -39- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes tc Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 4 - DEFERRED CREDITS AND REVENUE (CONTINUED) B. 1985 Special Assessments The City adopted a special assessment roll in 1085 which included $46,175 relating to improvements on City-owned property. The General Fund will pcy these assessments over 15 years in annual installments with 9.2% interest. The remaining assessment principal balance of $15,375 at December 31, 1995 has been recorded as due to/from other funds. The related revenue and charges have been deferred in the 1985 Improvement Debt Service and General Funds, respectively. C. Developer Advances In 1989, the City began construction of sewer and water improvements along State Highway 12 but had not finalized the amounts to be specially assessed against benefitted properties. The developers within the project area were charged a preliminary amount for the improvements. This amount was recognized as contributed capital in the Water and Sewer Operating Funds during 1995. D. Sewer Operating 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 balances due from MWCC total $277,958 for the facilities and $503 for reserve capacity charges and are included in due from other governmental units as of December 31, 1995. The total price for each portion of the facilities will be received over 30 years with interest at 4% per annum 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 future 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; Facility Treatment Works 1963 Interceptor 1965 Interceptor MWCC Acquisition Year 1971 1977 1977 Remaining Deferred Credits $ 1,963 94,217 6,299 $ 102,479 -40- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 5 - LONG-TERM DEBT A. Components of Long-Term Debt Original Issue Interest Rate Issue Date Final Maturity Date Balance End of Year eral long-term debt General Obligation Bonds Improvement Bonds of 1982 $475,000 6.50-10.00%12-1-1982 3-1-1999 $ 60,000 Improvement Bonds of 1992 $2,000,000 3.30-5.50%8-1-1992 2-1-2008 1,825,000 Refunding Bonds of 1995 $360,000 3.85-4.15%12-26-1995 2-1-2002 360,000 Public Facilities Revenue Bonds of 1991 $4,000,000 4.50-6.50%12-1-1991 2-1-2008 3,660,000 Vacation and severance b .ictiu payable N/A N/A N/A N/A 140.913 Total general long-term deot Proprietary Fund debt Revenue Bonds G.O. Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds of 1989 G.O. Refunding Bonds of 199S Total Proprietary Fund debt Total all long-term debt $ 2,300.000 6.10-6.60% 9-16-1989 2-1-2002 $ 1,550,000 3.85-4.15% 12-26-1995 2-1-2002 6,045,913 1.750.000 1.550.000 3.300.000 $ 9,345,913 ] I J I J I -41- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 5 - LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) B. Statement of Changes in Long-Tenn Debt Balance Be ginning of Year Additions Retired Balance End of Year General long-term debt General Obligation Bonds Public Facilities Revenue Bonds Proprietary Fund debt Revenue Bonds Vacation and severance benefits payable - net $ 2,410,000 $ 3,835,000 360,000 $ 525,000 175,000 $ 2,245,000 3,660,000 6,245,000 360,000 700,000 5,905,000 1,950,000 1,550,000 200,000 3,300,000 137,421 3,492 140,913 $ 8,332,421 $1,913,492 $ 900,000 $ 9,345,913 C. Minimum Debt Payments Minimum annual principal and interest payments required to retire long-term debt, excluding vacation and severance benefits payable: Year Ending December 31 General Long-Term Debt Enterprise Funds Total 1996 $ 613,998 $ 1,893,662 $2,507,660 1997 681,046 305,350 986,396 1998 683,020 299,674 982,694 1999 681,152 305,513 986,665 2000 672,204 306,524 978,728 Thereafter 4,982,488 522,976 5,505,464 $ 8,313,908 $ 3,633,699 $11,947,607 -42- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 5 - LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) D. Descriptions and Restrictions of Long-Term Debt 1. General LvT>g-Tenn Debt General Obl<;^ation 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 Redevelopment 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, and 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 cun^nt portion paid within 60 days), which will be paid or used in future periods. The liability for Proprietary Fund employees is included in the accrued liabilities of those funds. 2. Proprietary Fund Debt G.O. Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds of 1989 - These bonds were issued to finance improvements to the water and sewer systems and will be repaid from net revenues of the water and sewer systems, connection charges, and special assessments levied against benefitted propjerties. Under the resolution authorizing the sale of the bonds, the City is required to have in a water and sewer bond restricted cash account an amount not less than the total amount of the principal and interest on the bonds due and payable the following year. Amounts credited to the water and sewer account are to be used only for payment of principal and interest on the bonds. Net revenues of the water and sewer systems after payment of operation and maintenance expenses are available to be credited to the water and sewer bond account as required. Unspent bond proceeds received are restricted for debt service or construction in the Water and Sewer Operating Enterprise Funds. 1 I 1 1 1 I * i f 1 -43- r CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 5 - LONG-TERM DEBT (CONTINUED) 3. 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 $360,0(X3 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. Pending the call of the bonds to be refunded in 19%, the proceeds were invested by the City* and have been reported in the Water and Sewer Enterprise Funds. 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. E. Ultimate Responsibility for Debt Long-term debt is backed by the full faith and credit of the City, except the Public Facilities Revenue Bonds of 1991. F. Resources to Meet Future Debt Requirements “ Amounts AvaUable for Long-Term Debt - Available fund balance designated or reserved for repayment of long-term debt includes: General Fund $ 140,913 Debt Service Funds 1,367,973 $ 1,508,886 ° Amount to be Provided in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group - This amount represents future 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 $594,(X)0 at December 31, 1995. ■44- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 6 - DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLANS The City offers 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 compensation 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 BENXFIT 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 eligibilit) 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 panicipant. 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 anributable 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 the assets to satisfy the claims of general creditors in the future. -45- I 1 1 1 CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 8 - DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATE^^^DE A. Plan Description All full-time and certain pan-time employees of the City of Orono are covered by defined benefit pension 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 Minnesou Sututes, Chapters 353 and 356. PERF members belong to either the Coordinated Plan or the 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. The payroll for employees covered by PERF and PEPFF for the year ended December 31, 1995 w'as approximately $939,365 aiKl $748,795, respectively; the City ’s total payroll was $1,785,150. PERA provides retirement benefits as well as disability benefits to members, and benefits to survivors upon the 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 average salary for any five successive years of allowable serv ice, age, and years of credit at termination of service. Two methods are used to compute benefits for Coordinated and Basic Plan members. The 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 accrtial rate for a Basic Plan member is 2.0% of the average salary for each of the first ten 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 ten 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 2.5% for each year of service through June 30, 1993. Effective July 1, 1993, the annual accrual rate for PEPFF is 2.65%. For PERF members whose annuity is calculated using Method 1, and for all PEPFF members, 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, beca ,w‘ 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 lo benefits but are not receiving them yet, are bound by the provisions in effect at the time they last terminated their public service. -46- CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE S - DEHNTD BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE (CONTINUED) B. Contributions Required and Contributions Made Minnesota Sututes Chapter 353 sets the rates for employer and employee contributions. The City makes annual contributions to the pension plans equal to the amount required by sute statutes. According to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 356.215, Subd. 4(g). the date of full funding required for the PERF and the PEPFF is July I, 2020. As part of the annual actuarial valuation, PERA’s actuary determines the sufficiency of the statutory contribution rates towards meeting the required full funding deadline, "nte actuary compares the actual contribution rate to a "required ” contribution rate. The required contribution rate consists of (a) normal costs based on entry age normal cost methods, (b) a supplemenul contribution for amortizing any unfunded acmarial accrued liability by the date required for full funding, and (c) an allowance for administrative expenses. Current combined statutory contribution rates and actuarially required contribution rates for the plans are as follows: Statutory Rates Employees Employer Required Rates * PERF (Basic and Coordinated Plans) PEPFF 4.319? 7.60% 4.60% 11.70% 9.76% 19.00% • Xhe recommended rates scheduled above represent the required rates for fiscal year 1995 contributions as reported in the July 1. 1994 actuarial valuation reports. Total contributions made by the City during fiscal year 1995 were: Amounts Percentage of Covered Payroll Employees Employer Employees Employer PERF PEPFF $ 39,735 $ 42,084 56.908 85.363 4.23% 7.60% 4.48 % 11.40% $ 96,643 $ 127.447 The City's contribution for the year ended December 31. 1995 to the PERF represented 0.03% of total employer contributions required of all participating entities. For the PEPFF, contributions for the year ended December 31. 1995 represented 0.25% of total employer contributions required of all participating entities. -47- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 8 - DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE (CONTLNUED) C. Funding Status and Progress 1. Pension Benefit Obligation The "pension benefit obligation" is a standardized disclosure measure of the present value of pension benefits, adjusted for the effects of projected salary increases and step-rate benefits, estimated to be payable in the funire as a result of employee service to date. The measure, which is the actuarial present value of credited projected benefits, is intended to help users assess PERA's funding stams on a going-concern basis, assess progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due. and make comparisons among Public Employees’ Retirement Systems and participating employers. The measure is independent of the actuarial funding method used to determine required contributions, which is discussed in Note B. PERA does not make separate measurements of assets and pension benefit obligation amounts for individual participating employers. The pension benefit obligations for the PERF and the PEPFF as of June 30, 1995 are shown below: PERF PEPFF I I I I I I I Total pension benefit obligation Net assets available for benefits, at cost (market values for PERF * $5,266,688,(XX); PEPFF = $1,445,345,000) Unfunded (assets in excess oO pension benefit obligation $ 5,994.492,000 $ 1,113,225,000 5.074.357.000 1,356.179,000 $ 920,135,000 $ (242,954,000) The pension benefit obligation was determined as part of an actuarial valuation at July 1, 1995. For the PERF. significant actuarial assumptions used in the calculation of the pension benefit obligation include: (a) a rate of return on the investment of present and future assets of 8.5% per year, compounded annually, prior to retirement, and 5.0% per year, compounded annually, following retirement; (b) projected salary increases taken from an age related table which incorporates a 5.0% base inflation assumption; (c) payroll growth at 6.0% per year, consisting of 5.0% for inflation and 1.0% due to growth in group size; (d) post-retirement benefit increases that are accounted for by the 5.0% rate of return assumption following retirement; and (e) mortality rates based on the 1983 Group Annuity Mortality Table set forward one year for retired members and set back five years for each active member. -48- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 8 - DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLANS - STATEWIDE (CONTLNUED) Actuarial assumptions used in the calculation of the PEPFF include: (a) a rate of return on the investment of presera and fumre assets of 8.591 per year, compounded annually, prior to retirement and 5.0% per year, compounded annually, following retirement; (b) projected salary increases of 6.5% per year, compounded annual!), attributable to the effects of inflation; (c) post retirement increases that are accounted for by the 5.0% rate of return assumption following retirement; and (d) mortality rates based on the 1971 Group Annuity Mortality Table projected to 1984 for males and females. 2. Changes in Actuarial Assumptions and Methods Since the July 1, 1994 acmarial valuation, there were no changes in actuarial assumptions of the PERF and the PEPFF which impacted funding costs. Potential changes in the actuarial assumptions used for the PEPFF may be made in the future. Results of an experience snidy for the fund during the four-year period ending June 30, 1994, disclosed (a) retirees are living longer; (b) the expected active member death rate is declining; (c) the trend toward earlier retirement continues; and (d) the panem of salary increases varies substantially by age. With a strong merit and seniority component evident at the younger ages. Based on these results. PERA will soon consider revising the actuarial assumption for retirement age, mortality, payroll growth, and individual salary increases. These changes, if adopted within fiscal year 1996, will significantly impact the July 1, 1996 actuarial valuation of the PEPFF. 3. Changes in Benefit Provisions The 1995 legislative session did not include any benefit improvements which would impact funding costs for the PERF and the PEPFF. D. Ten-Year Historical Trend Information Ten-year historical trend information is presented in PERA’s Component Unit Financial Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1995. This information is useful in assessing the pension plan's accumulation of sufficient assets to pay pension benefits as they become due. E. Related Party Investments As of June 30. 1995, and for the fiscal year then ended, PERA held no securities issued by the City or other related parties. I I I I \ 1 -49- i I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 9 - INDIVIDUAL FUND DISCLOSURES A. Interfund Receivables and Payables at Year-End Interfund Receivables Interfund Payables General Fund Debt Service Fund 1985/1995 Improvement Bonds Capital Project Funds Permanent Improvement Revolving Minnesota State-Aid Streets Construction $ 15,375 15,375 135,000 135,000 $ 150,375 $ 150,375 B. Deficit Fund Balance The Minnesota State-Aid Streets Construction Capital Project Fund had a deficit fund balance of $265,543 at December 31, 1995. This deficit will be eliminated through reimbursements of project costs from state-aid construction revenue or transfers from other funds. 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 Projects - The amount in the Capital Project Fund represents fund balance that has been designated for specific road and bridge improvement projects. Designated for Capital Outlay - These amounts represent fund balances which are committed to pay for capital outlay in the Special Revenue Funds. -50- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 NOTE 9 - INDIVIDUAL FLTVD DISCLOSURES (CONTINUED) " Designated for Debt Semce - These amounts represent fund balances 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 amount in the General Fund represents fund balance which has been designated for payment of the estimated long-term liability for vacation and severance benefits. NOTE 10 - FUND TRANSFERS The following transfers were made during the year ended December 31, 1995 A. Operatii^ Transfers Funds Transferred From General Fund Transferred To Amount Special Revenue Fund - Building Capital Outlay Special Revenue Fund - Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Fund - 1991 Public Facilities Revenue Bonds Description $ 84,900 Capital outlay expendimres. 123,000 To finance current operating expenditures. $ 207,900 I I I I I I I I B. Residual Equity Transfers Funds Transferred From Transferred To Debt Service Fund - Enterprise Fund - 1980 Improvement Bonds Water Operating (1) Amount Description $ 26,326 To close 1980 Improvement Bond Debt Service Fund. (1) The residual equity transfer to the Water Operating Fund was closed to contributed equity and therefore is not reflected on the Combined Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings - Proprietar>' Fund Type. It must be included to reconcile residual equity transfers in and out for the reporting entity within the general purpose financial statements. -51- I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31, 1995 I NOTE 11 - SEGMENT INFORMATION FOR ENTERPRISE FLTVDS 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, 1995 is as follows: Gross profit and Water Operating Sewer Operating Golf Course Operating Total operating revenue $223,638 $579,390 $173,934 $976,962 Depreciation expense $64,764 $144,461 $13,021 $222,246 Operating income (loss)$(19,740)$(191,722)$31,764 $(179.698) Net income (loss)$(30,717)$(92,305)$39,914$(83,108) Property, plant, and equipment - additions $790 $70,746 $5,364 $76,900 Property, plant and equipment - deletions $5,781 $13,482 $1,700 $20,963 Net working capital $161,120 $1,112,252 $193,710 $1.467,082 Bonds payable $1.669,472 $1,630,528 $-$3,300,000 Total assets $3,246,645 $7,377.406 $410,961 $11,035,012 Total equity $1,521,154 $5,529,698 $399,698 $7,450,550 Tax revenues $40,586 $43,208 $-$83,794 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 $ 1,080,575 $ 3.826.499 $ 131,563 $ 5,038,637 Add special assessments levied in 1995 221.178 95,955 .317,133 Add developers prepaid assessments recognized during 1995 69,723 20,077 89.800 Add residual equity transfer from 1980 Improvement Bonds Debt Service Fund 26,326 26,326 Less depreciation on contributed assets (32,886) (124,052)(709)(157,647) Balance - end of year $ 1,364,916 $ 3.818,479 $ 130,854 $ 5.314.249 -52- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA I Notes to Financial Statements (continued) December 31. 1995 NOTE 12 - PROPRIETARY FUNDS' CONTRIBUTED CAPITAL (CONTINUED) During 1994, the outstanding bonds of the 1980 Improvement Bonds Debt Service Fund were called. The residual equity of the fund was transferred to the Water Operating Fund in 1995 for the purpose of assisting in the debt service requirements of the G O. Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds of 1989. 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, 1995, the Cif' awarded certain contracts for various construction projects. TTie City ’s commitment for uncompleted work on these contracts at December 31, 1995 was approximately $61,581. C. Facility Lease During the year ended December 31, 1991, the City entered into an unconditional lease with the Housing and Redevelopment AuLhority 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 1995 was approximately $396,266. Future minimum rental commitments under the lease are as follows; Year Amount 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Thereafter $ 402,455 402,700 406,903 405,017 406,990 3,297,495 $ 5,321,560 The lease purchase payments will equal the principal and interest due on the 1991 - HRA Public Facilities Bonds issued to construct the facilities. -53- I I I I I e I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I GENERAL FUND The General Fund is the general operating fund of tlie City. It is used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. -54- Exhibit B-1CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Fund Comparative Balance Sheet As of December 31, 1995 and 1994 1995 1994 Assets Cash and temporary investments $ 1,730,921 $ 1,344,283 Receivables Accounts 16,770 14,721 Accrued interest 102,292 84,638 Delinquent taxes 41,516 70,464 Delinquent special assessments 5,195 5,195 Contract for deed 10,025 13,358 Advances to other funds —10,043 Due from other governmental units 42.020 100,829 Prepaid items 35,603 34,502 Deferred charge - assessmentsonpropertyownedbyCity 15,375 18,455 Other assets 1,163 2,040 Total assets $ 2,000,880 $ 1,698,528 Liabilities and Fund Equity Liabilities Accounts payable $ 90,262 $ 75,535 Accrued salaries payable 74,961 62,902 Due to other funds 15,375 18.455 Due to other governmental units 106,845 46.055 Deferred revenue Contract for deed 10,025 13,358 Delinquent taxes 41,516 46,470 Special assessments 5,195 5,195 Total liabilities 344,179 267,970 Fund equity Fund balance Reserved for prepaid items —34,502 Reserved for advances to other funds —10,043 Unreserved Designated for vacation/severance benefits 140,913 137,421 Undesignated 1,515,788 1,248,592 Total fund equity 1,656.701 1,430,558 Total liabilities and fund equity $ 2,000,880 $ 1,698,528 I1 1 1 I I I I I -55- Exhibit B-2 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) Year Ended December 31,1995 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31,1994) 1995 1994 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget Actual Revenue Taxes Property $ 1,647,940 $ 1,644,394 $ (3.546)$ 1,644,974 Penalties and interest —46 46 159 Total taxes 1.647,940 1,644.440 (3.500)1,645,133 Special assessments —460 460 624 Licenses and permits Licenses 14,630 15,633 1.003 15,844 Permits 118,370 186.562 68,192 132,044 Total licenses and permits 133,000 202,195 69,195 147,888 I me. governmental Federal emergency preparedness 4,000 4,287 287 4,500 State grants Homestead and agricultural credit aid 270.705 270.705 -260,327 Police town aid 76,000 82,261 6,261 81,791 Police training reimbursement 5.000 5,518 518 5.911 Municipal state-aid streets 71,830 83,976 12,146 94,483 County grant - recycling 14,400 14,114 (286)47,145 Other -3,200 3.200 462 Total intergovernmental 441,935 464,061 22.l'26 494,619 Charges for scn'ices General government 255.490 286,500 31,010 238,362 Public safety 624,650 641.621 16,971 612,803 Total charges for services 880.140 928,121 4U981 851,165 Fines and forfeits 66.000 80.610 14,610 58,158 Other Interest earned on investments 41,000 62.347 21,347 49,065 Rents 5.400 5.400 —5.400 Refunds and reimbursements 22,600 24,056 1,456 21,566 Contract for deed - land 4,000 3,333 (667)5.714 Miscellaneous 3.000 7,384 4,384 4.263 Total other ' 76.000 102,520 26.520 86,008 Total revenue 3.245.015 3,422,407 177,392 3,283,595 (continued) -56- Exhibit B-2CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA General Fund Statement of Revenue. Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) (continued) Year Ended December 31,1995 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31,1994) -57- 1995 1994 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget Actual Expenditures General government Mavor and council• Personal services 16,899 16,139 (760)16,349 Supplies 100 —(100)22 Other services and charges 41,006 39.699 (1.307)32,925 Total mayor and council 58,005 55,838 (2.167)49,296 Administration Personal ser\ ices 171,626 173,045 1,419 166.067 Supplies 400 157 (243)3,889 Other services and charges 12,931 11.272 (1,659)24,172 Total administration 184,957 184.474 (483)194,128 Elections Personal ser\ ices —-—7,304 Supplies ———161 Other services and charges 435 —(435)2,395 Total elections 435 —(435)9,860 Assessing Supplies 100 —(100)483 Other services and charges 74.210 74.160 (50)75.134 Total assessing 74,310 74.160 (150)75,617 Finance Personal services 125,397 124,677 (720)122,500 Supplies 50 10 (40)826 Other services and charges 5,140 5,789 649 39,369 Total finance 130,587 130,476 (111)162,695 Legal Other services and charges 105,414 105,403 (11)98,777 Human services Other serv ’ices and charges 15,375 14,271 (1.104)13,940 (continued) II I 1 ■ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Exhibit B-2 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (G.iAP Basis) (continued) Year Ended December 31,1995 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1994) 1995 1994 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget Actual Expenditures (continued) General government (continued) Central services Supplies 14,776 16,468 1,692 2,249 Other ser\’ices and charges 180.285 178,583 (1,702)60,456 Total central services 195.061 195.051 (10)62,705 Total general government 764,144 759,673 (4.471)667,018 Public safety Police protection Personal serv ices 1,009.399 1,024.616 15,217 923.196 Supplies 50,300 51,053 753 42,466 Other services and charges 142,760 129,503 (13.257)140,164 Capital outlay 34.500 30,780 (3.720)30,081 Total police protection 1,236.959 1,235,952 (1.007)1,135,907 Fire protection Contracted fire protection 186,479 186.479 -182,783 Protective inspection and zoning Personal senices 281,806 279,026 (2.780)271,001 Supplies 1,700 875 (825)4,424 Other sendees and charges 10,150 9,161 (989)34,822 Total protective inspection and zoning 293.656 289,062 (4,594)310,247 Emergency preparedness Supplies ———233 Other ser\ ices and charges 2,252 2.251 (1)3,288 Total emergency preparedness 2.252 2,251 (1)3,521 (continued) -58- 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, 1995 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31,1994) 1995 1994 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget Actual Expenditures (continued) Public safety (continued) Animal control Personal serv ices 11,688 9,404 (2,284)10,515 Supplies 300 180 (120)369 Other services and charges 2,650 872 (1,778)2,826 Total animal control 14,638 10,456 (4,182)13,710 Total public safety 1,733,984 1.724,200 (9,784)1,646,168 Streets Personal services 235,768 233,740 (2,028)223,414 Supplies 77,000 73,913 (3,087)81.381 Other sen ices and charges 124,601 115,957 (8,644)180.696 Total streets 437,369 423,610 (13.759)485,491 Parks and recreation Personal services 26,578 23,126 (3,452)25,202 Supplies 2,800 1,505 (1,295)3,151 Other services and charges 21,130 25,818 4,688 27,386 Total parks and recreation 50,508 50,449 (59)55,739 Recycling Personal services 1,690 2,253 563 2,068 Supplies 350 —(350)1,487 Other services and charges 74,120 68.429 (5,691)68,582 Total recycling 76,160 70,682 (5,478)72,137 Miscellaneous Engineering 24,060 24,060 -20,831 Special services - consulting/police 39,971 39,966 (5)53,380 Contingency 33,919 18,724 (15.195)16,931 Total miscellaneous 97,950 82,750 (15,200)91,142 Total expenditures 3,160,115 3,111,364 (48,751)3,017,695 Excess of revenue over expenditures 84,900 311,043 226,143 265,900 (continued) -59- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Exhibit B'2 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Fund Statement of Revenue. Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (G.AAP Basts) (contmued) Year Ended December 31,1995 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1994) 1995 1994 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget .Actual Other financing uses Operating transfers (out)(84,900)(84,900)(84.900) Excess of revenue and other financing sources over expenditures and other financing uses $226,143 $ 226.143 181,000 Fund balance Beginning of year 1,430,558 1,249.558 End of year $ 1,656,701 $ 1,430,558 -60- SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS I I I 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 to account for park dedication fees received to be used for land acquisition and park development. Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Fund > used to repLce non-enterprise, non-police City equipment. Building Capital Outlay Fund - used to panially finance building facilities construction and additions through transfers from the General Fund. -61- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Exhibit C-ISpecial Revenue Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of December 31,1995 (with Comparative Touls as of December 31, 1994> Improvement Building Park and Equipment Capital Totals Capital Outlay Outlay 1995 1994 Assets Cash and temporary investments $ 273,396 Receivables $ 364,797 $ 2,357,807 $ 2,996,000 $ 3.012,789 Accrued interest 14,479 16,074 128,272 158,825 121,529 Total assets $ 287,875 $ 380,871 $ 2,486,079 $ 3,154,825 $ 3,134,3181 ■' Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities Accounts payable $ 20,523 $$$ 20,523 $ 8,567 1 ' Fund balance Unreserved Designated for capital outlay 267,352 380,871 2,486,079 3,134,302 3,125,751 Total liabilities and fund balance $ 287,875 $ 380,871 $ 2,486,079 $ 3,154.825 $ 3,134,318 . -62- Exhibit C-2 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Special Revenue Funds Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Year Ended December 31, 1995 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31,1994) I I I I I I I I I I I I I Revenue Intergovernmental State grant Other Interest earned on investments User fees Park dedication fees Miscellaneous Total revenue Expenditures Current Miscellaneous Capital outlay Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures Other fmancing sources (uses) Operating transfers in Operating transfers (out) Total other financing sources (uses) Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other fmancing sources over expenditures and other fmancing uses Fund balance Beginning of year End of year Park S 18,658 16,599 24,322 59,579 649 96,276 96,925 (37,346) (37,346) 304,698 $ 267J52 Improvement and Equipment Capital Outlay Building 17,028 3,597 20,625 69,266 69,266 (48,641) 84,900 84,900 36,259 344,612 $ 380,871 -63- Capital Totals Outlay 1995 1994 $S 18,658 $ 140,429 174,056 168,336 —3,597 2,745 --24,322 122,850 30,419 30,419 5,778 170,848 251.052 299,709 17,774 18,423 8,450 20,436 185,978 171,111 38,210 204.401 179,561 132.638 46,651 120,148 _84,900 174,900 (123,000)(123,000) (185,170) (123,000)(38,100)(10,270) 9,638 8,551 109,878 2.476.441 3,125,751 3,015,873 $ 2,486,079 $ 3,134,302 $ 3,125,751 Exhibit C-3 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Park Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) V ear Ended December 31,1995 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31,1994) 1995 1994 Over (Under)— Budget Actual Budget Actual Revenue Intergovernmental State grant Other $$ 18,658 $ 18,658 $ ' • Interest earned on investments 14,000 16,599 2,599 16,130 Park dedication fees Miscellaneous 10,000 24,322 14,322 122,850 Contributions ———300 Total revenue 24,000 59,579 35,579 139,280 Expenditures Current Miscellaneous 20,000 649 (19.351) 8,450 Capital outlay 99,682 96,276 (3,406)20,475 Total expenditures 119,682 96,925 (22,757)28,925 Excess (deficiency) of - revenue over expenditures (95,682)(37,346)58,336 110,355 r Other financing uses - Operating transfer (out)———(90,000)r-- Excess (deficiency) of revenue over W expenditures and other financing uses $ (95,682)(37.346)$ 58,336 20,355 • Fund balance Beginning of year 304,698 284,343 End of year $ 267,352 $ 304,698 w -64- I Exhibit C-4 I I I 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, 1995 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1994) Revenue Other Interest earned on investments User fees Miscellaneous Total revenue Expenditures Capital outlay General government Administration Finance Public safety Building and zoning Police protection Streets Parks and recreation Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures Other financing sources Operating transfer in Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other financing sources over expenditures Fund balance Beginning of year End of year -65- 1995 1994 Over (Under) Budget Actual Budget Actual $ 15,000 $ 17,028 $ 2,028 $ 17,695 3,000 3,597 597 2,745 ———5,478 18,000 20,625 2,625 25,918 12,220 10,157 (2,063)265 38,030 35,416 (2,614)2,799 6,730 6,721 (9)10,516 ———4,217 26,190 16,672 (9,518)98,145 310 300 (10)3,095 83,480 69,266 (14,214)119,037 (65,480)(48,641)16,839 (93,119) 84,900 84,900 84,900 $ 19,420 36,259 $ 16,839 (8.219) 344,612 352,831 $ 380,871 $ 344,612 Exhibit C-5 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Building Capital Outlay Fund Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Budget and Actual (GAAP Basis) Year Ended December 31,1995 (with Comparative Actual Amounts for Year Ended December 31, 1994) 1995 1994 Budget Actual Over (Under) Budget Actual Revenue Other Interest earned on investments $ 100,000 $ 140,429 $ 40,429 $ 134,511 Miscellaneous —30,419 30,419 — Total Revenue 100,000 170,848 70,848 134,511 Expenditures Current Miscellaneous 17,800 17,774 1,874 Capital outlay General government General government buildings 20,426 20,436 (1,890)31,599 Total expenditures 38,226 38,210 (16) 31,599 Excess of revenue over expenditures 61,774 132,638 70,864 102,912 Other financing sources (uses) Operating transfers in 90,000 Operating transfers (out)(123,000)(12 *,000)—(95,170) Total other financing sources (uses)(123,000)(123,000)(5,170) Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other financing sources over expenditures and other financing uses $ (61,226)9,638 $ 70,864 97,742 Fund balance Beginning of year 2,476,441 2,378,699 End of year $ 2,486,079 $ 2,476,441 -66- II 1 I f - 4 r ¥ ’ I DEBT SERVICE FUNDS Debt Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources used for the pa>7nent of principal, interest, and fiscal agent fees on general long-term debt. -67- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Debt Serv ice Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of December 31,1995 (with Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1994) 1980 Improve ment Bonds 1982 Improve ment Bonds 1985/1995 Improve ment Bonds Assets Cash and temporary investments $$55,302 $ 129,785 Cash and investments held by trustee ——— Receivables Accrued interest —10,931 13,285 Delinquent taxes —62 1,104 Delinquent special assessments ——4,103 Deferred special assessments —8,831 54,590 Due from other funds — —15,375 Due from other governments —78 1,132 Total assets $—$75.204 $ 219,374 Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities Accounts payable $—$25 $ 5,954 Deferred revenue Delinquent taxes —62 1,104 Special assessments —8,831 58,693 Special assessments on City property ——15,375 Total liabilities —8,918 81,126 Fund balance Reserved for debt service —— Unreserved Designated for debt serv ice —66,286 138,248 Total ftind balance —66,286 138,248 Total liabilities and fund balance $—$75,204 $ 219,374 * < I -68- I 1991 Public Facilities Revenue Exhibit D-1 1992 Improve ment Totals Bonds Bonds 1995 1994 S 122,068 $ 591,529 $ 898,684 $ 903.473 413,109 —413,109 413,267 10,417 19,441 54,074 34,309 4,935 328 6,429 10,281 —13,779 17,882 25,944 —m.2B2 762,703 882,170 ——15,375 18,455 2,818 5,135 9,163 — $ 553,347 $ 1,329,494 $ 2,177,419 $ 2,287,899 $ 1,078 $$ 7,057 $ 1,103 4,935 328 6,429 6,298 —713,061 780,585 907,784 ——15,375 18,455 6,013 713,389 809,446 933.640 413,109 -413,109 413,267 134,225 616,105 954,864 940,992 547.334 616,105 1,367,973 1,354,259 $ 553,347 $ 1.329,494 $ 2,177,419 $ 2.287.899 -69- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Debt Service Funds Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Year Ended December 31, 1995 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1994) 1980 1982 1985/1995 ImproveImproveImprove ment ment ment Bonds Bonds Bonds Revenue Taxes Property $ no $ 5,479 $ 42,894 Penalties and interest ——97 Special assessments 25,464 —20,418 Intergovernmental Homestead and agricultural credit aid ——7,055 Other Interest earned on investments 752 3,114 9,007 Miscellaneous —225 1,700 Total revenue 26,326 8,818 81,171 Expenditures Debt service Principal retirement —15,000 60,000 Interest on bonds —6,675 34,080 Fiscal agent fees —210 1,686 Miscellaneous —180 6,004 Total expenditures —22,065 101,770 Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures 26,326 (13,247)(20,599) Other financing sources (uses) Bond proceeds (net)-—357,899 Payment to refund bond issue -—(360,000) Operating transfers in —— Total other financing sources (uses)——(2,101) Excess (deficiency) of revenue and other financing sources over expenditures and other financing sources (uses)26,326 (13,247)(22,700) Fund balance Beginning of year 79,533 160,948 Residual equity transfer (out)(26,326)—— End of year $$ 66,286 $ 138,248 I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I -70- j I I I I I I I 1991 Exhibit D-2 Public 1992 Facilities Improve- Revenue ment Totals Bonds Bonds 1995 1994 $ 221,153 $ 17,850 $ 287,486 $ 276,204 —1,348 1,445 1,438 —128,101 173,983 256,551 28,215 -35,270 44,607 36,981 27,190 77,044 69,034 —48,450 50,375 2,184 286,349 222,939 625,603 650,018 175,000 90,000 340,000 550,000 221,266 91,100 353,121 379,635 2,156 355 4,407 2,837 —2,750 8,934 6,519 398,422 184,205 706,462 938,991 (112,073)38,734 (80,859)(288,973) MB .357,899 —-(360,00.)— 123,000 —123,000 95,513 123,000 —120,899 95,513 10,927 38,734 40,040 (193,460) 536,407 577,371 1,354,259 1,619,202 ——(26,326) (71,483) $ 547,334 $ 616,105 $ 1,367,973 $ 1,354,259 -71- 1 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS Capital Project Funds are used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or 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 RevoKing Fund - used to account for construction costs prior to obtaining permanent financing. 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Construction Fund - used to account for construction costs of the Stubbs Bay area sanitary sewer system. -72- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Capital Project Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of December 31,1995 (with Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1994) -73- Miimesota 1 ^ 1 State-Aid Permanent Streets Improvement Construction Revolving Assets — Cash and temporary investments $ 519 $ 318,258 Receivables Accrued interest —43,311 Delinquent special assessments —2,552 Deferred special assessments 38,697 36,184 Due from other funds —135,000 Due from other govenunental units 202,749 I Total assets $ 241,965 $ 535,306 • A Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities Accounts and contracts payable $ 333,811 $ 25,131 Due to other funds 135,000 — Deferred revenue Special assessments 38.697 38,736 Total liabilities 507,508 63,867 0 • Fund balance (deficit) Unreserved Designated for emergency contingencies —325,000 Designated for roadTiridge projects —122,830 Undesignated (265,543)23,609 Total fund balance (deficit)(265,543)471,439 Total liabilities and fund balance $ 241,965 $ 535,306 Exhibit E-1 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Totals Construction 1995 1994 $176,584 $495,361 $ 939,791 8,846 52,157 43,449 -2,552 1,399 -74,881 48,572 -135,000 — —202,750 — S 185,430 $962,701 S 1,033.211 $$358,942 $ 240,489 —135,000 10,043 —77,433 49.953 571,375 300.485 325,000 320,969 —122,830 187,837 185.430 (56,504)223,920 —185,430 391,326 732,726 $185,430 $962,701 $ 1,033,211 -74 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Capital Project Funds Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Year Ended December 31, 1995 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1994) Minnesota -75- State-Aid Permanent Streets Improvement Construction Revolving Revenue Taxes Property $$ Special assessments —15,102 — Intergovernmental State aid for construction 338,601 — Other ,— Interest earned on investments —27,998 Miscellaneous -372 w Total revenue 338,601 43,472 — Expenditures Capital outlay Professional serv’ices 49,551 2,860 Construction costs 596,197 77,979 % . Miscellaneous 233 — Total expenditures 645,981 80,839 r ' Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures (307,380)(37,367) r*- * Other financing uses mrnt Operating transfers (out)—— Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures and other financing uses (307,380)(37,367) $ ■ Fund balance (deficit) Beginning of year 41,837 508,806 End of year $(265,543)$ 471,439 I I I I 1992 Stubbs Bay Exhibit E-2 Sewer Totals Construction 1995 1994 $$$ 230 -15,102 17,768 -338,601 683,814 9,568 37,566 41,615 —372 16,284 9,568 391,641 759,711 81 52,492 237,128 4,862 679,038 481,367 1,278 1,511 23,491 6,221 733,041 741,986 3,347 (341,400)17,725 (343) 3,347 (341,400)17,382 182,083 732,726 715,344 $ 185,430 $ 391,326 $ 732,726 -76- ENTERPRISE FUNDS Enterprise Funds are used to account for the operations of self-supponing activities which render ser\'ices or goods to the public. The accounting records are maintained on the accrual basis of accounting. Water Operating Fund - used to account for the provision of water services to the residents of the City who have water service available. Sewer Operating Fund - used to account for the provision o^ sewer services to the residents of the City who have sanitary sewer service available. Golf Course Operating Fund - used to account for the golf course operation sales and related expenses. -77- Exhibit F-1 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA » < Enterprise Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of December 31,1995 (with Comparative Touls as of December 31,1994) Assets Current assets Cash and temporary investments Accounts receivable Accrued interest receivable Delinquent taxes receivable Delinquent special assessments receivable Deferred specia' assessments, current portion Due from other governmental units Inventory Prepaid items Total current assets Restricted assets Cash and temporary investments Accrued interest receivable Total restricted assets Other assets, less current portion Deferred special assessments Due from other governmental units Discount on revenue bonds Total other assets Property, plant, and equipment Work in progress Land and improvements Buildings and improvements Equipment Distribution^collcction svstem Less accumulated depreciation Net property, plant, and equipment Total assets (continued) -78- . I Golf W'aler Sewer Course Totals Operating Operating Operating 1995 1994 $ 143,143 $ 797,14H $ 189,408 $ 1,129.699 S 1.067.213 t' ■ 451 288,380 —288,831 274.694 6,654 42,304 5,541 54.499 36,299 678 663 -1,341 1,051 —19.976 -19,976 22,621 ► < 31,597 13,708 —45,305 41,556 480 28,616 —29.096 21.990 • ——2,289 2,289 3,599 1,400 1,600 950 3,950 31,571 184.403 1,192,395 198,188 1.574.986 1.500.594 785,521 1,539,324 .2,324,845 806,734 9,279 28,347 -37,626 30.258 794,800 1.567,671 —■2,362,471 836.992 . 189,581 82,247 271,828 mm ► ' ■ —255,089 —255,089 278,461 5.269 5,147 —10,416 11.941 194.850 342.483 —537,333 290,402 • 26,558 * 57.132 16.210 127,977 201,319 201.319 »■ 786,594 31.014 48,722 8to,330 866,330 48,837 74,047 101,968 224,852 236.799 • 2,083.577 6,780.600 —8.864,177 8,76«.715 2.976.140 6,901,871 278.667 10,156.678 10.099,721 903.548 2,627.014 65.894 3.596.456 3,377.690 t 2.072.592 4,274.857 212.773 6,560.222 6,722,031 $ 3,246.645 S 7.377.406 S 410,961 $ 11,035,012 S 9.350.019 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Exhibit F-1 Liabilities and Fund Equity Current liabilities Accounts payable Salaries and compensated absences payable Due to other governmental units Total current liabilities Current liabilities payable from restneted assets Revenue bonds payable Accrued interest payable Deferred de\ eloper advances Total current liabilities payable from restricted assets Long-term liabilities, less current portion Revenue bonds payable Compensated absences payable Deferred credits Total long-term liabilities Total liabilities Fund equity Contributed capital Retained earnings Unreserved Total fund equity Total liabilities and fund equity Golf -79- Water Sewer Course Totals Operating Operating Operating 1995 1994 S 16,727 S 45.579 S 1.731 S 64.037 S 9.594 3.144 4,638 2.747 10.529 8.644 3.412 29.926 -33.338 2.876 23.283 80.143 4,478 107.904 21.114 8><5,325 864.675 1,750.000 200.000 24J60 23.596 -47,756 52.094 -—-—89.800 909.485 888.271 -1 797.756 341.894 784.147 765.853 1,550,(KK)1,750,000 8.576 10,962 6,785 26.323 24.603 —102,479 —102.479 112.009 792.723 879,294 6.785 1.678.802 1.886.612 1.725.491 1,847.708 11.263 3,584.462 2.249.620 1,364,916 3.818.479 130.854 5,314.249 5.038.637 156.238 1.711.219 268.844 2.136.301 2.061.762 1.521,154 5.529.698 399,698 7.450.550 7,100.399 $ 3,246,645 $ 7.377.406 S 410.961 $ 11.035,012 S 9.350.019 Exhibit F-2 CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Enterpnse Funds Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Year Ended December 31,1995 (with Comparative T( ‘als for Year Endr -cunber 31, 1994) Golf Water Sewer Course Totals Operating Operating Operating 1995 1994 Sales and cost of sales Sales $$$ 17,728 $ 17,728 $16,158 Cost of sales --10.467 10,467 7,809 Gross profit ——7,261 7,261 8,349 Operating revenue Metered water sales 220,848 ——220,848 199.208 User charges —578,149 —578,149 544.471 Greens fees ——136,809 136,809 136,532 Equipment rental -—29,084 29.084 31,594 Other 2,790 1,241 780 4.811 12,538 Total operating revenue 223.638 579.39U 166,673 969.701 924,343 Total gross profit and operating revenue 223,638 579,390 173.934 976,962 932,692 Operating expenses Personal serv ices Salaries a-id wages 59,035 104,62,033 226,020 228.086 Retirement contnbutions HeaWi and life 6,759 12.*»4.843 24,045 24.805 insurance contributions J!M1 4.823 3,621 11,291 11,040 Purchased water 0,878 ——10,878 6,985 Sewer disp'^sal cb^ges —329,536 —329,536 282,592 Professional services 31.512 42.697 2,053 76,262 11,716 Operating and maintenance supplies 11.709 5,804 8,267 25,780 20,363 Heat, light, and power 21,454 21,112 2.930 45,496 45,812 Depreciation 64.764 144,461 13,021 222,246 217,320 Rem and equipment -—5.456 5.456 7,336 Maintenance and repairs Administrative and other expense 6.686 35,346 7,238 49.270 50,588 Administrative charges from General Fund 5,830 16,130 10,120 32,080 32,208 Communications 2,612 1,634 1,590 5,836 8,379 Office supplies Priming, publishing. —42 216 258 866 and advertising 117 709 4,522 5,348 3.473 Data processing 3,726 8,268 —11.9)4 9,869 Insurance 9,154 13,906 14.717 37,777 36.725 Other expep'*es 6.295 29.249 1.543 37.087 11.426 Totw. operating expenses 243,378 771.112 142,170 1,156,660 1,009,589 Operating income (loss)(19.740)(191.722)31,:’64 (179,698)(76,897) I I I I I I I I (continued) -80- J Exhibit F-2 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Enterprise Funds Combining Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings (continued) Year Ended December 31,1995 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31, 1994) Water Sew^ Golf Course Totals Operating Operating Operating 1995 1994 Nonoperating revenue (expense) Property tax revenue Interest earned on investments Interest on special assessments Interest income from MWCC Amortization of deferred credits Interest expense Revenue bond expense Gaia'(loss) on disposition of assets 40.586 5,069 1,178 (58.666) (205) 1,061 43,208 95,048 7,354 11,998 9.530 (57.296) (200) (10.225) 8.150 83,794 108.267 8,532 11 998 9,530 (115,962) (405) (9.164) 71,973 97.434 10,821 12,866 9,530 (127,416) (435) (8.774) Total nonoperating revenue(expense)(10.977)99,417 8.150 96.59C 65.999 Net income (loss)(30.717)(92.305) 39.914 (83,108)(10,898) Credit for depreciation on contributed equit>*32.886 124.052 709 157,647 156,882 Net increase in retained earnings 2,169 31.747 40,623 74,539 145.984 Retained earnings Beginning of year 154.069 1.679.472 228.221 2.061.762 1,915.778 End of year S 156,238 $ 1,711.219 S 268,844 $ 2,136.301 $ 2,061.762 -81- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA LAhibit F-3 Emerpnse Funds Combining Statement of Cash Rows Year Ended December 31,1995 (with Comparative Touls for Year Ended December 31,1994) Golf Water Operating Sewer Operating Course Operating Totals 1995 1994 Cash flows from operating activities Operating income (loss)S (19,740)S (191,722)$ 31.764 S (179,698) $(76.897) Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities Depreciation 64,764 144,461 13,021 222,246 217,320 Amorization of revenue bond discount 772 753 —1,525 1.461 Change in assets and liabilities (Increase) decrease in Accounts receivable 246 (14,383)—(14.137)(69.255) Due from other governmental units (4f<0)(6.626)-(7.106)(846) Inventory -—1,310 1,310 487 Prepaid items 440 26.903 278 27,621 (31,571) Increase (decrease) in Compensated absences 1,843 (102)(21)1,720 2.096 Accounts payable 12,591 40.567 1.285 54.443 (7.487) Salanes payable 402 649 834 1.885 1,405 Due to other governmental units 536 2‘»,926 —30,462 2,627 Net cash fovided by operating activities 61,374 30,426 48.471 140,271 39,340 Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Residual equity transfer in 26,326 -26,326 71,483 Taxes collected for revenue bond debt 40,548 42.95^—83,504 70.922 Special assessments for revenue bond debt 16,383 36,350 —52,733 61,998 Acquisition or construction of capital assets (790)(70,746) (5.364;(76,900) (103,440) Proceeds from sale of capital assets 6,002 1,297 —7,299 — MWee current value credit —35,370 —35.370 35.569 Principa’ paid on revenue bonds (101,180)(98,820)—(2(K».(K)0)(175,000) Interest paid on revenue bonds (60.860)(5 ‘J,440)—(120.300) (131.911) Proceeds received from revenue bonds issued 784.145 765.855 —1,550,000 — Other charges on revenue bonds (205)f200)—(405)(435) Net cash provided (used) by capital and related financing activities 710,369 652,622 (5.364)1,357,627 (170,814) (continued) 1 . I -82- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Exhibit FO CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Enterprise Funds Combining Statement of Cash Flows (continued) Year Ended December 31 » 1^95 (with Comparative Totals for Year Ended December 31,1 994) Golf Water Sewer Course Totals Operating Operating Operating 1995 1994 Cash flows from investing activities Interest received on investments 3.780 72.952 5.967 82.699 67.707 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 775,523 756000 49,074 1,580,597 (63,767) Cash and cash equivalents Beginning of year 153,141 1.580.472 140.334 1.873,947 1.937.714 End of year $ 928,664 S 2.336,472 $ 189,408 S 3,454.544 S 1.873.947 Cash and cash equivalents Unrestricted cash and temporary investments S 143,143 Restricted cash and temporary investments 785,521 $ 797,148 1,539.324 $ 189,408 $1,129,699 2.324.845 s 1,067,213 806,734 Total cash and cash equivalents S 928,664 S 2.336,472 $ 189,408 s 3,454.544 s 1.873,947 Noncash operating items (golf course) During the year ended December 31,1995, the City traded in equipment witit an adjusted book value of S1,020. Equipment Original price s 1,700 Accumulated depreciation 680 Adjusted book value 1,020 Less trade-in value (1.020) Loss on sale of equipment $— -83. Exhibit F-4 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Water Operating Fund Comparative Balance Sheet As of December 31, 1995 and 1994 -84- 1995 1994 Assets Current assets Cash and temporary investments $ 143,143 $ 73,708 Accounts receivable 451 697 Accrued interest receivable 6,654 2,865 Delinquent taxes receivable 678 640 Deferred special assessments, current portion 31,597 15,205 Due from other governmental units 480 — Prepaid items 1,400 1,840 Total current assets 184,403 94,955 Restricted assets Cash and temporary investments Debt seivice 785,521 79,433 Accrued interest receivable Debt serv ice 9,279 11,779 Total restricted assets 794,800 91,212 Other assets, less current portion Deferred special assessments 189,581 — Discount on revenue bonds 5,269 6,041 Total other assets 194,850 6,041 Property, plant, and equipment Land and improvements 57,132 57,132 Buildings and improvements 786,594 786,594 Equipment 48,837 53,828 Distribution'collection system 2,083,577 2.083,577 2,976,140 2,981,131 Less accumulated depreciation 903,548 839,624 Net property, plant, and equipment 2,072,592 2,141,507 Total assets $ 3,246,645 $ 2,333,715 (continued) » 4 - I I I J I J J Exhibit F-4 1995 1994 Liabilities and Fund Equity Current liabilities Accounts payable $ 16,727 $ 4,136 Salaries and compensated absences payable 3,144 2,742 Due to other governmental units 3,412 2,876 Total current liabilities 23,283 9,754 Current liabilities payable from restricted assets Revenue bonds payable 885,325 101,180 Accrued interest payable - revenue bonds 24,160 26,354 Deferred developer advances —69,723 Total current liabilities payable from restricted assets 909,485 197,257 Long-term liabilities, less current portion Revenue bonds pa>able 784,147 885,327 Compensated absences payable 8,576 6,733 Total long-term liabilities 792,723 892,060 Total liabilities 1,725,491 1,099,071 Fund equity Contributed capital 1,364,916 1,080,575 Retained earnings Unreserved 156,238 154,069 Total fund equity 1,521,154 1,234,644 Total liabilities and fund equity $ 3,246,645 $ 2,333.715 -85- CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Water Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes tn Retained Earnings Ycm Ended December 31,1*^5 and IW Exhibit F-5 * \995 1994 Operating revenue ^ A Metered water sales $ 220.848 S 199.208 f f Other 2,790 3,238 Total operating revenue 223.638 202.446 Operating expenses Salaries and wages 59.035 68,653 Retirement contributions 6,759 8,039 Health and life insurance contributions 2.847 1,845 Purchased water 10,878 6,985 Professional services 31.512 5,960 Operating and maintenance supplies 11,709 8,627 Heat, light, and power 21.454 25.281 » 4 Depreciation 64,764 62.495 Maintenance and repairs 6,686 20.357 rAdministrativ e charges from General Fund 5,830 5,833 I ‘ 4__A Communications 2,612 2,631 Office supplies -55 Printing, publishing, and advertising 117 199 ( Data processing 3,726 3,062 u Insurance 9,154 10.137 Other expenses 6,295 1,359 Total operating expenses 243,378 431,518 Operating loss (19.740)(29.072) Nonoperating revenue 'expense) Propertv' tax revente Interest earned on investments 40.586 34.295 ftip* Debt service -461 Operations 5,069 3,863 Interest on special assessments 1,178 2,356 Interest expense on revenue bonds (58,666) (64,472) Revenue bond expense (205)(219) Gain on sale of assets 1,061 -. Toul nonoperating revenue (expense)(10.977) (23.716) r- « Net loss (30,717) (52,788) Credit for depreciation on contributed equity 32,886 34,873 • I i Increase (decrease) in retained earnings 2,16^^(17.915)— Retained earnings 171.984Beginning of year 154,069 End of year S 156,238 $ 154,069 % -86- J CITY OF ORONO, KfTNNESOTA Water Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Cash Flows Years Ended December 31, 1995 and 1994 Exhibit F-6 1995 1994 Cash flows from operating activities Operating loss $ (19,740)S (29,072) Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash provided by operating activities Depreciation 64,764 62,495 Amortization of revenue bond discount 772 739 Change in assets and liabilities (Increase) decrease in Accounts receivable 246 (697) Due from other governmental units (480) Inventory —1,792 Prepaid items 440 (1.840) Increase (decrease) in Compensated absences 1,843 626 Accoun’*, payable 12,591 (7,395) Salaries payable 402 518 Due to other governmental units 536 2,627 Net cash provided by operating activities 61,374 29,793 Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Residual equity transfer in 26,326 ; 1,483 Taxes collected for revenue bond debt 40,548 33,655 Special assessments collected for revenue bond debt 16,383 17,561 Acquisition or construction of capital assets (790)(13.712) Proceeds from sale of capital assets 6,002 Principal paid on revenue bonds (101,180)(88,533) Interest paid on revenue bonds (6' 860)(66,734) Proceeds received from revenue bonds issued 784,145 Other charges on revenue bonds (205) (219) Net cash provided (used) by capital and related financing activities 710,3o9 (46,499) Cash flov/s from investing activities Interest received on investments 3,780 2.940 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 775,523 (13,766) Cash and cash equivalents Beginning of year 153,141 166,907 End of year $ 928,664 $ 153,141 -87- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Sewer Operating Fund Comparative Balance Sheet As of December 31,1995 and 1994 Assets Current assets Cash and temporary investments Accounts receivable Accrued interest receivable Delinquent taxes receivable Delinquent special assessments receivable Deferred special assessments, cuTcnt 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 Other assets, lesr .*urrent portion Deferred special assessments Due from other governmental units Discount on revenue bonds Total other assets Property, plant, and equipment Work in progress Land and improvements Buildings and improvements Equipment Distribution/collection system Less accumulated depreciation Net property, plant, and equipment Total assets -88- Exhibit F-7 (continued) 1 1 1995 1994 $ 797,148 $ 853,171 - 288,380 273,997 • 42,304 30,076 663 411 - 19,976 22,621 13,708 26.351 28,616 21,990 1,600 28.503 J1,192,395 1,257,120 819,565 38,645 719,759 688,656 1,539,324 727,301 -- 3,466 3,200 * -• 24,881 15,279 28,347 18,479 t 1,567,671 745,780 V -1 ; - 82,247 255,089 278,461 f 5,147 5,900 342,483 284,361 26,558 16,210 16,210 31,014 31,014 74,047 85,687 6,780,600 6,685,138 6,901,871 6 844,607 2,627,014 2,484,513 4,274,857 4,360.094 $ 7,377,406 $ 6,647,355 I ^ J I I I I I Exhibit F-7 1995 1994 Liabilities and Fund Equity Current liabilities Accounts payable $ 45,579 $ 5,012 Salaries and compensated absences payable 4,638 3,989 Due to other governmental units 29,926 — Total current liabilities 80,143 9,001 Current liabilities payable from restricted assets Revenue bonds payable 864,675 98,820 Accrued interest payable - revenue bonds 23,596 25,740 Deferred developer advances —20,077 Total current liabilities payable from restricted assets 888,271 144,637 Long-term liabilities, less current portion Revenue bonds payable 765,853 864,673 Compensated absences payable 10.962 11,064 Deferred credits - MWCC 102,479 112,009 Total long-term liabilities 879,294 987,746 Total liabilities 1,847,708 1,141,384 Fund equity Contributed capital 3,818,479 3,826.499 Retained earnings Unreserved 1,711,219 1,679.472 Total fund equity 5,529,698 5.505,971 Total liabilities and fund equity $ 7,377,406 $ 6.647.355 -89- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Sewer Opcraticg Fund Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Years Ended December 31, 1995 and 1994 E .hibit F-8 1995 1994 Operating revenue User charges $ 578,149 S 544,471 Other 1,241 7.492 Total operating revenue 579,390 551,963 Operating expenses Salaries and wages 104,952 105.163 Retirement contnbutions 12,443 12,365 Health and life insurance contnbutions 4,823 5,553 Sewer disposal charges 329,536 282,592 Professional services 42,697 4,156 Operating and maintenance supplies 5,804 4.322 Heat, light, and power 21,112 17,409 Depreciation 144,461 145,567 Viaintenince and repairs 35,346 24,967 Administrative charges from General Fund 16,130 16,550 Communications 1,634 2,836 Office supplies 42 no Pnnting, publishing, and advertising 709 511 Data processing 8,268 6,807 Insurance 13,906 12,483 Other expenses 29,249 6,219 Total operating expenses 771.112 647,610 Operating loss (191.722)(95,647) Nonoperating revenue (expense) Property taxes 43,208 37.678 Interest earned on investments Debt service 266 462 Operations 54,505 49,949 Construction 40,277 37.117 Interest income on special assessments 7,354 8,465 Interest income from MWCC 11,998 12,866 Amortization of deferred credits 9,530 9,530 Interest expense on revenue bonds (57,296)(62,944) Revenue bond expense (200)(216) Loss on disposition of assets (10.225)— Total nonoperating revenue (expense)99,417 92,907 Net loss (92,305)(2.740) Credit for depreciation on contnbuted equity 124.052 121,755 Increase in retained earnings 31,747 119,015 Retained earnings Beginning of yeai 1,679,472 1,560,457 End of year $ 1,711,219 S 1,679,472 n . : » t -Ofi CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Sewer Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Cash Flows Years Ended December 31, 1995 and 1994 Exhibit F-9 I Cash flows from operating activities Operating loss Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash provided (used) by operating activities Deprecia’.on Amortization of revenue bon^ discount Change in assets and liabilities (Increase) decrease in Accounts receivable Due from other governmental units Prepaid items Increase (decrease) in Compensated absences Accounts payable Salaries payable D"c to other governmental units Net cash provided (used) by operating activities Cash flow's from capital and relai> d financing activities 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 MWee current value credit Principal payments on revenue bonds Interest paid on revenue bonds Proceeds from revenue bonds issued Other charges on revenue bonds Net cash provided (used) by capital and related financing activities 1995 1994 $ (191,722)$ (95,647) 144,461 145,567 753 722 (14,383)(68,558) (6,626)(846) 26,903 (28,503) (102)1,052 40,567 406 649 739 29,926 — 30.426 (45,068) 42.956 37,267 36,350 44,437 (70,746)(60,470) 1,297 — 35,370 35.569 (98,820),86,467) (59,440) (65,177) 765,855 — (200) (216) 652,622 (95,057) (continued) -91- Exhibit F-9 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA I Sewer Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Cash Flows (continued) Years Ended December 31, 1995 and 1994 1995 1994 Cash flows from investing activities Interest received on investments 72,952 60,963 Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 756,000 (79,162) Cash and cash equivalents Beginning of year 1,580,472 1,659,634 End of year $ 2,336,472 $ 1,580,472 * ! I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Golf Course Operating Fund Comparative Balance Sheet As of December 31, 1995 and 1994 Exhibit F-10 1995 1994 Assets Current assets Cash and temporary investments $ 189,408 $ 140,334 Accrued interest receivable 5,541 3,358 Inventory 2,289 3,599 Prepaid items 950 1.228 Total current assets 198,188 148,519 Property, plant, and equipment Land and improvements 127,977 127,977 Buildings and improvements 48,722 48,722 Equipment 101,968 97,284 278,667 273,983 Less accumulated depreciation 65,894 53,553 Net property, plant, and equipment 212,773 220,430 Total assets S 410,961 $ 368,949 Liabilities and Fund Equity Current liabilities Accounts payable $ 1,731 $ 446 Salaries and compensated absences payable 2,747 1,913 Total current liabilities 4,478 2,359 Long-term liabilities, less current portion Compensated absences payable 6,785 6,806 Total liabilities 11,263 9,165 Fund equity Contributed capital 130,854 131,563 Retained earnings 268,844 228,221 Total fund equity 399,698 359,784 Total liabilities and fund equity $ 410,961 $ 368,949 1 -93- r Exhibit F-11 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Golf Course Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings Years Ended December 31,1995 and 1994 -94- 1995 1994 Sales and cost of sales Sales $ 17,728 $ 16,158 Cost of sales 10,467 7,809 Gross profit 7,261 8,349 Operating revenue Greens fees 136,809 136,532 Equipment rental 29,084 31,594 Other 780 1,808 Total operating revenue 166,673 169,934 Total gross profit and operating revenue 173,934 178,283 Operating expenses Salaries and wages 62,033 54,270 Retirement contributions 4,843 4,401 Health and life insurance contributions 3,621 3.642 Professional services 2,053 1,600 Operating and maintenance supplies 8,267 7,414 Heat, light, and power 2,930 3,122 Depreciation 13,021 9,258 Rent and equipment 5,456 7,336 Maintenance and repairs 7,238 5,264 Administrative charges from General Fund 10,120 9,825 Communications 1,590 2,912 Office supplies 216 701 Printing, publishing, and advertising 4,522 2,763 Insurance 14,717 14,105 Other expenses 1,543 3,848 Total operating expenses 142,170 130,461 Operating income 31,764 47,822 Nonoperating revenue (expense) Interest earned on investments 8,150 5,582 Loss on sale of assets —(8.774) Total nonoperating revenue (expense)8,150 (3.192) Net income 39,914 44.630 Credit for depreciation on contributed equity 709 254 Increase in retained earnings 40,623 44,884 Retained earnings Beginning of year 228,221 183,337 End of year $ 268,844 $ 228,221 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Exhibit F-12 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Golf Couree Operating Fund Comparative Statement of Cash Flows Years Ended December 31, 1995 and 1994 1995 Noncash operating items 1994 Cash flows from operating activities Operating income S 31,764 $ 47,822 Adjustments to reconcile operating income to net cash provided by operating activities Depreciation 13,021 9,258 Change in assets and liabilities (Increase) decrease in Inventory 1,310 (1.305) Prepaid items 278 (1.228) Increase (decrease) in Compensated absences (21)418 Accounts payable 1,285 (498) Salaries payable 834 148 Net cash provided by operating activities 48,471 54,615 Cash flows from capital and related financing activities Acquisition of capital assets (5,364)(29,258) Cash flows from investing activities Interest received on investments 5,967 3,804 Net increase in cash and cash equivalents 49,074 29,161 Cash and cash equivalents Beginning of year 140,334 111,173 End of year $ 189,408 $ 140,334 During the year ended December 31, 1995, the City traded in equipment with an adjusted book value of $1,020 Equipment Original price Accumulated depreciation Adjusted book value Less trade-in value 1,700 680 1,020 (1.020) Loss on sale of equipment 1 -95- I 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. -96- Exhibit G-1 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Trust and Agency Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of December 31, 1995 (with Comparative Totals as of December 31, 1994) Exp>endable Trust Agency Totals Flexible Benefit Plan Deferred Compensation Funds 1995 1994 Assets Cash and investments held by trustee $ -$ 776,874 $ 776,874 $ 616,600 Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees $$ 776,874 $ 776,874 $ 616,600 -97- I I I I J I I J I I I I Exhibit G-2 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOl A Flexible Benefit Plan Expendable Trust Fund Comparative Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance Years Ended December 31,1995 and 1994 1995 1994 Revenue Payroll withholdings for Flexible Benefit Plan $ 56,646 $ 51,491 Expenditures Miscellaneous Employee benefits 56,646 51,491 Excess of revenue over expenditures —- Fund balance Beginning of year End of year $$ -98- Exhibit G-3 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Agency Funds Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities Ycar Ended December 31,1995 Deferred Compensation Agency Fund (ICMA) Assets Cash and investments held by trustee Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees Deferred Compensation Agency Fund tMinnesota SnpplcmcnUl iBVtstmcpt Fund) Assets Balance Balance January 1 , December 31, 1995 Additions Deductions 1995 S 92,116 $ 31,459 $_ _ _54 $ 123^521 :» 92,116 $ 31,459 $ _ _54 $ 123,521 1 1 1 1 Cash and investments held by trustee $ 24,630 $ 8,615 $ 71 $ 33,174 Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees $ 24,630 $__8,615 $ 71 $ 33,174 Deferred Compensation Agency Fun d Assets Cash and investments held by trustee Liabilities $ 429,021 $ 71.886 $ 4,000 $ 496,907 Deferred compensation payable to employees $ 429^021 $ 71.886 $ 4,000 $ 496,907 (continued) -99-J I I I I CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Agency Funds Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities (continued) Year Ended December 31,1995 Deferred Compensation Agency Fund gjSCM/PEBSCO Fund) Assets Cash and investments held by trustee Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees All Agency Funds Assets Cash and investments held by trustee Liabilities Deferred compensation payable to employees -100- Exhibit G-3 Balance Balance January I, December 31 . 1995 Additions Deductions 1995 S 70.833 $ 53.061 $_ _622 $ 123,272 $ 70.833 $ 53,061 $ 622 $ 123,272 $ 616.600 $ 165.021 $_4,^747 $ 776,874 $ 61^600 $ 165,021 $_4,747 $ 776,874 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FlNANriAl SCHFDULRS CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Comparative Schedule of General Fixed Assets by Source December 31,1995 and 1994 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 31, 1990 Donations after December 31,1984 Years prior to January 1, 1985 Total investment in general fixed assets 1995 Schedule 1 1994 S 1,250,680 $ 1,239,796 3,205,130 3,205,130 1,355,565 1,303,129 $ 5,811,375 $ 5.748,055 $ 169,362 $ 143,921 834,086 754,192 3,989,224 3,989,224 4,025 4,025 814,678 856,693 $ 5,811,375 $ 5.748.055 1I •101- Schedule 2 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Schedule of General Fixed Assets By Function and Activity December 31, 1995 Land and Land Buildings and Building Function aH Activity Improvements Improvements Equipment Total General government Council $$$ 2,818 $ 2,818 Administration ——29,555 29,555 Elections ——24,476 24,476 Assessing ——2,336 2,336 Finance ——69,942 69,942 Central services 707,242 1,999,912 166,318 2,873,472 Total general government 707,242 1,999,912 295,445 3,002,599 Public safety Police ——254,808 254,808 Protective inspection and zoning ——43,532 43,532 Emergency preparedness ——29,155 29,155 Total public safety —-327,495 327,495 Streets 1,178,319 621,834 1,800,153 Parks 215,389 1,899 110,791 328,079 Other - unclassified 328,049 25,000 __353,049 Total general fixed assets $ 1,250,680 $ 3,205,130 $ 1,355,565 $ 5,811,375 -102- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Schedule of Changes in General Fixed Assets By Function and Activity Year Ended December 31, 1995 General Fixed Assets January 1, -103- Schedule 3 General Fixed Assets December 31, Function and Activity 1995 Additions Deletions 1995 General government Council $ 4,127 $ 599 $ 1,908 $ 2,818 Administration 30,739 1,806 2,990 29,555 Elections 24,476 ——24,476 Assessing 2,397 —61 2,336 Finance 23,990 49,970 4,018 69,942 Central services 2,852,033 21,439 —2,873,472 Total general government 2,927,111 73,814 8,977 3,002,599 Public safety Police 271,382 38,975 55,549 254,808 Protective inspection and zoning 53,588 2,563 12,619 43,532 Emergency preparedness 29.155 ——29,155 Total public safety 366,365 41,538 68,168 327,495 Streets 1,803,882 13,981 17,710 1,800,153 Parks 299,237 28,842 -328,079 Other - unclassified 353,049 353,049 Total general fixed assets $ 5,748,055 $ 158,175 $ 94,855 $ 5,811,375 ! S I^ i 1 1 j I I I I j Schedule 4 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Future Propertj’ Tax Levies to Retire Bonds (1) As of December 31,1995 Year Collectible 1982 Improvement Bonds 1995 Refunding Bonds 1989 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds 1991 Public Facilities Revenue Bonds 1992 Improvement Bonds Total Levies 1996 $ 4,500 (2)$ 46,000 (3)$ 90,000 (4)$ 228,400 (5)$ 24,000 (6)$ 392,900 1997 600 50.000 ———50,600 1998 500 50,000 ———50,500 1999 -50,000 ——<—50,000 2000 —50,000 ——50,000 $ 5 30 $ 246,000 $90,000 $ 228,400 $ 24.000 $ 594,000 The levies for these issues are the general obligation property tax levies which are in addition to the amounts levied in the special assessment rolls. Tax levies are placed (as required by law) at 105% of debt service requirements. The City levied J4,500 for the 1982 Improvement Bonds due to a projected shortfall prior to 1996. The City will continue to monitor the issue and levy additional taxes as required to generate sufficit . jources to pay future debt requirements. The City levied $46,000 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. The City levied $90,(XX) for the 1989 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds due to a shortfall in revenues. Projected development has not occurred, therefore user fees and property taxes are required to meet debt service payments. The City will monitor the issue and levy additional taxes as required. In addition, certain excess funds were transferred from the 1980 Improvement Bond Fund to be used to fully meet the debt service requirements of the 1989 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds. The City levied $228,400 for the 1991 Public Facilities Revenue Bonds for the 1995 lease-purchase payments. The appropriation for the levy is made annually and is anticipated to cover approximately 55% of the lease-purchase payment. The City levied $24,000 for the 1992 Improvement Bonds. The bonds are to be paid 70% from special assessments levied, and up to 30% to be levied in taxes. Prepayments of special assessments and interest earned thereon will determine the amount of taxes required from year to year. -104- ”rr STATTSTTCAI. SECTION (UNAUDITED) J Fiscal Year CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Revenue by Source (I) Property Taxes Special Assessments Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental (I) Includes General, Special Revenue, and Debt Service Funds. Charges for Services 1986 $ 988,547 $$ 102,533 $ 525,735 $ 605,002 1987 1,106,603 -136,420 499,864 594,424 1988 1,170,411 -124,334 489,319 643,151 1989 1,211,541 -148,564 493,385 685,952 1990 1,637,643 —136,552 135,512 758,369 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 1995 1,933,371 174,443 202,195 517,989 928,121 (2) Prior to December 31, 1992, special assessment revenue and interest income was included in other revenue. -105- 1 1 I 1 1 1 ] 1 j ! f 1 j "! A Table 1 Fines and Forfeits Interest Earned on Investments Other Revenue Total $ 84,877 $ - $1.028.474 $ 3,335,168 102,058 —717,467 3,156.836 140,657 —706,247 3,274,119 125,357 —676,838 3,341,637 108,231 —637,446 3,413,753 72,728 —504,819 3,246,028 62,458 282,582 (2)72,623 (2)3,814,507 61,491 254,054 71,948 4.160,750 58,158 286,435 170,500 4,233,322 80,610 313,447 148,886 4,299,062 -106- Fiscal Year 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 General Government $ 458,631 535,558 589.137 655,987 683,176 652,105 596.138 656,849 667,018 759,673 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA General Expenditures by Function (I) Public Safety $ 1,089,627 1,187,328 1,247,623 l.'»7o,323 1.419.419 1,508,485 1,562,709 1,609,867 1,616,087 1.693.420 Streets 385,422 344,407 494,742 471,420 474,350 463,710 495,983 485,491 423,610 Parks and Recreation $ 461,855 $ 46,656 (I) Includes General, Special Revenue, and Debt Service Funds. -107- 94,114 61,582 32,961 48,129 44,791 53,590 58,080 55,739 50,449 Unallocated and Other 126,389 63,154 67,160 95,164 106.778 165,228 148,908 152,547 171,729 190,524 I I I I 1 1 lI 4 ' I Table 2 Capital Outlay Debt Service Total 95,240 $ 743,450 $ 3,021,848 70,614 678,773 3,014,963 92,198 534,876 2,936,983 131,437 475,520 3,262,134 259.921 426,393 3,415,236 46,147 406,266 3,297,372 164,708 403,209 3,392,972 48,483 562,254 3,584.063 201,192 938,991 4,136,247 198,089 716,462 4,032,227 -108- Fiscal Year Collected 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Certified Tax Levy for Fiscal Period (1) $ 1,089,634 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 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Property’ Tax Levies and Collections Current Tax Collections (1)(2) 1,060,820 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 Percent of Levy Collected 97.4 % 97.7 97.2 96.4 96.4 95.6 97.0 98.1 98.5 98.6 Delinquent Tax Collections (2) 36,316 28,478 27,998 30,844 41,984 37,233 39,181 68,246 53,629 32,592 Total Collections as a Percent of Current Lev7 100.7 100.0 99.4 98.6 99.0 97.8 99.0 101.3 100.8 100,0 (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. I I 1 1 1 :i -! r -109- Tabic 3 Outstanding Delinquent Taxes $ 63,690 45,770 53,658 64,866 71,166 86,352 128,786 123,136 81,796 49,286 Outstanding Delinquent Taxes as a Percent of Current Levy 5.8 % 3.7 4.1 4.7 4.3 5.0 6.6 5.8 3.6 2.1 1 -110- 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 Adjustnent to Assessed Value or Year Tax Capacity Value Tax Capacity Value Tax Capacity 1986 $ 98,788,864 $ 385,901,800 $ 1,542,969 $ 3,588,500 $ 446,042 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 1990 (3)12,568,353 527,348,000 172,131 3,401,800 151,730 1991 I‘\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) (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” lax capacity to "net" tax capacity. -Ill- * » . I Table 4 Total Assessed Value or Tax Capacity 103,551,514 107,414,670 14,351,809 12,892,214 14,378,759 13,164,582 11,739,360 12,168,899 12,911,568 Estimated Market Value $ 100,777,875 $ 389,490,300 406,800,300 434,736,400 481,329,780 530,749,800 589,295,500 608,918,000 629,322,100 658.911.700 701.878.700 Ratio of Total Assessed Value or Tax Capacity to Total Estimated Market Value 25.87 % 25.46 24.71 2.98 2.43 2.44 2.16 1.87 1.85 1.84 Per Capita Valuations Assessed Value or Tax Capacity $ 14,052 14,358 14,747 1,945 1,787 1,969 1,787 1,602 1,648 1,727 Estimated Market Value 54,307 56,406 59,684 65,230 73,582 80,692 82,677 85,855 89,283 93,884 -112- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Property Tax Rates - Direct and Overlapping Governments (I) (Per SI,000 of Assessed Value or Tax Capacity) City of Orono Taxes Payable General Year Fund 1985 Debt Service Fund 1980 Debt Service Fund 1982 Debt Service Fund 1991 Debt Service Fund 1992 Debt Service Fund (3) Water Operating Fund (3) Sewer Operating Fund Total 1986 1987 1988 1989 (2) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 10,83 11.68 11.76 9.42 12.36 11.43 12.02 13.26 13.43 12.75 0.39 0.28 0.21 0.27 0.28 0.36 0.37 0.35 0.33 0.14 0.12 0,12 0.12 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 1.69 1.83 1.75 1.72 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.29 0.31 0.27 0.31 10.83 12.07 12.04 9.63 12.77 11.87 14.23 15.74 16.25 15.60 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 1986 58.67 57.52 51.35 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 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. 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. I 1 1 1 2 -113- Tables ISD #278 School District (I) Area Vo-Tech School Hennepin County Metro Council/ Transit Other Special Districts Total I 59.51 1.54 29.69 3.80 2.16 107.53 55.08 1.42 29.36 3.90 2.19 104.02 59.50 1.49 31.67 4.05 2.28 111.03 50.01 1.22 27.10 3.41 2.05 93.42 47.17 1.10 27.92 3.72 2.03 94.71 52.74 1.05 30.11 4.11 3.39 10327 59.80 0.51 34.33 4.48 1.66 115,01 67.19 1.10 35.84 4.40 2.31 126.58 65.03 0.81 37.44 4.42 2.15 126.10 65.72 —37.45 4.45 4 24 I27.4f -114- CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Special Assessments Levies and Collections Fiscal Year Current Assessments Due Current Assessments Collected Ratio of Current Collections to Amount Due Delinquent Assessments Collected 1986 $ 362,515 $ 321,142 88.6 $ 25,765 1987 296.702 262,268 88.4 23,446 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 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 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I Special Assessments Delinquent $ 136,302 147,635 90,023 61,562 43,766 43,313 54,657 55,507 55,159 45,605 Total Outstanding Assessments $ 1,247,407 1.021.321 764,234 663,372 735,609 581,048 1,639,996 1,277,078 1,027,451 1.200.322 -116- Tabic 7 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Computation of Legal Debt Margin December 31,1995 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 ftind-s on hand to retire said debt. Based on this formula, the City's legal debt margin is as follows: Estimated total market value of taxable property Debt limit (2.0% of estimated actual property value) Total bonded debt Less bonds not repaid solely from tax levies G.O. Improvement Bonds G.O. Revenue Bonds Public Facilities Revenue Bonds G.O. Refunding Bonds Total amount of debt applicable to debt limit Legal debt margin -117- $ 9.205.000 1.885.000 1.750.000 3.660.000 1.910.000 9,205,000 $ 701,878,700 $ 14.037,574 $ 14,037,574 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Ratio of Net General Bonded Debt to Assessed Value or Tax Capacity and Net Bonded Debt Per Capita Fiscal Assessed Value Gross Bonded Debt Service Funds Net Bonded Year Population (2)(in 1,000s)Debt (1)Available (1)Debt 1986 7.172 $ 100,778 $ 1,722,088 $ 1,354,642 $ 367,446 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 1,253,423 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 (1) Includes bonds recorded in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group. Gross bonded debt has been reduced by Debt Service deferred special assessments receivable in order to reflect only tax supported debt burden. For purposes of this analysis. Debt Service Funds available do not include individual fund balance amounts in excess of the related individual bond issue amotmt included in gross bonded debt. (2) Population from Metropolitan Council estimate as of April 1, annually. (3) Rating history from Moody Investors Service. (4)Begirming with fiscal year 1989, the terminology for As.sessed 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. (5) Federal census. (6) 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-purchase payments equal to the annual debt service requirement. While the intent is to continue the annual payments and budget annual appropriations, the City may terminate the lease as provided in the lease-purchase contract. -118- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1) ^ 1 |W--------------------- -------- Table 8 Ratio of Net Tax Supported Bonded Debt to Assessed Value Net Bonded Debt Per Capita Bonded Debt Rating (3) 0.36 %$ 51.23 Aa 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) -119- Table 9 Fiscal Year 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Ratio of Annual Debt Serv ice Expenditures for General Bonded Debt to Total General Expenditures (1) Pnncipal $ 520,000 485.000 360.000 325.000 300.000 300,000 155.000 150.000 550,000 1995 (2) 340,000 Interest and Other $ 224,693 197,184 174,876 150,520 126,393 106,266 248,209 412,254 388,991 366.462 Total Debt Ser\ice 744,693 682,184 534,876 475,520 426,393 406,266 403,209 562,254 938,991 706.422 Total General Expenditures $ 3,021,848 3,014,963 2,936,983 3.262,134 3,415,236 3.297,372 3.392,972 3,584,063 4,136,247 4,022,227 (1) Includes General, Special Revenue, and Debt Service Funds. Ratio of Debt Serv ice to Total General Expenditures 24.6 % 22.6 18.2 14.6 12.5 12.3 11,9 15.7 22.7 17.6 (2) Excludes $360,000 of bond principal paid to the refund bond principal from refunding bond proceeds in 1995. -120- t > • • I 1 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Computation of Direct and Overlapping Debt December 31,1995 Table 10 Net Debt Sinking Applicable to Orono Governmental Unit Gross Debt (I)Funds Net Debt Percent Amount Direct debt City of Orono $5,142.297 $ 1,361,687 $ 3.780.610 100000 % $3,780.610 Overlapping debt School districts No. 278 (Orono)5.860,(X)0 621,494 5.238,506 48.739 2,553,195 No. 276 (Minnetonka)20.239,640 945.464 19.294.176 0.164 31,642 No. 277 (Westonka)14.175.000 900,609 13,274,391 25.071 3.328.023 No. 284 (Wayzaia)115.112.042 42,017.206 73,094,836 1.431 1.045.987 Hennepin County 80.495,000 6,081,905 74,413,095 1.532 1,140,009 Metro council 100.140.000 10.514,473 89,625,527 0.830 743.892 Hennepin Suburban Park Disnict 18.245,000 2,196,754 16,048,246 2.095 336.211 Metro Regional Transit District 1,400.000 —1.400,000 0.914 _12,796 Total overlapping debt 355,666.682 63.277,905 292,388,777 9,191.755 Total direct and overlapping debt 360.808,979 S 64,639,592 S 296,169,387 $_12,972,365 Gross bonded debt used for the net debt calculation excludes revenue bonds for all governmental units except the City of Orono. -121- Water Operating Fund Sewer Operating Fund Table 11 CITY OF ORONO. MINNESOTA Revenue Bond Coverage - Enterprise Fundi (3) Gross Fiscal Rcvcmics Operating Expenses Net Revenue Available for Debt Serv ice Requirements ¥ 1 ' Year (1)(2)Debt Service Pnncipal Interest Total Coverage I98y $ 189.086 S 159,586 $ 29,500 s $17,917 S 17.917 1.65 1990 265,068 163,271 101,797 -74.975 74.975 1.36 1991 234,843 162,010 72,833 —74.493 74.493 0.98 1992 221,691 171,373 50,318 —74,495 74,495 0.68 1993 165,378 150,154 15,224 88,530 69,931 158,461 O.IO 1994 243,421 169,023 74J98 88,533 64.472 153,005 0.49 1995 270.471 178.614 91,857 101,180 58,666 159,846 0.57 (1) Total revenues, including interest. (2) Total operating expenses, net of depreciation. (3) Revenue bonds did not exist prior to 1989. -122- ^ \ 1989 489.658 29<(.797 189,861 —17,499 17,499 10.85 • 1990 583.998 305,980 278.018 —72,188 72,188 3.85 1991 613,009 343,230 269,779 —72.755 72.755 3.71 1992 543,887 445,562 98,325 -72.756 72,756 1.35 1993 557.999 509,286 48.713 86,470 68,324 154.794 0.31 1994 708.030 502,043 205.987 86,467 62.944 149,411 1.38 1995 746,528 626,651 119,877 98,820 57.296 156,116 0.77 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Fiscal Year 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Population (1) 7,172 7.212 7,284 7.379 7.213 (5) 7,303 7,365 7,330 7.380 7,476 Source: Demographic Statistics Per Capita Income (2) 18,990 20,096 21,239 22,584 23,705 24,200 • 24.900 * 28,266 29,100 * 29.900 * School Enrollment (3) 2,001 1,997 2,037 2,101 2,175 2.289 2,280 2,275 2,433 2,508 Table 12 Unemployment Rate (4> (1) Metro Council (2) Federal Census Bureau data; Hennepin County average (3) Minnesota Department of Education, as reported by Orono School District No. 278 (4) Minnesota Department of Economic Security; Hennepin County average (5) Federal Census Estimate 3.9 % 4.1 3.3 3.6 4.1 4.3 4.1 4.2 3.2 2.8 -123- Fiscal Year CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Propmy Value, Consmictio!i, azKl Bank Deposits Commercial Construction (I) Residential Construction (I) Number of Permits Value Number of Permits Estimated Market Value (2) Value Industrial/ Commercial Residential Source: Table 13 Bank Non»Taxable Deposits (3) 1986 II S 80.050 343 S 14.065.465 S 14.733.500 S 371.168.300 -$ 27.331.671 1987 28 2,555.700 343 19.824.845 15.652.600 387.243.800 22,325,430 25.215.095 1988 23 3,920.090 330 15,836.267 16.208.600 393,876.700 -25.353.000 1989 26 162,700 360 17,416.288 16.734,000 441.270,880 -27.693.000 1990 18 1.537,750 333 14.283.828 18,304,100 486,776,000 -29.031.945 1991 7 489.050 233 6.641.399 21.798,200 552,096,200 -30,796,880 1992 5 322.200 272 14.242.621 22.460.30C 582.333.100 -33.624.000 1993 4 12.300 300 20.916.290 21,656,200 599,912.300 20,939,670 33.389.000 1994 9 52.900 308 16,489,721 21,290.500 608,557.500 20,939,670 31.923.000 1995 13 500.467 335 20.695.799 22.579.300 675.081.600 20,939,670 38,819.000 (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. -124- 1 1 1 1 ] 1 n .1 . I I ^ i I ^ » • 4 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Table 14 Taxpayer Principal Taxpayers Type of Business Assessed 1994 Payable 1995 Tax Capacity Percent of Total Tax Capacity Washington Scientific Manufacturing $ 125,655 0.89 % Wayzata Country Clth Private Club 106,261 0.75 Private Residence Single Family Residence 99,280 0.71 Private Residence Single Family Residence 89.054 0.63 Van Dale, Inc.Manufacturing 69,140 0.49 Private Residence Single Family Residence 66,668 0.47 Private Residence Single Family Residence 62,601 0.44 Otten Brothers Nursery Nursery - Garden Center 60,095 0.43 Private Residence Single Family Residence 48,986 0.35 Private Residence Single Family Residence 48,385 0.34 $ 776,125 5.50 % Note: 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. Tax Extension Rates are determined in a similar manner to Mill Rates in that the tax levy is divided by the Tax Capacity. -125- 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 Full-time Part-time Number of cities sers’ed Education Attendance centers Number of students Water and sewer operations Number of connections Water Sewer Table 15 CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Recreation and culture Number of parks Number of swimming beach Employees Classified service/full-time Part-time/seasonal Miscellaneous Statistics December 31, 1995 December 17,1954; effective January 1, 1955 Optional Plan "A"; Council-Administrator 24.5 square miles; 50% is open water or marshland 45.83 15.42 29.28 120 1 16 4 4 4 2,508 830 1,838 12 with 65.20 total acres 3 with 1.40 total acres 42 22 -126- 11 I W.I t' I I 1 . I i CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Tax Capacity, Tax Levies, and Tax Extension Rates Table 16 Collectible in I Tax capacity Real property Personal property Fiscal disparities contribution Fiscal disparities distribution Total tax capacity Tax levies by County Auditor (1) General Fund Debt Ser\'ice Funds ’ 985 Improvement Bonds l995 Rebinding Bonds iV82 Improvement Bonds 1991 Public Facilities Bonds 1V92 Improvement Bonds Revenue Bonds Total tax levies Tax extension rates by County Auditor General Fund Debt Service Funds 1985 Improvement Bonds 1995 Refunding Bonds 1982 Improvement Bonds 1991 Public Facilities Bonds 1992 Improvement Bonds 1989 Revenue Bonds Total tax extension rates 1996 1995 1994 $ 13,942,213 200,133 (324,685) 282,659 $ 12,780,145 194,020 (319,388) 256,791 $ 12,007,816 183,655 (329,096) 306,524 $ 14,100,320 S 12,911,568 $ 12,168,899 $ 1,687,940 $ 1,918,645 $ 1,893,492 46.000 4,500 228,400 24.000 90.000 50.000 5,500 250,000 18.000 80,000 50,000 5,500 247,620 16,: jv) *'8,458 $ 2,080,840 $ 2,3 22,145 $ 2,281,570 11.959 % 0.326 0.032 1.618 0.170 0.638 12.753 % 0.333 0.043 1.717 0.139 0.619 13.428 % 0.354 0.039 1.751 0.117 0.563 14.743 %15.604 %16.252 % (1) Tax levies do not include the state paid Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA) beginning with taxes payable in 1996. -127- 1 INDEPENDFNT AUDITOR S REPORT ON THE INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE AND OTHER REQUIRED REPORTS PRINCIPALS KENNETH W MALLOV. CWA THOMAS M MONTAGUE. CPA THOMAS A KARNOWSKI. CPA PAUl A RADOSEVtCH CPA WILLIAM J LAUER. CPA INDEPENDENT AUnTTOR'S RFPORT ON THE INTERNAl CONTROL STRUCTURE BASED ON AN AUDIT OF THE GENERAL PURPOSE FlNANCIAl STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING 5 . A\T RDS 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, 1^5, and have issued our report thereon dated May 29, 1996. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and Govemmeni 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 responsibilit>\ 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 .o 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 financial 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 proceduies 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, 1995, 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 financial statements and net to provide an opinion on the internal control structure. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. (continued) csr^TiF^ieo F>lJOL.IC 410 PAMK national OANH BUILDING ) WAV/ATA BOULEVARD MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA SS410 TELEPHONE 612 S4S 04^4 TELEFAX 612 64S0569 -128- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 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 Instimte 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 maners involving the internal coi^^l structure and its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined above. We noted matters involving the internal control structure and its operation that we have reported to the management of the City of Orono in a separate report dated May 29, 19%. This report is intended for the information of the City Council and management of tfie City of Orono. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. May 29. 19% -129- M<^iMALJiOY PRINCIPALS KiNNETH M MAI LOY CM THOMAS M MONTAGUE CM THOMAS A KARNOWSKI. CM PAUL A HAOOSEVICH, CM WILLIAM J LAUER CM INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S COMPLIANCE REPORT BASED ON AN AUDIT OF THE GENERA! PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS Cit>' Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota I We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Orono. Minnesota, as of and for the year ended December 31. 1995, and have issued our report thereon dated May 29, 19%. 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. Compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to the City of Orono is the responsibility of the City’s management. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of the City's compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts and grants. However, the objective of our audit of the general purpose financial statements was not to provide an opinion on overall compliance with such provisions. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance that are required to be reported herein under Government Auditing Standards. 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. May 29. 1996 CKMTiriCD 1C ACCooraT amts 410 national BANK BUILDING S353 WAV7ATA BOULEVARD MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 5S410 TELEPHONE 612 S45 0474 telefax 612 545 0569 -130- M<^MAULOY PRINOPAIS KENNETH W MALLOY CPA THOMAS M MONTAGUE CPA THOMAS A KARNOWSKI. CPA PAUL A RAOOSEVICH CPA WtLLIAM J LAUER CPA INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH MINNESOTA 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 Orono, Minnesota, as of and for the year ended December 31, 1995, and have issued our report thereon dated May 29, 1996. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and the provisions of the Minnesota 1 .gyal Compliance Audit Guide for Local Government promulgated by the Legal Compliance Task Force pursuant to Minnesota Stamtes § 6.65. Accordingly, the audit included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. The Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Local Government covers five main categories of compliance to be tested: contracting and bidding, deposits and investments, conflicts of interest, public indebtedness, and claims and disbursements. Our study included all of the listed categories. The results of our tests indicate that for the items tested the City of Orono complied with the material terms and conditions of applicable legal provisions, except as described in the Schedule of Findings 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 jf Orono. However, this report is a matter of public record and its distribution is not limited. ' May 29, 1996 cev^TiFico f^LJOLIC ACCOOMT 410 PARK NATIONAL BANK BUU OING 5353 WAVZATA BOULEVARD MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55416 TELEPHONE 61? S45 04?4 TELEFAX 61? 545 0569 -131- r I I I CITY OF ORONO Schedule of Findings and Questioned Cost Year Ended December 31. 1995 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/! .aw Minnesota Statutes § 475.66 2. Finding Minnesota Statutes § 475.66 requires that the City receive a written broker acknowledgment certification prior to investment transactions occurring. The City did not receive such a statement from one of the investment companies it utilized during 1995. 3. Type of Finding This is a current year finding 4. Questioned Cost None CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP) 1. Explanation of Disagreement With Audit Finding There is no disagreement with the audit finding. 2. Actions Planned in Response to Finding The City will ensure that a broker certificate is received covering all investments, 3. Official Responsible for Ensuring CAP Thomas Kuehn, Finance Director. 4. Planned Completion Date for CAP The City will complete the CAP during fiscal 19%. 5. Plan to Monitor Completion of CAP The City will continue to update the broker certificates as needed -132- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 24,1996 ROLL ^ The Council met on the above mentioned date vsith the following members pf^Stot; Mayor Edward Callahan, Jr, Council Members Gabriel Jabbour, JoEllen Hurr, Diann Goetten Council Member Kellev was absent Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Zoning and Planning Administrator Michael Gaf&on, City Engineer Glenn Cook, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Mayor Callahan called the meeting to order at 7 00 p m. (•#1) CONSENT AGENDA Items #4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 were added to the Consent Agenda Goetten mosed, Hurr seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (*#2) REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 10, 1996 Goetten moved, Hurr seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of June 10, 1996. Vote Ayes 4, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS There were no Park Commission comments. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Sandra Smith was present and had no comments at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments ZONING ADMINISTR.\TOR'S REPORT (^3) f^2138 JOAN & WILLIAM WROBLEW'SKI, 630 PARK LANE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3732 Joan Wroblewski was present MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 (#3 - #2138 Joan & William Wroblewski - Continued) GafFron reported that the proposal for enclosing a 4x23' concrete and block expansion of the 6'x23' porch with screen requires front setback, lot coverage, and hardcover variances Hardcover of 44 4% in the 75'250' zone remains the same, but lot coverage by structure increases from 26.8% to 27.7% A 1 8' front setback variance would be required at a 33.2' setback rather than 35' for the addition. The slab was approved 5 years ago The applicant, at that time, said there were no plans to enclose the slab. There were no public comments Wroblewski informed the Council members that they had no other place on which to enjoy the view of the lake except on the patio The screening w ould accomplish mosquito control without additional hardcover Hurr questioned how the zoning code would treat a screen porch differently than an addition enclosed with glass Gaffron concurred that the condition of the resolution limiting this enclosure to a screen porch w as hard to control Hurr recommended eliminating the condition. Jabbour said he w as in favor of screening He informed the applicant that no additional hardcover would be permitted Jabbour said he would be concerned if the screened porch would become a part of the house and another screened porch would be requested in the future Discussion rev olved around the idea of screening and the porch becoming a future addition of the house Hurr did not see the need for screening as a hardship. Hurr also was not in favor of tv'ing the hands of another owTier with conditions of denial of future applications. She does not want to see any additional structure, however, at a future date. Jabbour asked that the record show the approval of this application would become the end of the building envelope Callahan reminded Council that the Planning Commission had denied another application due to a past condition placed on a resolution by another Commission asking that no further stnicture be allowed Jlurr moved, Jabbour seconded, to adopt Resolution #3732 granting hardcover, front setback, and lot coverage variances to Joan and William Wroblewski of 630 Park Lane for enclosure of the existing concrete slab porch The motion included dropping the condition for limiting it to screening only, but resolution shall include an advisory that the property has reached its limit of lot coverage by structure Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO Cm COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, l«96 (*#4) #2140 TROY ANDERSON, 1490 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3733 Goetten moved, Hurr seconded, to approve Resolution #3733. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (*#5) #2141 ROBERTA J. ROTH, 1251 BRIAR STREET - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3734 Goetten moved, Hurr seconded, to approve Resolution #3734. V'ote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (*#6) #2143 DIANE PEREZ, 3465 EASTLAKE STREET - VARIANCES RESOLUTION #3735 Goetten moved, Hurr seconded, to approve Resolution #3735, granting hardcover and setback variance for Diane Perez at 3465 Eastlake Street for reconstruction of the roof on 8'x9’ portion of the existing residence Vote; Ayes 4. Nays 0, (•#7) #2144 ARTHUR & TERRY JEWETT, 3546 IVT PLACE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3736 Goetten moved, Hurr seconded, to adopt Resolution #3736. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (*#8) #2145 DONALD & ROBIN IIELGAGER, 3265 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH VARIANCES - RESOLUTION #3737 Goetten moved, Hurr seconded, to adopt Resolution #3737, granting aide setback, lakeshore setback and average lakeshore setback variances to Donald and Robin Helgager of 3265 6th Avenue North to allow the construction of an attached garage and additions to the existing residence structure Vote Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#9) #2107 JOHN O’SULLIVAN - REQUEST FOR DRAINAGE EASEMENT OVER NAVARRE LANE The applicant was present Mabusth reported that the request was for approval of a drainage easement over unvacated Navarre Lane The vacation of 33' Navarre Lane was completed adjacent to the O'Sullivan/Smith project The Council had previously decided not to vacate the remainder of the right-of-way Drainage tiles will be installed in right-of-way to take the runoff to the church property and then to the wetlands. It was noted that a conservation easement was taken over on the wetlands within Outlot C of Lafayette Ridge by the City. The title company has asked for a drainage easement from the City in completing the title work. Mabusth said the granting of the easement will have no impact on a future bike trail ii MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CIT\' COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 (#9 - #2107 John O'Sullivan - Continued) Hurr questioned how the City could approve a drainage easement allowing runoff to drain to a neighboring property. She also asked that any cost in realignment be paid by the applicant Hurr cited an e.xample of the easement to Lafayette Ridge neighborhood but noting it still was owned by the association This drainage in question would travel to property not owned by the City or the applicant Jabbour asked if the City did not own the w etland area at Lafay ette Ridge Mabusth said the land was in tax forfeiture but was working with the association to regain the property. The Citv has an easement over that wetland area. Barrett opined that the law allow s runoff to travel dowiihill onto property owned by others. Callahan added that any runoff w ould have traveled naturally downhill due to the topography of the area Jabbour agreed that even on the existing blacktop, the runoff' travels the way of the proposed drainage easement and was of the opinion that a drainage easement was not necessary. When asked why the drainage easement was needed, O'Sullivan responded that he was in favor of having the runoff'travel its natural course He noted the compliance of the holding pond requirement to move drainage from his property to the church property’. O'Sullivan said their loan was set for ciosing on 1 hursday, June 27, and the title company was requiring the easement, permission from the City was not to the title company's satisfaction. Callahan noted there was a drainage easement to the retention pond. Mabusth said that was required as the City w'anied the runoff treated before it entered the wetland. Jabbour commented that as part of the vacation, the pond was required. Both sides of the street were vacated and now there is this current request. O'Sullivan said it was not his suggestion to construct the retention pond but a requirement of the City. He noted the escalation of the cost due to the retention pond. Callahan clarified the issues noting the drainage easement required for runoff to travel to the pond, and the question by Hurr regarding runoff traveling over private property. Mabusth responded that ail of the runoff now goes to the w etland, and the pond will create a better situation with treatment of the runoff prior to entering the wetland area. Mabusth also noted the treatment of the runoff is required by code. Barrett said the granting of the easement is a reasonable use of property upstream, and the applicant's method is reasonable. Hurr asked that it is then okay that anyone uphill can have water run downhill Barrett said that is how the property law' is written in Minnesota. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24» 1996 (#9 - #2107 John O’Sullivan - Continued) Jabbour did note that the v elocity of the runoft'can be controlled Mabusth noted that the rate must remain the same as it was in the undeveloped stage Callahan moved, Hurr seconded, to approv e the granting of the Drainage Easement to Voyageur Service Centers, Inc., and to direct the Mayor and Clerk to execute the Drainage Easement with the condition that the applicant was obligated to repair and pay the cost for any repairs within the easement Cook noted the sewer and water lines now in place Vote Ayes 4, Nays 0 (#10) REFERRAL OF DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR SKETCH PLAN REVIEW FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2380 SHADY WOOD ROAD Mabusth asked for direction from the Council to refer a dev^elopment proposal by John O'Sullivan of the church property to the Planning Commission for sketch plan review. Callahan questioned why this was being done Mabusth and Moorse both said when major applications are made. Staff would like to make the Council aware of such proposals and answer any major questions This particular proposal would involve rezoning. Hurr noted that an applicant has the legal right to make such an application Mabusth acreed Mabusth infonned the Council that the applicant nas sent letters out to the neighboring property ow ners regarding into- itional meetings Wednesday and Thursday of this week on the proposal The Plann* ^ Commission and Council are invited to attend. Jabbour said information can be sent in the information packets when such proposed development involves major policy changes. Jabbour continued that the code allows the right of applicants to make application, and he would not want to affect that process The failing condition cf the church property was noted I lurr asked if O'Sullivan owned equipment being stored on the site. O’Sullivan said it belonged to someone else O'Sullivan said he would have site plans at the information meetings He said he has distributed flyers about the meetings to a 3-block radius and is going door to door speaking with business owners in the area regarding the proposed development. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Jabbour reported his concern for the citizens located along the southern bypass alternative of the proposed Hwy 12 upgrade and what he sees as indifference Jabbour would like to inform the citizens of what is occurring regarding this issue to clarity it. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO Cm' COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 (Mayor/Council Report - Continued) Moorse was asked how the closure of Old Beach Road between CoRds 19 and 15 has w orked out Moorse said the results have been good. Hurt said residents still speak of a left turn lane proposal at County 15 and Old Beach Road Callahan said the location of such a turn lane was in the jurisdiction of Minnetonka Beach It was suggested »hat the City residents be updated regarding the City's eftbrts concerning the Highway 12 corridor selection process. Callahan said the position of the City regarding the Highway 12 corridor is simple and has been unchanging, w ith preference for an upgrade of the road as it exists and prevention of the highw ay going elsewhere Goetten said she was concerned that some people w ere not aware of the issues involved. Council agreed that the citizens should be aware of the political support by the Council and their monitoring of the situation Moorse said he informs those w ho inquire that Mn/DOT is leaning towards an alternate 6 solution w ith potential consideration of a southern bypass alternative Jabbour said the last discussions included a southern bypass route, w hich would trigger an EIS Moorse agreed that was his understanding of Mn/E>OT's inclination. Jabbour noted that prior to the school meeting on the issue, this position was not the inclination of Mn/DOT. Callahan asked Staff to consider the need. Joint use and cost of hiring a fire marshal. ENGINEER REPORT Cook reported that the sewer metering has been completed but the flow information has not yet been received The contractor has not released the information to Long Lake. Long Lake will inform the City of the raw data when it is received. Cook said the Kelly Avenue project is progressing. The sewer repair work should be completed in about two weeks cm' ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#11) RECODinCATION CONTRACT Hurr moved, Goetten seconded, to approve the contract with Municipal Code Corporation for recodification of the City's ordinances at a cost of $13,500 and to authorize the Mayor to sign the contract. Vote Ayes 4, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY’ COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 (#11 Recodification Contract - Continued) Callahan asked if this contract would provide updated code books, or if this would be an additional cost Moorse said the contract allows the hiring of a consultant to review and update the code The contract also includes the provision of 75 copies of the updated code book (#12) MAXWELL BAY ACCESS - COUNTY' ROAD 51/135 IMPROVEMENTS - RESOLUTION #3738 Moorse informed the Council that the information regarding the roadway improvements was related to the Maxwell Bay access Because Hennepin County is involved, a resolution is required from the City. Impacted neighbors w ere notified of'he project Gaflron said the four neighbors impacted by the improvements had questions but no problem with the project Tlie improvement will be located in the right-of-way but still have some impact on these neighbors Hurr questioned the state aid portion of the funding Cook said the slate aid w as that allowed to the County. I lurr asked that it be njade clear that no costs are incurred by the City for this project. Hurr moved, Goetten seconded, to adopt Resolution #3738, approving plans for turn lane and by-pass lane improvements at the intersection of CSAH 51 and CS.AH 135 in conjunction with construction of the Maxwell Bay access at no cost to the City including no easement costs. Callahan asked if a public her .ig was necessary. Gaffron said the public hearing was held in conjunction with the review of the access. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#13) HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PLAY GROUND EQUIPMENT- CRYSTAL BAY PARK Moorse reported that the handicap accessible equipment installation with ramp and sidewalk is the last item relating to the playground equipment at Crystal Bay Park. The handicap accessible play equipment will cost $3,759, and the ramp and sidewalk completion will cost $1,164. Callahan questioned the safety of a concrete base Moorse said the concrete base is the foundation on which the rubberized material is placed The rubberized material meets ADA code. Without the cement base, the rubberized material would become unstable. Gerhardson noted that this material also allows for wheelchair access and fall absorption li RIINIITES OF THE REGULAR ORO.NO CIT^ COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 (#13 - Handicapped Accessible Play Ground Equipment at Crystal Bay Park - Continued) Hurr asked if a sign is part of the ADA requirement. Gerhardson will check into this matter. Gerhardson noted that the swing used for handicap access is not used by the general public. Hurr moved, Goetten seconded to approve the purchase and installation of handicap accessible play equipment at Cry stal Bay Park at a cost of $3,759, to be paid from the Park Fund, and to appro' e a budget adjustment to reflect the expenditure This motion also authorizes the use of the $1,164 of savings from the landscaping and fencing project to purchase materials required to install a concrete ramp and complete the sidewalk. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#14) PURCHASE OF SPEED CONTROL RADAR TRAILER Moorse reported that the request is to purchase a speed control radar trailer to raise the consciousness of drivers to the speeds being driven. The purchase was initiated by contract cities It was originally budgeted for 1997, but the contract cities requested the purchase be moved up It was noted that these cities will pay their share of the cost. Hurr said she supports the purchase but asked where ’’le trailer would be used noting she noticed prior use to be mainly within the contract cities. Moorse said the trailer wil be used in Orono for a significant portion of the available time, as well as in the contract cities Goetten asked that the trailer be placed on CoRd 15 voicing a major concern over the speed and safety on that roadway. Hurr moved, Jabbour seconded, to approve the purchase of a radar trailer at a cost of $13,980 and to authorize an expenditure of $2,800 of Police Forfeiture Funds and $7,000 from the Contingency Account as the City’s share of the trailer, and to adjust the 1996 budget to reflect these expenditures The balance of $4,1 80 «s funded by the contract cities Vote Ayes 4, Nays 0 (#15) OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD TRAIL UPDATE Moorse reported that Doug Bry ant of Hennepin Parks has proposed that Hennepin Parks construct the trail from Old Crystal Bay Road along CoRd 6 and into Baker Park. Bryant was said to be willing to potentially participate in the construction of the remainder of the trail but that w ould require a formal agreement Moorse said he sent a letter agreeing to this proposal to Bryant as it was consistent with Council's decision to go forward with the trail construction The City is currently proceeding with its portion of the trail. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO Ci n' COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 (#15 - Old Cry stal Bay Road Trail Update - Continued) Park Commissioner McMillan asked if a more in-depth study of the maintenance issue was required regarding whether the City or the County would be maintainmg the trail Moorse said this was not necessary at this time. (#16) SAGA HILL PARK LAND ACQUISITION Moorse presented the Council with an update on the Saga Hili Park Land acquisition and a list of items to finalise the acquisition Moorse said the City is going ahead with the acquisition of the 9.5 acre tax forfeit parcel The 1 1+ acre property owned by Midway Bank is set for acquisition with the grant received and sufficient level of contributions obtained by the Saga Hill group The closing for the bank property is being readied Callahan asked if the tax forfeit parcel was not 9-1/2 acres Moorse said it w as but the 1/2 acre would to reconveyed to the Valek's. Callahan clarified that an easement to the park land was required before the conveyance would occur Moorse said the City would acquire the 9-1/2 acres and then can do what they wish with it. The 1/2 acre will be purchased by the City. Moorse reported that the Saga Hill group was working with the City and the Minnesota Land Trust in providing assistance with ihe purchase and with the grant The pu chase agreement itself is in the name of the Minnesota Land Trust At the time of closing, the land will be assigned to the City In discussing the bank land with the Minnesota Land Trust, Moorse said they are requesting a conservation easement on the 1 1 acres in order to gain some level of comfort on its use in the future Moorse said the City may wish to retain some flexibility on the uses of the property and asked for guidance from the Council Moorse informed Hurr that the DNR grant was for $50,000 with $95,000 raised by the Saga Hill group for the purchase price of $145,000 Callahan asked when the $50,000 will be obtained Moorse said it would be after the closing Hurt asked if the $95,000 was in the City’s name Moorse said he thought the funds were in the name of the Minnesota Land Trust as the non-profit organization. Patti Affeldt of Saga Kill group said that was her understanding. Hurr said this information would need to be clarified before any commitment was made Moorse said the funds would be necessary for the closing Hurr said any restrictions on the park land would be unacceptable. Goetten added that no specific use restrictions be placed on the 9-1/2 acre parcel. Moorse said the City could do as they wished with that parcel He noted the need for parking if the v-1/2 acres were used for a specific purpose The parking would have to be located on the 1 1 acre parcel. IVnNUTES OF THE REGULA j- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 (#16 - Saga Hill Land Acquisition - Continued) Callahan said, although the plan is to leave the land as open space, he was opposed to taking land with any conservation easement on it. Jabbour said the City should obtain the grant, and the grant cannot be received unless the ownership is with the City of Orono Jabbour said there have been concerns from neighbors over the use of the land. Jabbour said future Councils could not be bound regarding the use of the land. Moorse said he needs to check the language of the gram but thought there w ould be some restrictions placed on the City ’s use of the land Hurr said she was in favor of stipulating park uses but not to what type of park uses. Goetten said she was in favor of park use only Callahan informed Moorse that the Council was not in favor of any conservation easement Moorse said he would check the restrictions required by the DNR. Hurr asked about the time of closing. Moorse said it was currently scheduled for July 1 He said there may be the desire to do a phase 1 environmental study. Moorse said the Minnesota Land Trust was okay with an extension noting Midway Bank has not completed its title work Jabbour voiced concern with a possible problem due to the closing deadline of the purchase agreement Renay Leone of the Minnesota Land Trust arrived She said the title work was behind but saw no problem with delaying the closing on the property Callahan informed her that the Council was not interested in providing a conservation easement. Jabbour informed Leone of his concern that the bank may not defer the purchase beyono the July 1 date. Leone said the Minnesota Land Trust could address the issue of separating the tax forfeit property and the bank property regarding the conservation easement. Jabbour told Leone that there would not be a conservation easement over the tax forfeit parcel. Callahan said he was reluctant in accepting any land with a conservation easement on it. Leone asked Moorse if the DNR grant did not have a contingency for a conservation easement. Moorse said he would have to check on this. \ I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24,1996 (^^16 - Saga Hill Land Acquisition - Continued) Jabbour said he was contused why the City should give the Minnesota Land Trust a conservation easement Leone cited an example of property in a suburb that had placed a conservation easement on it 20 years ago and changes in feelings as time goes on Leone said she saw the conservation easement as reasonable with land being given free to the City Callahan informed her that the land w as not entirely free as there is a matter of lost property taxes Callahan also said there is a public policy against tying up land forever noting the desire for open space might change in the tliture Leone said that would be sad adding that the Minnesota Land Trust feels areas of land should be left undeveloped. Hurr said she did not want to see any conservation easement on either parcel Leone said the discussion at the board le\ el of the Minnesota Land Trust called for a conserv ation easement on both parcels but w ould have to be discussed regarding any separation of the two parcels. Leone said it was not acceptable to the Minnesota Land Trust not to have a conservation easement Jabbour asked why this was not discussed earlier in t'le process. Jabbour added that the Council must protect all of their citizens Hurr nvited that the conserv ation easement allows for minor uses of recreation such as trails anc asked what type of trails that would involve Leone said this would have to be discussed. Callahan said the answers need to be found regarding the environmental issue, the Minnesota Land Trust's opinion from their board on the easement, and the condition of the grant. He said the Council will not have any easement placed on the 9-1/2 acre parcel. Callahan asked that the answers be brought back to the July 8 meeting of the Council. Callahan asked Leone to inquire about an extension of the purchase agreement and to inform the City if any problems arise Callahan said he appreciates the work done by the Minnesota Land Trust and the Saga Hill group Jabbour was informed that the contract was a purchase agreement, not an option to purchase. Jabbour said a purchase agreement would require a formal cancellation. Jabbour asked about the expiration date of the DNR grant. Moorse said he did not have that date Leone said she thought the grant expired in 1997 Hurr inquired about other agreements where the Minnesota Land Trust has been the ci.'nduit Leone informed her of several Both examples had consenation easements. RnNUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY^ COIWCIL IMEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 (#16 - Saga Hill Land Acquisition - Continued) Callahan asked Flint for his opinion of paying the appraisal fee of $1,500 from Park Dedication fund Flint was inforn>ed that the Minnesota Land Trust was requiring conservation easements and the Council w as not in favor of any easements Flint said he could not see spending public money if no agreement was reached on the land usage Moorse said the appraisal has already been done as a grant procedure. The Saga Hill group were initially going to pay for it but have used their contribution for the property purchase They requested the City pay for the appraisal Hurr moved, Goetten seconded, to approve the payment of $ 1,500 for the appraisal of the Saga Hill park land parcel from the Park Dedication Fund professional services budget. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 0 Hurr asked Moorse to receive such information as this before the packet is sent out. This would allow more time for the material to be reviewed Jabbour asked Moorse to check with the DNR grant restrictions and see if any additional restrictions were required Leone said there may be the possibility of choosing either the DNR restriction or the conservation easement Leone said she would hate to see the property lost after all the time and energy spent by so many people Hurr said a compromise may be possible between the City and the Minnesota Land Trust. (#17) LOC/kL PERFORMANCE AID CERTIFICATION Moorse reported that a portion of the City 's HACA aid is being taken by the State and placed in an Local Performance Aid Program To regain tins allotment, performance standards are necessary Moorse said the City is at the point of certifying the beginning process of determining those standards. Callahan questioned the amount of time allowed to complete tiie standards and a concern over exceeding the amount of the aid. I lun inquired about City service and response times. Moorse said he has begun working on the performance measurements in order to ensure good service to the residents and did not believe the cost in determining the standards would exceed the aid amount. Hurr asked if the measurements being developed were part of a joint effort amongst city administrators and whether they were requested by Council. Moorse replied this is an area on which the lake area administrators are working, and this eftbrt has not been requested by the Council. 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIl MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 (#17 - Local Aid Performance Certification - Continued) Callahan noted the standards could become an unfunded mandate Hurr asked if this effort was suggested by Met Council. Moorse answered in the negative. Goetten moved, Jabbour seconded, to support efforts to develop performance measures for the delivery of city serv ices, and to authorize the Mayor and one Council member, Jabbour, to sign the LPA certification to indicate the city is in the process of developing and implementing a system of performance measures. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#18) HOUSING ACTION PIAN Moorse reported, in agreeing to participate in the Livable Communities Act. a housing action plan is required to be submitted by June 30 The submission would be reviewed and commented on by Met Council staff Callahan asked what w ould occur if the plan w as not submitted Moorse said if the City was not a participant in the Livable Communities Program, it would affect the City's eligibility for ISTEA grants Callahan said he was impressed with the plan as presented. Hurr said she supports the seniors and suggested the church property on Shadywood be used for such a project. Hurr questioned item #3 regarding the City cooperating with developers. Moorse said the City will support a dev elopment if it agiees with the plans presented Hurr said sh'’^ was concerned with loan guarantees. Moorse said the language was taken from the comprehensive plan in the code. Council determined to change the wording of the heading from "will" to "may' Hurr voiced concern with wording regarding the burden of urmecessary zoning under item #4. Hurr asked and was informed that there is no minimum house size requirement. Callahan moved, Jabbour seconded, to approve the Housing Action Plan with modification of paragraph 3 heading from "will" to "may". Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0 (#19) CLARIFICATION OF WETLAND FILLING AND MITIGATION POLICY Moorse said this question arose from a developer with interest in land on the northwest comer of Willow Drive and Hwy 12. The dev eloper questioned w hether the City would allow approximately one acre of city-designated wetlands to be rilled. If this would not be allow ed, the dev eloper would either drop his plans or change them. If the City would allow such filling, the developer then had additional questions regarding the mitigation requirements. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON JUNE 24, 1996 (#19 - Wetland Filling and Mitigation Policy - Continued) Hurt noted that the requirement calls for two times the holding area. Callahan said the policy should be adhered to and each case reviewed separately. Callahan said the developer should make a proposal, and the City would then review it. Moorse clarified that the developer would be informed that the Council was generally opposed to wetland filling but would review the proposal. Jabbour said the location of the wetland is also a factor. CITY' ATTORNEY’S REPORT City Attorney Barrett had no report. (•#20) LICENSES Goetten moved, Hurr seconded, »o approve the following license; Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Special Event Permit:Long Lake Com Days 4 Mile Run Sunday, August 11,1996 Noon - 1 00 p.m (•#21) BILLS Goetten moved, Hurr seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Callahan adjourned the meeting at 9:04 p.m. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION A NITEM NO.: ^ <f % DATE: July 2, 19%^ Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description; #2029 William Smith, 2580 Fox Street - Final Subdivision - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Final Plat Resolution B - Preliminary Plat Resolution No. 3577 C - Final Plat Applicant has fulfilled all conditions of preliminary subdivision approval and has provided all submittals requested in the resolution. StaP" recommends approval of the final plat of Beau Marais 2nd Addition, subject to »he findings ar;d conditions of the enclosed approval resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either adopt or amend the approval resolution 1 V A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE plat of beau MARVIS 2ND ADDITION FILE NO. 2029 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and W'HEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the o^'derly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a Class II subdivision t. a plat bv William F. Smith (hereinafter "the subdivider"); and WHEREAS, ;ie subdi\ ision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District finding that Lots I and 2 are of a size and configuration that would allow either its new or continued use as a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: L Completion of all the requirements of Resolution No. 3577. 2. 3. Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements. The subdividcr has created non-exclusive ingress, egress, easements over a private easement driveway in favor of all abutting and/or benefitting lots including a declaration of certain maintenance covenants known as First Amendment to Easement Agreement wherein each of the abutting and/or benefitting lot owners covenants and agrees to permanently maintain and pay the cost of maintenance for said private driveway. Page I of 3 The subdivider has completed the installation of certain driveway improvements as a condition of subdivision approval. The City Engineer, Shawn D. Gustafson, in his report of June 3, 1996 has confirmed the driveway meets the requirements of the City and has been found the improvement to be acceptable from an engineering standpoint. Applicant has completed brush clearing adjacent to access at Fox Street as also recommended by the City Engineer in that same report. 5. 6. 7. Payment to the City of a park dedication fee in the amount of $6,400.00. Payment to the City of a final plat application fee in the amount of $175.00. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat, easements and covenants in the amount of $200.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Beau Marais 2nd Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, subject to the following conditions; 1.Prior to the City issuing a building permit for a new residence for. Lot 1, Block 1, Beau Marais 2nd Addition, subdivider shall have installed appropriate identification/address signage identifying location of three residences served by driveway at intersection of private drive and Fox Street. Residences shall continue to be addressed at Fox Street. 2.The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder ’s Office or Registrar of Titles Office on or before January 8, 1997 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of easements and covenants as noted above. Page 2 of 3 I The approval granted by this resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 8th day of July, 1996 ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNTPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of July, 1996 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and Deputy 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 J. CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 g; 7 7_____ A RESOLin iON GRANTLNG PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A PLAT OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2580 FOX STREET (LOT 1, BEAU NLARAIS) - APPLICATION NO. 2029 WHEREAS, WUliam F. Smith, on May 25, 1995. filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a two lot residential plat of property legally descnbed as: Lot 1, Beau Marais, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property ); ana WHERE \S, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono’s Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 19, 1995, at which time al. persons desinng to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon, ana WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on July 10, 1995, the Orono City Council considered this subdivision application and variance to Section 11.31, Subdivision 5 noting the following facts and findings: The propert>- is located within the RR-IB, Single Family Rural Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable Ian within each newly created lot. The property contains a total of approximately 10.23 acres with 3.07 acres of wetland. The proposed plat contains two lots each exceeding tlie - acres dry contisuous minimum lot area requirement as follows: Lot 1 = 6.07 total acres, 3.5 acres dry, 2.57 acres wet. Lot 2 = 4.16 total acres, 3.66 acres dry, .5 acres wet. Each lot has been tested by a licensed on-site evaluator and found to have suitable soils for both a principal and alternate on-site sewage disposal system. 1. j. Page 1 of 5 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 57 7 4. The existing easennent driveway that intersects proposed Lot 2 will not violate Section 10.03. Subdivision 6 (B) as there is 2.15 dry contiguous acres to the west of the easement driveway. 5. In the granting of approval of the Beau Marais plat in 1986 the City also granted variances that allowed the filling of designated wetlands for the installation of the driveway to serv'e the most northern lot or Lot 1 of the Beau Marais plat. 6. If a private road with cul-de-sac was installed along the east side of property to serve all three lots, a half acre of designated wetlands would be filled. This improvement would also result in the loss of several mature evergreen trees along the east side of the propeny. All three access drives leading from road would also encroach upon the designated wetland areas. 7. The current subdivision is defined as back lot/front lot subdivision requiring shared access via a 30 ’ driveway outlot. The driveway outlot along the east would be limited to only two users. Lot 2 of the original Beau Marais plat would continue to gain access via the existing easement drive. Construction of a drive would result in the loss of some of the mature evergreen trees planted along the east property line. There w'ould be an encroachment of the required 26’ setback from the wetland. There would be additional encroachments of the designated wetland for the future drive to serve both Lots 1 and 2 of the current subdivision. 8. The Planning Commission found the creation ot two driveways within this property would have a negative impact upon the aesthetics and sensitive environment of this unique property'. 9. The current owner of Lot 2. Beau Marais, has agreed to maintain the current looped driveway within their property to ser\'e as a turnaround for emergency vehicles. 10. There is no record of problems reported by the former owners of Lots 1 and 2, Beau Marais or the current owners of Lot 2 in the use of the current driveway nor has the City any record of an accident resulting at the intersection of the private driveway and Fox Street. Page 2 of 5 i:l CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _S 5 7 7 ' 11.The granting of the variance to the subdivision regulations will not be detrimental to the public safety, health or welfare or injurious to other property. 12.The conditions upon which the request for a variance is based are unique to the property for which this variance is sought and are not applicable generally to other property in the City. 13.Because of the location of extensive designated wetlands that surround the dry buildable areas of this property and mature plantings on the property, an unusual hardship to the land would result, if the letter of the code were to be followed as distinguished from an inconvenience or hardship to the subdivider. 1^.It has been found that the strict enforcement of this chapter would result in an environmentally unsound development of land. 15.The variance will not in any manner vary from the provisions of Ae Comprehensive Municipal Plan which would approve three residential units being served by a driveway. No variances are sought to the minimum lot requirements of the RR-IB Zoning District. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the above findings, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliiniMry plat for William F. Smith at 2580 Fox Street per the survey dated 2-10-95, most revised date 5-25-95, by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg. Inc., subject to the followmg conditions: 1.The existing driveway shall be upgraded from a 10 ’ gravel road to a 12 gravel road. The entrance portion of the drive shall be upgraded to an 18 ’ width gravel road to a point just beyond new curb cut to serve residence on proposed Lot... Subdivider shall be responsible for installing appropriate identification signage identifying location of three residences served by driveway at intersection of dnve with Fox Street. Residence shall continue to be addressed at Fox Street. Page 3 of 5 1 II ^ rL-.-Ac'' C(.r^:?/ /o., o CITYofOROSrO ^ , u RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. y R y y • 2.Subdivider shall create<jn outlot)within Lot 2 defining the driveway at a 14’ and 18* width as described m Condition 1 above. 3. Subdivider shall be responsible for developing covenants for the maintenance and upkeep of driveway. The following list of fmal submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: 1. Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200’. Drawing to include: A.Lot lines platted per preliminary sur\ey by Mark Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc. dated 2-10-95, most revised date 5-25-95. B.Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 5 ’ each side of new internal property lines. C. Naming of plat. Legal documents renuired: A.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. E.xecution of a Developer ’s Agreement and posting of a letter of credit to be written to an amount equal to 150% of the costs of required improvements. This includes the required upgrading of the gravel driveway as set forth in Condition 1 above. Fees to be paid: Total due: $3751 Page 4 of 5 i CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 577 - A. B. c. Final plat fee = $175.00 T.egal review and filing fee = $200.00 I cIL Uj " ♦Park Dedication Fee ^ ^ ^ Upon approval of preliminar>' plat, the subdivision shall be referred to the City Assessor to determine the fair market value of the property in its undeveloped state. You will be advised as soon as a fee has been determined. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this lOUt day of July, 1995. ATTEST: ’■7£T, CO E)orothy M. Hillin, City Clerk Iward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1995, by Edward j“. ci^llahan, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the Cit>' of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. r*^****®'*SA?wf*^ NOTARY PUeUC-MlNNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My Commission Expires Jan. 31.2000 Ji C Notairy Public Page 5 of 5 ilI K) k'l Q SS9*20T 47 ) *I I » \ s* A ill !^l O. •t. > I h 1 I S I r'5 A f •) ~1 > I I N. I I ^1 X ^ *v JL c> Q> ^ •___. — 9 r . '' ■ ••i,C-Aqq_-i,::;;<g^_lLT0^_ >• n89‘iow 32J.9J 4 a I i > VI rj 4^ Ut o fs, C'o5 •i yj .OO sa-. ■'•. ' o «? r <:1F /«' k V 4<, K\ § u-CiS^ « N v« ^ si^ it0‘ZO'E 3?S.30 £ •• \ y^fosii I «I V* < ^ > ‘ ii * P'^U ODm > >::c > CO c cc c REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ DATE: July % ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator 6 Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Description: #2134 Robert Albrecht, 1810 Shadywood Road - Variance (After-the- Fact) Zoning Disirict: LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential. •/, Acre, Sewered Application: Request for after-the-fact hardcover variance for construction of new 207 s.f. deck on lakeside of residence. List of Exhibits A B C D E F Summary Annotated Site Plan Letter from Applicant's Attorney 6/28/96 Notice of Planning Commission Action 6/20/96 Planning Commission Minutes 5/20/96 (See also 6/17/96 minutes in packet) Memo and Exhibits of 6/12/96 Memo and Selected Exhibits of 5/16/96 Applicant constructed a deck addition to the lake side of his existing residence this spring Without a building permit. Work was stopped, and this application was required. The deck meets all setback requirements. The deck constitutes 207 s.f. of hardcover, of which 165 s.f. is new hardcover and 42 sf is over the pre-existing steps. Applicant initially proposed additional landscaping revisions and concurrent removal of portions of the driveway, resulting in a net 75-250' hardcover decrease of 35 s.f. Planning Commission recommended denial of this proposal on a vote of 5 - 0 on May 20. Applicant then requested and was granted a referral to Planning Commission s June 17 meeting of a revised proposal resulting in only minimal landscaping changes including slightly revising the front sidewalk, with concurrent removals of 255 s.f. of driveway, resulting in a net hardcover decrease of 205 s.f. in the 75-250' zone. — Request for Coyincil Action continued Page 2 July 2. 1996' Zoning File #2134 R^n Albrecht. 1810 Shadywood Road Planning Commission on June 17 voted 3 in favor, 4 against on a motion to recommend approval. No additional motions were forthcoming. Analysis of Planning Commission Recommendation It appears that the members of the Planning Commission voting against the motion for approval, considered the application in its historic context. Briefly, the property in 1984 contained a small residence with no driveway, and only a detached garage on the adjacent (otherwise vacant) commonly-owned lot to the north. In 1984 variances were granted to allow a house on the lot to the north, and the previous owner of applicant's property was granted approval to construct additions and a "grassed paver" driveway, all meeting the 25%, 75-250’ hardcover limit. The previous owner then paved the driveway, resulting in hardcover excesses which were ultimately granted an after-the-fact variance in 1991 for 5,080 s.f. of hardcover. Mr. Albrecht's current proposal is to reduce the existing 75-250' hardcover from 5,037 s.f. (•4? 5%) down to 4,832 s.f. (41.7%). A 180 s.f. portion of the existing house is in the 0-75’ zone, as is the 135 s.f. lakeshore stairw'ay. This comprises 315 s.f. or 4.9% hardcover in the 0-75’ zone. Bringing the lakeshore stairway landing into compliance would likely reduce this to approximately 280 s.f. or 4.3%. Two items in the 1991 after-the-fact variance approval granted to previous owner Steve Tibbetts, apparently had some impact on Planning Commission's recommendation: 1. 2. A finding in Resolution 2955 that "The Planning Commission finds that existing drive provides the necessary safety level for vehicular use on a busy County road." A condition stating that "The City will approve no further encroachment of the principal structure (this includes decks) within the lakeshore yard." Lakeshore Stairway Reconstruction An additional facet of this application is that the applicant replaced his pre-existing lakeshore stairway within the last five years without a building permit. The stairway system is partially nonconforming in that it contains a 6’ x 13 ’ landing parallel to the shoreline, technically not in compliance with the Code because it exceeds 4' in width and comprises 135 s.f. of hardcover where a compliant stairway would be approximately 90-100 s.f. in area. Planning Commission ’s iMay 20 recommendation to deny, included a recommendation that the applicant work with staff to bring the lakeshore stairway into compliance. Planning Commission's June 17 action gave staff no further specific direction on this. Request for Council AcMon continued Page 3 July 2, 1996 Zoning File #2134 Ron Albrecht. 1810 Shadvwood Road Comments from Applicant’s Attorney Please review the letter of June 28 written by the applicant's attorney, stating applicant's position. Discussion Staff has watched this property develop from a relatively conforming pair of commonly-owned 60' lots in 1984 into an extremely non-conforming situation today. On two occasions now, under two different owners, the property has been brought in for after-the-fact approval of hardcover increases, the first of which was approved in 1991 as reasonable and appropriate for the property, and the second of which is before you currently. In 1991 City approval included a condition that no additional structure, including decks, should be allowed in the "lakeshore yard" (See Exh. L of May 16 memo). Applicant's aitomry is correct in that the Zoning Code definition of lakeshore yard means just the 0-75' zone, not necessarily all the area between the house and the lake. It is unclear what the previous Council intended it to mean based on the minutes of April 1991. Because the lot coverage by structures is under 11%, and because the new deck requires no setback or average setback variances, the City is faced merely with a hardcover variance request. The proposal to reduce hardcover square footages to a level significantly less than was approved in 1991, places the application in a more positive light. The opposite argument is that hardcover fairly distant from the shoreline is being removed in exchange for allowing additional hardcover abutting the 75' setback line, much nearer the lake. Applicant's attorney has indicated that the hardships supporting the request include safety for the children playing in the lakeside yard, given the steep slope dropping to the lake. The deck has never been intended to have a railing, however, and is intended to have a hot tub taking up a significant portion of it. Council must conclude whether suitable hardships have been presented in order to grant the hardcover variance . Finally, Council must deal with the question of the lakeshore stairway/landing. Applicant notes that the structure was replaced board-for-board identical to what previously existed, and that the walkway parallel to the shoreline is necessary to retain the existing stairway system while meeting minimum LMCD dock setbacks from the north lot line. The only nonconformity of the section parallel to the shoreline is its 6' width where normally a 4' width would be allowed. Staff considers this as only a minor nonconformity, and would recommend that an after-the-fact permit be obtained by the applicant. Council should decide whether it will require that the stairway system be brought into total conformity or allowed to remain as is. Request for Council Action continued Page 4 July 2, 1996 Zoning File # 2134 Ron Albrecht. 1810 Shadywood Road Staff Recommendation Due to the inconclusive nature of the Planning Commission recommendation, staff has not drafted a resolution for approval or denial. Any action Council takes to approve or deny this applicaticf. should include a directive that staff draft an appropriate resolution for adoption at your next m^. *ing. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approve, conditionally approve or deny the after-the-fact hardcover variance for the deck adjacent to the house. Approve the lakeshore stairway system as is or require that it be brought into conformity. Direct staff to draft an appropriate resolution incorporating the necessary findings, conclusion, order and conditions reflecting Council's action, for adoption at your next meeting. LINDQUIST & VENNUM p.l.l.p. 4200 IDS CCNTcn 80 Soutm Eighth Sthcft MmNfAHOus. HA nncsota SS402-220S TfwCPHOwt; 612-371-3211 Fax :612-371-3207 In Ocnv CA U nooixst . Venmum 8 p u l^ 600 17th STHtrr. Sum 2125 OCNVfx. COCOXAOO 00202-5401 TcLEPHONt: 303-573*5900 ArroRNEYS A t Law Robert C. Mitchell, |r. (612) 371-3262 '7-; lune 28, 1996 ©•■ono City Council City of Orono P.O. *1ox 66 Qystal Bay, MN 55323 Re:Robert & Tara Albrecht 1810 Shady wood Road Application No. 2134 Ladies & Gentlemen: Rob and Tara Albrecht have asked me to help them with their variance application. I enclose a copy of the materials submitted by the Albrechts for the June 17, 1996 Orono Planning Commission meeting. The Albrechts and I have evaluated the fact situation subsequent to the June 17, 1996 Planning Commission meeting and have- been unable to identify ways in which the Albrechts could change the pending application to make the outcome even more favorable to the City of Orono. The Albrechts are open to suggestions from the city staff or the city council as to any changes which you think should be made. I believe there are three items which need to be considered. First, the Albrechts stand in a bad light with the city because this is an after-the-fact variance. Second, there is some language in the 1991 Orono action concerning the predecessor to the Albrechts to EDO I 885683 I t -mi',J LINDQUIST & VENNUM pi _l.p. Orono City Council June 28, 1996 Page 2 the effect that no further variances would be granted on the property. Third, is the fact that the Albrechts are proposing to reduce hardcover on the property by 205 square feet and they are placing no improvements in the 0'-75’ lakeshore setback zone. As to point number one, the Albrechts have apologized to the city for commencing construction of this deck without getting proper permits. They are new to Orono's requirements and made a mistake. They will pay the increased fees due to the violation. They will reiterate their apology to the City Council that the law has been broken. Beyond that, I do not know what further they could do. If there is something, please let us know. Second, there is no doubt that a significant number of the Planning Commission members who voted against this variance did so because of the language in the 1991 minutes. I have read those minutes and they are susceptible of two interpretations. One interpretation is to make certain that no future improvements on this lot encroached into the 0 ’-75’ setback zone. The new improvements in 1991 did not do that and the deck proposed in 1996 also does not encroach into the 0'-75' setback zone. The other interpretation, and I believe the one that was pertinent to the Planning Commission members voting against this variance, was the idea that this property is relatively small and with the house and other hardcover on it, it is substantially burdened. The hardcover on the lot in the 75*-250' setback zone exceeds the limitations imposed by Orono. And KUO I 885683 I LINDQUIST & VENNUM pllp. Orono City Council June 28, 1996 Page 3 therefore, that there should be no further variance which would make the existing nonconformity larger. I emphasize that the logical sense of the 1991 statement is that more variances which would incr^*ase the nonconformity of the property by allowing there to be more hardcover should not be granted. In this case, the Albrechts propose to reduce the nonconformity by reducing the amow'nt of hardcover by 205 square feet. Therefore, while a variance is necessary because work is being done in the 75 ’-250’ zone, the work being requested will have the net end result of reducing the nonconformity of the property by reducing the hardcover on the property and bringing the property more into conformance with Orono's ordinances. I respectfully submit that the inteiit shown in the 1991 minutes is not being subverted. Finally, the Albrechts' letter to the Planning Commission dated June 10, 1996 supplies affirmative reasons why, as new residents of Orono, they would like to rearrange their property ever so slightly, but with the net effect to Orono of decreasing the hardcover by 205 square feet. Those reasons relate to the fact that they are a young family with two young children. The way the house sits on the lot, there really is not a good, safe place for the children to play in the lakeside yard and be seen from the living room and/or kitchen of the house. The existing deck is simply too small for the Albrechts and their two children. The situation is personal to them and yet if they are allowed to decrease the roadside hardcover and increase the lakeside hardcover, but outside the 0’-75 ‘ zone, then EDO I 883083 I I LINDQUIST & VENNUM P.L.LP. Orono City Co* ncil June 28, 1996 Page 4 they wilt have a house which is suited to their family. I would ask you to visit the site. It is readily accessible and, by viewing the site, one can see the improvement the new deck brings to the Albrechts' house with regard to having young children. Hopefull/ that advantage, coupled with the advantage o Orono of oeaeasing hardcover by 205 square feet, would place you in a position to vote in favor of allowing them to do the deck work they are requesting. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Rob and Tara at 471-8708 or to contact me at 371-3262. Thank you. Very truly yours. LINDQUIST & VENNUM P.L.L.P. RGMrap Enclosure Robert G. Mitchell, Jr. ED0t:8g;6S3 I few . c CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2134 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 20, 1996 TO: Rob Albrecht 1810 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES; Robert G. Mitchell, Jr. Lindquist & Vennum 4200 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances DATE OF MEETING:06/17/96 VOTE: 3 FOR 4 AGAINST Planning Co»nmission motion to recommend approval subject to the following conditions (failed on a vote of 3-4; no further motions were offered): Approve deck adjacent to house as constructed. Subject to hardcover revisions per applicant's revised proposal. Lower deck (at shoreline) to be brought into conformance. Applicant's ne.xt scheduled meeting is confirmed as City Council on Monday, July 8, 1996; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. MINUrES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 20. 1996 (#3) #2133 JOHN AND KARLA SPOONER, 1385 ORONO LANE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARLNG 7:59-8:04 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant, Karla Spooner, was present. Mabusth reported that the application is for hardcover and lakeshore setback variances for improvements to a lakeside deck. The e.xisting deck consisting of 650 s f of hardcover would be removed, along with 37 s f of connecting brick walkway, and replaced with a grade level granite patio I'x?' step v\ill e.xtend from both sides, and r.x24‘ step will extend at the lakeside. The existing hardcover of 4,140 s f is proposed at 3,851 s f. for a reduction of 298 s f in Ih * 0-75' setback Mabusth noted that the property is 12 acres of which halt is located in the 0-75' setback A 4'x6' cement pad is proposed being located 50' from the lake at the base of the stairs for use of outdoor cooking The deck is 26' from the lake. The proposed patio would be 40' from the lake. The proposal would result in an overall improvement in reduction of hardcover. The applicant said they were willing to give back in hardcover to replace with what is suitable for the property. Peterson said he saw the proposal as an improvement to the existing conditions and to the lakeshore itself There were no public comments. Lindquist voiced his approval of the proposal. Mabusth informed Smith that the shoreland regulations allow for stairs and pad. Spooner said the steps are not an access to lake but to replaceloose stone steps adjacent to the house. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application #2133 as recommended. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#4) #2134 ROBERT CHARLES ALBRECHT, 1810 SHADYVVOOD ROAD VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARLNG 8:04-8:26 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certifleate of Mailing were noted The Applicant was present. i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 20, 1996 (#4 - #2134 Robert Charles Albrecht - Continued) GafFron reported that the after-the-fact request for hardcover variance was due to the construction of a 207 s.f deck to the lakeside of the residence Gaffron said the propeity was originally in ownership with an adjacent lot. which was subsequentiv sold Each lot now has a house with amenities A resolution in 1984 allowed for 277s's f of hardcover or 25% of the 75-250' zone. A permit was issued in 1985 for additions to the residence ’ subject to the use of grass pavers for the driveway resulting in a hardcover proposal of 19% It was found in 1991 that the driveway had been paved with asphalt and had constructed decks without approval resulting in 5080 s.f of hardcover. The 19' driveway with backup apron was approved in 1991 to eliminate the need to b ck up onto Co Rd 19. Work in progress was recently stopped when it was found that another deck was being constructed Also seen was a hot tub, which is to be placed on the deck This deck, along with different interpretations of calculations, result in 5352 s.f. ofliaidcover. 270 s.f. more than what was approved in 1991. Including the area outside of the 75', there is a net increase in hardcover of 165 s f Landscaping proposal by Otten Bros, of landscape patio blocks result in a net increase of 54 s f of hardcover. The proposal is to reduce the driveway to a narrower width and leave the backup apron, resulting in a net reduction of 35 s.f in the 75-250' zone. The lakeshore stairway, shown on the landscape plan, was rebuilt since 1991. This additional hardcover was addressed in 1991, and the owner was informed that a permit would be required The City also made an effort at that time to ensure that a new owmer w'ould be aware of these restrictions The stairway is 3'xl9' long with a 6'xl3' landing, where 4'x4' is allowed Gaffron said the square footage of the structure is not much more than code would allow, but since il is after-llie-fact, it is necessary to review the stnjcture. Gaffron noted that the present owner has owned the property since 1991. The applicant, Albrecht, disputed the calculations of the hardcover. It was noted that the hardcover calculation in 1996 included the entire properly, wliile only the 75'-250' zone w'as included in the calculation in 1991. Gaffron explained it was a matter of differing interpretations. Smith said the existing driveway was necessary for safety reasons. No further encroachments or hardcover were said to be allowed in the future by the Planning Commission in 1991. Smith said this was an opportunity to honor what a past Planning Commission had recommended. Lindquist commented that this application was a good example of why covenants are necessary’ for properties. Hawn agreed with Lindquist and Smith that no additional hardcover should be allowed. They, along with Peterson, agreed that the backup apron was necessary foi safely. ! MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 20. 1996 (W - #2134 Robert Charles Albrecht - Continued) Albrecht responded that, although he has owned the property since 1991, he was not aware of hardcover variances. He also noted that the proposal results in a net decrease in hardcover of 78 s f Peterson commented that the applicant knew that a building permit would be required to construct the deck. Lindquist said he would not have agreed to a new’ deck Peterson noted that the deck is not in the 0-75' setback. Albrecht informed the Planning Commissioners that the 1991 approval of hardcover in the 75-250’ zone of 34% was comparable to other homes in the neighborhood. Lindquist responded that there was a discrepancy in the hardcover calculation. GafFron said the current calculation by Stalf should be considered as accurate Smith said there were no opportunities for e.xchanges in order to further reduce hardcover. GafFron agreed that the stairway to the lake was necessary. Peterson reiterated that the 1991 resolution implied no more hardcover would be allowed and reconstruction of a deck would have to meet City codes. Albrecht responded that he was informed that if he replaced the stairway and deck, board by board, he would not need a variance. Stoddard commented that a neighbor had complained that the lakeshore stair encroached on their dock Peterson said he personally had no problem with the stairs. Hawn said approval of the deck would render the process meaningless. She did comment on the attractiveness of the deck. Albrecht asked, if he w ould reduce the size of the driveway, if the Commission would approve the deck. He was informed that the issue was the approval in 1991. Albrecht said ow ners should be made aware of variances Lindquist informed him that this would have been done if Albrecht had followed the procedure of seeking a building permit. Smith followed this comment with noting that building permits are a trigger mechanism For discovery of necessary' information. GafFron asked the Planning Commissioners to read the notation on the inspection notice from 1991 on the building permit that the "resolution provided to new owner". It was further noted that there is no policy requiring the City to relay this information to new buyers. MINL^TES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNOSSION NIEE i IN li held O n MAY 20, 1996 (A^4 - fl2i24 Rubcil Chailcs Aibrechl - Coiilinucu) Smith moved. Lindquist seconded, to deny approval of the after-the-fact deck. The stair landing was approved with the condition that the applicant work with Staff to meet the 90-100 sf compliance for .stair landing si7e Vote Ayes .S Nays 0 The applicant was informed that the application would go to the second Cou.ncil m.eetin<^ ir. June. It was noted for the record that the Planning Commission was not concerned with the stairway to the lake but would Uke to see the Citv work with the aoDlicant in meeting size reo,uirements (#5) #2135 PAUL AND SUE HEDLUND, 1575 LONG L.AKE BLVD. - VARLANCES - PUBLIC HEARLNG 8:28-9:12 P.M. The .Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The .Applica.nts was present. Gaftron reported that the property in question was a 3/4 acre lot. the bulk of which is located in the 0-7.5’ setback, with 17,600 .s f in the 0-7.5' sefhack and 11,000 s f in the 75- 250’ setback The house on the property' is small and mostly located within the 0-75’ setback. The single car garage e.ncroaches into the right-of-way. Gaffron said the proposal to purchase the property is contingent on approval of the additions. .A ji addition is proposed to the rear, non-lakeside of the house, but still partially in the 0-75' setback. A second story is also planned. The garage w'ill be removed and replaced by a 2-car attached garage. Gaftron informed the Planning Commission that the variances required for this proposal are for hardcover, side setback to the east, proposed at 18’ where 30' is required, and street setback. The attached garage requires a 30' street setback and is proposed at 1'. Gaftron said Staft' recom.mends a 10' setback to the street lot line. The norma! setback for a detached garage, when doors are to the side, is 10’. which Gaffron said should be strived for. Gaffron reported that the average depth of the lot is such that there is no buildable envelope The evi.sting house does not meet setback*; Any upward changes re.sults in visual impacts Gaffron said it should be noted that the height of the staicture be limited to 2 stories. If this limit was not placed in the resolution, the structure could be built to 2- I./2 stories. Any m-o.^’e than 2 stories would not fit the neighborhood and would be disproportionate from the street view'. A letter from the neighbor to the east stated his opposition to allowing a side setback less than the 30’ requirement. Gaffron said there could be ramifications to changing the garage to the other end of the house. 10 r TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Peterson and Orono Park Commission Ron Moose. City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator June 12, 1996 SUBJECT: #2134 Robert and Tara Albrecht, 1810 Shady\v’ood Road - Variance (After-the-Fact) - Revised Proposal - Referral from Council Zoning District: LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2 acre Application: Request for after-the-fact hardcover variance for construciion of new deck on lake side of residence. Note: Applicants have revised their proposal and Council has referred the revision back to Plarming Commission for consideration. List of Exhibits A - Applicants' Revised Letter of Submittal/New Data/Exhibits B - Referral from Council C - Planning Commission Action Notice 5/28/96 D - 5/16/96 Memo and Selected Exhibits Summary of Revisions 1. Additional detail provided regarding use and function of driveway, and the 255 s.f. area proposed for removal. 2. Front entiy way sidewalk area revised to result in no hardcover increase. 3. 4. 5. Landscape paving blocks along north side of house to be omitted. Net result is 205 s.f decrease in hardcover in 75-250 ’ zone, as compared to 35 s.f decrease with original proposal. Staff w ill accept the 75-250' zone area calculated by the sur\ eyor at 11,590 s.f rather than 11,100 s.f This has the impact of slightly reducing the hardcover percentages, although hardcover square footages are not affected. Issues for Consideration 1. Is the revised proposal, with a greater net hardcover decrease, more acceptable than the initial proposal? Zoning File #2134 June 12, 1996 Page 2 2. Have applicants provided sufficient additional information to show that a hardship exists? Staff Recommendation If Planning Commission determines that the revised proposal yielding a greater hardcover decrease, in combination with the additional hardships suggested by the applicants is sufficient to justify the requested variance, then a recommendation for approval would be appropriate. Whether or not a recommendation for approval is forthcoming, Planning Commission should address the need for an after-the-fact permit for the lakeshore stairway. Options for Action 1. 2. Recommend approval of after-the-fact variances under the revised proposal, including payment of at, r-the-fact variance and permit fees, and addressing lake stairway. Recommend approval of the revised plan as noted above, with specific additional conditions, and addressing lake stairway. 3. Table for further information/further discussion. 4. 5. Recommend denial, give specific reasons, and address after-the-fact permit for the lakeshore stairway. Other. £>”/'■ A ■-1 Robert and Tara Albrecht 1810 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 June 10, 1996 Planning Commission City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Ladies and Gentlemen: We are requesting that the Planning Commission reevaluate our variance application based on the file and the attachments to this letter (multiple copies). Best regards. Rob and Tara Albrecht 471-8708 cc: Mike Gaffron £801:883677 1 -r. New Data . A'2 _____I ^ Albrecht Variance Application 1810 Shadywood Road Application No. 2134 June 10, 1996 1. Original Exhibit "E" shows that our driveway varies in width from 20' to 22’ and covers 2,810 square feet of area. In addition, there is a 2-car parking area/turnaround near Shadywood Road. This size driveway is quite large for a house and lot of this small size made necessary by (a) the relatively long distance from the house to Shadywood Road, (b) the need for on-site parking and (c) the need for a turnaround on the property because it is safer to turn around in our driveway than to back out onto Shadyovood Road. Also note that there is "no parking' allowed on Shadywood Road in this area, and therefore we and our guests must park in our driveway and our driveway turnaround. This too necessitates a larger than normal driveway. If we reduce the width of our long driveway by only a few feet we can reduce the driveway hardcover by 255 square feet. The driveway will still be plenty w'ide for two cars, we will have maintained our parking spaces on our property, the turnaround won't be changed at all, and so the situation will result in a reduction in hardcover of 255 square feet with no disadvantage to anyone. See new Exhibit 1 (revised original Exhibit j) by Otien Bros. Since our driveway is used only by ourselve.s the slight reduction in lane width of the two lanes in our driveway will not matter, as there is still plenty of room for two cars side by side. EB01:Sa3660 1 2. Please note that only the original house encroached within the 0’-75 ’ lake setback zone. No portion of the 1985 addition and no portion of our proposed deck intrudes into the 0'-75’ lake setback zone. See original Exhibits *H-2" and “f. 3. The new deck does not encroach in the average lake setbacks of the homes nearby. See original Exhibit *N*. 4. Note that our neighbors most impacted by the deck has given their approval by original Exhibit *0* and new Exhibit 2. 5. Our hardcover area and percentage are being reduced. See new Exhibit 3 and new Exhibit 4. Note that new Exhibit 2 is the Sathre-Bergquist survey revised as of 3-21- 91 and is similar to the city's original Exhibit "E" except that the lot area within the 75'-250’ zone of 11,590 square feet depicted on Exhibit 3 (lOp of page) was inexplicably deleted in original Exhibit "E”. VVe cannot explain all of the different hardcover numbers in old City records. But we do know that the numbers we are presenting you with this revised application are accurate. There is a net decrease of hardcover of 205 square feet and, given the small size of the lot, it is a significant number of square feet. It is a 1.8% decrease. Also, the square footage reduction is in the 75'-250’ zone, the zone which is overburdened by your standards. 6. We do not think that our hardcover total based on our total lot area, including both the 0’-75' zone and the 75'-250' zone, is out of the ordinary for the houses along Shadywood. Therefore, we think we are being asked only to be treated similar to the way others have been treated. E BO 1:883680 I 1 7. We have children ages 3 % years and 2 weeks old. If we put the children in the lakeside yard, then there is danger of the lake and they are crawling around in the grass and they are bitten by lots of bugs. If we can just get the children a little bit higher off the grass, then the bug bites are significantly reduced and of course we can make a safety enclosure on the deck so that the children cannot get to the lake. Finally, the children on the deck can be clearly seen from inside the house, which would not be the case if we had a lower play area on our lawn. 8. Our whole problem with our house and lot starts with the fact that we have a sharply angled shoreline from northwest to southeast. This causes the original house to be partly within the 0 ’-75' zone. If the shoreline were more straight, we believe we would have a less serious problem in that we would be able to have the entire house outside of the 75' zone and we could make a much easier layout of driveway, house, deck, front lawn and lake. Second, our lot size is small and there is no way around that. The hardcover percentage limitations you used are easy to work with when you have a 2-acre Orono lot. On a small lot, the percentages are overly burdensome. Third, because of the safety problem backing out onto Shadyw'ood Road and the no parking on Shadywood Road, we need a larger driveway, parking area and turnaround than would normally be the case on a lot our size. Finally, our neighborhood is all existing houses and is now fully developed. There is no other land for us to acquire and there are no other houses to be built nearby that we know of. EB01:883680 I 9. For the foregoing reasons, we think that there is a substantial hardship to us if you do not allow us to build the new deck which is only 165 square feet in size, because the existing steps are 42 square feet, for a total new deck area of 207 square feet. No one else is being harmed if you grant this variance. We think our situation is unique and unusual. The reasons we need the deck space for our children are very important as a matter of safety. EBOI:883680 t i ^•tAl !•« • It.9^0 l<r »«r«o» »rw«t*tuu «t* 9t t.n*4 ft* mU m* •l.lltinIII f**it It!I.1IIt»t«| IW«tr«>wr »#«■;I,Mi o- a M «r U m iMrailaM tf *11 W«ll4tr<«« 90<d w •• litt *r »W«*, ****/ /? ^ lUftatarwf t*r«l y »1* Ura*«*« M»* list •Js:^ »-■ n. V I * V.' ,t .•-i' 1.,.'V • V s: 5^^ u . *•». 1.4 kV I uz D O os ty B f liJ fC Z f/V# •/ • • •• •• • • ' frrr:!^- L.-.;: n*. ..“•.•iuftx::.. (u 9. For the foregoing reasons, we think that there is a substantial hardship to us if you do not allow us to build the new deck which is only 165 square feet in size. because the existing steps are 42 square feet, for a total new deck area of 207 square feet. No one else is being harmed if you grant this variance. We think our situation is unique and unusual. The reasons we need the deck space for our children are very Important as a matter of safety. fe E B01:883680 1 >" . 1|HltImi« *f*-cij>t‘4;<*f' • • i« •»• • •• Oil. _F^ J y 1^*1/ "" 5/iOwiAJC» OF /’<it>rcs.i<2> N IVlU ML. SBrsML. ' . • ; • /• • • ^ •. • • —^ :i : • •-.. ./ j. V V • • • •• *#• ‘ ■A - 2.% -^-^ r/f'/ ‘ 4 • ’: . C^s-c-c<v^ S-r^U --------^>0-CSrTS-<^ JU__cs \^-crQjr 5T \ O Vw-cu^y=. c>^~=^A o ^0 pJLc O \ Ci-'f>.5-^ —<g—s-, * v.«5L-'~i;^ i^_r- .4-SL^ "An\ o-\io Douglas R. Seabolt 1800 Shadywood Rd. Orono. MN 55391 ■ . • « • 4 k *• f . , - • ► -i» NEW 0(H>8lt X •1 ■ A ^ *»2 June 10, 1996 To whom it may concern, We are Mr. Albrecht's neighbors at 1820 Shadv wood Rd. Mr. Albrecht has made available for our inspection his plans for improving his property with landscaping and increase in deck size. We feel the addition will improve his property and beautify our neighborhood. Sincerely, il I ^5 u» — 8* f* fir o m |5 :a Wt «►o- 83 c :? t i N> rj b ID r* 9 f F V « ao0^^k O s . / (.is: t- I! fli »• M •- O »«e f* 9 I 8 3 y •jk 'ti l: :: :j ^ 1 •I* 2: t .i. o o v.-» H ir \S If •1 s y /I ' j r \ i/« I — 5 5 c> N> — Ul — Qt 4. I ~ >4 — k : —c I » ec ^ c nil !t If i: 3 ’It I* ** 8 3 Itr* »• r» New Exhibit 4 Hardcover Calculations Setback Zone:75-250’- ^ . Existing Hardcover in Zone A. House w/garage 1653 s.f. B. Driveway 2810s.f. C. Front steps and sidewalk 124 s.f. D. Entryway deck 155 s.f. E. Preexisting rear deck and steps 144 s.f. ‘TO F. Landscaping at front entry G. Landscape timbers around sandbox 36 s.f. TOTAL 5037 s.f.i Total hardcover in zone 5037 s.f. total property in zone 11,590 s.f.2 = 43.5% hardcover Proposed Hardcover in Zone A. House w/garage B. Driveway 1653 s.f. 2555 s.f.— OC C. Front steps and sidewalk 124 s.f. D. Entryway deck 155 s.f. E. Proposed rear deck and steps(144 s.f. old/165 s.f. new)309 s.f.4- /(^r G. Landscape timbers around sandbox TOTAL 36 s.f. 4832 s.f. Total hardcover in zone 4,832 s.f. -i- total property in zone 11,590 s.f. = 41.7% hardcover {) Net decrease in Hardcover 205 s.f. (248 s.f. less then the 1991 approved amount - file no. 2134, resolution no. 2955) 1 Orono 5/16/96 report page 2 2 New Exhibit 3 I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION .^9 ■ ' - DATE: Junes, 1996 ITEM NO.: Department Approv al: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2134 Robert Albrecht, 1810 Shadywood Road - Variance (After-the-Fact) Request for Referral to June 17th Planning Commission (Revised Proposal) List of Exhibits A - Applicant’s Letter of Request B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 5/28/96 C - Staff Memo of 5/16/96 This item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their May 20th meeting, which resulted in a 5-0 vote for recommending denial. Since then, the applicant has revised his proposal and is requesting further review at the Planning Commission's June 17th meeting prior to Council action, which likely will be scheduled for Council's June 24th meeting. Options for Action 1. Refer back to Planning Conunission. 2.Deny referral to Planning Commission, direct staff to schedule the item for Council’s June 24th meeting. 3.Other. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends this item be referred to the Planning Commission for review at their June 17th meeting. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Refer this item back to the Planning Commission for review of the revised proposal on June 17th. Proposed Motion: Moved by , seconded by , to refer the revised proposal of Zoning File #2134 to the Planning Commission for review on June 17th. Vote: _ ayes, CD nays. 1 ' ^L' Robert & Tara Albrecht 1810 Shadywood Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 6/5/96 To: CityofOrono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 City of Orono, We are requesting a Planning Commission revaluation of our variance application based on nev; data acquired and a resubmittal of plans. 1 ■ Best Regards, Rob & Tara Albrecht 471-8708 ________________ t*XA'. C CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. M\ 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2134 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 28, 1996 TO:Robert Albrecht 1810 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance (After-the-Fact) DATE OF MEETING: 5/20/96 VOTE:5 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Denial for reasons noted below. NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Denial recommendation was based on: Excessive hardcover given the history of hardcover increases on this property. Previous approval resolution indicating no further encroachments should occur in the lakeshore yard. Previous approval resolution finding that existing driveway is appropriate. This item must be placed on the City Council's June 10 agenda. However, per our conversation, staff will recommend that Council refer it back to the Planning Commission's June 17 agenda for review of your revised proposal (this will be a "consent agenda" item on June 10, you don't need to be present). 1.Additional information, including your revised proposal and written materials, should be submitted by Wednesday, June 5 if possible in order for the Council to refer it back to Planning Commission. Please let staff know if this isn't possible. 2.If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. TO;Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM;Michael P. Gaf&on, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE;May 16,1996 SUBJECT; #2134 Robert Albrecht, 1810 Shadv'v.ood Road - Variance (After-the-Fact) Public Hearing Zoning District; LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1/2 acre. Application; Request for after-the-fact hardcover variance for construction of new 207 s.f deck on lake side of residence. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Letter from Neighbor E - 1991 Survey F - Enlarged Su. 'ey with Sketch of New Deck G - Deck Plair by Applicant H - Submitted Hardcover Calculations 1 - 1991 Hardcover Calculations J - Submitted Landscaping Plan K - Photos L - Resolution #2955 M - Selected Exhibits From Prior Variance Applications N - Topographic Map Pertinent Code Sections Sectun 10.22, Subd. 2/Section 10.56, Subd. 16(L) - 75-250' zone hardcover limited to 25%. Summary Applicant began constructing a deck addition to the lake side of his existing residence this spring without a building permit. The inspections department discovered this, stopped the work, and advised the property owTier that a hardcover variance is required. The deck meets all setback requirements. A -4 1 Zoning File #2134 May 16, 1996 Page 2 The deck constitutes 207 s.f. of hardcover, of which 165 s.f. is new hardcover and 42 s.f. is over the pre-existing steps. Applicant also proposes sidewalk and landscaping revisions resulting in a net increase of 54 s.f. hardcover. Applicant proposes the removal of portions of the existing driveway, to result in a net 75-250' hardcover decrease of 35 s.f Hardcover History In 1984 this property contained a small residence, and was owned in common with the (then vacant) lot to the north which contained a detached garage ser\ ing this house. The owner at that time, Mrs. Johnstone, was successful in gaining City approval to allow the two lots to be sold as two separate building sites. Resolution #1718-B required that ma.ximum hardcover allowed on the 1810 Shadyw'ood property' shall be 2,775 s.f, i.e. 25% of the 75-250 ’ zone. A permit was issued in 1985 for additions to the residence subject to the use of "grass pavers" for the driveway, with a stated hardcover proposal of 19%, meeting the 25% limit. In 1991 it was found that the then owner, Steven Tibbets, had paved the driveway with asphalt, and further had constructed decks on the property without the appropriate approvals. Tibbets ultimately was granted variance approval via Resolution #2955, which allowed hardcover on the property to increase to a el of t pproximately 5,080 s.f For some reason, the area of the 75-250' zone was at that time delcmiined to be 13,500 s.f rather than the 11,100 s.f used in 1984, hence the hardcover level was approved at 5,080 s.f./13,500 s.f or 37.6%. Hardcover on the property currently includes the following items: (Area of Lot = 17,545 s.f based on 60.5 ’ lot width x average depth 290 ’ per 1991 survey) (Area of0-75' zone = 6,445 s.f) (Area of 75-250 ’ zone = 11,100 s.f) Hardcoverltem 0-75' zone Stairs at lake (3xl9)+(6xl3) Portion of house (19xl9)/2 Remainder of house w/garage (49.7x22.4)+(8.5xl0.4)+(28.6x22.1)-180 Entryway deck (7x22.1) Front steps and sidewalk (Nom.) Driveway (Nom.) Pre-existing rear deck and steps (12x12) Landscape area at front entry (Nom.) Landscape timbers around sandbox (0.5x72) 135 s.f 180 s.f 1653 s.f 155 s.f 124 s.f 2810 s.f 144 s.f 115 s.f 36 s.f Totals 315 s.f (4.9%) 5037 s.f (45.4%) Zoning File #2134 May 16, 1996 Page 3 Total hardcover originally approved, 1984: 2775 s.f. Total hardcover approved, 1991: 5080 s.f. Total hardcover as of May 1996, excluding proposed partially built deck: 5352 s.f. +165 s.f. + 54 s.f. - 254 s.f. - 35 s.f. Proposed deck, net hardcover: Proposed sidewalk/lardscape revisions, net hardcover: Proposed driveway hardcover reduction: Net proposed hardcover changes: Proposed Final Hardcover: 0-75’: 315 s.f. ( 4.9%) 75-250’: 5002 s.f. (45.1%) Planning Commission may wish to review the 1991 approval resolution. It raises two specific important points: 1, In Finding No. 3(e), Planning Commission found that the existing driveway (as it exists today) provides the necessary safety level for vehicular use on a busy County Road. For that reason, Plarming Commission felt it was not appropriate or necessary to reduce the size of the driveway, ’• ’lich reduction is currently proposed. 2. Condition No. 2 stated that "The City will approve no further encroachment of the principal structure (this includes decks) within the lakeshore yard." The meaning of this condition is unclear, however, the Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 1991 suggest that no additional hardcover should be approved for the property. April 22,1991 Council Minutes do not shed any more light on this. Lakeshore Stairway The 1991 staff memo noted that the lakeshore stairway was in disrepair and would have to meet current standards of maximum 4' width, maximum 4'x4 ’ landings. That stairway has since been rebuilt without a permit, at a width of 3’ on the 19’ long stairway portion with a 6’xl3 ’ landing dong the shoreline. That stairway/landing system is technically not in compliance with code, comprising 135 s.f. of hardcover where a compliant stairway would be approximately 90-100 s.f. in area. Average Lakeshore Setback After further review (see topographic map. Exhibit N) it has been determined that the proposed deck will not encroach on the average lakeshore setback as defined by the neighboring adjacent residences. Zoning File #2134 May 16, 1996 Page 4 Issues for Consideration 1.Given the ever increasing hardcover on this property, which now comprises more than 30% of the entire lot area (compared to the DNR's 25% standard) what is the justification for allowing additional hardcover near the 75 ’ setback line in exchange for reductions in the drivewav far from the lakeshore? Does the 1991 Planning Commission comment that the driveway is appropriate "as is" suggest that its partial removal is not a reasonable trade-off today? 3. 4. Is there a hardship that justifies the proposed hardcover trade-offs? Is the non-compliant lakeshore stairway and landing so far out of compliance that it should be rebuilt, or should applicant merely be required to obtain an after-the-fact permit for it, leavinc it as is?W 5.Since applicant did not pay an after-the-fact variance application fee is there any reason he should not be required to pay that fee? If the variance request is denied, should the after-the- fact variance fee be required? Staff Recommendation In order to recommend approval of this variance request. Planning Commission must be convinced that a hardship exists, and that the proposed trade-offs, or additional required trade-offs, will justify granting of the variances. The history of this property clearly suggests that it currently contains extreme excesses of hardcover, virtually all of which have been created in "after-the-fact" circumstances. If Planning Commission recommends approval, staff would recommend the payment of tlie after-the- fact variance fee, and whether or not the deck variance is approved, applicant should be required to obtain an after-the-fact permit for the lakeshore stairway system. Options for Action 1.Recommend approval of after-the-fact variances, payment of after-the-fact variance and permit fees. 2.Recommend approval as above, with specific additional conditions (addressing deck as well as lake stairway). Table for further information/further discussion. fe. I liB im ■' Zoning File #2134 May 16. 1996 Pages 4. Recommend denial, giving specific reasons, and address after-the-fact permit for the lakeshore stainvay. 5. Other. ------i Application if Date Received Amount Paid ^6 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE-APPLICATION Initial Application F<a^^S^0.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) •» ^ Renewal Variance Fee SI20.00 .5? • • f i* ^(no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $250.00 After-the-Fact Fee.'". (Double application fee) J- <•' • < : \ r* ‘ • » > .. . ■* %* J PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address 5HAD1I a /v '^D V^*j. / ^AA/J Prop>erty Identification Number (P.I.D.) iT-llD-Pv^ 3vl OC2L1 Anach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_________________________________________ I (do) ^fon^ also own the adjacent parcels of land. (month/year) Present use of property: X residential Zoning District:__IC other (specify). r'-s. - * APPLICANT , . Phone (home ) ____ Name ftlbcgrKn Phone (work)_JflLi0^i ___ AdHrps<;: t9.tr> SHKTMOo'O V.[) City: 0?^MQ_________Zip:_£iiH OWNER (if different than applicant) (j Phone (home) _ Name C- iiA/d AlUaeck^ Phone (work) _ Address:__K'tO SHAt>( UiooD City: _________Zip: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost S _____ Describe request in detail: *Re/vA,ivJe^ A pe:>P>f7o\; e.~^ dg.ive-VJA^__ ftr»AP r(c»r.K- (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area _Lot Width ^ Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear Average Lakeshore _ Other (specify’) HARDSHIP/DESCRIP liON OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property •''nditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requirements:______________________________________ FKe. tovJQ KrJiA /J\SLiL/UAl AN t\ -C.4 “ - 1-.................r\ ^ ^ . -------- .r . t /VMBVJ c / ^ O' ^ U . « J . A ^1 ii) 0/9. IT- I . 14Wg. dc..y -^AVC(»SUp Av 4V\e- cig>. i>»v-/A.^) wTfLf^ -Iwn CA»g.<^ ^ lA/g. Anv w/rll>Wr. (attach additional sheets it' necessary) V\Ag.^Ci^x/.»0 » /i-1 !■>/?. I/-V i4_ ■lo 4V\' k-ftMcojiA AGiO'vwjAt dici; 7 .1. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following information must be submitted bv the applicariQn deadline .in order for vour application to be cor jidered comp! 1. 2. J. N *[ude h£irdcov« 4. Completed Application Form Certified Propert>' Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and mao from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and incli calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy SYi x 11 for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/z" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy SVi" x 11"). List of the legal names (include m arital statu.') of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include r.ame(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this appUcation. Please remember that yimr variance application is not complete if the aboYf ’-rtnatipn has not been included^ 5. 6. >c 7. 8. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to prc v iL? all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay addit:> lai fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultzint e.xpenses incuited in review of this application, and certifies that the Applicant's Signature ^—> Date U-l| 1 OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owTier hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes re^onable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of ^ipat^stigation and verificanon of this request. OwTier's Signature Date 4-l6>~^6 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Pla^irung Commi'- ion 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 Buildmg & Zoning Office oi this change prior to the meeting. 8 ■X_ \ijj RUN DATE W/l5/n BATCH 501 MCrt4CPIN COUNTY RRO«»£hTY iHrOWATION SYSTEM propcnty o^rs list HI^T HO. Pt41l401 PACE I PROP AOOR OMSCR NAME TAXPAYER fiAME/AOOR SO 17-117-2J n 0007 00058 ADDRESS UNASSICNED HEttlEPIN PORrEXiEO LANO CITY OP ORONO HARSHLATO PROTECTION/ALSO-LA 7/27/71 ST DEED IV*5a7 STORM HTR POND INC IF KT RATION U 17-117-25 21 00D8 01795 SMADVMOOO RO LID PILCRAM LEROY I OELPMIE PUCRAM BOX 61 NAVARRE m SS592 50 17-117-21 21 002^ 01780 SHADYHOOO RO ClEHOItC A^M HARRIS 6LEN0INE AIM HARRIS 1780 SHADVHOOO ROAD HAY2ATA MN 55191 PROP AOOR Ol«lCR f4AMf TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 18 17-117-21 21 0025 01790 SHAOYHOOO RO DONALD J URCAN DONALD J URBAN 1790 SHAOYHOOO R3 MAYZATA r«4 S5591 58 17-117-25 21 002A 01800 SHAOYNOOD RO DOUGLAS R SCA80LT DOUGLAS R SEA80LT 1800 SHAOYHOOO RO HAYZATA MT4 SS591 18 17-117-21 21 0027 01810 SHAOYHOOO RO ROOERT C ALBRECHT ROBERT C ALBRECHT 1810 SHAOYHOOO RO HAYZATA 55191 U PROP AOOR 0M4CR NAME taxpayer NAME/AOOR 18 17-117-25 25 0001 01825 SHAOYHOOO RO OIANE LEE RUUD OXAtiC LEE RUUD 1825 SHAOVHP^a RO HAYZATA r 55191 18 17-117-25 25 OOOA 01855 SHAOYHOOO RO SMARM MUTTON SCOTT H HUTTON 1855 SHAOYHOOO RO KaY^ATA MN SS191 18 17-117-21 4* 0007 01855 SHAOYHOOO RO MARLYS L FRAFKLIN MARK J KOSEK A CIHA H PI»« 1855 SHAOYHOOO HO HAYZATA rP4 55591 PROP AOOR OINER NAME TAaPAYER NAME/AOOR 18 17-117-21 74 0015 01820 SHAOYHOOO RO 8 A SRJERPINC A L S CAIN 8 A SRJERPINC A L S CAIN 1820 SHAOYHOOO RO HAYZATA MN 55591 18 17-117-21 24 0014 01840 SHAOiHOOO RO J0*9I J 8URKE ETAL JOHN J BURRE 18^0 SHAOYHOOO ROAD HAYZATA MN 55191 TOTAL BATCH iol ooon i . I CERTIFY THAT THE PACTS REPRESEMTEC ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OP INFORMATION AS XT APPEALS THIS OATF ON THE RECORDS THE COUNTY OEPARTMCNT OP PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST MY KNOKLIOGE AND BwlIEP. OF OF OAH 1 P \* . " ,., i», «. » 'li'' Vr:-':•>> /\Du'. !0r^ \9>\0 5H>0'/iOCD Ovwte.'. ?-,0BEp7 •: r LtP.T c- ' .\> m*- » * 5<a\«.; H,"= I' i * ' ' \ ■ ■5 A^IO 3>fi£cr.<j. 1'''- X+RtAd.^ • l\" oP /, i',ri—tr \•V'C-C /v ' A AT<s.yu -.^oL. ~A ~ — — ./ y 0^ -xF- V>T/s..0^f2. "i-iy/O W'U- 9^x6 Di. c<-v.’ ;e^I tfv4V69T i GMDCt'iT't), v; 4^4 P(jbTt 1J ^ xC i 9>yiO PoOTi^JtjS X •;,. ^ , la'/ <c' ll- — \1' !0" Vcc;K 9-^H" rcC\'KJ0i e<M SCNVTi3/A AMV 3r^riHi:OH3 ANV li Si.l9lH0tid ONO^SNO J^fn03B , ^ *’^uD> -SwAUify f^t^CAfOTS yA^oo\J^/Z 5>-«e.vHiT*nfel- HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEi SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) Q-75| 75-25^ 250-500' 5QQ-1QQ0' E xisting Hardcover in Zone- - - - - - - mdri^ ’ X _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ «A. House S.F. ■ LENGTH WIDTH I,HI S.F. S.F. I S.F. 9 S.F. 5^-1)%i B. Garage S.F. c. Driveway W x S.F. D, Sidewalk S'S.F. S.F. I E. Patio/ Deck /sv,-?S.F. /z (OX-S.F. 'S'tS.vv* /tj- F.Landscape _ _ 3 S.F. AREAS UNDERLAIN ?Iast.c' • SHEETING X ^ S.F. S.F. S.F. 6. Other S.F. C-3 O') Total Hardcover in Zone S.F. fT /3, O . Total Property Area in Zone S.F.B B 100 = '% !'5,^GO K 2- wsc'js cr fee /y^f^c^J<ct^ :l^ 1'^^'/ ' f I!i fiV} ,■ - yr V * /i I. « ' * m3aajrr:eJLl! mgm ’ '= 5^' - -vj -• I ► i ««*;.' I ' o o . - Pi CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ii- n^i i/Mi4Aj«k- NO. A RESOLDTION GRAHTIUG after -the-fact variamcbs to MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6(B) FILE #1636 HHERBAS, Steve Tibbetts (hereinafter "the ovmer of the property located at 1610 Shadywood Road within the City SroronI (hereinafter -City") and legally described as follows: Lot 22, Shadywood, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied ^2^^g^bdivision 2 to permit improvements to the property that hardcover within the 75-250* setb^^ area setback variance per L^\U'\o!2l;^Subdiv^^^on^(B) that would allow a deck 3* 1" from the side lot line instead of the required 10 . Minnesota; NOW, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1636. 2. The property is located in the LH-IC family Lakenhore Residential Zoning District requiring 21rJ80 s.f. or area. The property consists of approximately r 3 The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this ^ct hardship; a) This property was granted lot area and variances-per Resolution conditions Other variances were granted at that time and rne ^ of Resolution #1718-B specifically . "^^^\Whe improvements must meet hardcover must not exceed 25% in the 75 ^5U seooa Page 1 of 5 /;"O. oif CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 29 5 5NO. xemuue j. «.**• — -----------------------^ permit was issued on the basis that "grass pavers or mono slabs were to be installed for driveway use at total 19% hardcover (635 s.f. for hardcover of "grass pavers"). c) Since the issuance of the building permit and upon com.pletion of the remodeling and addition, a paved driveway was installed resulting in 2,809.95 s.f. of hardcover. d) The applicant claims that the "grass paver" proposed by applicants in seeking approval of lot area and lot width variance are not suitable for Minnesota's severe climatic extremes and will suffer frost heave and plow disturbance. Failure of such a system would potentially cause damage to applicant's vehicles. In addition, the permeability of the "grass pavers" has not been demonstrated under continuous usage conditions. In 1986 the property to the north was approved at 35% hardcover to allow a paved drive in place of the "grass pavers". e) The Planning Commission finds that existing drive provides the necessary safety level for vehicular use on a busy county road. f) The request of 75-250' hardcover of 37.4% is not exceptional but is similar tc many other properties along Shadywood Rocd. g) Resolution #1718-8 states as follows; "Any extension westerly of the north wall o « existing house must meet the 10' side yard^ setback. The deck structure does not involve the extension o north wall of the existing residence. h) In 1986 the grade level deck would have been allowed as close as 2' from the side lot line. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions property are peculiar to it and do not apply generala.y .•-nop property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, bu- Page 2 of 5 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2955___________ _ 5 The City Council has considered this application ii^^luding the findings Ld recommendations of the ^f reoorts by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect o^the propose/variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the 0^°"° ^°d"”tctir?0^2¥," ^Ldc^e^r "w\lhin thl 71-250®*^ setback area g^^were setbalk^is'"requi?ed*'f or a |rade“‘ie/eYdeok with railing, subject to the following conditions! 1 Aoolicant/owner to obtain building permit for ff'J' ind sweet siMe deck. Such permit shall be subject to a penalty fee. 0 The City will approve no further ei^croachment o the pkncipal stLcture (this includes decks) within the lakeshore yard. 3. Access /ur«°nl f^lSla?Is^w”a'/c\'s-sVtafr%truotures the City will not g^ stair structure that meets current City standards (4 step and 4' x 4' landings). 4. Authorities granted by this variance run with exerois'/d by^appli^'a'/ioV for a building exp'ire on the date of Council approval, or this van that date (Apr5.1 22, 1992). Pace 3 of 5 MitTsI mmsm m r> t » 1 birtty U.l* ls> k trv* »:*a c-rrtc*. rtpr«s«nu’.i,*;. & a.nc> ^r.». iwundarlee of Ld Ia ^ kta iU4C^':»od| acd U m 1 o: •ll d^Jur^t tx^rtjc. It dj«8 purport to ioou oU.cr U-irvA’^.'toi.ta or taeroocnrcr.tA, ••• j * "*■ .•• • •V i... V* •-s-rf-tw .•*. .. . ■ ■**•. ••■-•■■I#***’ \r» POOR ORJGJN CUMEN 30RXK A. corm c«;., dc . Soolti O&U I o I 1 inek • LC iron MTttr * #• %Son «, Coffin fl8n !• Groobtrf tttf* lic« 1?7^5 iiii[incan Axul Land Sumy oro ORONO PLANNING CO.MMISSION MEETING HELD APRIL 15, 1991 (16)ZONING FILS #1635-0'SULLIVAN i ERWIN SMITH CONTINUED times a year. T‘ie other trees will remain.” Mabusth added that the City Engineer has recotnmended removal of the Cottonwood trees because of the new construction. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Cohen, to recommend aoproval of the side setback Variance and Comm.erciai Site Plan^as presented, subject to Staff recommendations #1, #3, #4, and (#7)ZONING FILE #1636-STEVE TIBBETTS 1810 SHADYWOOD ROAD AFTER—THE—FACT VARIANCES—PUBLIC HEARING Steve Tibbetts was present. At 7:26 p.m., Kelley opened the Public Hearing. Mabusth outlined the issues noted in her April 15, 1991 memo relative to Mr. Tibbetts' application. Johnson asked Mabusth what the total hardcover is for the entire lot. Mabusth stated that the coverage for the entire lot is approximately 28%. The Planning Commission, as a whole, agreed that there were really no other forms of hardcover on the property that could be removed. They agreed that the back-up area of the drive should remain to provide turn-around space and eliminate the need to back onto Shadywood Road. Johnson noted that much of the runoff from the property drains down the driveway onto Shadywood Road, rather than toward the lake. Kelley closed the Public Hearing at 7:36 p.m. He stated that he was a Planning Commission member in 1935 v/hen the application involving the porous pavers was reviewed. He said, "The Planning Commission was skeptical that the pavers would workr and they have not.” It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval of the after-tho-fact lakeshore hardcover, and side setback Variances. It is recommended that the resolution 0,- approval, if adopted by Council, include language restricting any additional hardcover on this p.roperty. All voted aye. Motion carried. - 9 - ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 22, 1991 I (#5)ZONING FILE #1634-MAUS CONTINUED adjacent rdsidential st:ructures, an a/'erage Inkeshore setback Variance must also be addressed. Bernhardson noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval of this application. It was moved by Butler, seconded by Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2954, granting a side setback and average lakeshore Variance to construrt an addition no tne existing residence of James and Joan Maus, located at 3700 Bayside Road. All vn^,^d ave- Motion passed. _ _ _ _ _ (#6)ZONING FILE #1636-STEVEN TIBBETTS 1810 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE-RESOLUTION #2955 Steven Tibbetts was present. Bernhardson provided a brief summary of' the hardcover statistics for Mr. Tibbetts' property, as outlined in Jeanne Mabusth's April 11, 1991, memo. Commission had recommended approval Ha noted that the Planning It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Butler, to adopt Resolution #2955, granting after-tho-fact hardcover and side setback Variances for the construction of an addition to the principal structure of Steven Tibbetts, located at 1810 Shadywood Road. All voted aye. Motion passed. attorney, Robert (#7)ZONING FILE #1637-SPRING HILL LAND COMPANY 725 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT-RESOLUTION #2956 Jud Dayton was present, a-- was his Mitchell. Bernhardson reviewed the i>.5sues pertaining to this application as’ set forth in Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated April 12, ^ ^fjd her additional April 19, 1991 comments based on the Planning Commission’s review. He stated that a question had arisen at the Public Hearing regarding whether or not the "for- profit" company wou.'.d be able to operate and lease out other conference soace. The iiitial opinion v/as that would not be allowed. However, either the Church or the Freshwater Biological Foundation would be able to do so. Bernhardson advised that Staff al.so learned that as long as the property is owned by a ••for-profit" company, it will remain on the tax rolls, even thouoh the property will be leased to non-profit organizations. Bernhardson asked Mabusth to clarify the issue of legal combination of the parcels involved with the Conference Center. Mabusth confirmed that the applicant has agreed to legally combine the parcels on which the Conference is located. She noted* that an amended letter has been received from the applicant's attorney setting forth the revisions deemed necessary - 8 - • DattttSubject!Mayor Petarson a Orono Council Menbars Planning Comisaiofi Chalman ICallay Orono Planning Comiiiasion Manbara City Administrator BarnhardsonJaanna A. Mabusth, Building ( Zoning Administrator April 11, 1991#1636 Stava Tibbatts, 1810 Shadywood Road - Aftar-tha-fact Variancas - Public Hearing 7 Partinant Ordinancas - Saction 10.22, Subdivision 2 - After-the-fact lakeshora hardcover variances. 0-75* Setback Area - 4,500 s.f. Allowed ■ 0% Existing ■ 178 s.f. or 3.95% Approved in Resolution I1718-B (Exhibit D) 75-250' Setback Area - 13,500 s.f. (recently confirmed by surveyor) Total Lot Area • 18,000 s.f. (Exhibit H) Allowed - 3,375 s.f. or 251 Approved with Building Permit 7/12/85 - 2,109 s.f. or 19% (existing house 534 s.f., addn 940 s.f., porous block drive 635 s.f., no sidewalks or decks, second floor deck, 49 s.f. not included in hardcover inventory - see Exhibit N) Existing Per Recent Survey - 4,901.55 s.f. or 36.3% Existing Per Staff Inspec. - 5,059 s.f. or 37.4%* House ■ Drive ■ Sidewalk - Street Side Deck ■ Lakside Deck ■ 1,711 s.f. 2,809.85 124 154.7 102 Lower Level (second floor deck located above not included) Landscape Area - 115.5 w/Plastic Lakeside Deck Stairs • 42 (3.5x12.5) (# 1KNSection 10.25 - Side setback variance required for street side deck. Existing ■ 3'1" (approved per Resolution 11718-B) Proposed ■ 3'1* Variance ■ 6.9* or 69% Zoning Pile #1636 April 11, 1991 Page 2 of 5List of ExhibitsExhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat MapExhibit Dl-3 - Resolution 11718-B, Approved 1/14/85 Exhibit E - Permit 15678, Issued 7/12/85 Exhibit P - Hardcover Pact Sheet Submitted w/Building Permit Exhibit G - Survey Submitted w/Building Permit Exhibit H - Surveyor's Letter of 3/14/91 Exhibit I - Hardcover Pact Sheet Exhibit J - Hardcover Site Plan Exhibit Kl-2 - Ploor Plan/Elevation - Street Side Deck Exhibit L - Ploor Plan - Lakeside Area Exhibit H - Staff Site Plan Exhibit N - Elevation 2nd Ploor Lakeside Deck Exhibit 0 - Resolution #1908, Approved 1/86 Review of Application - Although a building permit was issued in 1985 for the proposed addition to the existing residence on the property, applicant has only recently applied for a certificate of occupancy. In the process of making the final inspection, the Building staff noted variations from the approvals granted for the development of this property in Resolution #1718-B (Exhibit D1 through D3). The applicant was advised that he had obvious hardcover problems and that applicant had constructed a deck along the north side of the lot line where the above referenced resoluton would have prohibited expansion. It was staff's understanding that all new construction at that portion of the property would have to meet the required 10' setback. The applicant claimed to be confuased because it was his understanding that he was only at 19% and the property was approved for 25%. Please review Exhibit P, the hardcover fact sheet that was submitted with the building permit. The 1985 building permit covered a 2-story 22'x49' addition to the south side of the structure that included an 8H'x6* second floor deck. The permit was issued based on the use of porous blocks for the driveway. Review Exhibit N, note the building permit did include the second floor lakeside deck. Review Exhibits Kl through 2 and L, the lakeside deck at 102 s.f. and the street side deck at 154.7 s.f. were not shown on the building plans. Note also that the floor plans in the dinette area showed windows and not doors. Doors were also not shown within the existing living room area. The lakeshore deck does not encroach the 75' setback line nor an average lakeshore setback line (Exhibit H). The structure would not have required a hardcover variance at the time of the issuance of a building permit even if they were included because the driveway was to bo at a 635 s.f. hardcover. Soning Fil# 11636 April II, 1991 Page 3 of 5Roviow Exhibits D and 0, in 1985 ths City granted lot araa and lot «#idth variances to this property and the property to the iMiediate north. The purpose %ras to allot# the oi#ner to sell the lot to the north for residential developSMnt. Developeient was to be based on specific guidelines set forth in the approval resolutions. Development of the subject property was spelled out in Resolution 1718-B (Exhibit D). In 1986, a year after the original variance approval, the City granted hardcover variances to the lot to the north because the current owner then clained practical hardships with being required to install a driveway •'ith the porous block. In order to allow a driveway with an appropriate backout apron, the property was approved at 35% hardcover within the 75-250* setback area. Review the findings and hardships noted in that resolution. The applicant has asked the sane consideration as porous blocks are not practical in this clinate and create even nore problesis for hoaieowners in the maintenance and upkeep. The paved drive at 2,809.85 s.f. results in 20.8% of hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. laaues for Consideration - 1. The side setback variance for the street side deck located 3.1* from north "side loC line. Resolution 11718-B stati followst "Any extension westerly of the north wall of the existing house must meet the 10* aide yard setback.” The deck does not result in the extension of the wall of the foundation of the principal structure. What was the intent of this condition? • In 1985 a grade-level deck would have been allowed 2* from a side lot line. Staff no longer considers deckb with railings as non-encroachments but as part of the principal structure required to meet all setbacks of the principal structure. The deck would now have to meet a 10* setback. The deck was constructed some time in 1985-86. Applicant contends that based on the location of the current entrance and entrance to the addition on the south side, that the connecting deck made functional sense and a positive aesthetic benefit to the structure. Zoning Pile 11636 April 11, 1991 Page 4 of 52. Excessive hardcover within the 72-250* setback area.The existing paved drive brings the property up to 37.4% hardcover. Review staff's sketch (Exhibit MK Staff has sketched in areas of drive that could be reau>v^ and still function resulting in a reduction of 600 s.f. or 4.4% hardcover. Note also that there is a landscape area underlain with plastic at 115.5 s.f. or .85%. Can the same findings be made for the current hardcover variance application as was made in the variance application of 1986 (review Exhibit 0)7 Please be prepared to respond to this issue. 3.Issue of deck__ ____ constructed without gilding permit authority. In 1985/86 deck %#ould have been approved at 3.1* setback. Would such action have been in conflict with intent of Resolution 11718-B? The decks would not have created hardcover excesses because porous blocks were to be used for drive (hardcover was at 19%). Both decks would not have required other setback variance. Options of Action - Denial. Please refer to the necessary findings sv;ction in your zoning code; or Approval as proposed and require applicant to obtain necessary building permits to cover lakeside and street-side declis. Building permit to include penalty fee. Conditional approval of application as proposed subject to applicant obtaining building permit for lakeside and street side decks, to include penalty fee, and the granting of a hardcover variance of _ _% and a setback variance of _ _• or _ _ _% for street deck based on oae or more of the fol lowing; 1. Approval or disapproval of lakeside deck as built. 2. Approval of street-side decks A. at current location; or B. to be alterated to meet 10* setback; C. other. 3. Excessive hardcover at 37.4%. foiling Pile I1636 April lit 1991 Page 5 of 5In review of Resolution 91908# is the granting of a hardcover variance appropriate? If so# at what percentage? - northern property approved at 35% or as reaovals shown on staff sketch (Exhibit M) would result in reduction of 715.5 s.f. or 5.3% or other.There is an access stair/deck structure at the lakeshore bank that is in a serious state of disrepair. The final resolution oust advise applicant or future owner that structural repair will not be allowed and new access structure shall be built to approved standards (4* step width and 4*x4* landings).Zoning Pile 11636 April 17, 1991 Page 6Additional Conents and Planning Coaeaiasion R tiooThe Planning CoMission reviewed the original 1985 lot area and width variance granted the subject property and the property to the inaediate north. Meabers also noted the 35% hardcover variance granted the year after to the northern lot. Bardcover in a recent review involving the northern property showed hardcover at a 404^%. Meabers felt the landscape area to be ainuscule in relation to overall hardcover (115.5 s.f. or .8%) and that driveway in its present configuration was needed to provide safe access froa the site. The Planning Coaaission recoaaended against any further reaoval of existing hardcover iaprovesients and approved hardcover at the current 37.4%. The lakeside deck and street side deck were approved as constructed. Meabers found both decks not overly aabiticus but wanted to create a special notice in a final resolution advising a future owner that no further encroachment of the lakeshore yard will be approved. In consideration of the street side deck# Resolution 91817-B did discuss that the extension of a foundation wall would not be allowed. The street side deck did not require the extension of the foundation wall. Meabers approved the side setback variance and noted the original 30* setback between structures was satisfied (condition of 1965 variance). There was additional discussion regarding the existing access stair/deck structure. Puture owner should be advised of the unsafe condition and that existing structure would not be allowed to be improved and that new access stair must meet current standards of the City. Of the options set forth above# the applicant chose to approve the variance application as proposed. The enclosed resolution has been draft per the findings and conditions noted above. City of OROIVOCITYOFORONORESOtUTIOM OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1718-B GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) PILE 1874 WHEREAS, Mrs. Donald Johnstone and Duane Barth (hereafter *the applicants") have an interest in the property located at IBIO Shadywood Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 22, Shadywood (hereafter "property"), and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to allow a side setbacic of 3.1 feet for an existing house where a 10 foot side setbacic is required. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as part of zoning file no. 874. 2. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The property is 17,200 square feet in area, has a lot width of 60 feet, and contains an existing house. 4. The existing house is located 3.1 feet from the north side property line and 57 fe^t from the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. 5. This house and the proposed house expansion and improvements to the property can meet the hardcover requirements in the 75-250 foot lakeshore setback zone. €• Because of the required 75 foot setback, the building proposed for the ad;)acent Lot 21 will maintain at least a 20 foot separation distance between the existing house on Lot 22 and the proposed house on Lot 21. page 1 of 3 wm city of ORONOVrClTYOFORONORESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _1718-B 7. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the aplicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to allow a side setback of 3.1 feet for the existing house at 1810 Shadywood Road where a 10 foot setback is rrqnjjrdi iiih jaat i in the fipnilKMiTTTlin I inji i 1. Maximum hardcover allowed on the property shall be 2,775 square feet.____________ ______ 2. All future improvements to the property shall meetthe current performance standards of the LR-IC Zoning District. In addition, any extension westerly of the north wall of the existing house must meet the 1C foot side yard setback requirement. 3. Applicant shall obtain a Hennepin County driveway access permit prior to construction of a new driveway to serve this property. 4. 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 (January 14, 1986). page 2 of 3 $ CP 8. 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. j 5^ CITY ' OF ORONO City of ORONORESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNGL NO. 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code* shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. 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. Adopted by the City Council on this 14th day of January, 1965. ATTE: T: /Lm,, 65^^ Ilin, Xity Clerk Mary C. Biitler, Mayor ^ (1) Property Owner page 3 of 3 STATE OF MINNESOTA ))COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )) SS.On thisbefore me a Notary Public w appeared (TT day oflie within and for said cF . TWieavsJ 1985county, personally known to me to be who executed the foregoingthe person(s) describedinand instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. lAXMAcL P GAF.-RC. J MOT AAV ^UALIC • MMNtSOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY NOTARY //y /96T> MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )8S. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 1985, before meOn this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ a Notary Public wit^^rn 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 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES \ H 1 ,X1 ot Jh« H«e. ,.v^—ordliuiie. «nd wlIX «l(o Mac th. 75 to 250 foot too* »hleh\ to root SOM vh •i'X55X * ■ *V 9.120 sf lf839 sf 233.4 sf •'>'.--v.:*a..j^3j :Wm 2.074 tf • ^•{iitaSirs!.,;, s.. pTTOd^covsrsgs 75» tb;250V zone In ordlosncs • 2775 sf 17.000 sf 11.100 sf 940 sf .534 sf 22.7^•^'W1^^i• if— . ; •'. .'V- ^ «v 1,825 (f - ;l«,«s 2,775 »£ m; • if‘ ">’V*'i.',ry^v“'*.• r't • .■* ;• * ' ; • ■ -^ • ' ■• ■"... vi.: -^ •■: V' '^.V "•;;: •.,.^poproAww«-w - • • ,<P :‘ r - •.».* V f ^ piQtNAi- OQCUM^^"^s ♦ ■; •:• V d. • « .*r* • t ^ I ff • •• %A % t ■- *-VV> .. • - 4 ,t4 < - ' • .• J P* /• . . * 4 1 • t •«. . /O \ Ui REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION d Cffy Off.DATE; July 2, 199Sk3fi^ ITEM NO = 7 Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2136 Greenfield Corporation, 180 North Shore Drive West Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution_____________________ Status of Application The application was tabled at the June 10, 1996 meeting of the Council pending Council’s review of the subdivision plan involving a modification in the access plan whereby Council agreed to allow Lots 1, 3 and 4 to be served by a 30' private driveway outlot. 'Ine following ordinances and Comp Plan sections are pertinent for this review; 1. Transportation section, CMP 7-17 - Private driveway. Maximum service: 1 residence typical; joint driveways allowed with maximum 3 residences per driveway in rural areas. More users require private road standards. Driveway width: Ml l2£ regulated wnere more than i »s.er k involvg.d or for public safety purposes where there is excessive length between the residence and the public road. Since August of 1995, the Municipal Comp Plan supersedes zoning standards. It is not necessary to grant variances when a driveway will serve up to three units within a rural zoning district. 2.Section 10.28, Subd. 5 (B) - Lot width variances for Lots 3 and 4. Required = 200' Lot 3 = 142’ (original proposal 90') Variance = 58' or 29% Lot 4 = 150’ (original proposal 150') Variance = 50 ’ or 25% J Request for Council Action continued Page 2 Jul®:’2, 1996 Zoning File #2136 Greenfield Corporation, 180 North Shore Drive West List of Exhibits A - Amended Resolution B-1-2 Stu} 'Sketches C - Amen<‘;d Preliminar)' Plan Review of Amended Plan Applicant's sur\eyor has provided a 30' wide private driveway outlot that will ser\e as access to Lots 1, 3 and 4. A temporar>' cul-de-sac has been shown at the northeast comer. A cul-de- sac in its present location appears to serve no purpose nor does the Code require a cul-de-sac or turnaround for a driveway at less than 500'. Review Exhibit B-2, the staff sketch shows the impact on the building site of Lot 4 as stmeture would have to be 50' from the edge of the cul-de-sac. The future residents would be best served by a backout pad being provided within Outlot B. There is adequate room within 50' Outlot B to provide a backout pad for emergency vehicles. A pemianent cul-de-sac will be located within property to the east when private road is developed. The Code does not require a cul-de-sac for a legal driveway. The Comp Plan recommends that the Cit>' should have special width requirements when drive serves more than one resident. With the amended plan. Lot 1 no longer needs a lot width variance. Lot 3 has been expanded to 142' width rather than a 90' width and Lot 4 remains at 150'. It will be necessary to define the legal accesses to each of the lots, specifically Lot 4. Review Exhibit B-1, note the impact on the building envelope if access is achieved from Outlot B. Lot 4’s front lot line must remain at the north to maintain a feasible building envelope (no setback variances needed). Staff has been advised that the developer will not be the builder of the future residences on the proposed lots. Staff is concerned that a future builder may propose a building site to the south of the septic test areas on Lot 3 Constmetion to the south for Lot 4 is not possible because of the location of the protected wetland area. Staff recommends adding a condition that no residential construction (principal or accessory construction) will be allowed to the south of the septic test sites within Lot 3. Staff has amended the original approval resolution to include the following: 1.Engineer to provide specs or standards for private driveway to serve three lots. Roadway shall be paved. A temporar>’ backout pad shall be installed within Outlot B to facilitate emergency vehicles or other larger vehicles. Temporary cul-de-sac to be eliminated. Request for Council Action continued Page 3 July 2, 1996 Zoning File #2136 Greenfield Corporation, 180 North Shore Drive West 2. Access to Lots 1, 3 and 4 shall be via a private driveway within Outlot A. 3.No residential construction shall be allowed to the south of the septic test sites within Lot 3. The enclosed approval resolution has been amended and conditions noted above added to the resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution. ♦ J A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A CLASS III SUBDIVISION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WEST . FILE NO. 2136 WHEREAS, Greenfield Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, (hereinafter the "subdivider") on April 26, 1996, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a six lot residential plat of property legally described as: The West half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 6, Township 117 North. Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, EXCEPT that p^rt of the W est 274.77 feet of said West Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter which lies South ot the North 580.00 feet of said West Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, and which lies North of the South 545.34 feet of said West Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, 1 lennepin CounK, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono ’s Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 20, 1996, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meetings held on June 10, 1996 and July 8, 1996, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the subdivider noting the following findings of fact: 1.The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of two acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The propert}' contains a total of approximately 17.2 acres with 2.34 acres of designated wetland area. Page 1 of9 3. 4. 5. 6. The proposed plat consists of six residential lots each meeting the minimum requirement of two acres of contiguous dry buildable area. All lots have been found to have adequate and suitable soils for on-site septic treatment facilities providing both a primary and alternate site for each of the six lots. Lots 3 and 4 do not meet the required 200' of lot width to the rear of the 50' front street setback line requiring approval of variances to Section 10.28, Subd. 5(B). Approval of the lot width variances is based on the following unique findings and hardships; A. 17+ acre parcel is long and narrow and measures 620' in width. B.Applicant has been required to plat a 50' road along east boundary of the property to serve property to the east further impacting lot widths of Lots 3 and 4. C.Lot 4 has 365' of frontage along Outlot B but shall be served by driveway to north, Outlot A. If the east lot line of Lot 4 becomes the front lot line, the building envelope would be rendered useless. D.The property is adjacent to 1,800 lineal ft. of public road along the north and west sides of property. E.The proposed access plan will allow for the preservation of desired building sites based on topography and views of open space and lake to south and east. The developer has provided a future private road extension outlot to serve property to the east. The developer shall prepare the roadbed of future road and restore ground cover should future property owner to east not plan immediate construction of residence. Page 2 of 9 I' 7. 8. 9. The developer shall also provide a backout pad for emergency vehicles within Outlot B to ser\e as a temporary facility until Outlot B is further developed or expanded by owner of Outlot C, Bayview Farms Second Addition. The City Engineer, in his report of May 13, 1996, approved the grading and drainage plan for the development of this property. Thomas D. Johnson, a Transportation Planning Engineer for the Hennepin County Department of Transportation, in his report of May 13, 1996, approved the three curb cut locations at the Countv roads. 10. Orono's Community Management Plan, Rural Transportation Policy 7 entitled "Driveway Locations in Rural Street or Private Road Intersections will be Limited for Traffic Safety" states as follows: "Joint use of carefully located private roads will generally be preferred over direct access on to public highways from separate properties." The developer has provided the following unique findings and hardships to support the creation of two new curb cuts (one existing curb cut to be relocated) that will serv'e three of the six residential lots. The Planning Commission has accepted the findings and hardships presented by developer. They are reviewed as follows: A. Location of wetlands. B. Sloping topography to south and east. C. D. E. Subdivider's responsibility to provide a future access road to serve property to east. Property is surrounded by 1,800’ of County Road along the north and west sides. The existing access ser\ing Lots 6 has been found to be unsafe and encroaches within property to the south. The new curb cut developed at the shared lot lines of Lots 5 and 6 has been approved by the County and meets the required sighting distance for a 50 mph speed zone. Page 3 of 9 11. F.New curb cut to serve Lot 2 has been found to meet the sighting/safety standards for the 50 mph speed zone. G. The location of septic sites on Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4. H. Desire of subdivider to preserve views to the south and southeast tor the obvious building sites on Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4. Orono's Community Management Plan. Transportation Chapter, CMP 7-17 states as follows: "PRlVATFi pPlVF-WAY A driveway is a privately owned and privately maintained vehicle path between the street and private property. Pnvate driveways shall be subject to access permits according to the classification of the abutting street. Private driveways will not be subject to any public easement or access right, but do require recorded private easements where driveways cross an intervening private lot between the residence served and the street. JURISDICTION: PROPERTY OWNER MAXIMUM SERVICE: I RESIDENCE TYPICAL; JOINT DRIVEWAYS ALLOWED WITH MAXIMUM THREE RESIDENTS PER DRIVEWAY IN RURAL AREAS MORE USERS REQUIRE PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS DRIVEWAY WIDTH:WILL BE REGULATED WHERE MORE THAN ONE USER IS INVOLVED OR FOR PUBLIC SAFETY PURPOSES WHERE THERE IS EXCESSIVE LENGTH BETWEEN THE RESIDENCE AND THE PUBLIC ROAD" Page 4 of 9 The Comprehensive Management Plan allows three residential lots to be served by a private driveway. The Management Plan further states that a driveway serving more than one residential lot shall be regulated. The City Engineer shall be asked to provide design specifications for the private driveway. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Greenfield Corporation per plat drawings by Mark S. Gronberg, a licensed surveyor of Coffm & Gronberg, Inc., dated May 3, 1996, most revised date June 28, 1996, subject to the following conditions; 1. Subdivider to grant a bike trail, drainage and utility easement 10' wide adjacent to Bayside Road (County Road 84) and North Shore Drive and (County Road 19). 2. Subdivider to dedicate 17 of additional right-of-way for North Shore Drive along the west boundaries of Lots 1 and 2. 3. Subdivider to execute private covenants dealing with the upkeep and maintenance of private driveway serving three lots and drainage facilities within plat that serve all six lots. Subdivider shall be responsible for adding share in ownership in driveway Outlot A and road Outlet B for Lots 1, 3 and 4 via transfer deed of lots upon sale. 4. All septic sites within subdivision are to be fenced off prior to any land alterations. 5. Subdivider to grant flow age and conseiv ’ation easement over designated wetland within Lot 6. 6. Subdivider to designate drainage easement at a minimum width of 15' over drainageway that extends westward from Outlot A to sediment pond in northwest comer of Lot 1. Drainage easements are to be taken over all sediment ponds and drainageways within plat. Subdivider shall provide partial detention pond south of the drainage facilities along west side of Outlot B within Lot 4. Page 5 of 9 7. Subdivider to complete grading of future roadbed within Outlot B and to restore natural ground cover w'hen City Engineer has approved the grading of the roadbed. Subdivider shall construct access of private road up to access to Outlot A. Subdivider shall also create a paved backout pad within Outlot B for the temporary use of the public who use Outlot A. 8. Access to Lots 1, 3 and 4 shall be from private driveway within Outlot A. Legal building envelopes have been created and approval based on the approved access plan and understanding of use of Ouilot B to serv’c future development within Outlot C, Bayview Farms Second Addition. 9. Subdivider is hereby advised that the City cannot grant final plat approval until a permit from the MCWD has been approved for all grading and drainage improvements on the property. 10. Subdivider to provide road name choices for Outlot B. lire City Council shall consider name choices and make final recommendation. This process should be completed before final plat approval. 11 . Subdivider to create private covenants for protection of Types I and II wetlands located within property that are not classified as a designated w-etland of the City of Orono. Such covenants to include site plans locating protected area and advising future owners of need to contact Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the U. S. Corp of Engineers if land alterations are proposed before submitting plan to the City for review and possible permit. Covenants shall include protective language for alternate septic sites along with site plans locating both primary and alternative sites. Applicant to develop language alerting future propertj' owners of need to protect sites on adjacent properties. Covenant shall also advise future owner of Lot 3 that no residential construction shall be allowed to south of primary and alternate septic sites. 12. Subdivider is hereby advised that preliminary subdivision approval will expire within one year of the date of Council approval, June 10, 1997. Should the subdivider fail to complete the filing of the final plat application within the year deadline, it shall be necessary^ for the subdivider to file a new preliminary subdivision application with the City. Page 6 of 9 The followng list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1. Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City's records and one for filing with Hennepin County) nnd one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200’. Drawing to include: A.Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc. dated most revised date, June 28, 1996. B.Dedication of drainage and utility easements 10’ wide along the exterior boundaries of property and 5’ along the internal lot line. C.Dedication of right-of-way for County Road 84 at 33 ’ and 50’ adjacent to west lot lines of Lots 1 and 2 and 33 ’ adjacent to the west lot lines of Lots 5 and 6 for County Road 19. Designation and dedication of drainage easements over detention ponds and drainageways as show-n on preliminary plat. E,Designation and dedication of drainage easement over the designated wetlands located within Lot 6. F.Designation of Outlot A to serve as a private driveway. Outlot A at a 30 ’ width is a private driveway that will serve Lots 1, 3 and 4. Outlot B at a 50’ width is a private road outlot, the private road shall serve future residential development within Outlot C, Bayview Farms Second Addition. G. The naming of plat. 2. Legal documents required: A.Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. Page 7 of 9 * t ) 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. B.The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. Signed and executed drainage easements to be taken over drainageway and detention areas within plat (see sample enclosed). Signed and executed developer’s agreement and letter of credit for site improvements and construction of private driveway (Outlot A) and preparation of roadbed (Outlot B) and private road entrance at Outlot B (see samples enclosed). Signed and executed road and utility easements over private road Outlot B. Signed and executed Flowage and Conservation easement over designated wetland within Lot 6. Signed and executed declaration of private covenants dealing with the upkeep and maintenance of private drive (Outlot A), drainage facilities and specifying share of Lots 1, 3 and 4 in ownership of Outlot A (see sample enclosed). Signed and executed trail easement over 10' wide drainage and utility easements adjacent to County Roads (see sample enclosed). Completed application for private road name for Outlot B (see form enclosed). Please note the selection of the road name is a separate action of the Council and should be submitted as soon as applicant has completed the selection of three name choices. Completed private covenant for lots involved with protected wetland not included within conservation maps of City which shall include a site plan and metes and bounds descriptions for these areas. Covenants to include protective language for alternate septic sites and to include the site plans locating both the primary and alternate sites. Subdivider to develop language alerting future owners of need to protect sites on adjacent properties. Covenants must be in a form suitable for filing. The City has samples of protective covenants used by former developers. Subdivider may wish copies and should notify City. Page 8 of 9 L.. 11. Fees to be paid; Total due: $400.00* A. Final plat fee = $200.00 B.Legal review and filing fees for subdivision and associated documents $200.00 ♦Park dedication fee shall be determined as soon as City Assessor has placed a fair market value on the undeveloped land at the time of preliminary plat approval. The subdivider shall be advised as soon as Assessor ’s report has been filed with City. Park dedication fee shall be based on 8% of the fair market value of land within Lots 1 through 5. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting lield this 8th day of July, 1996. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of July, 1996, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & Deputy Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 9 of 9 1 V .A^UM L io<)^^f i ^B ^''cr ‘^zr'i'* a' -O A-/<3i. \ 39^45 OU’ :. > JC'- >'-»-^ \ \ ^ '4 I .T . ^' J • 655.C9 N H '^!j h '*> *.j0i^TLOT ’iJ L. /' I ^ja^si^i)i/‘2 r^ V r TUM N 89 ”45 00' t.655.09 \ \ \ \V \ \sri^/ X 5iX50^OT -------------------- *______ I \-X- l I, >/<2;iv .0 V • , \ > j, /^/x I£xccdts. JraMjff \ \ ?\ X \ \ • N / \<f IT Gn ^0 set / i’/2 A ' ^iC V \^w\^ ^7I rsAt 7f : Ctft-S r. 0 -. SI —^- itip X ^70 - -sj C».Vo.^ ,0«O / / //y / / \ \ '> / V .V /.0^' \ 24tlV .• OvO” c> \ \274.7 ’^' \ \ ^ / N I I 2 \ / < *i ^o X 0 / J6 3c ■ A-2-4 •" » ’ A /, C/0 C'-=^i4o -y- 'tJ^r'TZ r\ \y ✓ * Ni// REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <9 DATE: July 81^1996 ^ ITEM NO.:J Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Tide Assistant Planning &. Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2137 William and Susan Dunkley, 2709 Walters Port Lane - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: LR-IB. Single Family Lakeshore Residential, One Acre. Sewered Application: Request for average lakeshore setback. lakeshore setback, 0-75' hardcover and lot coverage variances to allow conversion of existing deck at southeast end of residence to a room addition. List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - Resolution Recommendations from Two Doctors RE: Need for Swimming Facility Planning Commission Action Notice 6/20/96 Planning Commission Minutes'6/17/96, 5/20/96 Memo and Exhibits of June 12, 1996 Summary of Request Please review the memo and exhibits of June 12, as well as the Planning Commission meeting minutes. Briefly, applicant proposed an extension of the existing house to accommodate a swimming spa needed for therapeutic purposes. At their May meeting. Planning Commission tabled the original proposal in order for applicant to redesign, with the goal of decreasing the visual impact by lowering the room or moving it to a location on the face of the house opposite the lake. Planning Commission reviewed the revised proposal at their June meeting. The revised plan uses a lower, shed-type roof with somewhat less visual impact than the original proposal. The revised proposal still results in the following variances: Encroachment of average lakeshore setback. Increase in lot coverage by structures from 15.6% to 16.7%. Additional structure less than 75 ’ from the lake. Intensification of hardcover in the 0-75' zone. 1 i il Request for Council Action continued Page 2 July 3, 1996 Zoning File #2137 William and Susan Dunkley. 2709 Walters Port Lane Although hardcover will actually decrease by 23 s.f. as compared to the existing deck, a hardcover variance is still required. Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission voted 6-1 to recommend approval of the revised proposal, making a number of findings: Hardcover decrea.se of 23 s.f. is a positive aspect. Visual impact of the revised proposed addition is not much different from that of the existing deck and retaining wall. - Applicant’s house layout is not conducive to constructing a swim facility within existing envelope, and interior layout is not conducive to other locations adjacent to the house. - Property owner has a medical need for the addition. - Encroachment of average setback has no impact on neighbors. Planning Commissioner Schroeder was the lone dissenter, suggesting that more hardcover trade offs would be appropriate, specifically reduction of the driveway area. Note that existing hardcover of 35.4% in the 0-75 ’ zone will decrease to 35.2%. Hardcover in the 75-250 ’ zone is currently at 49%. Council may recall that this property was the subject of variances last fall regarding an entryway addition and retaining wall replacement. Significant hardcover reductions were made on the property last fall and this spring based on that variance approval. Staff Recommendation If Council agrees with the majority of the Planning Commission that there are suitable hardships and justifications for the hardcover, setback, average setback and lot coverage variance requests, then adoption of the attached resolution reflecting Planning Commission recommendation, would be appropriate. 1 Request for Council Action continued Page 3 July 3, 1996 Zoning File #2137 William and Susan Dunkley, 2709 Walters Port Lane Options for Action 1. Adopt per attached resolution •7 (*i»«Adopt with additional specific conditions. 3.Table for further information. 4. Conceptual denial 5.Other. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt attached approval resolution or take other appropriate action. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by____, seconded by____, to adopt Resolution No. granting average lakeshore setback, lakeshore setback, 0-75' hardcover and lot coverage variances to William and Susan Dunkley at 2709 Walters Port Lane for construction of an addition to the existing residence. Vote: ____ayes,_____nays. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C), 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2, 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8, AND 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) FILE NO. 2137 WHEREAS, William Dunkley and Susan Dunkley (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 2709 Walters Port Lane located within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows; Lot 4, Block 3, Walters Port. Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to allow lot coverage by structures to increase from the current level of 15.6% to 16.7% where only 15% lot coverage is normally allowed, and to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (A) to allow construction of a room addition located 40' from the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka where a 75’ setback is normally required, and to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to allow encroachment of the average lakeshore setback where no such encroachment is normally allowed, and to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2, 10.55, Subdivision 8 and 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) to allow an intensification of hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no hardcover is normally allowed, all of the above variances required for construction of a room addition housing swimming facilities attached to the existing residence structure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2137. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Page 1 of 5 1 k......... 3. 4. 5. Zoning District. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on May 20, 1996, at which time the Planning Commission tabled it for revisions. The applicant returned with revisions which were reviewed by the Planning Commission on June 17, 1996, at which time Planning Commission recommended approval of the revised proposal on a vote of 6-1, per the following findings: A. Hardcover decrea.se of 23 s.f. is a positive improvement to the property. B C. D. E. Visual impact of the revised proposed addition is not significantly different than that of the existing deck and retaining wall. Applicant’s house interior layout is not conducive to constructing a swim facility within the existing building envelope, nor are other locations adjacent to the house suitable for this addition due to the interior layout. The property owner has a medical need for the addition as indicated by the statements of two doctors submitted for the record. Encroachment of the average lakeshore setback has no impact on neighbors views of the lake. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 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 variances 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 applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to allow lot coverage by structures of 16.7% where only 15% lot coverage is normally allowed, and grants a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (A) to allow additional structure less than 75’ from the lake where a 75’ setback is normally required for structures, and grants a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) to allow encroachment of the average lakeshore setback where no such encroachment is normally allowed, and grants variances to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 2, 10.55, Subdivision 8. and 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) to allow an intensification of hardcover in the 0-75’ lakeshore setback zone where no hardcover is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. Hardcover in the 0-75’ lakeshore setback zone shall be limited to 6,091 s.f. or 35.2% in the 0-75' zone per the site plan and hardcover calculations attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Property owner is advised that any future proposal to increase or intensify hardcover on the property will require a new variance application and is unlikely to be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent removal of existing hardcover to result in no net hardcover increase or a net hardcover decrease. Applicant shall adhere to the revised plan submitted for this application in construction of the room addition. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, 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 dale (July 8, 1997). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms Page 3 of 5 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 City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of July, 1996. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner (s) I STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of July, 1996 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and Deputy Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. ! i Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. 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 PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. 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 Page 5 of 5 JUL-02-96 TUE 07:41 riEW HORIZON FAX NO. 6125779261 P.Ol *7 - V‘/6 Dale:July 2, 1996 Time: To:Cit\' of Orono Fax; From:Susan Dunkley This transmittal consists of 3 pages, including this cover page. If you have any problems/questions, please call 612-577-9232 m Following are two recommendations fiom Drs. Kicley and Van Beek pertaining to the William and Susan Dunkley matter. (2709 Walters Port Lane) Thank you. JUL-02-96 TUE 07:41 m HORIZON FAX NO. 6125779261 P.02 • METROPOLITAN INTERNISTS, P.A FRANK E. MARTIN. M D , CMCftlTUS RONALD W KAUFMAN M D J PETER KIELEY. M.O. Ol^UOMA.'C* Of TMt iNTCPvfiAL MtOC.NC OFFICE PHONE; 3^^*'7I71 metropolitan medical . BUfLDir4G 825 SOUTH 8TH street • SUiTE <M4 MlN>iSlA.P»Ou5. MINNESOTA 554CA June 20, 1996 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Re: William M. Dunkley 2709 Walter's Port Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 Mr. Dunkley has ongoing orthopedic symptoms related to a right hip fracture status post open reduction and internal fixation as well as a right arm injury and atrophy status post limb reattachment. Therapeutic swindling is beneficial for his ongoing rehabilitation. 2 JPK/gik el ey, JUL-02-96 TUE 07:42 NEW HORIZON FAX NO. 6125779261 Allen Van MJ>. 7373 Fw>nce Avc. So.. Suite 310 Edina, MN 55435 (612) 830-1028 For AAgla U )flJLbUA. f)t < AJ fC Date Addt«ss ]|^ (VK<V JV. Label □ Refill _ lyo^j^fdLAhL) ( i^y Substitute imes Generic Unless Checked Q T0‘d COO'ON S3:IT 96‘$C unf • ow "n I P. 03 7-3» CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2137 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 20, 1996 TO:William and Susan Dunkley 2709 Walters Port Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 COPIES: Dale Gustafson 1845 Wisconsin Avenue North Golden Valley, MN 55317 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variances DATE OF MEETING: 06/17/96 VOTE: 6 FOR 1 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below. Notes and Special Conditions: Approval per revised proposal. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as City Council on Monday. July 8, 1996; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission, I \ i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 20. 1996 (#5 - #2135 Paul and Sue Hedlund - Continued) Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0 (#6) #2137 WILLIAM AND SI SAN DUNKLEY, 2709 WALTERS PORT LANE - VARLANCES - PUBLIC HEARING 9:13-9:38 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Cenificate of Mailing were noted The Applicant was represented by Carl Smith. GafTron renewed the proposals and improvements to the Dunkley property. .An addition to the house, revamping of a garage wall, replacement of retaining wav was approved in 1995 with revision to hardcover with removal ot retanung walls that were replaced with plantings The current proposal is to change a deck on the ““jh «de of the rLdence and replace h with a room with a pool spa This addition would meet the Iff vide eethacl hut is located within the 0-75’ setback f hangmg the deck to the proposed enclosed structure would decrease the hardcover by 24 s f but would increase Ae bt coverage by structure from 15 6% to 16 7% The additional structure dso encroaches the average setback line Oaffron noted that the homes to the north and southeast ate set far back on the properties The visual Ga“d 'ih^re'ly'be oppo.onities for hardcover of the hardcover was done with the earlier application Gaffron added that the an y very large and could be an option for hardcover reduction. of the City Letters have also been received from the neighbors approving what has alrcddv been done on the piopeiiy this could be an option and asked how it would affect the side setback variance Carl Smith responded that the location of the spa room was best suited to the location with the patio door on the left side U c ^formed that the Spa was a therapeutic need for the applicant. Hawn asked Hawn was ,hc area in question could not be used for the spa. f art SmUrslid tha° hot tub was not in good condition, and the spa was probably too toge Carl Smith sa . r^iffrnn fmestirvnf*d whether there was anv logic to placing the MINUTES OF THE ORONO PL.^NNING CONCvOSSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 20. 1996 (#6 - <<2137 William and Susan Dunkley - Continued) Wen asked about hardships. Exhibit A was noted, w hich lists the reasons for the spa but Gaflron said no hardship statement w/as included Exhibit B cites medical reasons for the spa. Peterson said he did not see the average lakeshore setback as a problem with this proposal Gaffron suggested a possible mitigation with screening of trees or landscaping Carl Smith showed an visual representation of the deck along umh a representation of the spa room addition He noted that the addition was an improvement to the visual impact. Hawn inquired w hat was being placed under the spa room Carl Smith said this was undeci'ica. Lindquis: questioned whether this addition was too much for the property. Peterson noted that the deck does need to be replaced Smith questioned why it was not included in original proposal Hawn noted that the Commission denied a screen porch and could not see any difierence between a porch and this addition. Gaffron remarked that the spa room was brought up at ff - Council meeting at the end of the process with the last application hut was req aed to he submitted as a separate project He added that Dale Gustafson had suggested : ,.ai more of the w alkway pavers could be removed Gaffron noted that the drivewz-, ■» lixaied out of the 0-75' setback The retaining walls are necessary due to the iSe land Gaffron added that it could be argued that hardcover is hardcover - - :h commented, if the screened porch w as denied, and there were no other areas w her' w*rdcover could be reduced, the limit in lot coverage may already have been reached There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Application #2137. Vote; Ayes 2, Lindquist, Peterson, Nays 3, Stoddard. Smith, Hawn Motion failed. Gaffron asked for eiihei another motion or reasons for denial Stoddard noted the view. Carl Smith said he was flexible in the design and changes could be made Peterson said the Commission would need to table the application if a redesign was done Carl Smith asked if the height was an issue Smith said in terms of hardcover, .she could not see where reductions could occur. Smith said she was be more inclined to support the spa room if the visual impact was minimized by lowering it oi moving it forward. Hawn suggested exploring the idea of using the lower level room and eliminate the visual impact from the lake view Carl Smith was irfformed if tabled, the application could come back before the Planning Commission on June 17, with Council review on June 24. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANTSTXG COMNOSSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 20. 1996 (#6 - #2137 William and Susan DunkJey - Continued) ---------- Smth moved, Stoddard seconded, to table Application #2137 to work with landscaper in mtmmi7ing the vi«wf impact and take the above ideas into consideration Vote Aves S Nays 0 ' ’ * PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#7) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Hawm suggested the possibility of a Consent Agenda for the Planning Commission Meeting. Srmth asked that Staff request applicants to post application notices near driveways of the residences for easier identification. ADDITIONAL ITEMS (#8) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE APRIL 15, 1996 MEETING Lindquist moved. Smith seconded, to approve the Minutes of the April 15, 1996 Meeting of the Planning Commission Vote Ayes 5, Nays 0 (#9) PLANTSTNG COMMISSION TO SELECT A REPRESENTATIVX TO ATTEND THE JUNE 10, 1996 MEETING OF THE COUNCIL Lindquist will attend the June 10, 1996 meeting of the Council. ADJOURNMENT Lindquist moved. Hawn seconded, to adjourn at 9.45 p m Vote Ayes 5, Nays 0. Stephen Peterson, Chair Person TO: FROM: DATE: Chair Peterson and Orono Park Commission Ron Moose, City Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator June 12, 1996 SUBJECT: #2137 William and Susan Dunkley, 2709 Walters Port Lane - Variance Continuation of Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Residential, 1 acre sewered. Application: Request for average lakeshore setback, lakeshore setback, 0-75' hardcover and lot coverage variances to allow conversion of existing deck at southeast end of residence to a room addition. Note: this item was tabled at your May meeting to give the applicants an opportunity to redesign the addition in order to decrease the visual impact (i.e. lower the room, or move it to a location on the face of the house opposite the lake) or consider relocating the spa into the basement. Applicants have submitted a revised plan for your consideration. List of Exhibits A - Existing/Original Proposal/Revised Proposal Elevation Views B - Proposed Cross Section/Floor Plan/End Elevation C - Notice of Planning Commission Action 5/28/96 D - Neighbor Acknowledgments Submitted 5/16/96 E - Memo and Exhibits of 5/15/96 Revised Plan Applicants' designer, Carl Smith, has revised the proposed addition to lower it slightly and incorporate a shed roof rather than an extension of the main roof of the house. The revised plan is 272 s.f as compared to the original proposal of 271 s.f., as compared to the existing deck at 295 s.f. The 10' side setback will not be encroached. As noted in the May 15th memo, the proposal results in a slight hardcover decrease in the 0-75' zone, and will still constitute an encroachment of the average lakeshore setback, an increase in lot coverage by structures from 15.6% to 16.7%, and constitute added structure less than 75' from the lake. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the proposed revision address Planning Commission's concerns? Zoning File #2137 June 12, 1996 Page 2 2.Are there any specific measures Planning Commission would recommend to mitigate the impacts of the additional structure if it is approved? 3.Although hardcover will decrease approximately 23 s.f. from the existing, are there further hardcover reductions that might be appropriate? Staff Recommendation In order to recommend approval. Planning Commission should establish that there are sufficient hardships to the property that support and justify the request. Planning Commission should consider if there are further appropriate hardcover removals, or other conditions, which would help to minimize the impact of the addition as revised. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval of the revised plan without further conditions. 2. Recommend approval of the revised plan with specific conditions. 3. Table for further discussion, further revisions, or additional information, 4. Recommend denial, stating specific reasons. 5.Other. £W. A-l (y B~y I V ^ S En::) p E o F'o o O (2.1 G *'“'I A L_ PT? o P o Tj;;> Ct,-i"2-‘^ILj ! '.3s-L feiL^VATlOkJ UTC o-O C\£>. atT. s/ St ci'i o »- A . Q'Z 6,-tz-lL, t^={SDO\Z^ PLA v4 I't'i $ f • l/l 1 1 / "E: LE s /A”T” I o O^. c. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Cry stal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #2137 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMlVnSSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: May 28, 1996 TO: William & Susan Dunkley 2709 Walters Port Lane Excelsior, MN 55331 COPIES TO:Dale Gustafson 1845 Wisconsin Ave. N. Golden Valley, MN 55427 Carl Smith 610 Pleasant View Rd. Chanhassen. MN 55317 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Variance DATE OF MEETING: 5/20/96 VOTE:5 FOR 0 AGAINST Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Motion to approve as proposed failed on a vote of 2-3. Application was tabled to give applicant an opportunity to re-design to decrease the visual impact (lower the room, or move it to a location on the face of the house opposite the lake) ci consider relocating into the basement. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is dependent upon receipt of additional infomiation. Deadline for the June 17th meeting is June 10th. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. 1 Miyl. IfM D*-/ M«yl. I9M Mr Ctry BirobMM 2995 KtOy A viom E«<4iior.>C( 55311 RE: WiOI«a wd S««m D««kky . Z7M Waltm Ptrt U m DttGvy IS • eofjoT*• liHr •• mdiid y«« tiii y«ar «hca %• »«• vortiaf «i npua ai^ Mr hom. At Rtf Ri« dbt Gty dvfiiad our lo add • acrtao porcB Wt Bdfur rmwid ill hirdawror —^hy Aa d»^ md iti iiiB| matlt bt aUowod li Mdoioour cunwi bodroea dtf kw Rtf ii cm bouM a amtfl OMreue hy^ ipa (pkbtfo of a^ wloiod) Wt tro ibo tfidoau^f oopiai of Ro pItfM for Ra profOMd itfk. dMo tfga and rttim Rt ttfinotd copy of ttua lomr. todteaiiig • pUoa. or your attd fer fWRtf ifilBcsaM TbaiR you is advaMt roviow Raao ptaaa atd «iR our lr«wo aiTM Re pUoatd i8Bprovaa«Ma wdl trJufico Ra oaitkborbood and dMrcfbr* ba^ no iiauta lAaeaoodlD RepUMid «iR Bui Md Sue Dwkloy SueDMUoy SD« EadoiUKi Mr Andrew / McOorsoa 111 27C2 Walton Port Lim Eectiitor. .VCI 55)31 BE: Williaa aod Sumo Duoldey • rtf W*ali«n Part Laae Dear .Nadi ew •MamawkoM ptaoi. or your flood RrfMariiRrBtfioe Tbtfik yw R odva^o far your coopu^^ ** X *r« ibe ptacaod i^mvoaono wiU q|aa» Re aoi|hboibood atd Rortrort bave BO tllUMi I WO flood a diioiai Re ptaoflod itfpaacacRti whh BOJ «d Sue Ooaklty NWtMnnmi fcv^t>4.c^ tT, puotMkir :iiQi lunff rr Uhl .Cs^ A \ EaeJofurea Mays. Ifft Miyf. If06 ^ Mr *wlPohit / 27|; ?koaMct Boai WC E«c«iMr,bCf 3533i B£: W||U« afld Suaao D Dear Paul ••Wey.irtfW.ii^p^l^, '****** ****"****1W1HBJMJ j (P*c«tfe of ipa ODcloatd) » Rai it cao kouae a amaU eecreiae hydro apa ^•iia >!>-• pins M fore ham —d««„ *, Dui^h, rvaDVMonaa i Siaccrtiy, Sue DuakJty SOm Efldoaurcs Mr Strpkeo L Bakke 2763 PbeaatDt Road Eeceliior. MN 35331 BE: ^ »>lam afld SoiaoDflflkity.rHWaiiarf Part Loflo Dear StepktB U . copy Of *. I^ ^ ^ ^ ^ (t^cKrsorvsmaH!^ X I'M *r« At ptuiiMt iiinmwfiu will mksac* At oiuMciteod tad Atnftn no uruea □ two Boad to dUcuM Raplaaaad MprDVf aoii wiR Bdl Md Sue Duckky Name/addmaand ^ ^a .*U T^LL* ___------------------------------------------------------- ftave Eadoaum My-l5-9e ThiJ ll 5c liS IjCR'20» Ch’.LOCffe ►ft* jc. buc/ra<ti r. u Mr Ovnltny 27IOPtoc«L«Bt exc<IskM.MN 5S331 nC: Wiin«ai Md $«»■ Dvaklt; • W«lttrt P«rt Ua« D mtD ma bKloftd it t copy of tbt tfcur «t mm to vo« Uit ycac vImo wt »«rt «oduaf o« icr«a t * t tddiliiM to our haat. At (hot tice tfet City dcaitd out icquctt to add t aaoca porch. **! now rasovM all hardoovtr Actpi hy ihc dnvt and nuiiuot italli aad wt art nquib U)§ that »o b« allowtd to tocloM our ounwt btdrooa dock »that ti caa houM a tmall mraat hydro ^o (picotff of Ip* ttcloMd) WtMt^aodotisioopiaiofdMplanibrtepitpoNddtcL P1*m* ctviow te* plaoi asd ih«i MfB aod ftoara dM «Joi*d copy of diis iM. iodkatuig chhar your ijraiacBi with otr plMa.oryotraatdtefh(tei8lhimMio8. Thaoh you ia advaoca (hr your coopcrmoii) W Vwt afrw dw plaoaad latprovaaanu wQ] cduftca <h* oct^horhood aed thardbrc hm ^ OOiMtM* □ JAm Died to dtaeuia du plaiwad inprovtacoo «idi Bill and Sue DuoUey KiMiriddrai and phone ouBber Y ^t/4nr!0 ~fZrry Jl"*! ^0.v^0 Lx\*'t _______ Vtu. OQOQ Eoclofuxet rAM5-9t 16 23 S£- rv.n;:CN CrlLVftht NC 6;2t7:3i'6!P.Cl/CS •'ir / May I, 1996 Mr Hubert Bluet 2707 Wal-en Port Laae Excetoiof.MN 55331 RE: WUUara tad S«iaa DaeUcy • 2709 Walun Port Laac Dctf Hubert Encloaed la a copy of iha letter ue lent to you lait year then wa were mwI tag oo rep^'n lad additiooa to r bonie. At that tiase the City dtaiad our raquait u> add a icrtt^ porch Wi ha«c now removen mu i,^rdeorer except by the drve tad rctaiaiai Mill tad we art raq^ ntiag (hat w# be allowed to cacloM our ovreat bedroon deck to that h caa bouM a imaH Acrcae hydro spa (picaua of ipa cncloMd) We ire alto eodoiinf eop«a of the plans for the propoMd deJt Please rtuWw tbaae pti&i aod then sign aod rtaura the eocloicd copy of dus le^. iodicetiag cither your tgp—gem vith our plans, or your aaed for IWther informsooa Thank you la adviace kr your cooptntton' X t/we agree the pUooed improvimcna will cithaocc the oeighborhood and therefore hare ooisauM O l/w« aaed to discuss tfie pUnned ireprovenentj undi Bill and Sue Ounkley Naiaa^addreii and phoneBunher LtAJOL^^ __^ STJjt Sicced y. <::^^uV5>JJULA Sue Dundey SDu Eaclosurai W-H-5S THJ ll-’Se N£ii hCRlZCh CHiLDCftRE Fft* MC. 8125779261 ■ p May i 1998 Mr WilUan Recta, h 27C3 Wdtart Pert Lane ETceUior, MN 55311 BE: WBiian and Seiaa Duokicy • 2709 Wdirrt Port Laa# bear Willtam Encloead a a copy of the !ese we seat to you laM year when we were uerktag on repttn and additioBi 10 Our horn* At that tune the C:ty daated our requert to add a icraca porch Wt have aow reaMved all bardcove except by *J»e dnvt and retainiag wells and we are requeatutg that we be allowed to aacloM our current bedroom deck to that it caa bouic a iieaU cxercae kydro tpa (picaae of spa enckMad) We art alao enrdotirtg oopiei of the plana Ibr die propoead deck PImm review dUM plans aad ihea ligp aad Muni die eadoiad copy of du letur, lodicanai enher your agraeaeot with our plans, or your Bead for fiirtlur isforatiioa. Thank you in advance for your ooopvation' IVe agree the planned ioproveacnti wtU ciduoce the aetghborbood aod UMtafore kavo no itsuct l*we aeed to discuss the ptaaacd isipro\’caeRtt with Bill aad Sue IXadJey Nama^addreac a pteac number Nama^addfeac aod ei^ ^ / phone number Siccertly. Pv Sue Dutkiey SO as Encloiuxes rAY-15-36 k?: 16:24 hpi KRIKK CmiKAfi m IC 812*779251 PC2/C8 5 May 1.1996 Soiame Kalladay 3275 Canaan Road Excelsior. MN 55331 RE: WUIlam aad Satan Duaklry • 2709 Walters Port Lane Dear Soramae Enclcted u a copy of the letter we teot to you last year when we were working oo repuii acd additioos to our koma At that time the City denied our request to add a aaaca poich W*t hare now (cmored all hardcover except by the dnve and rataiaiag waUs aad we art rwpjuting that wt be allowed to eacloM ovr cuneot bedroom deck lo that U caa house a tmall exarcuc hydro spa (pistuc of spa enclosad) We art also aiicloiiag oopici of the pleas for the proposed deck PleaM review these pleas lad (hen sign and Mum the encloeed copy of this letter, iadicatisg ddier your agreement with our plans, or your aeed for fUrther informatioiL Thank you ia advaece for ywr coopcratioa^ 1/wt agree the planned uBprovemcots wtU enhaace foe oeighboebood aad therefore have 00 issues □ Iwc aeed to discuss the planned unprovccaeats with BUI and Sv * t^onkley Nsne/address and phone ouffiber.--------------•ORkBOi fOCDOXT----------- fxctLftoa. MN iaal PW. 41 __ Sincerely, Sue DunkJey SO as Enclotures >exu-^ -!Z XU To:Chair Peterson and Oro.io Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, Citv Administrator From: Date: Subject: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator May 15, 1996 #2137 William and Susan Dunkley, 2709 Walters Port Lone - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1 Acre, Sewered Application: Request for average lakeshore setback, lakeshore setback, 0-75' hardcover and lo* coverage variances to allow con\ersion of existing deck at southeast end of residence to a room addition. Lbt of Exhibits A - Application B - Letter of Request from Landscape Designer C - Plat Map D - Property Owners List E - Sketch of Proposed Room Addition F - Survey G - Site Plan-Existing/Underwa, H - Site Plan Including Roof Overhangs and Proposed Conversion Area I - Letter from Neighboring Property Owner J - Resolution N'o. 3619 K - Overall Landscaping Plan L - Hardcover Review Pertinent Code Sections* 1. Section 10.22, Subd. 2/10.55, Subd. 8/10.56, Subd. 16 (L) - No hardcover allowed in 0-75' lakeshore setback zone. 2. Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) - No encroacliment of average lakeshore setback is allowed. 3. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Lot coverage by structures limited to 15% of lot area. 4. Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (A) - 75' lake setback required for all structures. Zoning File #2137 May 15, 1996 Page 2 Pertioent Facts 1.In October 1995, applicants were granted a variance to add an entryway and replace retaining walls. A proposed 10' x 33’ enclosed porch and 10* x 16' open deck on the lakeside of the existing house were specifically denied in that application. Approval was conditioned on significant removals of hardcover. Most of the work, including hardcover removals, is underway or has been completed. 2.Applicants now propose to convert the existing deck at the southeast end of the house to an enclosed room for a swim spa. The room will be of a slightly different configuration than the deck, and slightly smaller in footprint area. The proposed addition will meet the required 10' side setback, but requires the following variances: Additional structure less than 75' from the lake. Change in character of hardcover in 0-75’ zone (changing from deck to enclosed structure, net result is hardcover decrease of 24 s.f) Increase in lot coverage by structures from 15.6% to 16,7%. Additional structure encroaching average setback line. Discussion Please review the letter from Dale Gustafson of Gustafson Design, who is representing the Dunkleys, and the letter from the neighboring propert)' owner, Douglas Bell. The applicants' need for the spa is related to a health condition, and apparently the spa cannot be incorporated into the existing house. Planning Commission may wish to have applicant address whether there are other possible locations on the site that might accommodate this addition. Applicants have completed significant hardcover removals per the previous approval conditions, including the removal of extensive (and what turned out to be very deep) rock beds. Permits for the entryway and retaining wall work were issued after applicants' surveyor had provided detailed hardcover calculations, indicating a final hardcover (consider this as "current hardcover") of 35.4% in the 0-75' zone and 49.0% in the 75-250' zone. Recall that these were reduced from 49.6% and 74.2% respecti' ely. The current proposal results in a net decrease in the 0-75' zone of 24 s.f of hardcover, reducing that to 35.2%. The average lakeshore setback encroachment include.*; virtually the entire house, since this property sits on a point, more or less, when the lagoon is taken into account. The proposed spa room location is such that no significant views of the lake enjoyed by neighboring propert)' owmers will be affected. Zoning File #2137 May 15, 1996 Page 3 The slight increase in lot coverage by structures, and the proximity to the lakeshore of the proposed spa (approximately 40' at the closest point) are somewhat related in that they address the bulk of structure on the property, and in this case, its visual impact from the lake. Although the proposed addition meets the required 10' side setback, it will to some degree reduce the perception of open space on the property. Vegetative screening such as some shrubs and small trees, might help reduce any negative visual impact as viewed from the lake. Issues for Consideration 1. Is there sufficient hardship demonstrated to support the proposed variances? What specific measures might be appropriate to mitigate the impacts of the additional structure if it is approved? 3.Are there any other locations on the property where this addition might be more appropriate? 4.Although hardcover is proposed to further decrease as a result of this addition, are there further hardcover reductions that might be appropriate? Staff Recommendation In order to recommend approval. Planning Commission should establish that there are sufficient hardships to the property that support and justify the request. Planning Commission should consider if there are further appropriate hardcover removals, or other conditions, which would help to minimize the impact of the addition. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval without conditions. . .ur' /j.s; 2. Recommend approval with specific conditions. \ I ^ . —• FA.'i- 3.Table for further discussion or additional information / J .r 4. Recommend denial, stating specific reasons, 5.Other.l/’CLte-- - V :■> V I f. _ •r* \ ■CR ORIGlN.<XL DOCUMENT . f ,/ -IL L I ! f-V o:'* .. Application # 3 Date Received y/s\:- Amount Paid ~^3n.C'> CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 it (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.00 Afte;-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) ROPERTY INFORMATION , , n i , Site Address CS-Y^- 1 \ ^a r Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) li I ' ___________ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey Date Property Acquired _______________________________^(month/year) I (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of property; X. residential ___other (specify). Zoning District: _________________________ APPLICANT Name /t(.7//^v. ^ Ic _________ Phone Address: icHCYt City-: ^ '\C' Phone (home) Phone (woik)_ >\C-Zip: / OWNER (if different than applicant) Name '____________ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address;Citv ”7:'P:. DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTw ___Estimated Construction Cost $ r<TtY'. Describe request in detail: /A(^0 CC^ n. t ^ f r"\c-r \ I ^ ^ 4 V\ , V, (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED X Lot Area ___Lot Width Hardcover Lot Coverage Setback:Front Side Rear X Average Lakeshore Other (specify) HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zorung Code requirements:_____________^------------------------------------ f:;-! < cut’<>!-• [ lf~tO I \1 1 r\ ^ w N r\n At- ^ C- V'«~ wvr nn.T7 vv.<re‘t J (attach additional sheets if necessary) A I REQUIRED SUBMITT.AJLS All of the following information must be submitted bv the aDplicatiog deadline datc.m order for vour application to be considered complete; 1. ^ 3. A 4. 5. 6. :2i 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property' 0\^"ners List of o\Miers within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance. A-603, Govi Center, 348-3271). Cenificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/i x 11 for reproduction. Topographic sur\ey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing erade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8V2 x 11 for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/j" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons y ou wish notified of this application. Additional 'terns as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that yfiuc variance application is not cnmnlete 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 Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant e.xpenfe incurred i in review of ,this application, and certifies that the information supplied i^rue and «r^c* to theybest/6f his/her knowledge. ^ .Applicant ’s Signature Date OWTMER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property' by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council mernbers for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner’s Signature Date Applicant must have all subminals into the City' 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 arraneements to have an authorized agent anend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. •xi'Jtafson Design Inc. Fe■ :t 11544 Hpr j"?: •Ct-'F. CO E gustafson design, inc . April 26.1996 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 Dear Ms. Mabusth. Attached is the application for the Dunkley residence for a variance of tho 75 foot setback rule, and hardcover rulings. The owners are requesting variances to allow for tho conversion of tho existing deck into a spa deck for the installation of a swim spa for medical reasons. The inclusion of this feature will change the structure from a deck to an onclosed structure attached to the house. The current plan allows for a very slight increase in the hard cover. In light of the large amount of hard cover that has been removed to date, the increase of 2.6 square feet seems reasonable. Please advise me if there are other considerations that need to be considered. Thank you very much. 1845 Wisconsin Ave. No. Golden Valley, MN 55427 tel (612) 544-4215 RUN DATE 04/26/9ABATCH 502PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR HE^t«PIN COUrfTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS LIST58 20-117-25 !<♦ 000702695 KELLY AVE S A H KAPLAN GARY BIRNDAUH 2695 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR m 55551 38 21-117-25 25 0065 027P9 HALTERS PORT LA H M t S K DUNKLEY HILLIAM M t SUSAN K DUNKLEY 2709 halters PORT LANE EXCELSIOR MN 55551 58 21-117-25 25 0069 00058 ADDRESS UNASSICNEO DAL UPHOFF DARYL L A LUCY S UPHOFF 2699 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55551 REPORT NO. PI655401 PAGE 658 21-117-25 25 006502705 HALTERS PORT LA DOUGLAS J BELL DOUGLAS J BELL 2705 HALTERS PORT LA EXCELSIOR MN 55351 58 21-117-25 25 006602707 HALTERS PORT LA H D BLUNT AON BLUNT TRSTES HUBERT 0 BLUNT 2707 HALTERS PORT LN EXCELSIOR MN 55531 -I • ^ 58 21-117-25 25 0066 02710 PENCE LA DEAN E TERRY DEAN E TERRY 2710 PENCE LANc EXCELSIOR MN 55351 38 21-117-23 25 0068 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED ENVIROrt^NTAL PLANNING INC ENVIROrtlENTAL PLANNING INC 6530 IDS CENTER MPLS MN 55602 58 21-117-23 23 0051 02710 PENCE LA DEAN E TERRY DEAN E TERRY 2710 PErCE LAT« EXCELSIOR MN 55551 TOTAL BATCH 502 00008 I CERTIFY THAT TH*: FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRCSENfATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEWEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF.. DATE tti Me a) xy ‘ V I 1n*- ; /.* f ■ Concrete Steppers \ . • M I V / Propsed Walls / DUNKLEY RESIDENCF Gustafson Design, Inc. Dale: 10/27/95 Scale: 1* = 30 ’-0* DOI GLAS J. BELL 2705 WALTERS PORT LANE EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 612-471-8070 Jeanne A. Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 1 13"!^ Dear Ms. Mabusth, Thank you for the recent Planning Commission notice sent to my attention regarding the upcoming May 20, 1996 planning commission meetinu In particular, I would like to direct my comments to Item #5 entitled "#2137 William and Su.'un Dunklev - 2709 Walters Port Lane". This past summer, 1995, the Dunkley's had the unenviable task of rebuilding the SW comer of there home because of some structural problems that had occurred due to settlement. In a very open and transparent manner they informed their neighbors of their problems and solicited our comments regarding the repairs necessary to correct this problem. In addition, they asked for any other comments that we might have regarding overall improvements to their home. Due to the extensive amount of work that needed to be done to complete the repairs it was necessary that they rebuild a rock retaining wall and small patio adjacent to the structural damage of their home. It was at this point that the Dunkley’s engaged the services of costly professionals to assist them with the structural engineering, soils testing, architectural design, and landscaping design to bring together a well thought-out plan for the overall improvement of their property During the course of this design particular emphasis was given to the stringent requirements of the City regarding setbacks, and hardcover issues. They have reduced their overall hardcover and have taken everv s^ep possible to add additional landscaping and green area to the lot area. The design also tr< A • nt<- .-ccount the upgrading that was necessary to take care of outdated and obsolete functional devig'^^- and uses. In other words, they attempted and I believe succeeded in bringing the home from the 1960's in appearance into the I990's while still attempting to meet the "spirit" of the zoning ordinances that apply to residences such as theirs and mine in this area. As a neighbor, two homes away, I believe that the Dunkley's have attempted to satisfy all the city requirements within reason, that any owner of a 1960's built house on an irregular shaped lot being repaired and upgraded to 1990's design and functional use can possibly do. X i H This overall project and the room addition, are a credit to our small neighborhood, and to the City of 0:ono also. The City of Orono needs to encourage people to take the time and effort to make the kind of design and improvements that the Dunkley's have made and the improvements they are asking approval for I would like to respectfully ask that the Planning Commission give favorable approval to the Dunkley's for this variance to the City of Orono land use laws If you have any questions please feel free to call me. Thank you. Sincerjjly yours, ■J^S~ Doueias J Bell I T CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ^619 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDrVTSION 1, SECTION 10.55, SL^DHTSION 8 AND SECTION 10.56, SL'BDIMSION 16 (C) AND X), ANT) GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE NO. 2073 WHEREAS, William Dunkley and Susan Dunkley (hereinafter the "applicants") are the owners of the property at 2709 Walters Port Lane located within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 4, Block 3, Walters Port, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hertmafter the "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1, 10.55, Subdivision 8 and 10.56, Subdivision 16(C) and (L) to permit the construction of an entry'way addition constituting strucmre and hardcover in the 0-75’ lakeshore setback zone where no strucniral hardcover are normally allowed, and requestint' similar variances for an enclosed porch and open deck located within 75’ of lakeshore w'here no structure or hardcover is normally allowed, and for a conditional use pe^t per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 for the reconstruction of retaining walls within the 0-75 zone. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. Minnesota: FINDINGS 1.This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2073. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. Page 1 of 8 CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.3 6 19 3. B. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 18, 1995 and recommended approval of certain of the requested variances and conditional use permit and recommended denial of certain variances per the following findings: A. Plannin g Commission recommended approval of the necessar>‘ hardcover variance and conditional use permit for replacement of existing retaining walls, finding that such walls are necessary to the integrity of the property, and that such walls should be constructed per the recommendations of the City Engineer regarding removal of the existing wood, walls prior to construction of new walls. Planning Commission recommended approval for repair of the driveway, replacement of a retaining wall along the north side of the driveway, and replacement of a front walkway from the stoop to the driveway, finding that such improvements are necessary' to protect the driveway and the neighboring property ’ and provide access from the driveway to the house. C. Planning Commission recommended approval of an approximately 100 s. f. front entry addition to the house to alleviate a water problem due to topography and roof pitch at that location. D. Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposed 10 ’x33’ three season porch and 10*xl6 ’ deck behind the garage, w-hich construction would be located as near as 24’ and 19’ respectively from the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka, which construction would constitute additional structural hardcover in the 0-75 ’ lakeshore setback zone, and which construction would increase lot coverage by structures on the property to in excess of 165c where only 15% lot coverage by structures is allowed, and which additions would add to the bulk of the structure as viewed from the lake, and which additions would encroach into the average lakeshore setback. E. Planning Commission further recommended that substantial amounts of landscape hardcover on the property' be eliminated, given that existing hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone is 49.6% w'here no hardcover is normally Paee 2 of 8 W).CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION Of THE CITY COUNCIL NO.19 allowed, and given that hardcover in the 75-250’ lakeshore setback zone is 74.2% where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed. Planning Commission finds that the hardcover areas recommended for removal are not necessary to support the integrit)' of the property, and there is no hardship to justify the continued existence of said hardcover in light of the current hardcover variance request. 4.The Cit>' Council has considered this application including the fmdings and recommeudations of the Planning Commission, reports by City ’ staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5.The City' Council fmds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that eranting the variances and conditional use permit would not adversely affect traffic DDnditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely ser\'e 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 applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and inient of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City’. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and variances to Sections 10.22, Subdivision 1 and 2, Section 10.55, Subdivision 8, Section 10.56. Subdivision 16 (C) and (L) to allow certain structure and hardcover and retammg walls m the 0-75’ lakeshore setback zone where no structure or hardcover is normally allowed, as follows and per the following conditions: Page 3 of 8 i i CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8 ^ 9 I.Approval of the replacement of existing wood retaining walls with modular block walls per the site plan attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. Existing wood walls adjacent to new block walls must be removed rather than buried, except in the locations shown on Exhibit A. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Approval of the 100 s.f. front entry way addition as proposed, per the construction plans submitted with the application. This approval is subject to specific hardcover removals as shown on the "removals" site plan. Exhibit A, and subject to the final site hardcover allowance shown on the "final" site plan attached as Exhibit D. The property owners are advised that all hardcover required to be removed shall be removed prior to footing inspection for the proposed entry addition. Applicants or their contractors shall obtain the appropriate permits for construction of the proposed entry addition and construction of the retaining walls. Further, prior to issuance of such permits, applicants shall provide a "proposed hardcover" survey correctly depicting the new driveway, indicating all proposed retaining w'alls, sidewalks, stairs, entry addition, etc. and all other proposed hardcover, including a 'proposed' itemized hardcover calculation by applicant's surveyor confirming the proposed final hardcover percentages in the 0-75' and 75-250' zones. The proposed 10'x33 ’ enclosed porch and 10'xl6 ’ open deck are specifically denied, and shall not be constructed. Any future hardcover placed or constructed on the property of other than the nature, location and area of that hardcover shown on the final approved site plan, Exhibit B, shall first require approval of the City Council, and likely will not be approved without substantial removals of pre-existing hardcover resulting in no net increase or a net decrease in hardcover on the property. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are pennissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (October 9, 1996). Page 4 of 8 r CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. S R j 9 8.Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of tins resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 9.The undersigned applicants has read, understood and hereby agree to die terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigm, 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 October, 1995. All EST: Edward J. Call^^, Jr., Mayo Vo f\>r\2 Property ’ Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on t^s 9th day of October 1995. by Edwfrd J. Callahan. Jr. and Dorothy M. Halim. Mayor and City Cleric of the City’ of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was execu behalf of the City. ^ ^ Notary Public IK JAMIE L. BOSMA NOTAflY PUBUC-MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY My Comtitolon Eiplres Jin. 31.2000 Page 5 of 8 I iS'lS CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL S 9NO. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. On this day of Chfaher., 199 y . before me a Notary Public withinand for said County, personally appeared Ui’l/iam ry\treim.<l^ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executec^fe foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. fw* r CAROLE A. HASEMAN N0iMrrMUC4MNCS0tA MWWWCOUNTY M» ccwiMtw jg. 31. yyo Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this ^7//.day of ~• t'l , 199 cT , before me a Notary Public < r~ *-ih y>'y ^ "withinand for said County , personally appeared ^ , . ------------- known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing mstrument, and gdo^Qwjgdogd that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. * €L Notary Public ^^gggggggggggggggsggggsg / I »<?«•JAMIE L BOSMA NOTARY PU8LIC-MINNES0TA HENNEPIN COUNTY MyCominlsionE)q)iiesJv.31.2000 S Pase 6 of 8 I % L.. SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ c-ar ^ di^ocjc, 3 VJai -r' HARDCOVER CALCULA^TliiiN ^ "^75-250^ 25-500’ EXISTING RARProVER IN ZONE A. House X Length X X X B. Garage X C. Dr;ve*.vav \ X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paiio/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 S/33 -r Q PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN’ ZONE A. House X Length X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Dcck X X F. Landscape Underlain • By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _• ® • • • • • • 500-1000’ WidA S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F Sr S.F S.F. S.F. S.F. S F. S.P. S.F. S.F. S.F, S/33 ^9/S X 100 S.F. S.F, 7-^. 23 % widdi 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. X 100 S.F. S.F. 55 • ' 14 A 3 A B 3 v/Ai. r^r*' ^ hardcover CALCCLATiOM VV Ui<Ai)^t j SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ‘^-"5’ ^ 75-250’ 23-500’500-1000 EVISTCS’G HARDCQVFR IN ZONE A. House ______S.F. LengCi Wid-Ji X X B. 2.4-^ C. Drivc’.vav X X D. Sidewalk Sr£p$ ^lANCfuCj •it' i-1<^Z23 <f ■‘■•f.. S' * <s^ ^ «»•/ */o /s c? E. Patio/Deck Dec.f< X X I4.t 2 9/ F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic/gpc.*: Or Fabric • X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - A 8577 ___ - B mio 8677 /7Z90 X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ Lengdi Widdi X X X B. Garage C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X F.Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X O. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE total property area in zone ^ A _------^--------- X 100 - S.F. S.F. S.F. s ^ 3S9 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. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.P. S.F. S.F. % I-1 A B A B \ . I / ! • • ■ SETBACK ZONE:(CIRCLE ONE)0-75’^5-2S0j> 25-500’500-1000’ « • •ETaSTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE X • • • • S.F. ; 1'• • Length X Width . S.F. / *•$ •%X S.F.»• •,» ;X a S.F. f * B. Giraec X • ^ a'S.F. C. Driveway X s • ••• S.F. • 4 • .X a .S.F. V •• • • • •• m •• «»• • * ..D. Sidewalk X m S.F. }•X a S.F. ;•E. Patio/Deck X •" ■ S.F. X as: *S.F. 4*1'» f-F. Landscape • • • X • * • • • • •S.F. Underlain X S.F. !By Plastic.•X ‘ S.F. •r Or Fabric •* • •U/AWG. Other X 2 S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A 3f33 ^ B 3/33 S.F. X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ______________ Length V/iJet X X X WALL5 B. Garage 7// JZ" 2./^ IS « C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk 4-'X X E. Patio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric ^ MS <2.5 G. Other X X X 1 • • total hardcover in zone • total B- - -«10a . .T_, • •: 14 S.F. % 1 • • • S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. U/ , • JS‘S.F. 3£>70’S.F. •S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. s -. • •b.r. • S.F. S.F. S.F. . S.F. ■S.F. * 43.^% •* * • • - • • A B A B . i iL . - /0-Z4—9^ • W.'DuMt.u^y HARDCOV'ERX^CULATION VVORK^ttiit. j SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 7S-2S0* 25-500’SOO-IOOO’ • •• 4 % A.House i. •f • •r.;• r%r *1 •1 B. C.Driveway J?- V • ^£FPI£e5 f. i: e D.Sidewalk !:■ » tr ;•E.Pat^Deck r t-'Pat/o Lxngch Width X X X (»•> 8" 4S^ if 30 X X I£L r#- X 2g>g X X F. Landscape »^**>^* S Underlain _______ By Plastic. _____ Or Fabric • X X X G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE 6032.-r B PROPOSED HARDCOVER-IN ZONE A. House ____________ Lcngih Width * •» •«•••••«> • "fiM^exs B. Garag e 6" S'' X X X / 4-" X 9 JO C. Driveway STAppe €S X X D. Sidewalk /S3 tf6 */£, X X E. Patio/Dcck X X X 100 • •• *• F. Landscape f Underlain f' By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G- Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL B 17Z^<D X TOO 34,6^S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. - S.F. / o \ a 316 S F. 1 S.F. S.F. no •S.F. S.F. 1033 S F. S.F. S.F. S.F. • • • S.F. S.F; 171^0 S.F. 34.39 % ?757 • t • S.F. • S.F. S.F. S.F. 2Z^ 44>S.F. /o 37S S.F. 54 S.F. S.F. S.F. • 2*7/S.F. /o3S S.F. ^4 S.F. z.S.F. S.F. f •S.F. 61/4 • S.F. S.F. A . .1 A B A B Dunkley - Hardcover & Lot Coverage Summary 1. Hardcover:0-75’ Zone (17.290 s.f.) 75-250'Zone (6.915s.f.) Existing 8-21-95 8577 s f. (49.6%)5133 s.f. (74.2%>) Proposed/Approved per Resol. #3619 6114 s.f. (35.4%)3386 s.f. (49.07c) Current Prop'^sal 6090 s.f. (35.27c)3386 s.f. (49.0%)tf 2. Lot Coverage (15% allowed): (Lot area = 24,205 s.f.) Existing 8-21-95 3664 s.f. (15.17c) Approved per Resol. #3619 3764 s.f. (15.6%) Added 100 s.f. entry Current Proposal 4035 s.f. (16.7%) Add 271 s.f. spa room '^6'^ eREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: Julyl,T9%04j ITEM NO % 9 Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: ^2142 Angela Woodhouse, 2625 North Shore Drive - Variances Resolution _________ Zoning District:LR-IA Lot area = 92.060 s.f. or 2.11 acres Additional Exhibit K - Revised Hardcover Information Brief Review of Application Please refer to the enclosed staff memo dated June 10, 1996 and the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting for more detail on this review. The applicant seeks approval of an average lakeshore setback variance, lakeshore setback variance and hardcover variance within the 0-75' setback area to permit construction of a 6' x 18’ two story addition at the west side of the residence, a single story bay addition at 52 s.f. at the lakeside of the residence and a new west side entr>' addition and stoop. The existing residence structure is located 21' from the shoreline. The proposed addition to the west will be located 42' and the single story bay addition 39.6'. The two story addition will encroach 21’ in front of the average lakeshore setback line and the bay addition will encroach 23'. During the Planning Commission review, hardcover vrithin the 0-75' setback area was proposed with a hardcover increase at 193.8 s.f. or 0.90%. Planning Commission's approval of the variances was based on hardcover being maintained at existing 20.25% in the 0-75’ setback area. Applicant’s consultant has reviewed both existing and proposed hardcover improvements and has made the following amendments: Har jeover to be Removed Existing entry structure = 52.2 s.f. Steps and paving = 86 s.f. Existing bay = 17.5 s.f. Boathouse = 108 s.f. (remeasured in field) Total hardcover removals = 263.7 s.f. or 1.3% Request for Council Action continued Page 2 July 1, 1996 Zoning File #2142 Angela Woodhouse, 2625 North Shore Drive Proposed Hardcover Improvements New bay = 52 s.f. Stoop = 19.5 s.f. Side entr\' = 24.5 s.f West side addition = 108 s.f (corrected per building plans, two story addition = 6’ X IS’ or 108 s.f) New pavement = 33 s.f Total hardcover improvements proposed = 237 s.f Net decrease in hardcover within 0-75 ’ setback area = 26.7 s.f or 0.10% Pla ining Commission Recommendation The Plarming Commission recommended unanimous approval of the application as proposed, subject to hardcover within the 0-75' setback area being maintained at existing level. Approval was based on the hardships set forth in the staff memo prepared for Planning Commission review (Page 3). The approval resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBLIVISIONS 1 (A & B) AND 2 FILE NO. 2142 WHEREAS, Kirtland C. Woodhouse and Angela VVoodhouse (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 2625 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows; Refer to Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the propei* ^"); and WHEREAS, the applicants hav applied to the City foi variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 (A & B) and Subdivision 2 to permit construction of a 6' X 18 ’ two story addition with a single story entry addition to be located 42' from the shoreline and a single story bay addition at the lakeside of the residence to be located 39.6' from the shoreline where a 75' setback is required, the west addition will encroach 21' to the la!:eside of the average lakeshore setback line and the bay addition will encroach 23' where the Code would allow no encroachment, and a hardcover variance within the 0-75' setback area for new hardcover improvements resulting in 3,983.3 s.f or 20.1% total hardcover where 4,010 s.f or 20.25% exists and where none is allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. 2 This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2142. The property is located in the LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring two acres in area The property consists of 92,060 s.f or 2.11 acres The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 17, 1996 and recommended unanimous approval of the variances as proposed based upon the following unique findings and hardships: Page 1 of 5 A. The entire house is located within the 0-75’ setback area. 4. 5. B. The proposed improvements will result in a hardcover reduction of 26.7 s.f. or 0.10%. C. The house is located within the mid-point of a 280+' width property, the proposed improvements will have no impact on the lake views of the adjacent residences. D. The location of mature vegetation and the topography also minimizes the impact of the proposed improvement on the lake views of the adjacent residences. E. Major portions of the new improvements will be located over existing hardcover improvements. F. Total hardcover on the 2.11 acres property is 14,347.9 s.f. or 15.5% and is proposed at 14,321.2 s.f. or 15.5%. G. The City has received no negative comments from the adjacent property owners. 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 variances 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 applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary' to preserv’e a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 2 of 5 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 (A & B) and 2 to permit the constiiiction of a two story addition that includes a single story entry addition and a single story bay addition and grai.ts a lakeshore setback variance of 35.4' or 47.2%, an average lakeshore setback variance of 23' for the lakeside bay addition and 21' for the two story addition, and hardcover variance of 3,983.3 s f. or 20.1% within the 0-75' setback area. Approval is subject to the following conditions 1. Upon application for a building permit, applicants shall provide to the City an updated survey locating all existing and approved additions 2. Applicants to obtain a demolition permit for the removal of the boathouse and deck within the lakeshore yard. 3. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants, 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 (July 8, 1997). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.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. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of July, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of July, 1996 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. 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. • t I Notary Public Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. 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 ) ss. 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 Page 5 of 5 That part of Government Lota 4 and 5, Section 9, Township 117. R^n^e 23. described as commcncini: at the north quarter corner of said Section; thence on a bearing of South (the North line of the Northeaet quarter of said Section being msmed to have a bearing of North 88 degrees 51 minutes West for purposes of this description) a distance of 2878.55 feet; Uicoce South 70 de grees 37 eimites 31 seconds East a distance of 838.42 feet; thence South 67 degrees 19 minutes 23 seconds last a distance of 266.25 feet; thence South 59 degrees 05 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 300.00 feet to the point of begii^nlng of the property being described; thence continuing South 59 degrees 05 minutes 30 seconds East a distance of 159.15 feet; thence South 26 degree^ 36 minutes West to the shore La)ie Minnetonhr: thence Northwesterly along said shore to its lslar^*tion with a line drawn South 32 degrees 16 minutes 30 seconds West from the point of beginning; thence North 32 degrees 16 minutes X sec onds East to the point of beginning, according to the Govemmeot survey thereof, and That part of Government Lot 4. Section 9, Township 117, Range 23, described as follovs: Commencing at the North quarter corner of said Section; thence on a bearing of South (the North line of the Northeast quarWr of maid Section bolag assuBed to ba^ a bearing of North 88 degrees 51 minutea West for purposes of thle description) a distance of 2678.55 feet; Ibeeca Sduth 70 dt* grees 37 minutes 31 seconds East a distance of 636.42 feet; thence South 67 degrees 10 minutss 23 seconds last a distance of 266.25 feet to “Point A", aaid "Point A" being the point of beginning of the property being described, and also the point of beginning of Line A"; thence South 32 degrees 16 minutes X seconds West along “Line A* to a point on the shore of take Mionetonka, and said "Line A" there ending; thence Southeasterly along said shore to a point 300.00 feet Southeasterly . said 300.x feet being measured on a bearing of South 59 degrees 05 minutes X seconds last from said "Line A ; i minutes X seconds East a distance of 370 feet to an intersection with a line drawn South 59 degrees 05 minutes X seconds East from said "Point A"; thence North 59 degrees 05 minutes X seconds West to said "feint A" at the point of beginning. EXCEPT that part cf said above described property lying Northmemimrly of the following described line: Commencing at said "Point A": thence Sovith 59 degrees 05 minutes X seconds East a distance of 246.74 feet to the point of be ginning of the line being described: thence South 34 degrees 54 minutes X seconds West tc the ahore of Lake Minnetonka, and there ending. aaid "Line A thence North 32 degrees \ To: From: Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Mocr.,e, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:June 10, 1996 Subject: #2142 Angela Woodhouse. 2625 North Shore Drive - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA oCo Lot area = 24 ,(^60 s.f. or 2.11 acres Application: Applicant seeks approval of average lakeshore setback, lakeshore setback and hardcover variances t\ithin the 0-75’ setback area to permit a single story bay addition to the lakeside of the residence and an approximate 6’ x 23' addition to the west side of the residence involving a second stoiy expansion over the new addition and west wing of the residence (above garage). The improvement results in 193.8 s.f. or 0.9% increase in hardcover in the 0-75' setback area. The following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1. 2. 3. Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (A) - Lakeshore setback variance. Allowed = 75' Existing = 21’ Proposed west addition = 42' Lakeside bay addition = 39.6' Variance = 35.4' or 47.2% Section 10.22, Subd. 1 (B) - Average lakeshore setback. Bay addition encroaches 23'. West side addition encroaches 21'. Section 10.22, Subd. 2 - Hardcover variance within the 0-75' setback area. A. 0-75’ setback area Area = 19,800 s.f. Allowed = 0 s.f. Existing = 4,010 s.f. or 20.25% Proposed = 4,203.8%* or 21.2% Hardcover increase = 193.8 s.f. or 0.90% * Hardcover to be removed: Existing entry structure = 52.2 s.f. Steps and paving = 50 s.f. Existing bay = 17.5 s.f. Total = 119.7 s.f. I Zoning File #2142 June 10, 1996 Page 2 New proposed hardcover improvements: New bay = 87.5 s.f. Stoop = 19.5 s.f. Side entry = 24.5 s.f West side addition = 132 s.f New pavement = 50 s.f Total = 313.5 s.f B.75-250' setback area Area = 42,800 s.f Existing = 9,687.9 s.f or 22.64% C.250-500' setback area Area = 29,460 s.f Existing = 650 s.f or 2.21% 4.Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Structural coverage. The property is not subject to structural coverage standards as area of property is 2.11 acres. List of Exhibits A B C D E F G ■ Application • Plat Map ■ Property Owners' List • Existing Survey 0-75’ • Reduced Lot Survey ■ Proposed Survey 0-75' ■ Hardcover Inventory 0-75' Setback Area H-1-3 Existing Elevations 1-1-2 Floor Plans J-1-3 Proposed Elevations Review of Application Applicant proposes additions to existing residence completely loc-^ted within the 0-75' setback area. The improvement involves a single stor>’ bay addition at the lakeside of the residence providing for an expanded dining area within kitchen. The 87.5 s.f larger bay will replace a 17.5 s.f bay window'. The bay addition will be located 39.6' from the shoreline. The major portion of the improvement involves an approximate 6' x 23' two story addition to the west side of the residence. The second floor addition will extend over the west wing above Zoning File #2142 June 10, 1996 Page 3 the lower level garage and first floor (refer to E?diibits F, I and J). There will be a new entr>’ addition with stoop to the immediate west of the two story addition. The existing paved access will be realigned to conform with relocated entry. Staff has adjusted the hardcover facts to reflect removals and additions of hardco\er. Staff has determined an increase of 193.8 s.f., not 56 s.f as noted by applicant's consultant. The improvements to the west side of the residence will have little impact on the views of the adjacent residences based on the topography, existing vegetation and location of house in the middle of the 280' wide lot. Issues fur Consideration 1. 2. Should additional hardcover removals be requested to offset increase of 0.90% of hardcover within the 0-75' setback area? 89.9 s.f. of boathouse and deck structure would result in a 0.4% decrease. Should structural improvements be reduced? The proposed 6' x 23' addition will be placed over existing sUiicture, paving and entrance steps. Refer to Exhibit B and hardcover facts in staff memo. 3. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Statement of Hardship Please refer to Exhibit A, they are reviewed as follows; 1. The entire house is located within the 0-75 ’ setback area. 2. The home was constructed prior to current standards for lakeshore coii.struction. 3. 'fhe addition on west side will have no impact on the lake views of the adjacent residences due to the 280-some’ w idth of the propertv', location of vegetation and topography. 4. Major portions of the new improvements will be located over existing hardcover improvement. 5. Total hardcover on the 2.11 acre property is 14,347.9 s.f. or 13.5% and is proposed at 14,541.7 s.f. or 15.7%. Options of Action To approve as proposed or amended. Any recommendation of approval must include the condition that if additional hardcover improvements are to be removed, that they be completed at the time of the footing inspection for the new construction. Isv Application # ), j U '9—Date Received 5 - 7,^ - 9 Amount Paid "^3 >- c . co ^ i:/'K-T4AlMO C. Ljoo DH oujp -* AKifrEi-A E uoo£>Houif CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S220.00 (S50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee SI20.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S220.00 After-th-J-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address Vf-Z S' AJC/ZFH SHCl^^ ________________________ Idcnuncarion Number (P.l.D.) V - >1? - ^ ? Cdi ‘t^SL------ Attach legal description to application if noMncluded on required surve>. Date Property Acquired_______^-------±_i -----------------------------------------^ U -it - .N*- J I (do) (§05^)---------- Present use of property: NcT residential ___other (specify) Zoning District: QU o NQ applican Name ULQOlv Address: Phone fhome ) Oc''! ^ ^ _^ Phone fworic) ___________— ^ , Zip:__I OWNER (if different than apnlicant) Name _________------------------ Phone (home) Phone (work)_ Address:Citv: Estimated Construction Cost S. g XUr/'iVtT AfA/Zj^rihC iZ. PtK/s/e^ PQOT ^ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED ___Lot Area ___Lot Width _>C Setback: J^/ront —Side Other (specify) ^ Hardcover Lot Coverage Rear Average Lakeshore hardship /description OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS ^^cribe undue hardship or practical difficulty' or X'r/r?Tt compliance rcith Zoning Code AMDffFr /ffTWfAl Mf) f iiFP-.v LifTLr) lAA7.il THCZEAJ£—------L (attach additional sheets if necessary) 1 REQUIRED sun: riTTALS All of the following inforniation must be submitted bv thg apDhcatiQn deadline datf_ip order for vour application to be considered co mplete: 1.X J. A 4 T' ■ 5. 7 6. X X 7 7 8. Comp eted Application Form Certitied Propem- Owners List of owners within 150’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County- Depanment of Finance, A-603. Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8I/2" x,H" for reproduction. Topographic surv-ey (existing and proposed elevations) it any changes in existing grade^are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8‘/2" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy ZVz” x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notitied of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that ymir variance application U not comnicte if the above information has not been includ.e<L APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zomng Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true^and correcMto the^est af^s/her knowledge. Applicant’s Signature X OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of i’^-estigatioft and yerife^ion of this request. Owner’s Signature ^Date Applicant must have all subminals into the City offices 25 days before the Planmng 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 arrangemepts to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building &. Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 8 M RUN DATE 05/2U/94 MEmEPXN COUITY PROPERTY INfORtUTIOij SYSTEH PROPERTY OU4URS LIST REPORT NO. PI^IS^Ol PAGE 16BATCH 506PROP ADDR O^SIER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADOR 58 09-117-25 16 000701150 OLD CRYSTAL DAY RO S TIIOriAS G I PHYLLIS 0 COLUELL THOMAS G i PHYLLIS 0 COLt^lELL C/0 COLHELL INDUSTRIES INC 125 5RD ST N MPLS m 55601 58 09-117-25 61 000602565 NORTH SHORE DR JEFFREY L MARTIIIEAU JEFFREY L TURTINEAU 2565 rtORTH SHORE DR FIAYZATA rtl 55591 58 09-117-25 61 0009 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO CHARLES t DIRGITTA SCHOEN CHARLES I BIRGITTA SCHOEN 2650 rX)RTH SHORE DR HAYZATA III 55591 PROP ADDR OUTER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/ADDR 58 09-117-25 62 0002 02605 NORTH SHORE DR J D JEROME ASK JEROtlE JOHN D A SANDRA R JEROtlE 2605 NORTH SHORE DR NAYZATA MN 55591 50 09-117-25 62 0005 02625 NORTH SHORE DR KI RTL AMD C ITOODHOUSE ET AL KIHTLAND C NOOOHOUSE 2625 NORTH SHORE OR MAYZATA MN 55591 / V 5 I certify that the facts represented are an accurate and true representation of information as it appears this date on the records of .the Henhepin County Department of Property Taxati^T-tQ^ the best of my knowledge and belief. Pate^^//6^ irate )ears my \ \ c MwViV*» /. » *C t* i «OI»ITY ROAD NO^I $S % • . >• f-' -*~i h • -r t-» r-li -V >■# i-S5l *’%ri»?S5 ^ • • • A ■ f. ZSrO ^7 « 9 Cfti%t <•«< * » w ^(<^-^r>(xr.[yy^yyy/^ >t A *) ^xi^n 7y——^ C > . /'Vjl <y:tki02li> !*.• -. , TW~~T —• •** /***^ V» *■ \S^»*^v.’or' ''-TtT^r •rv / tAioF.. '-fPr.- MINNETONIO^ jL HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) , 0-75*75-250*250-500'500-1000' EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House S.F. Length Width X X X /- 7 S.F. > S.F. S.F. B. Oarage X S.F. — N C. Driveway X X S.F. S.F. D. Sidewalk X X / :• 7 S.F. S.F. E. Paiio/Deck X X S.F, S.F, F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE, ' -r B 0' X 100 = w*v J O S.F. S.F.^ ' j j 'zo.'T. r % PROPO.SED hardcover IN ZONE --------- Uo'J'f ■ A. ^ House 2 k^/7.? S.F. A Length Width • NS X X 5 ^. ■-' J,1 '■ ■ S.F. S.F. S.F. \ / * k ' f »« ^ B. Oaiage i-7,-7 S.F. -y'D S.F. C. Driveway X X no.o S.F. S.F. D. ty/J Sidewalk 1 r r v>' - X ^ •— % » yV 7ji_ S.F. S.F. E. Paiio/Deck C X X /iSr ,’j S.F. H r:. 0 S.F. F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic X X X S.F. S.F. S.F. G. Other S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE , ? /DO - B 7A6 ^ 7:7.0 S.F. •* 9 U A i; .• f/ I »>• A B X 100 = JF ryy S.F., _ I A B < _ O« *"^.3 % — • I • <-4 f N ‘I 1 0 • to 3: O •m Jrt § * * ' I ' * ‘ I-------. ; f J * V N r»v ■V ■ wt 5 8 KJ ir ^-li t *. , r*w 4 o 5^ Um 1SS?ip X . •*(.V t. T 1 r:.ligst — Z^4 o Oo D 'Tr> BT {. V r..- 4. 2 j■l^■J l■^%|^crs=^;^j «r> r ♦'v' \ \ ^ X N (/^ n\e t^V- t-J C n »n ,K' C V ^ i % th / •i n e 'lit IJ c N % g rJm (>' c > I r £ 0 0ua rn • I !I . . «» «. • j: y 'T\ O' IVI ' X \ 'C!0 C -- \ \ -c V i''"’ > 1^ i/i i^j\ XP 3no ?: n\ rx i* I 2T \ a o 0-,n\ c r> 3; N 0 h T 0 rn 3 crn S- 1 > 2: tv Ut f' > 8 XI T:- 1 pr 1 : ' ................................ ...........i 1 • ' I r C* •I i T~~r A WEST DESIGN CENTER 825 E. Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata. MN 55391 Phone (612) 473-9640 FAX (612)473.9713 f' V "I n.UnOCC6I BP05. penooaino EAST DESIGN CENTER 7166 10th Street N. Oakdale. MN 55128 Phone (612) 735-8640 .... "fXX (612) 735-2022 T?c ^ONiSiCr ril-^ *-.c‘ti4i3 2)fA? jm\. JUN i 8 1996 ^jO(x Toiz joai? i:oMTKU(Fi:i oa IS uAiJMWCfc' rVfi.TTFT^/. AS ?F'R 00 12 ■pfAOmr C iAnia>M X J2 £Z fp^ /7/li?D LOO'tZ ?rniyu«^ /K/O 2 cl ZJ? I0& ^ Of WffT I-IO'-UF ^klp 6^ ^ Of ^M/'k AO'> TATiO 170ME ^... UHlLC ONLO z^/iO/N^T- Si Sf HEU/ PftT/O XrOA-Jf- 7MAX ^f>OULt> LJOTiK XffAUtr ■'Jo'J ToZ yc'->.Z -ATTif~”A.•'\ Tf^~rH/A ,A ■^Trf^ XCL SS‘-/LC( Xti E July J-''' /-Ic X7 <f'-i T '-fHANlcJ ACfAhi. (r'i k,o 0 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING S J996 DATE: Ji^fTy,Cf5O0roNO ITEM NO: /O Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name Ron Moorse ■M/-Administrator’s Report Title City Administrator Item Description:# Saga Hill Park Land Acquisition Attachment: Grant Agreement Section 7.14 Conversion of Use/Permanent Record Requirement Background In late 1994, the residents of the Saga Hill area proposed the acquisition of approximately 11 acres of undeveloped property to preser\ e it from being privately developed for home sites, and to protect the unique natural features of the area. The residents proposed that the acquisition be accomplished by a combination of private donations and a DNR Natural and Scenic Area grant. The grant agreement with the DNR requires that the property be maintained consistent with the purpose and type of property acquired, and provides that the property may not be used for any purpose other than that stated in the grant application without the express written approval of the Commissioner of the DNR. Because the city had not (and has not) developed a plan for the use of this property, and because staff was not familiar with the type of restrictions the DNR would place on the use of the property, the grant application simply indicated the purpose of the grant was to acquire the property as open space and did not indicate any plans for development activities. The DNR Grant Coordinator has indicated the Namral and Scenic Area grant program does allow development activities such as roads, parking lots and structures as long as the natural and/or scenic resources of the area are protected. If the Council is open to some level of restriction in terms of protecting the natural and/or scenic resources of the area, it appears it is possible to obtain authorization from the DNR for such developm:. i activities. Conservation Easement Options At its June 24 meeting. Council expressed concern regarding th: Niiunesota Land Trust’s requirement that a conservation easement be placed on the proposed park land that would prevent all uses other than open space and trails in perperuity. The concern was not based on any specific plans for park development activities, but rather on the uncertainty about how the space might be used as part of the city’s park system both now and in the future. It appears the two general options available to the Council are as follows: * *> Request for Council Action Continued page 2 of 2 July 2, 1997 Saga Hill Park Land Acquisition Option #1.Follow through with the grant and the park land acquisition based on the acceptance of some level of restriction on the use of the property. a. ) Advantages 1. ) This would enable the acquisition of the land for park land to proceed. 2. ) This would provide the city with authority to protect the natural and scenic resources of the area. 3. ) The city’s acquisition of the land, even with restrictions, could provide as much or more actual and potential flexibility regarding future uses than if the land was simply purchased by a private developer for residential development. b. ) Disadvantages 1.) This would restrict the city’s flexibility in regard to the use of the property to meet future needs. Option #2 Reject all restrictions and withdraw the grant application. A. B. Advantages 1.) General flexibility regarding the use of the land is maintained. Disadvantages 1. ) Without public ownership of the land, it would become difficult to preserve the unique natural and scenic resources of the area and to preserve access to these features by the general public. 2. ) An opportunity to preserve a significant amount of land for park use would be lost. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Option #1. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to indicate whether the city should continue its participation in the acquisition of the Saga Hill park land; and, if so, to indicate the general conditions under which the city participation would continue. For the Commissioner of Natural Resources at: Name; Wayne Sames Address: Office of Planningw 500 Lafayette Road St. Paul. MN 55155-4010 Section 7.12 Assignment or Modification. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Agency and the State, and their respective successors and assigns. Provided, however, that neither the Agency nor the State may assign any of its rights or obligations under this .Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party. No change or modification of the terms or provisions of this Agreement shall be binding on either party unless the change or modification is in writi- ' and signed by an authorized official of the party against which said change or modification is .o be imposed and approved, if necessary, by the Finance Commissioner. Section 7.13 Waiver. Neither the failure by the Agency or the State, in any one or more instances, to insist upon the complete and total obser\ ance or performance of any term or provision hereof, nor the failure of the Agency or the State to exercise any right, privilege, or remedy conferred hereunder, or afforded by law. shall be construed as waiving any breach of such term, provision, or the right to e.xercise such right, privilege, or remedy thereafter. In addition, no delay on the part of either the State or the Agency in exercising any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial e.xercise of any right or remedy preclude other or further exercise thereof, or the exercise of any other right or remedy. Section 7.14 Conversion of Use/Permanent Record Requirement. It is the intention of the State that the property acquired under this agreement shall exist in the Agency's ownership and be maintained and managed consistent w ith the purpose and type of property to properly protect the natural and/or scenic resources in perpetuity. The .Agency shall not at any time convert any property acquired or developed pursuant to this agreement to uses other than the uses specified in this Agreement w ithout the prior written approval of the State. The Agency shall have the follow ing condition recorded with the deed and submit a copy to the Stale. In ( rder to comply with the Department of Natural Resources, Natural and Scenic Area Project Agreement, the City of Orono does hereby impose the following restrictions on the property: 1. The property shall be managed and maintained consistent with the purpose and type of property acquired using appropriate management and protection practices to protect the natural and/or scenic resources. 2. The property may not be used for any other purpose without the express written approval of the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Section 7.15 Resource Protection, Management. The Agency shall protect, manage and maintain, or cause to be maintained, the property acquired pursuant to this Agreement. Properties shall be kept reasonably safe for public use, if applicable. All state and federal accessibility laws, regulations and standards shall be adhered to. Fire prevention, vegetation management and similar safeguards and use supervision shall be provided to the extent feasible. 41. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^Ui ^//Vg 8 ^996 DATE; July^QS^ // ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: t . '/ h Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report / ' Item Description: Permanent Appointment of Police Chief ./ Attachment: Gary Cheswick Education and Experience Summary Background Gary Cheswick was appointed to the position of Acting Police Chief in June of 1995. Based on his commendable performance as Acting Chief during 1995, a recommendation was made to extend his appointment through 1996 and to make a decision by mid-1996 regarding whether to initiate a process to hire a new chief or to permanently appoint Gary Cheswick as Police Chief. Gary Cheswick ’s Performance as Acting Police Chief As Acting Police Chief, Gary Cheswick took over a department that was experiencing a number of problems. Based on his understanding of the causes of these problems and his knowledge of police operations, he took a number of key actions to address these problems. These actions were successftil in significantly improving the operation of the department. Gary Cheswick is committed to ensuring the police department provides excellent service to Orono and to the three police contract cities, and is committed to continuing to grow in the position in terms of his leadership and management abilities. Recommendation Based on his commendable performance as Acting Police Chief, it is recommended that Gary Cheswick be appointed to the position of Police Chief on a permanent basis effective July 9, 1996. Salary When Gary Cheswick was appointed as Acting Police Chief he was placed into the Police Chief salary range at step 1. Based on his performance over the past year, it is recommended his salary be adjusted to step 2 of the Police Chief pay range effective July 9, 1996. The step 2 salary level is $53,830. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the appointment of Gary Cheswick to the position of Police Chief at a salary level of $53,830 effective July 9, 1996. TO: FRO^: DATE: Mayor and City Council j Ron Moorse, City Administrator •/ July 2. 19% SUBJECT: Gary Cheswick Education and Experience Summary Education 1966 - 1969: 1969 - 1971: 1972 - Present: 1992: 1991: 1990: Experience Summary Normandale College North Hennepin College Normandale College Transferred to Metropolitan State University Continuing Education Relatively recent examples of continuing education with direct relationship to police management and supervision are as follows: N ,:ivational Leadership - 14 hours Completion of Police Management/Supervisory Series A. Police Management and Concepts B. Police Personnel Management C. Law Enforcement »n a Changing Community D. Communication 1 E. Communication 2 F. Legal Aspects of Law Enforcement Supervision G. Managing Police/Media Relations i: February 1, 1969: March 14, 1983: October 1, 1986: June 27, 1995: Productive Planning Skills Development - 8 hours Staff Development - 8 hours Advanced Communication Skills for Supervisors - 8 hours Liability Issues for Supervisors - 8 hours Decision Making: Processes and Application - 8 hours Advanced Communication Skills for Supervisors - 8 hours Appointed to City of Orono Patrol Officer position Appointment to Sergeant position Appointment to Lieutenant position Appointed to Acting Police Chief REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION 'JUi ^INq ^^96 DATE: ITEM NO: / Department Approval: Name Title Administrator Reviewed: ____________________ Agenda Section: Item Description: Budget Adjustment to Fund a Bituminous Overlay of a Portion of Watertown Road Backeround The city has an ongoing program of contracted street maintenance which includes bituminous overlays and seal coating. The overlays are done when streets begin to rapidly deteriorate, to prevent them from deteriorating to the point where they require total reconstruction. The overlays extend the life of the roads by 5 to 10 years. The seal coating is done one year after new paving, including overlays, is installed. The seal coating provides a non-slip surface and seals the pavement to reduce the formation of cracks which prolongs the life of the pavement. The annual budget includes $97,000 for overlays and seal coating. In 1996 $45,000 of this amount is programmed for seal coating the new pavement installed in 1994 and 1995. The remainder is programmed to overlay residential streets that are rapidly deteriorating. Overlay of Watertown Road Through an inspection in the spring, it was found that the portion of Watertown Road west of Stubbs Bay Road to Tumham Road, .9 of a mile, is in very bad condition and needs a bituminous overlay to prevent further deterioration and extend the life of the roadway. The cost to overlay this portion of Watertown Road is estimated to be $37,000. This is well beyond the budgeted amount for contracted street maintenance in 1996. Because the streets currently programmed for overlays are in as bad or worse condition than Watertown Road, staff is recommending that rather than substituting Watertown Road for these streets in the overlay program to 'tay within budget, the cost of overlaying Watertown Road be funded from the Permanent Improvement Revolving (PIR) Fund. A portion of this fund is designated for road construction. The balance in this portion of the fund is $107,000. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve a bituminous overlay lor that portion of Watertown Road west of Stubbs Bay Road to Tumham Road at a cost of $37,000 to be funded from the PIR Fund, and to amend the 1996 Budget to reflect the expenditure from the PIR Fund. r1 ^0(4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUi DATE: ITEM NO: / 8 ia»V^1996 Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: j: > ^ . , Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report Item Description: Preparations for the Sale of McCulley Road Property The Council has directed staff to move ahead with the sale of a 4 plus acre parcel of property on the east side of McCulley Road, as one source of funding for the purchase of the County ’s library property. Staff recommends that prior to advertising the property for sale, a number of actions be taken to make the property as desiraMe as possible. These are as follows: 1 . Conduct septic testing: approximate cost $600.00 2. Prepare a survey and plat of the property to create a separate lot for sale: approximate cost $2,000.00 3. Complete a lot area variance process to confirm the buildabilin' of »he lot with 4+ acres of dry buildaiv - area in the city’s 5 acre residential zr Staff will provide more exact cost information at the Council meeting. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the following actions in preparation for the sale of the McCulley Road property. 1 . Conduct septic testing 2. Obtain a survey and plat of the property 3. Complete a lot area variance process Motion .V. authorize expenditures not to exceed $____for the above items, to be funded from the General Fund Contingency account, and amending the budget to reflect these expenditures. m REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUi 8 199$ DATE: ITEM NO.:H Department Approval Administrator Reviewed: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator ^"7 Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Authorization to Begin Digital Mapping List of Exhibits A - DSU Letter - Description of Coverages 3 - DSU Letter - Di.scussion of Costs; Contract for Initial Work The 1996 budget contains S4.000 for upgrading City maps. I have been working with Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. (DSU) to formulate a strategy for digitizing the various maps used by the City on a daily basis, as a first step in creation of a CIS database. This $4,000 will cover the work needed to convert our AutoCAD topographic maps to a format that can be read by Arcinfo, thereby allowing topography to be overlaid onto the City plat map. It will also cover the costs of a final parcel-base plat map, yielding City boundary maps, a street and road centerline map and a MUSA map. We have identified a comprehensive list of maps to be digitized in order to create Arcinfo coverages with applicability to all City departments. Staff will be proposing that an additional budget line item be included in the 1997-1999 budgets in order to complete these mapping upgrades. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the expenditure of $4,000 for the initial phases of digital mapping by DSU, Inc. per the attached contract. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the expenditure of $4,000 for digital mapping work. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by ____, seconded by digital mapping services at a cost of $4,000. Vote; _, to contract with DSU, Inc. for ayes,____nays. . ^ A i *« X : ^ ‘ '•- : % • I • • . *\M- i-: rr* * > . . I ’ »I ‘ i i 26 June 1996 Mr. Mike Gaffron Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 RE: Detailed descriotion of the coverages identified by the City of Orono as the ultimate city GIS database . Dear Mr. Gaffron: It was a pleasure to meet with you and your intern last Wednesday 19 June 1996. From our discussion it was clear to me that the City of Orono herein referred to as the City has a vision of a for a comprehensive and furictional GIS. Dahlgren, Shardlow. and Uban, Inc. herein referred to as DSU is happy to be assisting the City to create that database. The following is a detail description of what it will take l ' create each of the coverages that the City identified for completion in its GIS database. This du«cription will hopefully allow DSU and the City to be on the same page when we discuss each of the coverages. BASE DATA COVERAGES Two Foot Topography Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects of St. Paul (Bonestroo) at this time maintains a city-wide 2 foot contour data ba^e for the City. Bonestroo has agreed to share these AutoCAD format two foot contour files with DSU. DSU will use the files to create an ARC/Info format topography coverage for the City. Since the topography data that Bonestroo maintains is in AutoCAD format, there will be significant translation necessary for DSU to create ARC/Info GIS cover.jges from the data. When DSU receives the files from Bonestroo, they will have to be converted to a format that can be read by ARC/Info, read into the GIS, fit together and then attributed. Moving the data to the GIS will take a significant amount of time, as there are approximately 80 Megabytes of data in 97 separate files that have to be translated. DSU has created a set of routines that automate this translation, but a great deal of care must be taken when perfroming the translation to insure that the data maintains both its positional and attribute accuracy. Once it has been translated, the coverage will have a number of mismatched contours at the seams that were created when the city-wide data was broken up to create manageable AutoCAD files. Finally, the coverage will have to be checked to make sure that the contours are positioned correctly and that their elevation values are coded correctly. Mr Mike Gaffron June 26, 1996 Detailed Description of Coverages Page 2 Plat Map As part of the Comprehensive Planning work that DSU began last year, DSU created an initial draft o* the plat map for the City that contains PIDs, Lot/Block data and address infromation for each parcel. The plat map was created by importing the Hennepin County parcel database and then updating the database with the Vk section maps for the City. The plat map should be current to last year and mostly correct, but will have to be checked by City staff. After the plat map has been reviewed, DSU will make any corrections or updates that are necessary. City Boundary By default, when the plat map was created for the City, the City Boundary was defined in the data set A coverage containing just the City Boundary has already been created and tested against the Minor Civil Division (MCD) coverage that is maintained by the State of Minnesota Land Management Information Center (LMIC). Hydrography with Lake Boundaries and Names DSU maintains a Twin Cities Metro Area hydrography coverage that contains all major lakes and rivers in the area. The Metro Area data can be easily "clipped" down to the extents of the City. Street and Road Centerlines DSU purchased the ETAK- road centerline network for the T'vin Cities Metro Area. The centerline network is a generalized 1" = 100,000' data set iuat will make a good starting point for the city as it is topologically structured and contains data attributes that will facilitate future GIS objectives of the City. The ETAK**^ data will, however, require edits, updates and corrections to create a comprehensive and accurate centerline network for the City. The extent of the edits and corrections will depend on how the city plans to use the data. The first option, to create the data to mainly facilitate small scale mapping and GIS routing, will not require to sm.oothing the curves, centering the center line in the street right-of-way, etc. However, if the second option, to create the cener-line data set to support large scale mapping, is chosen the data will have to be edited. Street Names Street names can be managed in two manners. The first and most economical solution is to label the streets from the centerline database. This method does not result in the clean regular street naming that creating an annotation set for the streets in the city provides. However, to create an annotation set for the streets in the City is a time consuming process that adds an editing step as new streets are added to the centerline database for the city. If this second solution is adopted, the City will be able to create cleaner maps and ouput at both large and small scales. It should be noted that if street names are handled through use of the centerline data set, an annotation set can be created at any time in the future. Mr Mike Gaffron June 26, 1996 Detailed Description of Coverages Page 3 Lot Dimension Data When the plat map of the City was created, ARC/Info automatically calculated a length for every line in the database and and area for each parcel in the City. These values should not be assumed to agree exactly with the lengths and areas determined for the parce's when they were surveyed or platted. The calculations are, however, accurate for planning purposes (approximately ±5' - 10’ for the area of a parcel and ±2' - 5’ for the length of a parcel boundary). The ARC/Info calculated lengths and areas can be added to map or used in queries without any additional work on the database. If the City desires to have the surveyed or platted lengths and areas added to the plat map as an annotation layer it can be done, but would require a great deal of work. A dimension for each line and area for each parcel in the City would have to be determined from the City 'h section maps and placed in the annotation set for the plat. Street Numbering Grid Like a map locator grid, the Street Numbering Grid is merely a square mathematical grid spanning the City with intersection addresses annotated around the edges. There will be very little work involved with creating this coverage. PUBLIC MAPS Zoning Districts The pattern of zoning districts in the City is not very complex. Therefore, to create a coverage of the districts will not take a great deal of work. The districts often follow parcel boundaries, which will allow many of them to be created by extracting lines from the city plat mao. Fire Districts Like the Zoning Districts, the pattern of the fire districts in the city is simple. Most of the boundaries can be extracted from the city plat map and the street centerline coverage. The additional linework is primarily straight line connections from line intersection to line intersection. School Districts As part of the comprehensive planning work for the City that DSU performed last year, the initial work to create a school district coverage was completed. The boundaries of the districts have been identified and isolated. All that is left to do on this coverage is to clean up the boundaries and to attribute the districts. Postal Service Area The postal zip code areas can be derived from the ETAK* street and road t. network. City Designated Wetlands In the event that the City completes an inventory of the wetlands in the City, the data accumulated during the inventory could be included as a coverage in the City GIS database. DSU would digitize the wetland boundaries to tit with the City parcel base and attribute each wetland as the City desires. Mr Mike Gaffron June 26, 1996 Detailed Description of Coverages Page 4 Nationa* Wetland Inventory (NWI) Wetlands OSU maintains a Twin Cities Metro Area NWI coverage. This coverage is available to the City for a nominal DSU cost recovery fee. The only work that will have to be done is to "clip" the metro area coverage to the extents of the City. MUSA DSU maintains a copy of the 1992 Metropolitan Council MUSA boundary and a 1995 MUSA boundary that we created while producing the Builder's Association of the Twin Cities Cost of Sprawl Study and Report. Both of these coverages can be easily and quickly 'clipped" to the extents of the City. Shoreland Districts The shoreland districts in the City are defined as setback distances from the water bodies and creeks. The shoreland districts coverage can be created by buffering the hydrography coverage by the setback distance and "clipping" the resulting line work to the extents of the City. This is a process that is internal to ARC/Info and, therefore, will not be a very time consuming process. Floodplain Districts The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maintains maps that display the floodplain districts for all areas of the united states. The data on the FEMA map for the City would have to be digitized and attributed. The floodplain districts in the City are mostly large and regularly shaped and can be created in digital format rather easily. Voting Precincts The voting precincts in the City are large and often follow road centerlines or parcel boundaries. The coverage can for the most part be created by extracting lines from the centerline and plat map coverages. Those boundaries that cannot be extracted from other coverages can be easily added to complete the voting districts coverage. Attributing the districts will be minimal. Land Use At this time the City does not maintain an existing land use map. Therefore, a land use inventory of the city will have to be performed for tl e City There are two methods for completing the inventory: - OSU can send the City a blank copy of the city plat map and a definition of the land use categories that we normally use. Staff at the City can then define the land use categorization for areas and parcels in the City. When the City staff has completed the classification, the plat map can be returned to DSU and the land use coverage can be created from the plat map. This is the least expensive and most easily completed option. • DSU can perform a land use inventory of the City by driving and walking the streets of the City and identifying the land use for each parcel and area on the City plat map. To perform this type of inventory will be highly accurate but will be very time consuming and expensive. Comprehensive Guide Plan The City has ^lot finished updating its Comprehensive Plan and thus does not have an immediate need for a comprehensive plan map. When the comprehensive plan is complete, the City will then want to map the plan but at this time to map a plan that is sure to change would be imprudent. Mr Mike Gaffron June 26, 1996 Detailed Description of Coverages Page 5 Parks When an existing land use coverage is created, by default the parks in the City will be identified and attributed as parks. To extract the park areas from the land use coverage and create a separate park coverage is just a matter of running a single command and will take very little time and effort. TECHNICAL MAPS Sewer Lines The sanitary sewer lines in the City are identified on paper maps and described on a series of paper files. The conversion of the sewer data will require a significant amount of time and effort. First the sewer lines will have to be digitized from the paper maps and then each sewer segment will have to be identified and attributed from the files of data. Storm Sewers and Culverts The storm sewer and culverts in the City are also ‘d .ntified on paoer maps and described on a series of paper files. The conversion of the storm sewer and culvert data will require a significant amount of time and effort. Water Lines Like the sewer lines, like the City water lines are represented on paper maps and in paper files. To ere? .e a coverage of the the water lines will require a great deal of time and effort. Cable TV, Gas, Electric, Phone The source data for each of these data sets is maintained by the private agencies that provide the services. These agencies are not always willing to share the locations of there facilities for strategic reasons. If it is difficult to obtain the source data for these coverages the cost to create the coverages could be significant. If the agencies are willing to share there data with the City, the time and work necessary to develop these coverages will reduce significantly. Metro Waste Control Commission (MWCC) DSU maintains a metro wide coverage of the interceptor and forcemain facilities installed and maintained by the MWCC. To create a coverage of this information for the City would simply be a matter of "clipping* the data to the extent of rhe City. Soils The soil data for the City can be digitized from the Hennepin County Soil Survey Book. DSU retains a copy of the book. Soil data is intricate and represents a difficult and time consuming digitizing and attributing effort. Sidewalks There are very few public sidewalks in the city. However, they are not identified on the City plat map. The sidewalks will have to be constructed from the City Public Works Department records. Well Locations The City maintains 3 public wells. These wells along with a number of private wells are not on any city maps. They will have to be identified from parcel records. The identification of the wells will be a significant research endevor. After the City has located the wells, DSU will add the locations to a coverage that will match with the parcel database. Mr Mike Gaffron June 26, 1996 Detailec* Description of Coverages Page 6 Septic Locations Septic locations will have to be entered into the database from record cards. With no graphic source available to indicate the locations of the septic systems, it may be wise for the City to consider adding the instance of a well as a field in the City parcel base. APVANC6P GIS The City has identified that the capability to attach the data that the City maintains for each parcel (lot area, assessment information, building permit data, etc.) should be available if that data is converted to a digital form. This capability is possible with the parcel (plat map) coverage that DSU had begun to create for the City last year. The parcel coverage was derived from the Hennepin County database. This database contains the PIN number, ownership, and other basic data for each parcel. Using the PIN number in the parcel coverage and in the city database, the graphical parcel base and the textual city database can be related to one another. Other capabilities such as the ability to perform routing analysis on the street centerline coverage and other data analysis on and among the other layers must be considered in the creation of each coverage. The coverages must be topologically clean (no unconnected lines or open polygons) and the attributing must be rigorous and accurate. DSU considers the desire to perform coTipiex operations at all times when creating data sets. Sincerely, DAHLGREN, SHARDLOW, and UBAN, Inc. irchell L. Vanderperreh | GIS Analyst/System Administrator * G 06:896MG LET STANDARD RATE SCHEDULE CONSULTING PLANNERS DAHLGREN SHARDLOW ANDUBAN Staff Member Rate Principal $110.00 to $150.00 CIS Specialist $60.00 to $85.00 Accounting Specialist $60.00 to $85.00 CIS Analyst $45.00 to $60.00 Senior Planner $55.00 to $80.00 Planner $35.00 to $55.00 Landscape Architect $55.00 to $85.00 CADD Specialist $45.00 to $50.00 Draftsperson/Designer $35.00 to $55.00 Admin/Financial Specialist $40.00 to $55.00 Administrative i^issistant $35.00 to $50.00 Outside Consultants Cost Plus 5% Supplies Cost Plus 15% Expenses Cost Plus 15% Mileage $0.30 Per MUe Travel Time Over 1 Hour 1/7 Hourly Rate Expert Testimony Two Times Hourly Rate (4 hour minimum) Special Counsel Howard Dahlgren $200.00 Public Presentations 1.5 Times Hourly Rate Past Due Accounts 1.5% Per Month LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS J C( I • i'.v L.W'v /'i •. ;.>ti !!••'■ •.'. i huitl • \. I I. i' '•• ti ■ I ■■ 26 June 1996 Mr. Mike Gaffron Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE:Discussion of cost to complete the set ot coverages that the City of Orono wishes to include in their database Dear Mr. Gaffron: It was a pleasure to meet with you and your intern last Wednesday 19 June 1996. We are happy that you are able to begin some of the data conversion that we discussed last October. Working together, we should be able to create a set of very solid coverages that will serve the City of Orono well into the future. OBJECTIVE The objective of Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc. referred to herein as DSU, will be to create a collection of city-wide data sets for the City of Orono herein referred to as the City. DSU will create these covet ages to the satisfaction of the City in an order to be determined. DSU and the City will schedule the creation of the coverages by order of importance beginning with the parcel base and two foot topology. SCOPE OF SERVICES BASE DATA COVERAGES Two Poot Topology Plat Map City Boundary Hydrography with Lake Boundaries and Names Street and Road Centerlmes (t.) Stree' Names Lot Dimension Data Street Numbering Grid Cost:$2,900.““ Cost:$ 650.““ Cost:$ 0.““ Cost:$ 75.““ Cost:$ 4C0.““Option 1 $1,000.““Option 2 Cost:$ 100.““Option 1 $ 800.““Option 2 Cost:$ 0.““Option 1 $1,500.““Option 2 Cost:$ 200.““ 1— Mr Mike Gaffron June 28, 1996 Letter of Agreement Page 2 PUBLIC MAPS Zoning Districts Fire Districts School Districts Postal Service Area City Designated Wetland National Wetland Inventcry (NWI) Wetlands MUSA Shorelar.d Districts Floodplain Districts Voting Precincts Land Use Comprehensive Guide Plan Parks TECHNICAL MAPS Sewer Lines Storm Sewers and Culverts Water Lines Cable TV. Gas, Electric, Phone Metro Waste Control Commission IMWCC) Soils Sidewalks Well Locations Septic Locations Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: Cost: $ 400.®“ $ 175.®® $ 175.®® $ 75.®® $2,500.®® $ 225.®® $ 50.®® $ 175.®® $ 225.®® $ 150.®® $ 650.®® (1992 & 1995 MUSA) $4,500.®® Option 1 Option 2 Will be investigated when the City Comprehensive Plan is complete. $ 150.®® $2,000.®® $2,000.®® $2,000.®® Will be determined when the amount of cooper- lion and condition of the source data offered by the external agencies can be determined. $75.®® $2,250.®® $250.®® $750.®® $750.®® ADVANCED GIS Tne City has identified that the capability tc attach the data that the City maintains for each parce' (lot area, assessment informa'iion, buildino permit data, etc.) should be available if that data is converted to a digita. form, ihis capability is possible with the parcel (piat map) coverage ihat DSU had begun to create for the City last year. The parcel coverage was derived from the Hennepin County database. This database contains the PIN number, ownership, and other basic data for each parcel. Using the PIN number in the parcel coverage and in the City database, the graphical parcel base and the textual city database can be related to one another. Other capabilities such as the ability to perfem routing analysis on the street centerline coverage and other data analysis oi. and a;noi>g the other layers must be considered in the creation of each coverage. The coverages must be topologically clean (no unconnected lines or open polygons) and the att.lbuting must be dgorous and accurate. DSU considers the desire to perform complex operations at all times when creating data sets. Mr Mike Gaffron June 28, 1996 Letter of Agreement Page 3 DSU will provide the City with digital data and one final map of the above coverages upon completion of each. Other maps may be created as necessary during the process of creating the data sets. The City will be responsible for providing source data and maps where possible. When data must b* obtained from state, county or private agencies DSU will work t.) assist the City i' obtaining these data sets but will ask the City to request the data sets to avoid confl'cts with agencies not comfortable with providing their data to a private entity. COMPLETION TIME The work outlined above will begin immediately upon receipt of this agreement and will be completed as expeditiously as possible unless delayed for reasons of unexpected emergencies, forces beyond the control of the parties, or by the request of a party acquiesced in writing by the City. If so delayed for more than six (6) months at the request of the City, DSU reserves the right to renegotiate the contract m account for rising costs before resuming work. COST OF SERVICES The work will he charged for on a time plus materials basis with the estimates as above. A summary of the cost estimates is as follows: BASE DATA COVERAGES Two Foot Topology $2,900.®" Plat Map $ 700.®" City Boundary $ 0."" Hydrography with Lake Boundaries and Names $ 75."" Street and Road L $ 500.""Option 1 $1,000.""Option 2 Street Names $ 100.""Option 1 $ 800.""Option 2 Lot Dimension Data $ 0.®"Option 1 $1,500."®Option 2 Street Numbering Grid $ 200.®^ PUBLIC MAPS Zoning Districts $ 450.®" Fire Districts $ 175."" School Districts $ 175.®" Po'^^ral Service Area $ 75."" City Designated Wetlands $2,500.®"(Does not include wetland designation) | NWI Wetlands $ 225.®" MUSA $ 50."" 1 Shoreland Districts $ 175.®"11 Floodplain Districts $ 225."" Voting Districts $ 150."" Land Use $ 650.®°Option 1 Comprehensive Guide $4,500.®"Option 2 Plan To be Determined Parks oodin</> Mr Mike Gaffron June 28, 1996 Letter of Agreement Page 4 techn :' al maps Sewer Lines Storm Sewers and $2,000.°° Culverts $2,000.°° Water Lines Gas. TV, Electric, and $2,000.°^ Phone To be Determined MWCC $ 75.°° Soils $2,250.°“ Sidewalks $ 250.°° Well Locations $ 750.°° Septic Locations $ 750.°° DSU proposes that at this time, the City authorizes the creation of the two foot topology, parcel base, city boundary, MUSA boundaries, and street and road t, (Option 1) coverages to exhaust the original $4,000.°° budget for GIS database creation. The additional coverages are listed as reference only. These coverages indicate optional coverages that were identified by the City as coverages that the City would ultimately like to include in its GIS database. The costs for this initial set of coverages is as follows: Two foot Topology:$2,900.°° Parcel Base (Plat Map)$ 650.°° City Boundary $ o.°° Street and Road t,s $ 400.°° Option 1 MUSA $ 50.°° TOTAL $4,000.°° Time spent by OSU on the pmject will be billed according to the attached Standard Rate Schedule. The cost of expenses, materials, and supplies directly related to the project will be billed according to the attached Standard Rate Schedule. These expenses might include plotting costs. Xerox copies, mileage, postage, delivery charges, and other reasonable and normal expenses associated with the work. The cost figures above are estimates only, since the amount of work necessary create a coverage can vary greatly depending on the condition and format of the source data for the coverage. Mr Mike Gaffron June 28, 1996 Letter of Agreement Page S TERMIISIATIOM This contract may be terminated upon written notice by either party. In the event of termination, the City shall pay DSU for the work completed on a time plus materials basis. If this agreement meets with your approval, please sign both copies and return one to us for our records. Sincerely, DAHLGREN, SHARDLOW, and Inc. CONDITIONS HEREIN AGREED TO: (S, C. John Uban, ASLA, CEO Date % ATTACHMENT:Detailed Description of Coverages Standard Rate Schedule G ORONO LOA REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUi ® i9J{ DATE: ITEM NO: / ^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Item lC>escription: Administrator Reviewed: I. ^ » 11111 / Agenda Section: Administrator's Report Scheduling of Work Sessions The Council has two sets of items to be reviewed at worksessions. The first is a set of organizational issues including the reorganization of the Public Works and Building & Zoning Departments and the replacement of the retiring department heads of those two departments. The second is a joint work session requested by the Park Commission to review progress on the Parks Master Plan. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to select dates and times for Council work sessions. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION »VI9 <9 l99g DATE: Jul>%yWa6 ITEM NO; j Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report Item Description: Old Crystal Bay Road Bike Trail Update Staff has been working with the property owners at the comer of Silver View Drive and Old Crystal Bay Road to address their concerns regarding the trail and to obtain temporary easements required for the construction of the trail. These have been difficult discussions due to major concerns of the property owners regarding the construction of the trail itself and regarding the loss of screening that would result from the trail construction, and due to substantial reluctance to provide the temporary easements. Although the trail will not be constmcted on their properties, the grading work for the trail will involve the removal of trees on the back side of the Old Crystal Bay Road ditch. Staff can continue to try to work toward an agreement with the property owners and/or staff could initiate condemnation proceedings to obtain the temporary easements. It appears that both of these options will require a substantial amount of time. A "quick take" condemnation requires a minimum of 90 days. Because this process will push us toward the end of the construction season; staff recommends the plan for trail constmction in 1996 involve work north of these properties, including the portion from Old Crystal Bay Road along County Road 6 to Baker Park to be funded by Hennepin Parks. It appears that if the City completed $100,000 worth of construction on the trail north of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks the trail could be completed to Kelley Parkway. The benefit of constructing the trail north of the railroad tracks is that we can get a substantial portion of the trail constructed in 1996. The disadvantage is that we will not be eligible to receive the $50,000 matching grant from the DNR in 1996. The reason is that the grant requires a continuous trail which would not be the case if the properties at Silver View and Old Crystal Bay Road were excluded. However, the city will become eligible for the matching funds at the time the trail is completed along the excluded properties, which is planned to occur in early 1997. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to authorize the expenditure of $100,000 from the Park Fund for the construction of a bike trail along Old Crystal Bay Road from the Burlington Northern Railroad to Kelley Parkway REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JOL DATE: Julv I, 199^ ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name John Gerhardson Title Public Works Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator’s Rep^t Item Description: No Parking Resolution - 340 Old Crystal Bay Road During the review process for constructing the bike/liike trail on Old Crystal Bay Road, the property owner at 340 Old Crystal Bay Road requested the area in front of his home be posted "No Parking" as parking alongside the road creates a site distance problem for them. Now that the trail is built there is a problem for site distance and I have proposed a resolution authorizing the installation of No Parking signs. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To authorize and direct the Orono Public Works Department to place "No Parking" signs at 340 Old Crystal Bay Road. i A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION OF NO PARKING SIGNS ON A PORTION OF OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal organization under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono has authorized the installation of a Bike/Hike Trail on Old Crystal Bay Road; and WHEREAS, the installation of the Bike/Hike Trail has encouraged roadside parking adjacent to 340 Old Crystal Bay Road; and WHEREAS, the roadside parking is causing a site distance problem at the driveway at 340 Old Crystal Bay Road. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby authorize and direct the Orono Public Works Department to install No Parking signs for three hundred feet north and south of 340 Old Crystal Bay Road. Approved by the Orono City Council at a regular Council meeting held on July 8, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor Page 1 of 1 .j REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: Julv §7)lg ITEM NO 96 M NO: Department Approval: Name Rod Moorse Title City Administrator Item Description: Administrator Reviewed: // 7 Agenda Section: Administrator ’s Report Corrected Payment Amount for Highway 12 Safety Improvement Project When the city approved the Highway 12 safety improvement project it was after meeting with Mn/DOT to reduce the city’s share of the project cost. The reduced cost was based on project cost estimates. When the bids were awarded for the project, the costs were higher than the estimates. The initial estimated cost was $135,049.58. The revised cost is $143,874.97 for a difference of $8,825.39. Mn/DOT has requested the city pay the additional amount as called for by the project agreement. Staff recommends paying the additional amount, to be funded from the MSA fund. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve payment of the additional $8,825.39 amount to Mn/DOT for the Highway 12 safety improvement project, to be funded from the MSA fund; and to amend the 1996 budget to reflect this expenditure. ^oum REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Mb, 8.JUi DATE: July 2!^19^$ CtTy ITEM NO: Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name Dorothy Hallin TIUe City Clerk Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval No licenses COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: 1 'I r I JUl S- 8 c/n., °flo/ \ . T. - .t^,. 2 Jul 1996 Tue 8:54 AH Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 51785 51785 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 03-Jul-96 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Totals Check Number 51785 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Check Number 51786 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 51786 51786 51786 03-JU1-96 03-JU1-96 03-Jul-96 FIRSl- NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Totals Check Number 51786 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Check Number 51787 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. 51787 03-Jul-96 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO Totals Check Number 51787 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO Check Number .17f'' HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT & COLL 51788 03-Jul-96 HFNNEPIW CO. SUPPORT 6 COLL Totals Check Number 51788 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT 6 COLL Check Number 51789 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT k COLL 51789 03-Jul-96 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT k COLL Totals Check Number 51789 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT k COLL Check Number 51790 I0*4A RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 51790 03-JU1-96 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Totals Check Number 51790 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 Check Number 51791 LAW ENFOROffiNT LABOR SERVICE 51791 03-JU1-96 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Totals Qieck Number 51791 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Check Number 51792 MN DEPT OP REVENUE 51792 03-Jul-96 MN DEPT OP REVENUE Totals Check Number 51792 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Check Number 51793 MN MUTUAL LIFE 51793 03-Jul-96 MN MUTUAL LIFE Totals Check Number 51793 MN MUTUAL LIFE Transaction Amount 5.744.00 5.744.00 3,091.77 3,091.77 7,236.02 13,419.56 1.190.00 1.190.00 164.82 164.82 184.50 164.50 100.00 100.00 495.00 495.00 3.059.14 3.059.14 55.00 55.00 Page 1 Comments SAVINGS W/H k TRANSFERRED FICA k MEDICARE W/H FICA.MEDCR CITY SHARE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING DEFERRED COMP W/H THOMTQN 8C0266780 SKREEN iC0262310 DEFERRED COMP N/H UNION DUES W/H STATE TAX W/H DEFERRED COM? H/H 1 r:2 Jul 1996 Tue 8:54 AM Check Number Check Number 51794 Check Register City of Orono Date Name 51794 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP 03-Jul-96 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Totals Check Number 51794 MN STATE RETIRBC3IT-DEF COMP Check Number 51795 51795 PEBSCO/OBRA 03-JU1-96 Totals Check Number PEBSCO/OBRA 51795 PEBSCO/OBRA Check Number 51796 51796 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 03-Jul-96 Totals Check Number PEBSCO/OS CONF OF MAYORS 51796 PEBSCO/US CONF OP MAYORS Check Number 51797 51797 51797 PERA 03-Jul-96 03-Jul-96 Totals Check Number PERA PERA 51797 PERA Oieck Number 51790 ST. CROIX COUNTY Transaction Amount 150.00 150.00 334.42 334.42 1,742.50 1,742.50 3,786.84 4,981.53 8,768.37 Page 2 Comments DEFERRED COMP W/H OBRA DEFERRED COMP W/H USCM DEFERRED CaV .»/H PERA EMPLOYEE W/H PERA CITY SHARE 51790 03-JU1-96 Totals Check Number ST. CROIX COUNTY 51790 ST. CROIX COUNTY Check Number 51799 UNITED WAY 51799 03-JU1-96 UNITED WAY Totals Check Number 51799 UNITED WAY Grand Total 129.34 129.34 29.00 29.00 35,565.65 CHILD SUPPORT-SCHULTZ CHARITY DONATIONS W/H 3 Jul 1996 Med 10:S3 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Dace Name Check Number 51800 51800 AT&T 02-Jul-96 ATiT Total! Check Number 51800 AT4T Check Number 51801 AUGIL. RILL CHEF 51801 02-JU1-96 .JGIES MOBILE CHEF Totals Check Number SI801 AUGIE3 MOBILE CHEF Check Number 51802 BANYON DATA SYSTEMS 51802 02-Jul-96 BANYON DATA SYSTEMS Totals Check Number 51802 BANYON DATA SYSTEMS Check Number 51803 BELL 6 HOWELL 51803 02-JU1-96 BELL & HOWELL Totals Check Humber 51803 BELL k HOWELL Qieck Number 51804 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP 51804 02-Jul-96 BENEFITS DESIGN GROUP Totala Check 51804 BENEFITS DESIGN QIOUP Qieck Number 51805 BIFFS INC. Transaction Amount 5.30 5.30 64.54 64.54 3.322.66 3.322.66 235.72 235.72 1.600.79 1.600.79 -1Page 1 Comments long DISTANCE CHARGES SANDWICHES FOR RESALE FIN.PAY.U.B..POS SUPPORT DEVELOPER TRAY JULY BQIEFITS 51805 03-Jul-96 BIFFS INC.130.52 JULY SERVICE 51805 03-Jul-96 BIFFS INC.130.52 JULY SERVICE 51805 03-Jul-96 BIFFS INC.130.52 JULY SERIVCE 51805 03-Jul-96 BIFFS INC.65.26 JULY SERVICE Totals Check Number 51805 BIFFS INC.456.82 Check Number 51806 BOBZIEN. SUE 51806 02-Jul-96 BOBZIEN. SUE 16.28 REIMBURSE FOR MANUAL Totals Check Number 51806 BOBZIEN. SUE 16.28 Check Number 51808 BONESTROO ROSENE k ASSOC. 51808 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE & ASSOC.3.214.89 SEAL COAT PROJECT ENG 51808 03-JU1-96 BONESTROO ROSENE k ASSOC.125.50 L.S. 86 EVALUATION-MAY 51808 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE k ASSOC.341.06 BRN RD/WTRTWN RD INSP-MAY 51808 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE k ASSOC.584.71 L.S. 828 RENOVATION-MAY 51808 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE k ASSOC.143.60 OCB RD TRAIL INSP-MAY 3 Jul 1996 «ed 10:53 AM Check Number Check Number Check Register City of Orono Page 2 Date Name 51808 BONESTROO ROSENE 4 ASSOC. 51809 02-Jul-96 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS Totals Check Number 51809 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS Check Number 51810 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 51810 02-Jul-96 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO Totals Check Number 51010 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO Check Number 51811 CITY OF MINNETONKA 51811 02-Jul-96 CITY OF MINNETONKA Totals Check Number 51011 CITY OF MINNETONKA Check Number 51012 CITY OF MOUND 51012 02-Jul-96 CITY OF MOUND Totals Check Number 51012 CITY OP MOUND Check Number 51013 CITY OF WAYZATA 51013 02-Jul-96 CITY OF WAYZATA Totals Check Number 51013 CITY OP WAYZATA Check Number 51814 CCMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE Check Number 51815 51815 CRABTREE COMPANIES 02-Jul-96 CRABTREE COMPANIES Transaction Amount 51.86 51.86 176.07 176.87 8.970.00 8.970.00 17.676.50 17.676.50 3.147.25 3.147.25 Comments 51808 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE 4 ASSOC.322.86 INSP WILLOW DR-MAY 51808 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE 4 ASSOC.435.50 MSA ACCT STATUS REVIEW 51808 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE 4 ASSOC.42.50 KELLY AVE PERMIT APPLIC. 51808 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE 4 ASSOC.793.25 L.S. 86 EVALUATION-APRIL 51808 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE 4 ASSOC.180.75 MSA GENERAL APRIL 51000 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE 4 ASSOC.2.690.02 APRIL CC MEETING 51806 03-Jul-96 BONESTROO ROSENE 4 ASSOC.435.50 NAV WTR tLANT PRIORITY 51800 03-JU1-96 BONESTROO ROSENE 4 ASSOC.3.050.45 MARCH CC MEETING Totals Check Number 51000 BONESTROO ROSENE 4 ASSOC.13.160.59 Check Number 51009 CDP IMAGING SYSTEMS STAPLES 8173 REPAIR BALL JOINT 3RD QTR PROSECUTION 3RD QTR FIRE PROTECTION 3RD QTR FIRE PROTECTION 51614 02-Jul-96 CCMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 0.85 JULY LIFE INSURANCE 51814 02-Jul-96 COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 2.66 JULY LIFE INSURANCE 51814 02-Jul-96 COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 1.14 JULY LIFE INSURANCE 51814 02-JU1-96 CCMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 281.00 JULY LIFE INSURANCE Totals Check Number 51014 CCMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 285.65 239.30 TONER CARTRIDGES 3 Jul 1996 Hed 10:53 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 51815 CRABTREE COMPANIES Totals Check Number 51815 CRABTREE COMPANIES Check Number 51816 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 51816 02 Cul-96 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO Totals Check Number 51816 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO r.heck Number 51817 E-Z RECYCLING 51817 02-Jul-96 E-Z RECYCLING Totals Check Number 51817 E-Z RECYCLING Check Number 51818 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC. 51818 02-Jul-96 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC Totals Check Number 51818 EARL F. ANDERSON k ASSOC Check Number 51819 BAST SIDE BEVERAGE 51819 02-Jul-96 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE Totals Check Number 51819 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE Qieck Nufriser 51820 ENVIRONMENTAL RE-CREATIONS 51820 02-JU1-96 ENVIRONMENTAL RE-CREATIONS Totals Check Number 51020 ENVIRONMENTAL RE-CREATIONS Qitck Nu^nber 51821 FROST. SHERRY R. 51821 02-JU1-96 FROST. SHERRY R, Totals Check Number 51821 FROST. SHERRY R. Check Number 51822 GALL'S INC. 51822 02-Jul-96 GALL'S INC. Totals Check Number 51822 GALL'S INC. Check Number 51823 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN 51823 02-Jul-96 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN Totals Check Number 51823 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN Check Number 51824 HAGEN. TED 51824 02-Jul-96 HAGEN. TED Transaction Amount 239.30 128.00 128.00 5,422.92 5,422.92 95.90 95.90 261.40 261.40 1.980.90 1.980.90 450.00 450.00 66.93 66.93 24.00 24.00 375.64 Page 3 Comments BEER FOR RESALE JUNE RECYCLING SERVICES SIGNS FOR GOLF COURSE BEER FOR RESALE INSTALL SHADE GARDEN PARK CO^«1ISSION THOffTON-TROUSERS C.I.P. PLANNING GUIDE REFUND APPLICATION A r 3 Jul 199€ Wmd 10:53 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 51824 HAGEN. TED Totals Check Number 51824 HAGEN« TED Check Number 51825 HASEMAN. CAROLE 51825 02-Jul-96 HASEMAN. CAROLE Totals Check Number 51825 HASEMAN. CAROLE Check Number 51826 HENNEPIN COUNTY-TAX 51826 02-JU1-96 HENNEPIN COUNTY-TAX Totals Check Number 51826 HENNEPIN COUNTY-TAX Check Number 51827 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC 51827 02-Jul-96 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Totals Cieck Number 51827 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Check Number 51828 LAND CARE EQUIPMENT 51828 02-Jul-96 LAND CARE EQUIPMENT Totals Check Number 51828 LAND CARE EQUIPMENT Check Number 51829 LMCIT-BERKLEY RISK 51829 03-Jul-96 LMCIT-BERKLEY RISK Totals Check Number 51829 LMCIT-BERKLEY RISK Check Number 51830 LOGIS 51830 03-JuI-96 LOOIS Totals Check Number 51830 LOGIS Check Number 51831 MALLOY KARNOWSKI k CO. 51831 51831 03-Jul-96 03-Jul-96 MAITOY KARNOWSKI & CO MAL4..< KARNOWSKI k CO Totals Check Number 51831 MALLOY KARNOWSKI k CO Check Number 51832 MEDICA CHOICE 51632 51832 51632 02-Jul-96 02-JU1-96 02-Jul-96 MJ-DICA CHOICE MEDICA CHOICE MEDICA CHOICE Totals Check Number 51832 MEDICA CHOICE Transaction Amount 375.84 15.90 15.90 46.72 48.72 65.50 85.50 119.23 119.23 500.00 500.00 2.518.48 2.518.48 66.00 9.651.00 9.717.00 262.03 112.29 10.590.71 10.965.03 Page 4 Comments REIMBURSE MILEAGE POSTAL VERIFICATIONS REPAIR DA BOX PARTS FOR STEINER DEDUCTIBLE-TRUCK DAMAGE MAY DATA PROCESSINC AUDIT PAYMENT 82 AUDIT PAYMENT 82 JULY HEALTH INSURANCE JULY HEALTH INSURANCE JULY HEALTH INSURANCE I i 3 Jul 1396 Wed 10:53 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 51833 51833 51833 METRO WASTE CONTROL COffllSSTON 02-Jul-96 METRO WASTE CONTROL CC^ISSION 02-Jul-96 METRO WASTE CONTROL COITUS ION Totals Check Number 51833 METRO WASTE CONTROL COWISSION Check Number 51834 MILLER. CHRIS 51834 03-Jul-96 MILLER. CHRIS Totals Check Number 51834 MILLER. CHRIS Check Number 51835 MINNEGA5C0 51835 51835 51835 02-Jul-96 02-Jul-96 02-Jul-96 MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO Totals Check Number 51835 MINNEGASCO Check Number 51836 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION Transaction Amount 891.00 23.746.00 24.637.00 43.50 43.50 12.26 111.88 199.82 323.96 Page 5 Comments MAY SAC CHARGES AIXIUST SEWER SERVICE MAY. JUNE MILEAGE GAS CHARGES GAS CHARGES GAS CHARGES 51836 02-JU1-96 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION 74.22 JULY BENEFITS Totals Check Number 51836 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION 74.22 dieck Number 51837 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 51837 02-JU1-96 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 2.573.00 SALES TAX-JUNE 51837 02-JU1-96 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 44.00 SALES TAX-JUNE Totals Check Number 51837 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 2.617.00 Check Number 51838 MOROWCZYNSKI. JIM 51838 02-Jul-96 r«ROWCZYNSKI. JIM 27.00 REIMBURSE MILEAGE Totals Check Number 51838 MOROWCZYNSKI, JIM 27.00 Check Number 51839 NOW CARE MEDICAL CENTERS 51839 02-Jul-96 NOW CARE MEDICAL CENTERS 35.00 DRUG SCREENING Totals Check Number 51839 NOW CARE MEDICAL CENTERS 35.00 Check Number 51840 NSP 51840 02-Jul-96 NSP 1.136.39 STREET LIGHT BILL 51840 02-JU1-96 NSP 147.83 HWY 12 a WILLOW 51840 02-Jul-96 NSP 139.47 NSP CHARGES 51840 02-JU1-96 NSP 3.316.21 NSP CHARGES 51840 02-JU1-96 NSP 529.13 NSP CHARGES i A 3 Jul 1996 mrnd 10:53 AH Check Register City of Orono Check Number Date Name Check Number 51840 51840 NSP 02-Jul-96 NSP Totals Check Number 51840 NSP Chtck Number 51041 OFFICE DEPOT 51841 51841 02-Jul-96 02-Jul-96 OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE DEPOT Totals Check Number 51841 OFFICE DEPOT Check Nun^r 51842 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. 51842 02-Jul-96 OLD DUTCH POODS IHC, Totals Check Number 51842 OLD DUTCH POODS INC. Qieck Ihimber 51843 OMAN, LYLE 51843 51843 02-Jul-96 02-Jul-96 OMAN. LYLE OMAN. LYLE Totals Check Number 51843 OMAN, LYLE Check Number 51844 OTTEN BROTHERS 51844 02-Jul-96 OTTEN BROTHERS Totals Check Number 51844 OTTEN BROTHERS Check Number 51845 PERA LIFE INSURANCE 51845 C2-JU1-96 PERA LIFE INSURANCE Totals Check Number 51845 PERA LIFE INSURANCE Check Number 51846 PIONEER 51846 51846 51846 03-Jul-96 03-JU1-96 03-Jul-96 PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER Totals Check Number 51846 PIONEER Check Number 51847 PRO TIRE 6 EXHAUST 51847 51847 51847 02-Jul-96 02-Jul-96 02-Jul-96 PRO TIRE 6 EXHAUST PRO TIRE & EXHAUST PRO TIRE k EXHAUST Totals Check Number 51847 PRO TIRE k EXHAUST Check Number 51848 R.L. YOUNGDAHL k ASSOC. Transaction Amount 1.862.90 7,131.93 123.17 155.50 278.67 11.17 11.17 10.50 72.30 82.80 760.41 760.41 132.00 132.00 50.75 17.50 49.00 117.25 23.79 38.29 40.79 110.87 Page 6 Comments NSP CHARGES MISC SUPPLIES MISC SUPPLIES OilPS FOR RESALE REIMBURSE MILEAGE REIMBURSE MILEAGE REPLACE DEAD SPRUCE TREES AUGUST INSURANCE LAND USE APPLICATIONS HAGEN SUBDIVISION AD FOR BIOS L.S. 828 8172 OIL CHANGE 8172 OIL CHANGE.TIRE REPA 8174 OIL CHANGE. TIRE PEG 3 Jul 1996 Ved 10:53 AM Check Regisuer City of Orono Check Ifumber Date Nanve Check Number 51848 51848 R.L. YOUNGDAHL 4 ASSCXT. 03-Jul-96 R.L. YOUNGDAHL k ASSOC Total* Check Number 51848 R.L. YOUNGDAHL k ASSOC Check Number 51849 RC IDENTIFICATIONS 51849 02-Jul-96 RC IDENTIFICATIONS Totals Check Number 51849 RC IDENTIFICATIONS Check Number 51850 REED VENDING 51850 02-JU1-96 REED VENDING Totals Check Number 51850 REED VENDING Check Number 51851 RITZ CAMERA 51851 02-Jul-96 RITZ CAMERA Totals Check Number 51851 RITZ CAMERA Check Number 51852 SCHULTZ. MICHAEL 51852 02-JU1-96 SCHULTZ. MICHAEL Totals Check Number 51852 SCHULTZ. MICHAEL Check Number 51853 SMITH k NEPHEW ROLYAN INC. 51853 03-Jul-96 SMITH k NEPHEW ROLYAN INC. Totals Check r«umber 51853 SMITH k NEPHEW ROLYAN INC. Qieck Number 51854 SNYDER DRUG STORES 51854 51854 51854 02-JuI-96 02-JuI-96 02-Jul-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES SNYDER DRUG STORES SNYDER DRUG STORES Totals Check Number 51854 SNYDER DRUG STORES Check Humber 51855 STATE OP MN CPV PROGRAM 51855 03-Jul-96 STATE OF MN CPV PROGRAM Totals Check Humber 51355 STATE OF MN CPV PROGRAM Check Humber 51856 STREICHERS 51856 02-Jul-96 STREiaiERS Transaction Amount 1.800.00 1.800.00 3.73 3.73 133.30 133.30 11.57 11.57 32.70 32.70 927.59 927.59 2.96 14.89 8.80 26.65 350.00 350.00 5.16 Page 7 Comments INS AGENT 3RD QTR ID CARD-SCHULTZ CANDY FOR RESALE FILM DEVELOPING MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT MARKER BUOYS FILM DEVELOPING TAPES FILM DEVELOPING CPV ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP RED FILTER 3 Jul 1996 tfed 10:53 AM Check Register City of Orono Check Hunber Date Name Check Iluinber 51856 51856 STREICHERS 02-Jul-96 STREICHERS Totals Check Number 51656 STREICHERS Check Number 51857 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. 51857 02-JU1-96 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. Totals Check Number 51857 SUBURBAN TIRE INC. Check Number 51858 THORPE DIST CO. 51658 02-Jul-96 THORPE DIST CO. Totals Check Number 51858 THORPE DIST CO. Check Number 51859 THRALL DIST. 51659 51859 02-Jul-96 02-JU1-96 THRALL DIST THRALL DIST Totals Check Number 51859 THRALL DIST Check Humber 51860 TOP SQUADS 51860 51660 51860 02-Jul-96 C2-JuX-96 02-Jul-96 TOP SQUADS TOP SQUADS TOP SQUADS Totals Check Number 51660 TOP SQUADS Check Number 51861 TOWN k COUNTRY 51861 02-Jul-96 TOWN k COUNTRY Totals Check Number 51861 TOWN k COUNTRY Check Number 51862 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS 51862 51862 51862 51662 02-JU1-96 02-Jul-96 02-Jul-96 02-JU1-96 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COWUNICATIONS Totals Check Number 51062 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Check Number 51863 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 51863 51863 02-JU1-96 02-Jul-96 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Totals Check Number 51063 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Transaction Amount 19.12 24.28 590.95 590.95 272.40 272.40 9.92 94.79 104.71 262.90 52.00 374.78 689.68 963.83 963.83 281.60 42.62 81.44 755.97 1.161.63 9.00 8.56 17.56 Pa je 8 Comments MAG HOLDER SQUAD CAR TIRES BEER FOR RESALE G.S. 92 G.S. 92 9174 SIREN, FLASHER 9176 REPAIR SIREN 9174 ELECTRICAL WORK JULY SERVICE US WEST CHARGES US WEST CHARGES US WEST CHARGES US WEST CHARGES SECURITY LIGHT SECURITY LIGHT 3 Jul 199€ li«d 10:53 AM Check Register City of Orono Page 9 Check Nunber Date Name Transaction Amount Comment8 Check Number Grand Total 51063 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 125.679.44 h/ j r INFORMATION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING OF JUL 8 1996 J T TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator • 'J July 1, 1996 SUBJECT: Management of Stormwater Runofl Staff has discussed planning for the management of stormwater runoff with the City Council on a number of occasions. The city has been moving slowly regarding the management of stormwater partly because this has not been an urgent issue. In recent months a number of factors have reinforced the need for the city to begin to do more and better planning for stormwater management. These are as follows: 1.Orono has generally required detention ponding sufficient to control the flow of stormwater so that the rate of flow from a property does not increase with the addition of hardcover. The city has not, particularly in smaller developments or subdivisions, required "water quality" ponding. Orono has relied on wetlands for the filtering of stormwater to address water quality needs. The current direction in stormwater management is that stormwater needs to be "pre treated" in a water quality pond to allow sediment etc. to settle out prior to the stormwater entering a wetland. Otherwise the sediments will be deposited in the wetland, degrading the wetland over time. The rules of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District now require water quality ponding for all new development, with the exception described in #4 below. 2.Over the past months, a number of stomwater drainage problems throughout the city have been brought to the city ’s attention. Although some of these can be resolved by site-specific solutions, many require broader "subwatershed" solutions. This requires a broader analysis of stormwater flows and solutions, both from a stormwater quantity standpoint and from a water quality standpoint. This analysis is currently done "manually" versus using a computerized modeling capability. The manual process is a relatively effective method if the stormwater problem areas are small in number, small in area, and can be resolved with site-specific solutions. However, if there are a large number of drainage problems, many of which require solutions that extend well beyond a specific property, the manual analysis is very inefficient. 3.The city has numerous areas in which stormwater flows into Lake Minnetonka with no detention or pretreatment either by a pond or by a wetland. Based on the city ’s goal of protecting the water quality of Lake Minnetonka, the city may want to do some analysis to determine whether it would be possible to create water quality ponding to treat this water before it reaches the lake. 1 4.Although the rules of the MCWD now require water quality ponding for all new development, their rules were recently amended to provide for a payment toward a regional water quality pond as an alternative to constructing a water quality pond on the site of the development. This alternative is available for properties less than 40 acres. The city has several concerns about this new option. 1.) If the property owner selects the fee option, the development could move forward without addressing the water quality needs specific to the development. 2.) The fee paid to the MCWD could be put toward a "regional" pond at a totally unrelated location in a different part of the watershed. The MCWD has requested that Orono identify locations where subwatershed water quality ponds could ^sl serve the water quality needs of the city, and particularly in those areas where the city foresees development on small parcels. These ponds could then be designated for funding through the MCWD’s fee. The process of identifying these subwatershed ponds will require a significant amount of stormwater flow analysis. The four factors listed above all point toward the need for the city to move forward in planning for the management of stormwater. The steps in the process of planning for the management of stormwater are as follows: 1.Develop, clarify, and/or confirm the city’s goals, objectives and policies regarding the management of stormwater and water quality. 2. Identify each of the city’s subwatersheds. 3. 4. Identify current and proposed land uses. Obtain topographic information for the entire city (this step has been completed) 5.Create a computer model of the stormwater flows in each of the subwatersheds of the city based on the current and proposed land uses and the topographic information. 6.Develop an overall plan for managing stormwater flows in the city. a. ) Use the stormwater flow model to develop solutions to current stormwater problems both in terms of water quantity and water quality. b. ) Identify potential sites for subwatershed water quality ponds to address current stormwater problems and to serve future development. As indicated above the first step in initiating a stormwater management planning process is to identify, clarify, revise, and develop goals, objectives and policies of the city for stormwater management. Staff proposes that this step be accomplished through a committee made up of Council and Planning Commission members, similar to the way the Lake Use Committee was formed for the development of shoreland regulations. TO:Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM;Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE:August 8, 1994 SUBJECT; Benefits of Stormwater Planning Status of Development in Orono Total land area of Orono is 10,200 acres including 1,750 acres wetland and 8,450 acres dry land. Just over 4/5ths of Orono’s total land area is zoned 2 acre or 5 acre minimum lot size. These rural zones are 60% developed, with potential for an additional 1,100 residential lots to be developed under the current zoning. Slightly less than l/5th of Orono’s total land acreage is zoned 1/2 acre or 1 acre minimum lot size. This area is currently developed at 101 % of its zoned density due to pre-existing high density development, with a likelihood of topping out at 105- 110% of zoned density when all parcels are developed. Overall, City is 75% developed. Most additional development will be in rural, unsewered areas with final rural density (including wetland) of 3.2 acres per residential lot. This low density tends to reduce the degree of stormwater impact, yet there are stormwater impacts. As each local subwatershed becomes fully developed, the residences downstream experience stormwater flows previously neither encountered nor anticipated. Current Stormwater Controls Since the 1984 subdivision code, Orono has required each developer (typically only for subdivisions of three to five lots or larger) to construct stormwater facilities such as ponds and swales to handle the additional runoff created by the subdivision. • Whether the location of such facilities makes sense in the o .erall scheme of things has not always been clear. Little attempt has been made in the past to define how all area stormwater facilities interact or to define their cumulative effects. While recent subdivisions (within the last three years) have made use of "wet" NURP ponds, subdivisions prior to that time constructed "dry" ponds, which may or may not be capable of retrofitting to accomplish the dual tasks of stormwater quantity and quality control. i Memo - Stormwater Planning Au2ust 8, 1994 Page 2 Subdivisions more than ten years old generally have minimal or no stormwater controls. These subdivisions comprise perhaps 90% of the existing development in the City, and incidently are where our existing stormwater problems occur. The City ’s current stormwater "system" is mainly a collection of neighborhood swales and culverts that direct runoff away from where it can do property damage, into naturally occurring drainageways, wetlands and lakes. However, the constructed facilities are often not on easements, are old and not uniform in design capacity or materials, and most do nothing to enhance water quality but in fact may act to detract from it (i.e. the storm sewer from Forest Arms Lane adding tons of sediment next to the Forest Arms joint use dock). Benefits of Stormwater Planning One might argue that the City has reached 75 % of its ultimate zoned development with little or no stormwater system construction, making use of existing wetlands and drainageways. However, that development has in fact created a significant number of stormwater quantity problems for property owners downstream, which are, it seems increasingly more often brought to the City ’s attention for a solution. Furthermore, although Orono has been at the forefront of wetland protection, State and Federal standards will no longer accept the previously widely held notion that wetlands can be used as storm sewers. Henceforth, stormwater flows directed towards wetlands will have to first be pretreated in retention ponds. Knowing the necessary sizes and locations for such ponds and connecting drainageways will uhimately ensure that runoff water flowing into our area lakes, especially Lake Minnetonka, is of a quality to enhance rather than detract from those water bodies. There are a number of additional benefits of creating a stormwater management plan: Development of the plan will allow the City to analyze needs and establish goals for stormwater management. • By analyzing current and future stormwater needs on a subwatershed-by-subwatershed basis, an efficient plan can be created that will minimize the public capital expenditures needed to control stormwater mnoff. The obvious benefits of controlling stormwater runoff include: Minimb.ing flooding impacts, with concurrent reductions in erosion and sedimentation. Improving the quality of stormwater that enters lakes and water bodies Memo - Stormwater Planning August 8, 1994 Page 3 Enhancement and protection of wetlands as well as fish and wildlife habitat. Promotion of groundwater recharge. Preservation and improvement of water and wetland recreational capabilities. A comprehensive stormwater plan will provide a factual technical basis for requiring stormwater controls and facilities to be constructed by developers. It will provide the data necessary for proper sizing, location and design of stormwater controls to accomplish the City’s stormwater management goals. • A comprehensive stormwater plan will provide a technical basis to suppon and justify the collection of stormwater impact fees from developers and siormwater utility fees from residents and businesses should the City wish to proceed with such programs. A comprehensive stormwater plan will detail the stormwater controls that exist and the scope and magnitude of additional controls needed under expected uses. Additionally, the plan will allow for easy manipulation and system redesign if uses change (for instance if areas of the City are rezoned in the future). • A comprehensive stormwater plan will provide accurate estimates of the cost to provide the needed controls, and will define and analyze alternatives for financing implementation of the plan. Plan Structure A comprehensive stormwater plan for the City will likely be structured as tw-o parts, a Management Plan and a Technical section. The Management Plan section would include the following: Detailed stormwater management goals and policies. • A review of government regulations. Recommendations for prioritization and implementation of the plan. Cost estimates for plan implementation. Financing alternatives and a capital improvement program Requirements for new developments. 1 J If Memo - Stormwater Planning August 8, 1994 Page 4 • Operation and maintenance policies. • Education program. The technical section will provide an extensive technical background in regard to stormwater quantity, stormwater quality, and protection of wetlands and lakes for each subwatershed, and will include; • Detailed mapping and description of the storm aewer/drainageway system and ponding areas including a definition of major and minor drainage districts. • Ordinary High Water Levels and required amount of storage in each pond will be established. • The necessary sizes and capacities of existing and proposed links in each part of the system will be determined by computer modelling to analyze stormwater flows under various conditions. Existing wetlands, ponds and water bodies will be identified and classified to determine their capability to enhance water quality. Additional quality/quantity facilities will be proposed at key locations in the watersheds where necessary. • Phosphorus removal efficiency will be an integral part of the design plan, as phosphorus is a limiting factor in Lake Minnetonka water quality. Ancillary Benefits An additional result of the processes used to analyze Orono ’s subwatersheds and model stormwater flows, will be the development of layers of computerized mapping information such as topography, land use, zoning, etc. Staffs ability to provide maps for various purposes will be greatly enhanced. Similarly, the availability of information will reduce the fumre costs of designing and developing road, sewer and stormwater projects. Finally,, the City’s credibility with the general public as well as developers will be sustained and enhanced by providing a proactive, well thought out, comprehensive approach to stormwater management. TO:Mayor and City Council FROM:Ron Moorse, City Administrator DATE:July 3, 1996 SUBJECT: John O’Sullivan Appeal of Local SAC and WAC Charges In April of 1996, the city initiated local SAC (Sewer Availability Charge) and WAC (Water Availability Charge) fees to be charged to properties that are redeveloped for more intense uses that require greater use of water and generate greater sewer flows. The reasoning behind the local SAC and WAC was that the redeveloping propenies were originally assessed based on a certain level of usage. When this usage is substantially increased the property should pay a fee for the additional units of usage. The city set the fee level at the same level as the Metro SAC charges which is $900 per unit. The first property owner to be affected by these new charges is John O’Sullivan in relation to the redevelopment project at 3340 Shoreline Drive. He first became aware of the charges when requesting the issuance of a building permit for the development proposal. Rather than building fees of approximately $30,000 the fees were instead approximately $70,000. Mr. O’Sullivan has raised two concerns regarding the fees. The first is that the fees are too high, the second is that he should have been advised of the new fees prior to the time of requesting the building permit. Mr. O’Sullivan has indicated he plans to appeal the local SAC and WAC charges to the City Council. However, he needed the building permit to be issued prior to the time in which the appeal could be completed. He proposed that the building permit be issued upon payment of all building permit fees with the exception of the local SAC and WAC charges and that the local SAC and WAC charges be paid based on the result of his appeal. A letter setting out the conditions of the issuance of the building permit is attached. The appeal will be brought to the Council at the August 12 Council meeting. 1 f July 2, 1996 City of Orono do Ron Moorse, City Administrator P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Mr. Moorse: This letter is to request the issuance of a building permit for the O’Sullivan construction project at 3340 Shoreline Drive in Navarre prior to the resolution of concerns related to the level of the local SAC and WAC charges. It is proposed that the building permit be issued upon payment of all building inspection fees, the plan review fees, Metro SAC charges, and all other charges and fees with the exception of the local SAC and WAC charges. It is the intention ot Mr. O’Sullivan to appeal the local SAC and WAC charge amounts to the City Council. However, the building permit is needed prior to the time in which the appeal to the City Council could be completed. If the building permit is issued as requested above, Mr. O’Sullivan agrees to the following conditions. 1. 2. 3. Mr. O’Sullivan will abide by the decision of the City Council regarding his appeal of the local SAC and WAC charges. Mr. O’Sullivan agrees that the appeal will be brought to the August 12, 1996 meeting of the City Council. Mr. O’Sullivan agrees that the amount of local SAC and WAC charges determined by the City Council in response to his appeal will be paid by August 16. 1996. i \ f i ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 17, 1996 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present Chair Stephen Peterson, Charles Schroeder, Sandra Smith, Dale Lindquist, Janice Berg, Elizabeth Hawn, and William Stoddard. The following represented the City Staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, and Recorder Sherry' Frost. Council members Jabbour and Goetten, along with Mayor Callahan, were present Chair Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p m. SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS/PUBLIC INFORMATION REVIEWS (Ul) #2139 THOMAS BETZ, 300 CRESTVIEW AV ENUE - V ACATION OF UNIMPROVED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY - 7:00-7:12 P.M. The Affidavit of Fhjblication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present Mabusth reported that the applicant proposes to vacate 36' of the remaining portion of unimproved Hill Street The southern 4' has already been vacated The applicant will come back at a later date with a lot line rearrangement application The future subdivision would propose leaving 8' to the property to the north and 28' to the applicant. Mabusth reported that there may have been an issue with a need to maintain access to the Nash property to the immediate east. The applicant was asked to notify Nash. Nash reported that access to his property is gained from lot 6. Drainage concerns were raised by several neighboring property owners. Mabusth located the catch basin on the plan located in the southeast comer of the applicant's property. The catch basin was installed as part of the Stubbs Bay sewer project The road was installed higher than originally built resulting in lots being lower at the road with drainage collecting at the edge of the road The drainage now runs along the road to a culvert that drains under road to west. Mabusth said the applicant's driveway is located within the Hill Street right-of-way. The culvert in this area drains under Crestview. The tile taking the runoff to culvert is being inundated with runoff. It is the general feeling of the neighbors that the runoff has been increasing. The Betz home had severe flooding problems in the lower level, which were corrected with drain tiling, which has resulted in additional runoff. The neighbors state that the accumulation of runoff is not necessarily only during rainy periods. Mabusth said the neighbors need assurance of correction of drainage problems. Staff recommends asking for a drainage easement within the right-of-way to be vacated. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION NIEETING HELD ON JUNE 17, 1996 (#1 - #2139 Thomas Betz - Continued) Peterson clarified that the neighbors are in favor of the vacation but ask the City to address the drainage concerns within the opportunity presented. The neighbors also want to be assured that the Citv retain the easement Betz said it is his attempt to improve the lot as the driveway is now rocky. Betz said he has never seen the culvert underwater noting the water is traveling the same way as it did before the drain tiling was done. Betz said he understood the condition for the easement. There were no public comments. Peterson noted that the City Engineer would review the drainage concern. Smith asked what would occur if the Engineer sees a problem with the drainage issue. Mabusth said if the Engineer sees any problem or a need to retain the right-of-way, the application would come back before the Planning Commission Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to approve the vacation petition of Thomas Betz for the vacation of a portion of unimproved Hill Street located adjacent to properties located at 290 and 300 Crestview Avenue .Approval of the vacation petition is subject to property owners granting a 10' drainage and utility easement within the vacated right-of- way The location of the easement is to be determined by benefiting property owTiers and City Engineer The vacation petition w ill be presented to Council as soon as Staff receives confirmation from applicant's surv eyor regarding location of any existing utilities within unimproved right-of-way. Schroeder asked if 10’ for drainage easement was enough Mabusth said the Engineer would make that determination Lindquist amended his motion to grant an appropriate drainage easement, deleting the 10’amount. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. ACTION ITEMS (#2) #2134 ROB ALBRECHT, 1810 SHADYWOOD ROAD - AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES - REVISED PLAN - REFERRAL FROM COUNCIL - 7:12-7:41 P.M. The Applicant was present, along with attorney. Bob Mitchell. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17, 1996 (#2 -U2UA Rob Albrecht - Continued) Gaffron reported that the application was reviewed at the last Planning Commission meeting where it was recommended for denial The Council referred the application back to the Planning Commission for tlirther review with changes made by the applicant The original proposal was for an after-the-fact hardcover variance for a deck located in the lakeshore yard outside of the 0-75' Hardcover is excessive on this property, and the applicant has suggested a number of areas where hardcover can be removed to reduce the impact Suggestion has been made for removal of 255 s f of driveway, revision to the front entry sidewalk, which would have no affect on the hardcover, and omission of landscape paving blocks on the north side This would result in a net decrease of 205 s.f of hardcover in the 75-250' zone originally proposed at a 35 s f reduction Gaffron noted that the applicant has submitted a different lot area calculation in the 75-250' zone of 11,590 s f, which Gaffron said was satisfactory to Staff Peterson clarified that the hardcover is over the 25% allowable. The new exhibit 4 shows the new calculations of 43 5% of hardcover, originally proposed at 41.7%, for an additional 1.8% decrease. Albrecht's attorney. Bob Mitchell, commented on the additional data provided to the Commission He noted that the site is complicated and pre-dates the applicant The lot was said to be long and skinny Mitchell said there is no parking on the street which results in the need for less removal of driveway than the applicant would perhaps suggest Mitchell said the lakeshore angles at this location He added that the applicant was not fully aware of the previous review of the property. Mitchell noted that the improvement is out of the 0-75’, and the after-the-fact deck improves the front yard situation for the applicant allowing them to see where their children are playing. The yard drops off towards the shoreline and limits the amount of yard space on the lakeshore side. Peterson questioned the situation with the dock located near the lake ‘'-hore. He noted that the Commissioners were in favor of reducing that dock to the required 90-100 s f, instead of the present 135 s.f Mitchell said the applicant was in favor of that resolution. Mitchell also commented that the applicant thought he was able to rebuild that dock on a board-to- board basis Gaffron said the parameters allow for a 4' stairway with a platform area. He noted this particular dock increases to 6' due to the centering of the dock on the property. Peterson said, at the time of the original denial of the application, this particular dock was not a large issue The dock and deck were after-the-fact, and the applicant purchased the home without checking on the current codes. Albrecht said he thought it was okay to replace the dock as it stood. Gaffron said Staff did not inspect the replacement since no permit was issued. Mitchell said it was not the applicant's fault that no original permit was taken out, but the applicant did rebuild it board-for-board. He asked the Commission to accept the explanation as an honest one. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17, 1996 (»7 - #2134 Rob Albrecht - Continued) Smith commented on a driveway reduction It was her understanding that the Commission was of a consensus that no reduction be done in the driv eway area due to safety concerns Smith said she was not convinced that the information presented is enough to recommend approval. Mitchell responded that the previous survey was inadequate He asked if the issue was if the drivew ay reduction deemed it unsafe noting its adequate width Smith said Staff recommended against it Gaffron clarified that the driveway was a point of findings in the 1991 review, and the Planning Commission at that time recommended it would be best to leave the driveway as it is. Mitchell remarked that there is no more land available and the applicant can only do so much and requests approval of the small amenity located outside of the critical 0-75' zone. Smith said it was a matter of adhering to the 1991 Planning Commission review. At that time, the property owner was informed that no more improvements would be allowed. Mitchell not^ the number of substandard lots in the neighborhood He said if the area was looked at in its entirety, there is alot of green space with no stormwater problem, and the application was not a matter of correcting deficiencies Mitchell cited an example in Medina of where improvements onginally denied were later deemed a necessity. Lindquist responded that this property already has a deck Mitchell noted its different location and the need to recreate Peterson said the emotional ties have been established with the deck already being in place Mitchell asked for reconsideration noting the double fees paid by applicant and expressed an apology. Hawn expressed her concern for setting a precedent questioning at what point a Planning Commission recommendation is taken seriously. Mitchell responded that the hardcover is in the 75-250' zone and a net decrease in hardcover was the result of the application Peterson inquired about the average lakeshore setback. Gaffron said it is not an issue and does not require a variance. Mitchell noted the house sits back on the property, and the applicant was doing what he could to create a less non-conforming situation. Peterson said he now w as considering approval of the application. When asked why by Smith, Peterson said the main issue is to reduce hardcover in the 75-250' zone, which is being done, conditioning his approval on the driveway safety issue being satisfactory. Smith voiced concern that over time, the driveway would reappear as it now stands. Schroeder asked abr.ut reducing the dock down to 4'. Hawn asked if the neighbors w ere concerned with the 6' shoreline dock. Albrecht said his neighbors were in favor of it noting a letter of approval from the neighbors. ! I ( i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17. 1996 (#2 * ^2134 Rob Albrecht - Continued) Peterson commented that a tradeoff of driveway for a deck is considered for recommendations. He noted changes in the application as now presented, and the goal of a net decrease in hardcover. Hawn said the property, and its improvements, are attractive but had a problem with setting a precedence Peterson said that the applicant is staying within the precedent as he is staynng within the hardcover amount by showing a reduction Hawn questioned the structural versus non-structural hardcover removal. Schroeder moved, Stoddard seconded, to approve the after-the-fact variance for the new deck subject to the completion of removal of hardcover in the drivew ay and reduction in size of the lower dock to conform to the existing code of 4' plus landing. Vote: Ayes 3, Stoddard, Peterson, Schroeder, Nays 4, Lindquist, Berg, Smith, Hawn Those recommending denial ^ttreed that the previous Planning Commission’s directive was clear to no further principal structure being placed in the lakeshore yard. Motion failed. No further motions were offered. (#3) #2137 WILLIAM DUNKLEY, 2709 WALTERS PORT LANE - VARIANCES - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - 7:41-7:58 P.M. The applicant was represented by Dale Gustafson and Carl Smith. Gafffon reported that the application was previously tabled to allow a revision to the proposal for construction of an addition to the south end of the house. The Planning Commission had suggested another location or lowering of the addition to reduce the visual impact from the lake. At present, there exists a deck with a screen wall. The original proposal was for an addition with a spa with a continuation of the roof line. The rev ised proposal is for a shed-type roof which would lower the height of the addition along with steps. The revision results in 1 s.f reduction than previous plan with a different shape and a smaller pool. Gustafson said other areas were explored in which to locate the pool. He noted the existing large overhang on the house. Gustafson said all attached areas are within the 0- 75', and the decision was made to take advantage of the eave by placing the addition under Smith asked if the floor of the addition was lowered. Carl Smith said it was lowered 28" and is practically at grade level. C. Smith said there a design difficulty with the door located in the corner of the lower level. Smith noted that this revision was less intensive. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COM\nSSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17. 19% (#3 - #2137 William Dunkley - Continued) Peterson commented on the encroachment into the 1 O' side setback in the previous proposal, which is now eliminated Gaffron said the variance was for additional structure within the 0-75’ He noted the net decrease of 25 s f of hardcover. The lot coverage originally proposed at 15.6% is now proposed at 16 7*^/o, where 15% is allowed. The average lakeshore setback variance is necessary due to the location of the property on the point. Peterson said he saw the addition as a mute point with the size of the existing overhang and the deck. Hawn asked if there was a demonstration of hardship for health reasons. Gustafson said the ii^^plicant's doctor recommended the pool as a point of health Hawn said she was concerned with the extensiveness of the house which is located in the 0-75' zone. Gustafson remarked that the proposal was changing the nature of a structure already in place. Stoddard was informed that a precedent has already been set with changing a deck to a structure. There were no public comments. kiustafson reminded the Commission of the extensive removal of hardcover which already was done by the applicant Schroeder asked if it was possiol- *o reduce the size of the driveway. Gustafson said it was possible, but it has not been discussed with the applicant adding that any changes would be expensive. Lindquist noted that there was no other parking. Smith asked if other locations were reviewed such as the use of the lower level walkout area. Peterson noted that the deck would not disappear if that was accomplished. Gustafson said there was a space concern with the lower level. Carl Smith said the original proposal was for a swim and spa and is now for a swim area only. Peterson said the applicant is asking for a 1% increase in structure. He saw it as only adding sides to an existing deck located under large eaves. Lindquist moved, Stoddard seconded, to approve Application #2137 according to the revised plan. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 1, Schroeder Schroeder said more reduction in hardcover could be accomplished. 4 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17, 1996 (#4) #2138 JOAN AND WILLIAM WROBLEWSKl, 630 PARK LANE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 7:58-8:03 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted The Applicant was present Gaffron reported that the application was for a request for hardcover, front setback, and lot coverage variances to enclose an existing concrete slab porch, which was originally approved and constructed in 1990 No roof or walls were planned for at that time The proposed enclosure will include extending the roof The lot coverage allowed at 15% is currently at 26.8% The lot is small, and lot coverage would increase with this proposal to 27.7®o The front setback is currently at 37' The proposal is for a 33 2 ’ setback, which would result in a 1.8' variance from the 35' standard There is no change in the hardcover percentage at 44.4%. The change is in the nature of the hardcover with the proposed structure above the slab. Hawn said she saw the screening as reasonable, noting there was no outdoor seating area available. The applicant had no comments There were no public comments Hawn moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve the enclosure of the existing concrete slab with screening Vote: Ayes 7, Nays C. (#5) #2140 TROY ANDERSON, 1490 LONG LAKE BOULEVARD - VARIANCES • PUBLIC HEARING - 8:03-8:08 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present Mabusth reported that the applicant previously received a variance for a second story addition from the 50' street setback and a side variance for an attached garage. The applicant now proposes a family room addition to the west side of the residence and entry additions to the north and south sides. The street setback currently exists at 35.1% and is proposed at 30'. The covered entry is proposed 42' from the street. A new rear entry would meet the required 50' setback from the rear lot line. The structures meet the hardcover requirements. Mabusth noted that a new septic was installed in 1993. Lindquist commented that the property is attractive. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17, 1996 (#5 - #2140 Troy Anderson - Continued) Smith said the setback was appropriate to the neighborhood Mabusth added that it was also located on higher elevations. There w ere no public comments Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to approve the two street setback variances with the condition that the applicant be responsible for providing an updated sur\ey locating approved family room addition upon application for a building permit. Peterson asked to include that the addition would be the limit for additional structure on the property agreeing that the setback was appropriate to the neighborhood. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Mabusth said the applicant has asked the application to be presented at the June 24 Council meeting. (#6) #2141 ROBERTA J. ROTH, 1251 BRIAR STREET - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:08-8:15 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted The Applicant was present Mabusth reported that the property is located in the Crystal Bay neighborhood. The application involves a setback variance for a proposed detached garage. The garage would be single stall at I6'x20' and a back-out apron to be located 2' from unimproved Minnetonka Avenue. If the garage were to be located 8' into the yard v^ ith gravel drive, it would result in the loss of trees. Stoddard asked if it was the City’s intent to make any improvements to Minnetonka Avenue. Mabusth reported that at the time of the French Creek subdivision, the posibility of a through road was considered but neighbors objected. Response times for emergency vehicles were found to be adequate using existing county roads. Mabusth said there was no intention of the City to extend the roadway noting the 20’ commons outlot. Mabusth said the French Creek Homeowners Association has installed high berms with landscaping, and the City has received no negative comments from the property owners notified. Mabusth reported that the shoreline of French Lake w as located in an earlier application and that property is located within 500-1000’ of French Lake. 35% hardcover is allowed, and the applicant ’s property is well below that amount. There are no structural coverage issues. 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17, 1996 (#6 - #2141 Roberta Roth - Continued) Smith asked if the slied was to be remov ed. The applicant said it w ould be. When asked where the items in the shed w ould go. the applicant said there was 9’ of storage on one side of the proposed garage and 5' on the front. The applicant said one car would be sitting outside There were no public comments. Smith moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve the side street setback variance for the I6'x20' garage and removal of the shed. V'^ote: A'es 7, Nays 0. (#7) #2142 ANGELA WOODHOUSE, 2625 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:15-8:28 P.M. The Affidavii • Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applic?*ii present along with Scott Gikling Mabusth repon ' hat the property is located on North Shore Drive, and the majority of the residence is uhin the 0-75' setback The proposed improvement requires lakeshore setback, average lakeshore, and hardcover variances The improvements include a two story addition at 6'x23' to the w est side of the 2 story home, a new side entry w ith stoop, a realigned stairway, and a bay addition at lakeshore. The upper level would allow an additional bedroom. A 17.5 s.f bay currently exists and a 52 s f bay addition is proposed. Elevations were shown. Both structures encroach the average lakeshore with the west addition 21' in front of the average lakeshore setback and 42' from the lakeshore. The bay is located 23' in front of the average lakeshore setback and 39-1/2' from the lakeshore. The existing structure is 21' from the shoreline. The improvements would increase the hardcover in the 0-75' setback by 193.8 s.f or 0.90%. Peterson commented that the variance is a result of the entire home being located in the 0- 75' setback. Mabusth said the increases are a result of the new entry and stoop and would be considered minor if the home was not in the 0-75' setback. She added that the house was centrally located on the 280' wiue lot, and there was no visual impact on the lake view of the adjacent residences. Lindquist asked if the 193 s.f was all in the 0-75' setback. Mabusth said it was and recommended removal of a boat house with deck. Lindquist said any hardcover increase would require a decrease in the 0-75' setback. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JL^NE 17, 1996 (#7 - #2142 Angela VVoodhouse - Continued) Mabusth asked the contractor for a clarification on the size of the bay window. She said she had used a figure of 87 s f Gikling noted that the bay window is 52 s f Mabusth said the increase would be less than noted in the memo. Stoddard asked the applicant if the sidewalk and entry were more necessary than the boathouse. The applicant said the boathouse is only used to house skis and the sprinkler system pump Peterson said a pump box is allowed in the code for covering such a pump. Mabusth informed Peterson that the surv ey was completed in 1991. Mabusth said the increase as amended would result in hardcover at 45-50 s f Lindquist said he would have a problem with any additional hardcover in the 0-75' and asked that it remain at the existing level Gikling said there was miscellaneous hardcover that could be removed and would identify’ it by the Council meeting. Peterson clarified that the proposal is to have no net gain of hardcover. There were no public comments The applicant had no additional comments. Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of Application #2042 with no additional hardcover in the 0-75' setback. The boathouse and deck is to be removed. Only a pump house cover will be allowed at the lakeshore Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#8) #2143 DIANE PEREZ, 3465 EASTLAKE STREET - VARUNCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:15-8:28 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was represented by Joe Stepniak Gaffron reported that the application is for hardcover and setback variances for the reconstruction of the roof over a portion of the existing house. The shed-type roof would be replaced with a pitched roof The proposal requires a variance as it is located in the 0- 75' setback There are no additional changes and no changes in hardcover or setback. Smith asked the reason for the change. Stepniak said the applicant can increase a window size and eliminate a doorway by this change in order to gain more light into the house. He added that steps would also be removed. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17, 1996 (#8 - #2143 Diane Perez - Continued) Hawn asked how entry is gained into the house. Stepniak said there is a front doorway leading into the garage with steps into the house. There is also a back slider-type doorway and a 3’ door where the steps are, which will be removed Stoddard added that the change will assist the drainage There were no additional applicant comments and no public comments Smith moved. Hawn seconded, to approve the hardco\ er/setback variances for reconstruction of roof over portion of e.xisting house. The steps wilt be removed at the time of the roof construction Vote Ayes 7, Nays 0. The application w ill be presented at the June 24 Council meeting. (#9) #2144 ARTHUR AND TERRY JEWETT, 3546 IVT PLACE - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:32-8:42 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicants were present. Mabusth reported that the request is for setback and hardcover variances for a proposed roof expansion and realignment in the 0-75' setback to allow for better drainage. The drainage would disburse to the sides rather than toward the lakeshore with this change. The improvements also involve a new entry and expansion of garage. The average lakeshore setback is encroached with the structure 22.6' in front of the average lakeshore setback line.. Existing hardcover has been removed and will be below the 25% allowable in the 75-250’ zone Mabusth said there is a .ong driveway and recommended increasing the area adjacent to garage by 8' and to allow for backing out apron. The original 10'xl2' deck has been reduced to 4'x 12' in the 0-75' zone. Hawn asked for clarification of runoff. It was determined that the runoff travels westward through neighbors yards on to a nearby lagoon. Mabusth said with the decrease in hardcover, although the runoff will be traveling toward the neighbors, less would go in that direction. There were no public comments. Hawn moved. Smith seconded, to recommend approval for average lakeshore setback and hardcover variance in the 0-75’ setback with impro’ ^^m.^nts to the drainage. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17, 1996 (#9 -U214A Arthur and Terry Jewett - Continued) Mabusth noted that the applicant has asked that the application be presented at the June 24 Council meeting (#10) #2145 DONALD AND ROBIN HELGAGER< 3265 SIXTH AV ENUE NORTH • VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 8:42-8:53 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that the request is for street, side, lakeshore, and average lakeshore setback variances for additions to the property, which abuts Lake Classen located on CoRd 6. The existing house side setback is 27', which will drop to 5' with the removal of a detached garage (now located at a 6 8’ setback) and addition of a new attached garage. With the location of the residence on Lake Classen, which is a natural environment lake, a 150' setback is required, 50 ’ from the street, and 30 ’ from the side Gaffron showed a sketch of the property with required setbacks, noting that the house is located where it should be on the property, which is about 2 acres in size. A side garage addition is proposed resulting in a 5’ side setback The addition to the rear would be located at a 140' setback from the lake The additions would meet the front or street setback requirement Although an average lakeshore setback variance is required, there is an outlot located between this property and nearby residence to the west. Gaffron said the improvements may actually improve the visual impact for the neighbor to the east. Gaffron said the main issue would be with the side setback. Gaffron noted that the topography rises toward the adjacent property and is lined with pine trees. Peterson asked if the improvements were a problem for the neighbor. The neighbor was in attendance and said he had no problem with the proposal. Gaffron said he discussed w ith Robin Helgager the possibility of adding a small retaining wall to flatten out the area where the topography rises in order to allow it to be mowed easily. Gaffron said the wall would be 2-3 ’ in height. Helgager said the current garage is unusable with only 1 side door and a shed-type roof He said it is difficult to drive a vehicle into the garage and spacing is tight. Helgager said he has responded to any hardcover issue with his proposal to remove a cement slab located near the road. Gaffron said the hardcover is within the allowable amount. Peterson asked how many homes were affected by natural environment lakes. Gaffron said there were probably 30-40 homes affected in Orono MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17. 1996 (#10 - #2143 Donald and Robin Helgager - Continued) Hawn said the proposal would immensely improve the property. The neighbor added that the existing driveway and garage currently gets flooded after rain, and the proposal would improve that situation Smith asked what the workshop would be used for. Helgager said it would be used for storage There were no additional public comments Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to approve application #2145. V'ote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#11) #2146 DOUGLAS J. OLSON, 2601 WEST LAFAYETTE ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING The application was withdrawn by the applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS (#12) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 13, 1996 No report was given (#13) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION No other issues were discussed during the meeting. ADDITIONAL ITEMS (#14) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MAY 20, 1996 MEETING Schroeder moved. Smith seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 20, 1996 Vote. Ayes 7, Nays 0. (#15) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT REPRESENTATIVES TO ATI END THE COUNCIL MEETINGS OF JUNE 24, 1996 AND JULY 8, 1996 Smith will attend the June 24, 1996 Council meeting. Peterson will attend the July 8, 1996 Council meeting. 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17, 1996 ADJOURNMENT Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to adjourn at 8:55 p m. Vote; Ayes 7, Nays 0. Stephen Peterson, Chair Person t CITY OF ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, JULY 1,1996 7:15 P.M. 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY - COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA ATTENDANCE 1. 2. 3. Approval of Minutes of May 6, 1996 and June 3, 1996 Meetings. Introduction of Summer Intern, Michael Schultz. Discussion of Work to be Done by Intern. Rev iew Draft of Parks & Open Space Plan; Establish Meeting Date for Work Session with City Council. 4. 5. Report of Status of Saga Hill Matters (Lili McMillan). Presentation of Plan for 1996 Bike Trail Construction; Report on Meetings with Hennepin Parks. 6. Status Report on Interior Trail Construction of Dickey Development. 7. 8. Review of Park Tour; Discussion of Follow-up. Other Busine: a. City Code Section 2.52, Subd. 2 Setting Out the Powers and Duties of the Park Commission Information Related to the Park Master Plarming Processb. c. d. Copies of the Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan and Map Handicap Accessible Equipment Crystal Bay Playground. ADJOURNMENT t ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR MAY 6,1996 ATTENDANCE The Park Commission met on the above mentioned date v\ith the following members present Chair Richard Flint, Commissioners Lili McMillan, Susan Wilson, Andrew McDermott, Sherokee Use, and Jim White. Mayor Callahan was present. Recorder Sherry Frost represented staff. Chair Flint called the meeting to order at 7:21 p.m. (#1) APPROVAL OF MLNUTES OF APRIL 1.1996 McMillan requested the following changes; On page 3, under agenda item #3, 2nd paragraph, "school districts" was changed to "communities". Under agenda item U4, page 4,1st paragraph, the trail descriptions with last sentence was changed to; "One possible trail would connect, by trail only. East and West Countryside A second trail leads north through the park land and east to Thoroughbred Lane to the cul-de-sac." McMillan moved, Wilson seconded, to approve the Minutes of the April 1, 1996, Meeting of the Park Commission as amended. Vote; Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#2) REPORT ON APRIL lOTH MEETING WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF ORONO SCHOOL DISTRICT, VARIOUS YOUTH SPORTS LEAGUES AND OTHER PARK COMMISSIONS IN OlfR AREA (MCMILLAN) McMillan reported on the recent meeting conducted by Melanie Daluka, Community Education Director, w ith members of the Park Commissions of area cities, heads of community youth sports leagues, and two school district board members. One recommendation of the meeting was the possible creation of a joint clearinghouse for youth sports. This would enable the groups to consolidate into one office for providing information to the public regarding their specific sports. The provision of such an office would require a fee to be collected from each community to pay for its operation and for staff to take calls and administer the central office. Also discussed was a possible future community play field on the school property. White, who was not in attendance at the aforementioned meeting and who has been involved in soccer organization for iiany years, said he did not believe the position would require a full-time person and scheduling could be accomplished in a relatively short time period by use of a computer Wilson said the soccer organization was represented at the meeting also and noted that field coordination would also be part of the position. There was no agreements reached at the meeting but discussion only. Wilson commented that the central office would enable new people within the district to easily inquire about the many sports organizations MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 6, 1996 (#2 - Youth Sports League Meeting - Continued) Use said she did not believe the individual organizations would relent their power over their particular organization but saw the focus as being on bulk mailings and information. McDermott commented that the school is handling such calls at this time, and it is not their function to do so. WTtite again said he did not see the need for such a position and noted that the soccer organization pays a small amount to the Minnesota Soccer League for administration Flint asked him how fields were organized for soccer White said a number of fields have been available over the years, and a coordinator of west suburban fields checks for current availability against the number of enrollees for scheduling. McMillan asked White what happens when a member leaves the organization. White said there is on-going training and transitioning into different positions Flint asked why this did not work with the softball organization? McMillan said the softball organization works through the district rather than as a separate organization Wilson noted that the soccer representatives did show interest in strategizing with the other organizations White said the soccer group has no problem with cancellations due to lack of fields He noted there are new fields each year but conceded that the soccer organization has a much wider base WUson said Community Education presented the idea for a paid position and asked for a community steering group. Wilson said she felt the Park Commission should acknowledge it and assist in getting the group started Use said volunteers were needed to aid the start up Wilson said the Community Education person would coordinate the eftbrt McDermott noted that there were five cities involved. McMillan commented that the next meeting w ould consist of a smaller group with only 1-2 representatives from each organization White said he felt the concern was being raised before there has been shown any need for such an office or position Flint agreed with W^hite that a broader community scope was needed. White noted the position would not require a full-time person. McMillan commented that some groups were more organized than others. Wilson said this would enable the exchange of information and assistance amongst tb. :,.*ganizations. The Park Commission designated Use, McMillan, and White to alternate as representatives to this community group. Flint said he saw it as a response to a request by Community Education to get more organizational involvement. Use noted new fields in Minnetonka Beach and Independence Flint said he was asked at the meeting what other issues the Park Commissions have. He reported that it was important for the sports organizations to understand that the Park Commissions are involved with many other issues in addition to organized sports, such as open space and trails. He asked that this point be made at future meetings MINUTES OF THE REGUL.AR ORONO PARK CONLMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 6. 1996 (#2 - Youth Sports League Meeting - Continued) orah Use reported that McDermott investigated the school attendance by residents within the City and found that only 50% of the children attend the Orono School District, yet, the Park Commission has been focusing on Orono Schools McDermott commented that more focus needs to be placed on the Mound Westonka School District. White said that soccer is organized throughout both districts. Use noted that mailings were tied to the Orono School District. Flint commented that baseball now includes both districts in their mailing. Use said 3% of the children attend Wayzata and Minnetonka Schools She said it is necessary for the Commission to be aware of these percentages when planning parks and working with organizations, pointing out that many do not cross district lines. McDermott said the school district should also look at Independence and other communities for their needs. Wilson moved, WTiite seconded, to form a subcommittee, consisting of VV^hite, Use, and McMillan, to represent the Park Commission in working with other groups regarding possible creation of a central clearinghouse office. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (#3) WORK ON PARKS AND OPEN SP/ JE PLAN (ILSE AND MCDERMOTT) A. STATUS OF SUMMER INTERN REQUEST B. REVIEW OF CURRENT PLAN Flint reported on meetings w ith Council members and City Staff regarding the Parks and Open Space Plan He noted that Moorse suggested updating the Council at a Council Meeting Callahan said he would rather meet with the Park Commission in a work session. Commissioners discussed when they would be prepared for such a work session. McDermott asked tor the Commissioners to submit their individual goals as discussed at the last meeting. McMillan suggested the work session be scheduled after the hiring of the park intern. After discussion, McDermott was designated to work with the intern and Staff (Moorse and Gaffron). Flint asked for an update on the park plan. Use said she and McDermott are reviewing the information being gathered from the other Commissioners. The history/background, along with goals and objectives are the items being reviewed. A meeting date ot May 24, 8:00 a m. was scheduled with goals to be submitted to Use by May 13. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COM^^SSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 6, \^96 (#4) UPDATE ON PLANS FOR 1996 BIKE TRAIL CONSTRUC PROGR<AM Flint asked the Comn .issioners for their recommendation regarding trail construction for this year He noted the grant money is to assist in completion of the trail to Baker Park. Moorse iiad informed Flint that Hennepin Parks has yet to commit to pay for its half of the trail into Baker Park. Moorse had suggested the Commission decide (a)whether to wait on the trail this year and complete it in 1997 or (b)do a portion of the trail this year with City money and complete it next year Flint said Moorse suggested using grant money when available. The trigger to obtaining the grant money, however, is completion of the trail to Baker Park Flint said Moorse believes Hertnepin Parks is close to agreement on the trail into Baker Park and the configuration of Hwy 12 intersection Moorse has shown Mn/DOT the City's own plan and said Mn-T)OT was satisfied with the plan The City and Mn/DOT now need to meet jointly with Hennepin Parks. Wilson, Flint, and Callahan commented that Bryant of Hennepin Parks has said that he would not use money on the trail if the intersection takes significant land from Baker Park. Callahan said the Hwy 12 inter''ction is tied into what is being done on the eastern portion of the roadway. McMillan said she agrees vvith the infoonation given by Moorse in his memo and believes the subcommittee should speak with Hennepin Parks. Flint commented that in the short run, the chance of agreement with Hennepin Parks is not good as Bryant now is unwillling to separate the Hwy 12/CoRd 6 intersection and the trail Callahan said the trail is part of the whole City trail system. He said the Council is conceptually in favor of it Callahan said Hennepin Parks came in after the trail system for the City was designed and wanted to get involved. He said there is a concern for how the trail will be paid for, but it is not based on Hennepin Parks. Callahan told the Commission they should go ahead with the trail to the extent they are willing to use park funds. Callahan said that he thinks Hennepin Parks eventually will get involved in the trail. Areas of the new trail sections w here problems have arisen were discussed. A section south of Old Crystal Bay Road bridge may need to go through condemnation proceedings or be built outside of the tree line Flint said that construction would probably kill some of the trees and a retaining wall would be required. Flint proposed building the trail to Hwy 12. He noted the grant money requires completion of the trail by 1997 but said there w as a possibility of an e.xtension It was noted that the school district may also assist with the trail on the school property as well as the County Highway Department with the trail near CoRd 6 Callahan said the Park Commission should first decide whether they want to continue with the trail before deciding on the particulars. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 6, 1996 (#4 - 1996 Bike Trail Construction Update - Continued)BRAFT Flint noted that the availability of Hennepin Park funds was based on the trail leading from one recreational area to another Callahan agreed that the grant money was connected to conditions but it should not change the Commission's mind regarding the trail McMillan noted that the portions of the trail that have already been constructed were low in cost. She added that the more expensive areas of construction are ahead. Callahan suggested completing the trail from Old Cry stal Bay Road to the school property. He added that another bond referendendum would probably involved a new school, and that construction would trigger the trail on the school property. Flint said he was concerned with changes being made because of Hwy 12 McDermott noted that if that should occur, the trail would be replaced in kind by Mr/DOT. Flint commented that the Park Commission is not made aware of the highway plans He not«?J that Cook said he was redesigning the trail to keep costs down Flint informed VVilsoti that the trail cost would come out of the Park Dedication fund. Wilson said she could not agree to that. Callahan commented to Wilson that she wants the trail but doesn't want to pay for it? He noted that the trail should continue to be built White and McMillan agreed that the trail was worthwhile and should be continued. McMillan asked what has been spent on the trail so far. Flint said the cost w between $100,000 and $150,000 Wilson asked what part of the trail so far has been paid for /itn Park Dedication money. Flint said the Dickey subdivision poiiion w as paid for by me oeveloper, in lieu of Park Dedication fee The trail north of Watertown and from the Dickey property to the Luce Line w as completed with aid of grant money from the DNR. White noted that a trail costs about $20/foot to construct without culverts. Flint asked the Commision if a decision should be made on continuing the trail. McDermott said a realistic cost estimate should be received. McMillan said dialogue should be reopened with Doug Bryant of Hennepin Parks. Callahan said that Moorse will be speaking vsith Bryant on the subject also. Flint said the cost will be determined for discussion at the June meeting Callahan said he would ask for input at the Council meeting from the Council members. (Ilse left the meeting at this time.) a I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO P.ARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 6. 1996 (#5) UPDATE ON LNTERIOR TR.AILS FOR DICKEY/COFFW DEVELOPMENTS (DEVTLOPER TO BE ASKED TO APPEAR AT THE MEETING) Flint noted disappointment at the develop.w*’s absence He reported that Moorse commented if the interior trails were not completed using a permanent material, maintenance would be difficult Moorse has suggested if the Commission does not w ant an asphalt trail that the trail should be made private McDermott suggested keeping the trail public as the City would never get the trail back once it is private McMillan noted that the road was private with a public easement access McDermott said the road would not become a public road until the road was completed connecting it to the other side of Countryside McDermott commented that the development homeowners association could also put restrictions on the trail use if it was private. Wilson asked what happened with the Park Commission motion for a natural trail with monument markings? McDermott noted that the Staff w as not in favor of that motion. Wilson said she was personally opposed to a blacktop trail as it ruins the character of what Orono is representative of. McDermott commented that the City does not wish to maintain natural trails. McMillan commented that the area would be low in traffic count. McDermott said the trails would provide an easy cut through from one area to another for the residents and reiterated that the trails were shown on the plat maps. Flint read the motion made by the Commission at the April meeting. Wilson agreed with the motion. McDermott said he now could not agree with the motion. White noted a problem when weeds grow ta", but Wilson said she preferred the monument markings. Wilson moved, McMillan seconded, to reaffirm the motion made for a natural trail with monument markings. Vote; Ayes 4, Nays 1 - McDermott. (#6) ACCESS TO LOW RY W OODS OPEN SPACE AREA Flint reviewed the memo by Moorse regarding access to Lov/iy Woods. Staffs recommendation for access is a 20' pedestrian only easement via the triangular piece of land adjacent to the southwest corner of Low ry Woods separating the parcel from CoRd 84. No parking w ould be provided Moorse said if the Park Commission agreed with the recommendation. Stall'would attempt to negotiate for the easement over the land mentioned MINUTES OF TR" REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 6, 1996 V, ■>» lJ w - -■ *4 U. -» (i?6 - Acce:js to Lowry Woods - Continued) Wilson noted that this access is apart from the homes in the area, and the only resident that would need to be contacted were the Johnson's. McDermott commented that the only people that could have a problem with this solution w ould be the residents of4440. WTiite moved, McMillan seconded, to accept the recommendation made by Staff. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#7) PLANNLNG FOR JUNE PARK TOUR. THE FOLLOWING SUGGESTIONS WERE MADE AT APRIL MEETING: CRYSTAL BAY PARK BEACHES LOWRY WOODS SAGA HILL FISHING PIFRS NEW DNR BOAT RAMP HIGHWOOD NATURE TRAU ANTOINE PARK DICKEY PROPERTY - PARK AND INTERIOR TRAILS The tour is set for Monday, June 3, 1996, at 6:00 p.m. Flint said Moorse suggested adding open space areas that are being considered for open space preservation. Wilson said she recently reviewed the open space plan and didn’t see anv significant areas of importance but would consider touring a) the 60 acre parcel east of th" play fields for possible use as a community field, and b) the 9.9 acre site in Navarre, which is the only open space in Navarre, which she noted to have no park areas. The areas considered for parks were c) lot next to Hackberry and d) 2 houses next to Old Crystal Bay Park. Commissioners discussed concern for property owners and conflict with the Commission considering lai.d that is currently privately owned. Flint suggested identifying areas for possible future open space and working with property owners in retaining land as park land through Minnesota Land Trust. The recent tour of Big Island was noted. Jabbour had suggested identifying the area as a large open space so future developers understand how the City views certain parcels. McDermott noted the importance of givmg the City direction in the way to pursue land in the future. He commented if the Staff i -. unaware of how the Commission views open space parcels, the Staff will not have a clear view on how to work with developers when .such land comes up for development. White said he saw' it as a community wide issue noting the need for all residents to be involved. MINXTTES OF TFIE REGULAR ORONO P.ARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 6, 1996 \ ^ (#7 - Park Tour Planning- Continued) Flint recommended the Commission identify areas they would like to be preserved as such areas are on the decrease McMillan said she was concerned with the property owners hearing the City w ants their particular property WTiite cited the City of Minneapolis as an example He said Minneapolis has created a list of significant properties to use as a guideline Wilson noted the difference in size of the two conununities and suggested Orono preser\ e the integrity of the City and assist those interested in preserving their land. McMillan commented that she set up a photo session with Jason Christenson at Old Crystal Bay Park as the first stop on the June tour. McDermott asked about the DNR boat ramp This area will be driven by. Antoine Park was added to the list of stops on the tour. (#8) OTHER BUSINESS Flint brought the Commission's attention to the recommendation made in o memo by Moorse regarding an upcoming subdivision at CoRd 19 and CoRd 84. Moorse suggested the Park Commission recommend taking an easement along the utility easement, which is along both Bayside and North Shoreline Drive This would enable the trail to be built when the County improves CoRd 19. McMillan commented that her goals suggested a north/south bike trail along CoRd 19. The recommendation would be consistent with her goal. The easement would provide the necessary tie in for such a trail. Park Dedication fund would not be reduced because of the easement as it is over a utility easement and would be constructed through the future development. White moved, McDermott seconded, to recommend taking an easement along the drainage and utility easement around the tw'o perimeters of the aforementioned property and not reducing the Park Dedication fee. Vote; Ayes 5, Nays 0. Wilson said she was concerned with the conditions of the parks in the City. It was noted that sod needs to be replaced near the playground equipment at Old Crystal Bay Park. The utility lines need to be buried first, and sidewalk installed near the post office. This sidewalk has to be completed prior to the plantings, which is scheduled in two weeks time. She said there also were piles of scraps that need to be cleaned up. Wilson also reported that the sig.i and bench have not been installed at Highwood. Boardwalks are also necessary in some low lying areas. White reported that trail signs have not yet been installed. 11 8 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COM\flSSION MEETING HELD ON MAY 6, 1996 i (#8 - Other Business - Continued) The Commissioners commented and a^ecd that although there are insufficient funds to do much, what is being done should be done well, or the City will lose its credibility. Wilson noted that the two Girl Scouts troops are working at French Creek picking up loose asphalt and trimming the landscaping. Flint said he reported to Moorse his disappointment regarding the funding for the park intern being taken out of Park Dedication Fund instead of the general fund Moorse said the original recommend was of a lesser amount, so he thought the intent w as that the funds come out of Park Dedication Flint said he thought we should look at the Park Dedication Fund as a trust fund and not as an operating fund The Commissioners also felt the intern and docks should have been paid out of a maintenance fund. It was also noted that the trails were originally planned to be paid from MSA funding rather than from the Park Dedication Fund. ADJOURNMENT Chair Flint adjourned the meeting at 9;45 p m. Richard N. Flint, Chair 1 ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 3, 1996 ATTENDANCE The Park Cominission met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Richard Flint, Commissioners Lili McMillan. Susan Wilson, Sherokee Use, Jim White, Andrew McDermott, and David Beal. Council Member Goetten was also present. Representing Staff w ere Public Works Director John Gerhardson and Recorder Sherry Frost. The meeting was conducted after the Park Tour, which was held from 6:00- 8:35 p m During the Park Tour. Park Commission members. City Council members JoEllen Hurr, Charles Kelley, Mayor Callahan, and J Diann Goetten, Planning Commission Chair Steve Peterson, and City Staff'members John Gerhardson, Jack Brinkhaus, and Carole Haseman viewed the following: Crystal Bay bike trail. Cry stal Bay Park, site of new DNR ooat landing on Ntaxw ell Bay, Antoine Playground, Sandy Beach swimming area, Highwood Nature Trail, Lowry Woods access, proposed Saga Hill Park, and fishing pier at Stubbs Bay. Chair Flint called the meeting to order at 8:42 p m. (#1) BIKE/HIKE TRAIL UPDATE Flint reported having received Hennepin County's Bike Transportation Plan's executive summary w hich included w ays to build trails and the philosophy of the County regarding trails He w ill send copies of this report to members of the Park Commission's Bike/Hike Trail Subcommittee (V'^iite, McMillan, and Flint). Wilson suggested the sub-committee review the plan and flag important issues. Flint reported that a meeting was . “cently held between Moorse, Mn/D(JT, and Doug Bryant of Hennepin Parks Moorse informed Flint that Bryant w as satisfied with the resolution of the interchange at Co Rd 6 and Hwy 12. The Council, at their last meeting, authorized Staff'to go ahead with the bike/hike trail as planned. Flint noted that Kelley asked that the neighbors be contacted regarding the trail. The trail will be constructed as far as SI 00,000 will allow. This funding consists of a 50/50 split betw een the City and the DNR grant money. Flint said it is the hope of the Commission that the money will build the trail to the City hall area. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNU 3, 1996 (#1 B’keyHike Trail Update - Continued) McMillan commented that there was no possibilit> that City funds could pay for the trail to connect to Baker Park She would like to see it constructed to at least the school property Goetten said the Council w as of a favorable posture towards completion of the trail but funding would dictate the outcome McMillan noted that the trail was a City trail to this point, and it would take Hennepin Park's participation to make it a connecting trail to Baker Park (#2) PARK PLAN GOALS AND OBJECITVTS Flint asked the Commissioners to consider the following questions: Are we ready to meet with the Council for a work session with the Park Plan in its current draff ’ If not, w hat is necessary to be done*’ Are we satisfied with the broad goals and objectives as curiently proposed? WTiere do we go from here'’ Wilson said she was ni : satisfied at this point and would like to see the large goals discussed and some agreement made Flint responded that the Commissioners have submitted their ideas and questioned how far the Commission should go before receiving the Council's input Wilson said she sees what is labeled as "A" as an overall mission statement with the other lettered items as subcategories of A. McDermott commented that all of the lettered items, including A, are part of a vision statement. When asked how the other items should be handled, Wilson saw them in three categories with (I) active park areas with goals dealing with improvements and maintenance, (2) passive parks and nature areas, and (3) trails She then saw these components followed up by financial stipulations Beal asked if the goals were in actuality, proposed action, rather than objectives Use responded that the goals and continuing objectives are documentation for the long term record, and from that, action is taken Use noted that the goals and objectives may be too specific, how ever McDermott said he was concerned that if the goals w ere too loose, it would result in "fiuff ” McMillan commented that the objectives are designed not to be too specific, or else, they result in promises that might not happen. McMillan said she would like to see general direction given without deadlines McDermott noted that there was a need for visions for a continuation of the park process He added that the surveys and park descriptions were more specific Wilson responded that once the large goals are established, then the Commission could get down to the specifics. NtINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 3, 1996 V '*■ (#2 Park Plan Goals and Objectives - Continued) Goetten asked the Park Commission to consider what their role is and suggested that the role be placed up front in the objectives McDermott read the vision statement Beal questioned whether there was already a mission stated or if the Commission was attempting to justify what they are doing'’ Wilson commented that w hat the Park Commission wants is consistent with that of the Council WTiite noted that the charge of the Park Commission is in the Comprehensive Plan Gerhardson said the Commission should refer to the Statutues for a definition of the Park Commission’s Mission, as the City is a statute city, not a chaner city. Wilson said she thought "A" is what the Commission is try ing to accomplish noting the Commission is the City's vehicle by which this is accomplished Flint said he saw the Commission as one component with the citizens, staff, and Council making up the rest of the equation Flint said "A" is our primary function, but is nothing, without the other three components. Use suggested to take ”F", as noted in the table of content? which she sees as the role of the Park Commission and make it an entity in itself, rather than one of the objectives. Flint said he had also noted in his comments if "F" was located in the right area within the plan. Goetten informed the Commission that she saw the group as the conduit for what is done. VV'ilson acknowledged the Commission's advisory capacity but did not feel the Commission was in a management role as noted in "F". Goetten said the ideas come from the Commission, however, in addition to being an advisory body. White said he saw the group as advisors to the policy makers Flint said it was necessary to see what the statutue says about a park commission McDermott asked Gerhardson to get him a copy of the stati'tue. It was decided that "F" would be moved to be "11" in the plan as the Park Commission Mandate. Wilson noted a statement in the old policy regarding park planning as a "management tool for City staff." She said this should be used as a guideline. McDermott said he would add this to the introduction. Beal asked if the Commission w as a conduit versus an adv isory position. The Park Commission was said to be an active advisory group, which, studied and prioritized llie work to be done, and made recommendations. NHNUTES OF THE REGUL.AK ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON JUNE 3. 199b V • (#2 Park Plan Goals and Objectives - Continued) McMillan said she thought the park plan was to be a manual A point of changing the 1980 plan was that park planning has changed She noted the old approach was that of there being enough space and no need to acquire more This needed to be revised Goetten said she agreed with the need of revision asking that the Commission relav the information to Gerhardson and Moorse Flint explained that the Park Commission was w orking on the park portion of the Comprehensive Plan Use said the intern to be hired this summer will take up each of the existing parks, map them out, inventory their existing facilities, and describe any legal limitation as to their usage Goetten said she saw the real change come to .he City as far as parks are concerned with Bederwood It made the Park Commission a more prominent figure McDermott cited an example at Antoine Park with the old equipment McMillan said the updating came from the survey and the next step was to implement the survey into a management tool. Goetten asked if there was a time plan McMillan said it w as more of an open ended tool. Goetten noted that the plans from 15 years ago were now in need of updating. Wilson said it would be difficult to look ahead further than 10 years and most plans are only good or applicable to that point It was agreed that a plan was good until a need was shown for it to be upgraded The Commission then began to discuss the broad goals as laid out in the draft without going into the specific details of each goal "F" was decided to be the vision statement and removed from the broad goals and objectives "A; Provide open space and diverse recreational opportunities to serve Orono residents '' The "air was omitted (See page 1 of draft.) "B: Protect and preserve natural resource areas, wildlife habitats, and open space." The point was made of the importance of preserv ing open space Beal suggested shortening the statement up to be concise but Use saw it as inclusive McMillan thought natural resource areas and wildlife w ere redundant, but others disagreed, and no action was taken to remove this part of the language "Prudent utilization of environment" was removed. (See page 3 of draft ) "E" was moved and changed to "C". (See page 6 of draft.) It was discussed whether the trail should be noted as "city-wide" and if "transponation corridor" should be eliminated. It was agreed that, although the trail would not extend to every road in the entire city, the plan does encompass the entire city Flint commented that Hennepin County sees their role as providing bike transportation corridors with cities connecting their local trails to these corridors. Use w as concerned if the transportation corridor was removed, it '.vould be seen as only trails e.xtending from one park to another, which is not the case. Accordingly, it was decided to retain these statements MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMNnSSION MEETING HELD ON nJNE 3, 1996 - r > .• •-•*^ • (#2 Park Plan Goals and Objectives - Continued) The old C was changed to "D". With the partnerships established with team sports groups, Minnesota Land Trust, and other agencies covering private, governmental organizations, and the Park Commission, it was decided to say "public and private organizations". Flint said this objective was noted as a new- concept with the City working with other public and private groups Beal suggested using the terminology of "taking advantage of public and private organizations to meet Park Commission goals" Use agreed but said it should show the need to sit down with others under an umbrella of cooperation. Flint said he saw it as two functions He noted it was to achieve the park goals but not just a Park Commission goal. Use said all of the goals go back to the main plan and questioned whether itneeded to be stated in each objective White suggested saying "cooperate and actively work with public and private organizations to provide opportunities for recreation and open space." This was accepted and agreed upon by all Commissioners (.See page 4 of the draft ) The old "D" is now "E" as shown on page 6 and changed to read, "Encourage civic involvement in developing and maintaining parks and open spaces " It was noted to include volunteer services. The old "G" is now "F" as shown on page 10. The old "H" is now "G" Wilson said she saw the implementation steps under trails and parks as being separate for each McDermott suggested calling it "Park Standards" Flint suggested having this section under "A". Use said in looking to future Commissions, it would be easier to be able to go to a particular section of the plan Flint commented that the Commission was talking about a vision, and McDermott responded that the standaids are not a vision. Wilson did not think it should be in a separate area McDermott said he would leave it as a goal but move the details elsewhere. Beal asked Goetten if the Council would want the standards Goetten said there are standards for other things She noted the zoning codes are there but are not listed whenever the code is referred to. Goetten said there may be a need to be more general. Wilson said she was unsure about the detail. Flint said the details would need to be reviewed at a later time. With agreement on the broad objectives, A through H, without the additional detailing, Use asked if the Commission was now ready to have a w ork session w ith the Council. It was determined that the park classifications would also be part of what is presented. Goetten said she believed the Council would ask for the Commission's thoughts and ideas under each heading It was suggested to use the details as examples. MINTJTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION . vp MEETING HELD ON JUNE 3. 1996 ♦ / \ • V (#2 Park Plan Goals and Objectives - Continued) The Commissioners decided to review the details under each broad objective and relay their ideas and comments to McDermott by June 21 to be reviewed at the July nieetmg The work session would then be scheduled with the Council. (#3) OTHER BUSINESS Representatives were selected to attend Council meetings: June 10 - Jim White July 8 - Susan W'ilson August 12 - Drew McDermott September 9 - David Beal June 24 - Sherokee Ilse July 22 - Lili McMillan August 26 - Dick Flint. ADJOURNMENT McDermott moved, Beal seconded, to adjourn at 9:58 p.m. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Richard N. Flint. Chair Aoodation of Hetropolitan Nunicipalitier 5 •A June 21, I>96 Dear Mr. Moorse: Many critical issues affecting metropolitan cities will be dealt with in the 1997 Legislative Session. Talk of property tax reform and elimination of or reductions in LGA/TiACA and removal of education financing from local property taxes could be a major issue. Lack of adequate transportation/transit funding has reached a critical point. Land use controls including regional growth management and mandated planning in areas adjacent to the seven* county metro area could be on the front burner, as well. We need your views ard input on these and other important issues to help shape and establish legislative policy and direction for the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities for the 1997 session. To provide a forum for this input and discussion, we are holding our 1 Ith annual series of Outreach Breakfast meetings for you and other city officiab. The breakfast meeting for your area is scheduled for Thursday July 11 at 7:30 a m., in the Wellington Room of the Ramada Plaza in Minnetonka. The Ramada Plaza is located on the southeast comer of highway 12/1394 and Ridgedale Drive Interchange. E„it 1394 at Ridgedale Drive. Go one block south. Your input on these issues is cmcial and we invite you to review the ertlosed Issues Paper to help focus your thinking and facilitate good discussion at the breakfast This will be an informal gathering and we look for a good exchange of ideas. The get-together can also be an avenue for you to tell us what you'd like to see the AMM do more or less of in the way of member services and how we can build a better rapport between city officiali'AMM and metro legislators. We hope you plan to attend your area breakfast by making reservations now. We would ask that managers and mayors make this information and invitation available to city council members and interested staff persons. If you have any questions, call the AMM at 215-4000. AMM President Eagan Mayor ijfr Prosser MM Vice President Richfield Manager 4«4 Ann Lenczewski AMM Board Member Bloomington Councilmember l45UnivffiityAvfli«HBt bint Paul, tlinneum ^0j-i044 (6ii) BS-4000 fax. 1 i? ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION 1. Property Tax Reform For several yea^s the legislature has been discussing major changes in prop>erty tax to essentially take over more K-12 school funding and reduce property taxes on people. In the past session there were 12 reform bills heard, a Sen-te passed levy freeze, and several bills proposing HACA elimination. The Board of Directors feel that the AMM ..hould become more proactive with more comprehensive policy. To that end the Revenue committee has met and proposes the following draft of principles for your reaction and input. PROPERTY TAX REFORM PROPOSAL {Drafti ASSUMPTIONS 1. Revenues are limited a. State revenues will increasingly go to fund health, criminal justice, and education. 2. Property tax reform will be a major focus at the 1997 legislative session a. Businesses will continue to seek property tax reductions through lower class rates and/or market value levies. b. HACA will likely be targeted for elimination under at least some proposals. c. State will assume more of K-12 funding. PROPOSED PRINCIPLES FOR PROPERTY TAX REFORM Property tax reform proposals should: 1. Be simple and accountable as long as it is recognized that the property tax system must satisfy diverse financial needs. 2. Recognize city cash flow needs and not jeopardize existing development districts, tax increment finance disirieis, or enterprise zoues. 3. Assure that cit>’ revenue sources be diversified. The property tax is considered a regressive tax and does not provide growth as does income and sales taxes. Cities must avoid becoming totally dependent on property tax. 4. Protect cities' ability to determine and generate revenue and not be dependent on referenda. 5. Should assure that net propert}' tax for city taxpayers shall not increase as a result of propert}' tax reform which reduces or diverts aids (LGA/HACA) (i.e. School properwy tax reduction equivalent to aid reduction) • State aid should remain an essential component of the property tax system. Categorical aid programs should not become a substitute. • A program such as income-adjusted circuit breaker and renter's credit should continue. 6. Stabilize city revenue sources so that cities may effectively do both short and long range planning. 7. Be based on cither a class rate tax capacity system or a market value based system, but not a combination of the tw o. 8. Include elements that promote fairness and geographic balance, i.e. there should be a semblance of equality and taxes paid by income and type and size of property. • Class rates may be adjusted to provide more fairness and equity to the system. However, care should be exercised and overall tax burdens analyzed before making major changes. As an example, C/I property taxes are high, but Minnesota exempts business equipment which is taxed in most states. The overall tax burden including property, income and sales should be considered before changing one or the other. • Local Government Aid should be distributed based both on need and property wealth and should not favor one region of the state at the expense of any other region. Recently proposed "power equalization" formulas would have resulted in a shift of state aid from metropolitan cities to greater Minnesota cities by failing to adequately recognize the needs of metropolitan cities tmd by inflating the population factor of greater Minnesota cities. • If K-12 school funding is substantially changed, the principles of equity, accountability', and progressiveness should be observed. 2. Transportation/Transit Funding Legislative/Administrative GRIDLOCK continues. The Senate remains committed to 5 cent gas tax increase plus 1/2 cent metro transit sales tax. The House remains divided several ways, rural vs. metro, republican vs. DFL, and metro suburban vs. core. The administration supports 2 or 3 cent gas tax increase, strongly opposes 1/2 cent sales tax or other replacement tax, and opposes adding more money for transit. Members of the AMM Transportation Committee are looking for ideas on how to break the logjam! Lets get creative? 3. Blueprint Implementation/Growth Options The Metropolitan Council in response to a 1995 legislative mandate and as a planned Regional Blueprint implementation step began a study to project a likely future growth pattern for this region in mid-1995. The Council chose to offer three possible growth options rather than just one as required by the legislature. The central question to answer is how the region can accommodate and manage growth based on Council forecasts that Uie metro area will grow by 650,000 people, 320,000 households and 380,000 jobs by 2020. The growth options being considered by the Met Council are: The Current Trend. This is very similar to existing development patterns and assumes that accommodating housing market demand and making public investments accordingly best assures the economic and social health of the region. Under it, housing is the major shapes of development. The Concentrated Development Trend. This option assumes that increasing the density of jobs and housing in the core area of the region best assures the health of the region. Under this option, the MUSA line would not be expanded until after 2020. The demand for housing and jobs w ill be met by increasing density in the MUSA area. Growth Centers. This option encourages the development of mixed-use centers. It would channel a major portion of the region’s job growth into designated centers, add medium-to-higher density housing and promote a more transit and pedestrian-friendly development pattern within cities. Guiding Principles The AMM Metropolitan Agencies Committee met four times to discuss this issue and while not recommending a specific growth option, it has developed three guiding principles as a framework for managing future growth. The principles are: 1. We should strive for freedom, both for individuals and for communities. At the same time, individuals and communities should be cognizant of, and heL accountable for the consequences of their decisions. Hea\7-handed government regulations that fly in the face of deeply held citizen values and preferences are not likely to withstand the test of time. Rather, regional policy should seek to encourage choices consistent with a broader public interest. liiuiinPHrar«n9Tti tBCt] tKi rtiii:ir«i mr-u] €3 & '^ 'i- '-i M mpm: att" £ tSiUA - ■'‘- ■■■ ■ :i.m * ,i > i*Wm \wk » MOianUKwt ii«K* 9mm m •*» up« -» «MW *»n» ——' ;?r4VSKV^“-— -i' 11 t 3 ---- •■•;f I/^'’ |ji S|' Sip I 'i/' ■■ *'^ .> ‘4 . "V i»- ■' <*T/ f.4 'Hntfa' li,0<aai / 41, <1 PROPOSED SUBDlVlSiON FOR HILLOWAY CORPORATION M THF VVEST 1/2, NW 1/4. NW 1/4. SECTtCH^ 6-117-23 HEI^PIN COUNTY. I«W£S0TA s?{i- OWNER ft DEVELOPER: HILLOWAY CORPORATION 1551 HUNTER DRIVE WAYZATA. MINNESOTA 55391 ENGINEER ft SURVEYOR: COFFIN ft GRONBERG. INC. 482 TAMARACK AVENUE LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA 55356 .rC4. 0Vm>U^. •V #4^* ** Vr-»««»|r .An* ’..♦♦r • •••' f *•» / 4 W Nc»*«^* *-<»♦•• ^ •»*h.** ' *4 Nw ■* !*• N» »• ‘‘A*, 1« »c«* im* No»i>w* >•*» «*• A 5** **•■•% f» M» I «v^ ♦ ■ *•>«» A ••M iV **# * *W ,* «•« Nwt*' Me-11' w •■« vme *••* ?»w* M**** ■•»* S«r >•>«••« •»•