Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-07-14 Council Agenda Packet CITY OF CORCORAN *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. Corcoran City Council Agenda July 14, 2016 - 7:00pm 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Approval 4. Open Forum 5. Presentations 6. Consent Agenda a. Draft Minutes of June 23, 2016 Council Meeting* b. Resolution 2016-54 – Appointing Election Judges for the 2016 Election Cycle * c. Authorize Bidding of Gravel for 2016 and 2017* d. Resolution 2016-53 – Police Officer Declaration of PERA Contributions* e. Pollinator Summit Registration Approval* 7. Claims as Presented a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500)* b. All Other Financial Claims* 8. Staff Reports / Memos / Commissions a. Commissioner Schedule for Attendance at Council Meetings* b. July 5th Storm Report* 9. Planning Business a. Park Dedication Ordinance Amendment (city file 16-006)* b. FEMA Required Flood Plain Ordinance Update * c. Temporary Family Health Care Dwellings* 10. Unfinished Business 11. New Business a. North Hennepin Pioneer Society Request for Funds* b. Conditional Offer for Full-Time Police Officer* 12. 2016 Council Schedule* 13. Council Liaison Calendar Planning Commission 7/07/16 8/14/16 9/01/16 10/6/16 11/3/16 12/1/16 LaFave Hank Thomas Guenthner LaFave Keefe Parks and Trails Commission 7/19/16 8/16/16 9/20/16 10/18/16 11/15/16 12/20/16 Hank Thomas Guenthner LaFave Keefe Hank 14. Adjournment CITY OF CORCORAN City Council Meeting Minutes June 23, 2016 - 7:00pm The Corcoran City Council met on June 23, 2016, at City Hall in Corcoran, MN. Present were Mayor Guenthner, Councilor Hank, Councilor Keefe, Councilor LaFave, and Councilor Thomas. Also present were City Administrator Martens, City Planner Lindahl, Director of Public Safety Gottschalk, and City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator Beise. 1.Call to Order / Roll Call Mayor Guenthner called the meeting to order at 7:00pm. 2.Pledge of Allegiance Mayor Guenthner invited all in attendance to rise and join in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3.Agenda Approval City Administrator Martens updated the Council on the video recording equipment. MOTION: made by Thomas, seconded by Hank to approve the agenda as presented. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, LaFave, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) 4.Open Forum Michelle Matthews of Minnesota Solar LLC. addressed the Council relating to the proposed Solar Ordinance. Ms. Matthews specifically wanted to clarify the proposed tax impact as $53,029 and discussed construction and decommissioning processes. Terry Nord, 10080 Sundance Road addressed the Council on concerns relating to the minor subdivision ordinance. Mr. Nord specifically interested in knowing when Council will review the building rights. Steve Motley, 6620 Pioneer Trail addressed the Council on concerns relating to the minor subdivision process. Mr. Motley noted he is interested in the minor subdivision process update. Jackie Hoglund, 19220 Hackamore Road addressed the Council on concerns relating to the grading plan proposed by Lennar. Ms. Hoglund specifically is concerned with the grading and process, economic motivation concerns, tree removal, and limited communication from Lennar. Greg Hoglund, 19220 Hackamore Road addressed the Council on concerns relating to the grading plan proposed by Lennar. Mr.Hoglund specifically is concerned with the timeline and process of the project and urged the Council to define items more clearly in the 5th phase of the development. Paul Tabone of Lennar Corporation addressed the Council on concerns relating to the grading plan proposed by Lennar. Mr. Tabone reviewed the reason for the request noting a short construction season and provided background on their wetland approach. 5.Presentations No presentations were heard. 6.Consent Agenda a.Draft Minutes of June 9, 2016 Work Session b.Draft Minutes of June, 9, 2016 Council Meeting c.Copier Machine Agreements d.Resolution 2016-50 Establishing An Absentee Ballot Board Councilor Hank asked that Item c. be considered separately to discuss the item. MOTION: made by LaFave, seconded by Keefe to approve the consent agenda consisting of Items a., b., and d. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, LaFave, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) Councilor Hank inquired about the performance of the current administration department copier and if delaying purchasing was an option. City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator Beise noted the start date of the lease could be delayed however the rate guarantee is only available July and noted some copier issues. 6a. MOTION: made by Thomas, seconded by LaFave to approve the Item 6c. as presented. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, LaFave, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) 7. Claims as Presented a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500) MOTION: made by Thomas, seconded by Keefe to approve the escrow claims as presented. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, LaFave, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) b. All Other Financial Claims MOTION: made by LaFave, seconded by Keefe to approve all other claims as presented. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, LaFave, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) 8. Staff Reports / Memos/Commissions a. Planning Project Update; report received. b. Code Compliance Report; report received. 9. Planning Business a. Park Dedication Ordinance Amendment (City File 16-006) City Planner Lindahl presented the report noting that the current values had been updated and that upon review a distinction cannot be made between MUSA and non-MUSA area. MOTION: made by Hank, seconded by LaFave to approve Ordinance 2016-325 Amending the Park Dedication Ordinance. Council discussed the language related to the land dedication and the effect building rights on park dedication. Councilor Hank withdrew the motion to approve Ordinance 2016-325 Amending the Park Dedication Ordinance. MOTION: made by LaFave, seconded by Keefe to table Ordinance 2016-325 Amending Park Dedication Ordinance for further clarification at a future meeting. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, LaFave, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) b. Randahl Construction Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review at 7241 County Road 116 (PID 26-119-23-41-0002) (City File 16-012) City Planner Lindahl presented the report noting the application would continue outside storage and other non-conformities and would include a privacy fence and additional landscaping. Council discussed outside storage in downtown area and if paving should be required. MOTION: made by Hank, seconded by Keefe to approve Resolution 2016-52 Approving a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review for Randahl Construction. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, and LaFave Voting Nay: Thomas (Motion carried 4:1) c. Solar Ordinance Update (City File 16-008) City Planner Lindahl presented the report outlining the types of solar categories included in the ordinance including building integrated, building or roof mounted, ground mounted and solar gardens in specific land use areas. Council discussed locations and aesthetics and clarifying the timeline of approval to include construction, decommissioning, and height limits. MOTION: made by LaFave, seconded by Thomas to direct staff to proceed with the ordinance and schedule a public hearing for August. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, LaFave, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) d. Minor (or Administrative) Subdivision Process (City File 16-017) City Planner Lindahl presented the report noting that this ordinance update would streamline the process for applicants with lot line adjustments and minor subdivisions and save applicants additional monies. Council discussed distinguishing subdivisions by zoning classification, outlining the criteria for platting, communication within this process. MOTION: made by Thomas, seconded by Keefe to direct staff to proceed with the ordinance and schedule a public hearing for August. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, LaFave, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) e. Revised Request for Amended Phase 5 Grading Plan – U.S. Home Corporation (City File 16-015) City Planner Lindahl presented the report noting the grading is consistent with the preliminary plat and adopted grading plan and clarified that the request did not move forward at the last meeting for lack of a second. Council discussed their thoughts on the proposal. Council discussed the timeline, lack of a tree preservation ordinance, understanding the business concerns and the buffer between the existing neighborhood. MOTION: made by Thomas, seconded by Keefe to approve the revised request as requested. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Keefe, and Thomas Voting Nay: LaFave and Hank (Motion carried 3:2) 10. Unfinished Business No unfinished business was presented. 11. New Business a. 2016 Fee Schedule Amendment City Administrator Martens presented the report noting that as the Park Dedication Ordinance was tabled the changes to the fee schedule could be tabled. Council discussed. MOTION: made by Hank, seconded by LaFave to table the 2016 Fee Schedule Amendment. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, LaFave, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) 12. Closed Session a. Consider an Offer for the Purchase of Real Estate – Easement Acquisition for the Downtown Utility and Street Improvement Project Councilor Thomas stated he would not attend the closed session as he is on the finance committee for St. Thomas Church. Mayor Guenthner stated: “The City Council is going into closed session to consider an offer for the purchase of real estate” “Under the authority of Minn. Stat. § 13D.05 subd. 3(c)(3) the City is permitted to close a meeting to consider offers and counter-offers for the purchase of real estate. The city council is going into closed session to consider an offer for the purchase of real estate; the following property is the subject of the closed meeting: 20000 County Road 10; Mayor Guenthner recessed the regular meeting at 9:11pm. Mayor Guenthner reconvened the regular meeting at 9:27pm. Mayor Guenthner stated: “In the closed session the city council discussed an offer for the purchase of real estate; no formal action was taken.” 13. Unscheduled Items No unscheduled were presented. 14. 2016 Council Schedule City Administrator Martens reviewed the Council schedule. Council discussed reviewing the budget at the regular meeting and having the road maintenance discussion as the topic of the work session. 15. Council Liaison Calendar Councilor LaFave noted she would be attending the July Planning Commission instead of Councilor Keefe. The Council liaison calendar was not further reviewed, but was available in the Council Packet. 16. Adjournment MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by LaFave to adjourn. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Hank, Keefe, LaFave, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) Meeting adjourned at 9:30pm. ________________________________ Jessica Beise – City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator City of Corcoran June 23, 2016 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2016-54 Page 1 of 2 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE 2016 ELECTION CYCLE WHEREAS, a State Primary Election will be held on August 9, 2016 and a State General Election will be held on November 8, 2016; and WHEREAS, MN Statute 204B.21, subd.2, requires election judges for precincts in a municipality be appointed by the governing body of the municipality; and WHEREAS, the City of Corcoran has two voting precincts; and WHEREAS, the following Minnesota residents have agreed to serve as election judges and have met the qualifications established by the State of Minnesota, or will be receiving training prior to the elections and will be eligible to serve after meeting the qualifications established by the State of Minnesota; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Corcoran hereby appoints the following persons to be eligible to serve as election judges for the 2016 Primary and General Elections, with the understanding that amendments may be necessary to the appointments in order to fill vacancies and meet party splits; and approves payment of an hourly wage of $ 9.50 per hour for elections judges and, $ 10 per hour for head judges during election judge training and time served on election day. Bonnie Aksteter Bertha Roos Linda Benson Janice Stieg Suzanne Fehn Patricia Tadych Catherine Franssell Rosanne Tessmer Mary Hage Dorothy Theis Mary Hartkopf Lillian Wawra Katy (Karen) Hegg Catherine (Katie) Leuer Gerald Johnson Sheila Schouviller JoAnne Johnson Linda Hrdlicka Lori Kaiser Linda Faatz Angeline Linquist Rebecca Pease Bonnie Maue Kim Arneson Warren Nordstrom Diane Entrikin Gail Propson Brian Dixon Sharon Ratke VOTING AYE VOTING NAY Guenthner, Ken Guenthner, Ken Hank, Pat Hank, Pat Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike LaFave, Tonya LaFave, Tonya Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron 6b. City of Corcoran June 23, 2016 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2016-54 Page 2 of 2 Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 23rd day of June, 2016. ________________________________ Ken Guenthner - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 6c. Council Meeting: July 14, 2016 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: Authorize Bidding of Gravel for 2016 and 2017 Action Required: Approval Summary: Gravel roads require additional gravel to be placed on them periodically to maintain the quality of the road. Typically staff purchases the gravel the year before it is actually used in order for it to become a better product. For example the 8.5 miles of road graveled in 2016 was from gravel purchased in 2015. Staff is requesting approval to go out for bids for gravel to be purchased in 2016 and 2017. Financial/Budget: The 2016 budget allocated $130,000 towards gravel. The amount purchased will depend on gravel pricing. Alignment with Values: This item relates to the following adopted values: EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for citizen confidence in government. Council Action: Authorize staff to bid gravel for 2016 and 2017. Attachments: N/A City of Corcoran July 14, 2016 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2016-53 Page 1 of 1 Motion By: Seconded By: POLICE OFFICER DECLARATION OF PERA CONTRIBUTIONS JEREMIAH S. JESSEN WHEREAS, the policy of the State of Minnesota as declared in Minnesota Statutes 353.63 is to give special consideration to employees who perform hazardous work and devote their time and skills to protecting the property and personal safety of others; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 353.64 permits governmental subdivisions to request coverage in the Public Employees Police and Fire plan for eligible employees of police departments whose position duties meet the requirements stated therein and listed below. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Corcoran of Hennepin County, MN hereby declares that the position titled Police Officer, currently held by Jeremiah S. Jessen, meets all of the following Police and Fire membership requirements: 1.Said position requires a license by Minnesota peace officer standards and training board under sections 626.84 to 626.863 and this employee is so licensed; 2.Said position’s primary (over 50%) duty is to enforce the general criminal laws of the state; 3.Said position charges this employee with prevention and detection of crime; 4.Said position gives this employee the full power of arrest and 5.Said position is assigned to a designated police or sheriff’s department. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this governing body hereby requests that the above-named employee be accepted as a member of the Public Employees Police and Fire Plan effective the date of this employee’s initial Police and Fire salary deduction by governmental subdivision. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY Guenthner, Ken Guenthner, Ken Hank, Pat Hank, Pat Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike LaFave, Tonya LaFave, Tonya Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 14th day of July 2016. ________________________________ Ken Guenthner - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator 6d. STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 6e. Council Meeting: July 14, 2016 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: Pollinator Summit Registration Approval Action Required: Approval Summary: At the June Parks and Trails Commission meeting, an upcoming pollinator summit was discussed along with the possibility of a member of the Parks and Trails Commission to attend on behalf of the City. By consensus the Commission recommended Sharon Meister attends if approved by the City Council. Since there is no training budget associated with the Parks and Trails Commission, Council approval is required. It should be noted that the Parks and Trails Commission has requested training funds for 2017 budget consideration. Financial/Budget: The cost to attend the pollinator summit is $70 and would be paid for out of the Parks budget. Alignment with Values: This item relates to the following adopted values: FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for citizen confidence in government. PROFESSIONALISM We believe that continuous improvement is the mark of professionalism and are committed to applying this principle to the services we offer and the development of our employees. Council Action: Approve funds for Sharon Meister to attend the Pollinator Summit on August 18, 2016. Attachments: 1. Pollinator Summit Overview 2016 Pollinator Summit http://www.arboretum.umn.edu/Pollinators2016.aspx[6/10/2016 11:21:34 AM] One Stop | Directories | Search U of M Pollinator Summit Planting Solutions Thursday, August 18th, 2016, 9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Registration begins at 8:30 a.m. Minnesota Landscape Arboretum - MacMillan Auditorium $70 Arboretum Members & Conference Affiliates $80 General Registration Fee includes Arboretum admission, lunch and coffee breaks. Amy Y. Yang/Flikr HOME : MN LANDSCAPE ARBORETUM : EVENTS AND PROGRAMS : CONFERENCES AND SUMMITS : 2016 POLLINATOR SUMMIT SUMMIT OVERVIEW Pollinators and other beneficial insects are in trouble, with multiple stressors such as habitat loss, fragmentation, pesticide use, and disease all contributing to alarming declines in their health and biodiversity. This has serious implications for the health of our landscapes, our food systems, and our communities. The 2016 Pollinator Summit will focus on plants and plant choices as an important solution to protecting pollinators on our urban landscapes, including current research and best practices that can be applied in your own work or community. WHAT TO EXPECT Presentations and case studies with a focus on current research and best practicices in planting design, plant selection, plant materials and supply, and plant management on both public and private lands. The Summit will feature: Current research information focusing on bee nutrition, and the connection between healthy pollinators and plants, including native and non-native plant species. QUESTIONS ABOUT REGISTRATION? Call 612-301-1210 or email: ArbEdu@umn.edu Cancellation Policy: Registration cancellations must be made two weeks prior to class date in order to receive refund. A $5 processing fee will apply. Download Summit Flyer SPONSORS Become a Summit Sponsor CONTRIBUTING SPONSORS PATRON SPONSORS 2016 Pollinator Summit http://www.arboretum.umn.edu/Pollinators2016.aspx[6/10/2016 11:21:34 AM] Projects with a goal of protecting pollinators, and that demonstrate best practices in planting design, plant selection, and plant management, including lessons learned on both private and public lands. Local and regional policies affecting landscape development and management that address pollinators, to inform future needs and work. Wild Bee Safaris - get up close and personal with native bees and other pollinators in the garden. WHO SHOULD ATTEND Landscape designers • landscape architects • land managers • state and local agency staff • parks and public works staff • community planners • non-profit staff • urban gardeners • elected and appointed officials • commercial growers • builders and developers • educators • concerned citizens • nurseries/garden centers/plant production staff • others inspired to protect pollinators SUMMIT HIGHLIGHTS This Summit will feature Pigeonhole Live, an interactive platform for audience participation. Bring any web-capable device such as a phone, laptop, or tablet. No apps, sign-up or downloads reguired, and wi-fi is available, but data usage may apply if using cell service. Tentative...be sure to check regularly for updates! KEYNOTE PRESENTER Emma Marris, author of "Rambunctious Garden" Ms. Marris is a writer based in Klamath Falls, Oregon, where she writes about nature, people, food, language, books and film. Her goal is to find and tell stories that help us understand the past; take meaningful action in the present; and move towards a greener, wilder, happier and more equal future. Her stories have appeared in the New York Times, Slate, Orion, Discover, Grist and Nature, where she worked as a staffer for several years. She has a Master’s in Science Writing from the Johns Hopkins University. Her first book came out in 2011. Rambunctious Garden is an important read for anyone who cares about the environment. As humans influence every centimeter of Earth, from where species live to its very climate, our strategies for saving nature must change. This book explains why, and more importantly, how. And it is an exciting journey. CURRENT RESEARCH Native Pollinators and the Science of Pollination Dr. Daniel Cariveau - Assistant Professor, Department of Entomology, University of Minnesota PLANTING SOLUTIONS - BEST PRACTICES Plant Selection - More than Just Wildflowers Karl Foord - Regional Extension Educator, University of Minnesota Extension Updates in Plant Production and Plant Supply Presenters TBD Planting Solutions - Succes Stories! Multiple case studies featuring: ENDORSING ORGANIZATIONS Become an Endorsing Organization Barr Engineering Company UofMN Extension Master Gardener State Office Mississippi Watershed Management Organization Minnesota Association of Golf Course Superintendents Monarch Joint Venture Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District University of MN Monarch Lab University of Minnesota Extension Preferred Conference Hotel Country Inn & Suites - Chanhassen 591 West 78th Street, Chanhassen, MN 55317 area map 952-937-2424 2016 Pollinator Summit http://www.arboretum.umn.edu/Pollinators2016.aspx[6/10/2016 11:21:34 AM] − Project purpose, partners, funding, and goals − Motivating factors, communication, and engagement of stakeholders − Policy barriers and challenges − Management and maintenance needs and plans − Lessons learned - Top Three Do's and Don'ts! AFTER THE SUMMIT Please join us for happy hour, networking, and BEE SAFARIES in the Garden! 3675 Arboretum Drive, Chaska MN 55318 | 952.443.1400 ©2016 University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum | Privacy Policy | Site Map | Extranet | Contact Us The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer. Last modified on 05/27/2016 Powered by Brandspring Solutions LLC STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 8a. Council Meeting: July 14, 2016 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: Commissioner Schedule for Attendance at Council Meetings Action Required: None - Informational Summary: Earlier this year the Council solicited feedback from the commissions on the Council liaison role at commission meetings. Through that discussion the Council has proposed creating a rotating schedule where a member of each commission is assigned to attend Council meetings. The goal is to increase communication between the groups. The role of the commission member at Council meetings would be to review the packet in advance of the meeting, attend the meeting, and be available for questions if requested of the Council. The commission member attending would receive a printed meeting packet as does the City Council. The below schedule is anticipated for attendance at meetings but is subject to change: Meeting Date 7/14/2016 7/28/2016 8/11/2016 8/25/2016 9/8/2016 Parks and Trails Sharon Meister Trish Krueger Sharon Meister Deb Regan Val Nybo Planning Alan Schultz Dorothy Theis Meredith Wu Dean Jacobs Alan Schultz Financial/Budget: N/A Alignment with Values: This item relates to the following adopted values: OPEN AND HONEST COMMUNICATION We believe that open and honest communication is essential for an informed and involved citizenry and to foster a positive working environment for employees. Options: N/A Recommendation: N/A Council Action: N/A Attachments: N/A STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 8b. Council Meeting: July 14, 2016 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: July 5th Storm Recap Action Required: None - Informational Summary: On the evening of July 5th a severe storm affected a great portion of Hennepin County including the City of Corcoran. On the evening of the storm, Public Works and Police coordinated a response to multiple road closures due to downed trees and power lines, and to begin storm cleanup. Initial effects included the following: • All north/south roads between the cities of Corcoran and Rogers were closed due to downed power lines • Lost power to the Public Works facility and to many residential homes and businesses • Tree damage in all areas of Corcoran The response to the storm continued the following morning to ensure public safety and to re-open roads. City Hall staff fielded many questions from the public and provided information via phone and website. By end of day Wednesday, July 6th all roads were passable and power was restored to the Public Works facility. The Corcoran team was well prepared and handled the situation in an efficient, caring, and professional manner. Staff at City Hall has received many questions regarding opportunities to bring tree debris to a location within the City. Staff continues to inform residents of the ability to burn on their property or to use other sites outside of the City for a fee. The City temporarily eliminated the fee for burn permits through Tuesday, July 12th. This response will continue unless a change of direction is received from the Council. Staff will be having an internal storm recap meeting in the near future which also may result in recommendations for future action when storms hit the City. Due to the number of questions regarding a compost site or similar, staff looked into the costs of becoming a member of the Maple Grove compost site. The costs include a monthly membership fee and then each City is billed for the amount of materials brought to the site by their residents. Using the City of Dayton for an example, their annual costs are around $20,000. Financial/Budget: N/A Alignment with Values: This item relates to the following adopted values: OPEN AND HONEST COMMUNICATION We believe that open and honest communication is essential for an informed and involved citizenry and to foster a positive working environment for employees. Page 2 Options: N/A Recommendation: N/A Council Action: N/A Attachments: N/A 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. TO: Corcoran City Council FROM: Anne Hurlburt through Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: July 7, 2016 for the July 14, 2016 City Council Meeting RE: PUBLIC HEARING. Park Dedication Ordinance Update (City File 16-006) 60-DAY REVIEW DEADLINE:N/A 1.Request Approve the update to the park dedication requirements of the Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 9 of the Corcoran City Code. 2.Background At its March 28, 2016 meeting, the City Council authorized staff to conduct a review of the park dedication ordinance to: a)Update the 2011 calculations of park system costs, based on changes in construction costs and any new information about proposed parks and trails available since the 2011 update. b)Update the land value information used in the 2011 analysis with available data for Corcoran and the surrounding market area from city and county assessors. c)Examine the current residential dedication formula to determine whether the percentages of land or equivalent cash dedication are adequate to meet the city’s needs. d)Provide an alternative formula to address the concern about the equitable application of residential dedication requirements to land outside the MUSA. Specifically, consider whether the formulas could incorporate a measure of the expected population growth from various types of residential development. Use the results of this exercise to propose a revised formula for consideration by the city. e)Evaluate and recommend the appropriate maximum cash-in-lieu of land fee. f)Determine what ordinance amendments are necessary for conformity with the 2013 state law changes. On April 28, 2016, the Council received a report and draft amendments, and referred it to the Parks and Trails Commission for review and to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. The Parks and Trails Commission reviewed the report at its May 17, 2016 meeting. Although the Commission did not have a quorum at their meeting, the members present reviewed the report and made positive comments about the draft amendments. Agenda Item: 9a. Park Dedication Ordinance Update 2 July 14, 2016 City Council Meeting The Planning Commission held a public hearing at its June 2, 2016 meeting. No comments or public testimony were received at the hearing. The Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council adopt the amendments. On June 23, 2016, the Council received the draft ordinance, a resolution of findings of fact, and amendments to the city’s fee schedule. The Council tabled the matter to allow further discussion about the impact on large-lot rural subdivisions, and possible additional revisions to the ordinance to address these concerns. 3. Impacts on Large-Lot Rural Subdivisions The draft ordinance would change the percentage of land dedication for Rural/Ag Residential subdivisions from the current 10% to 4%. As documented in the findings of fact and the detailed report presented in April, the required per capita contribution needed to fund the city’s park plan is $1,418. Assuming a density of one unit per 10 acres, and a household size of 2.8 people, rural subdivisions would generate an average of 0.28 persons per acre. This requires park dedication equivalent to $397 per acre (0.28 X $1,418), which is 4% of land value based on $10,000 per acre. In all subdivisions, the city may require land dedication if there is a park or trail planned within a proposed subdivision. Otherwise the per unit cash-in-lieu of land fee would apply, at the city’s discretion. The fee is calculated by multiplying the per capita contribution $1,418 by the expected household size (2.8 X $1,418 = $3,970 for single family, 1.9 X $1,418 = $2,694 for multi-family.) Incorporating population estimates into the formula is an important change. It recognizes that the need for the park system is created by the new residents the development attracts to the community, not by the acres of land subdivided. Not all subdivisions in the rural area will be subject to the City’s Subdivision Regulations. Per state law, cities cannot regulate land divisions if all parcels created are greater than 20 acres in size or 500 feet in width. Some rural lots, therefore, will escape park dedication because platting is not required. Most rural subdivisions would probably pay the cash-in-lieu of land fee, which would be the same for any single family lot where land dedication is not required. Each of the land use categories has a density range, which is part of the park dedication calculations. For example, the Low Density Residential category has a range of 3 to 5 units per acre. When calculating the park dedication fee, we used the minimum density of 3 units per acres in the formula, to ensure that even if the city develops at the low end of the density range contributions of land and cash would be sufficient to develop the planned park system. If the density of a development exceeds the minimum, the cash-in-lieu of land fee could generate revenue greater than the assumed value of the percentage land dedication. In such a case the additional payment is justified because of the increased population, and therefore higher demand for park facilities, created by the subdivision. The minimum of the range was used for all of the urban density categories. In the Rural/Ag Residential category there is no minimum and a much wider density range is possible. In Corcoran generally, rural subdivisions may be based on 1 development right per 10 acres on a paved road, and 1 development right per 30 acres on an unpaved road. Because of the lower density allowed for Park Dedication Ordinance Update 3 July 14, 2016 City Council Meeting some parcels, there is a concern that applying the same percentage of land dedication (4%) to all rural subdivisions may not be fair. The 2011 park dedication report assumed that 1,240 acres of rural land could be subdivided to allow up to 632 dwelling units. In updating the report, we changed this to a maximum of 124 units, or 1 unit per 10 acres. This (and the reduction in land value) was the major factor that changed the dedication requirement from the current 10% to the proposed 4%. During our review of the proposed formula, the Strehler Estates subdivision was used as an example. This subdivision included 63.4 net acres of land and was proposed to be platted into 4 lots. The overall density is 1 unit per 15.85 net acres, less than the 1 per 10 density assumed when calculating the park dedication requirements. One lot already has a home, so 3 units (75% of the subdivision/ 47.55 acres) would be subject to park dedication. The following table shows the park dedication requirement for Strehler Estates under the current ordinance (Column A) and under the proposed ordinance (Column B) Both of these examples used the 2016 estimated land value, $10,000 per acre. Under the existing formula, the per capita and per unit land value to be dedicated would be more than four times the cash-in-lieu of land fee (428% more). Even with the new formula, the per capita and per unit land value to be dedicated would be about 60% higher than the cash-in-lieu of land fee, because the density of this example is lower than that assumed by the formula. Park Dedication Example: Strehler Estates A B C D Park Dedication, Land Only Current Ordinance Proposed Ordinance Adjust Land Value Adjust to Proportional Share Land Value per Acre $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $7,500 $ 10,000 % of Land to be Dedicated: 10% 4% 4% 2.5% Required Acres: 4.76 1.90 1.90 1.19 Value Acres to be Dedicated: $ 47,550 $ 19,020 $14,265 $11,910 Land Value Per Capita $ 5,661 $ 2,264 $ 1,698 $ 1,418 Land Value Per Unit $ 15,850 $ 6,340 $ 4,755 $ 3,970 Park Dedication, Cash Only Total Cash In Lieu $ 9,000 $ 11,910 $11,910 $11,910 Cash in Lieu per Capita $ 1,071 $ 1,418 $ 1,418 $ 1,418 Cash in Lieu Fee per Unit $ 3,000 $ 3,970 $ 3,970 $ 3,970 The ordinance (current and proposed) states that “the dedication requirements based on the development’s proportional share of the City park system are presumptively appropriate.” (Chapter 9, Subd. 6.H.) The formula has been created so that land owners can calculate required park dedication when planning their subdivisions, and so that the city can ensure that there will be adequate contributions to fund the planned park system. This predictability saves time and money. Park Dedication Ordinance Update 4 July 14, 2016 City Council Meeting The owner is not required to pay for appraisals and the city does not need to negotiate the park dedication requirements for each individual subdivision. A subdivision may include more or less units than the assumed density, or the value of the land may be more or less than the city’s estimates, but the land dedication formula remains constant. The proposed ordinance includes language (Subd. 6. F.) that allows the city to adjust park dedication in circumstances where the formula does not produce a fair result; typically, if the owner believes that that the land is more valuable than the value assumed by the city. This revised language in this section is taken directly from the state law. It allows the City to negotiate the value, or to base it on an independent appraisal. If the City finds the land value to be higher, it could require less land than the formula requires in that particular subdivision. In the rural area, there is a greater potential for the value of 4% of the land to be worth more than the per capita or per household contribution of the formula. The range of possible densities among rural subdivisions is much wider than for urban subdivisions. For example, the maximum density (5 units per acre) of the Low Density Residential category is 166% of the bottom of the range (3 units per acre.) In the rural area densities could range from 1 unit per 30 acres to 1 unit per 10 acre—a 300% difference. The City will be updating the land values to be used to calculate the park dedication land and cash in-lieu-of-land requirement on an annual basis. While the value determination will be based on the best information available to the city at the time, it will only be an estimate and actual land values may vary widely within a land use category. If the land is worth more than the city’s estimate, the owner may request a reduction. Logically, if the land is actually worth less than the estimate, the owner is unlikely to request an adjustment. Because of the concern about equity, the question has been raised whether the City should take land dedication from rural subdivisions, or instead only require payment of the cash fee. We would strongly recommend that land dedication should be required from all subdivisions where the City has identified the need for land for a park or trail. Purchasing the needed land later would be potentially much more costly and a very difficult process, particularly if the future landowners are not willing sellers. Column C of the table above shows that if the land value for the Strehler Estates example was reduced to $7,500 per acre, the value of the land dedication would be closer to the cash-in-lieu requirement. It is unlikely that the two will be exactly equal, because of the variations in density. If the Council is not comfortable adjusting land values to address equity for Rural/Ag Residential subdivisions, we have identified a possible addition to the draft ordinance to address the concern. Section H of the ordinance could be modified as follows (new text underlined.) H. Deviation from Required Dedication. The dedication requirements based on the development’s proportional share of the City park system are presumptively appropriate. The City Council may modify the land dedication required for a subdivision if it finds that the value of the land dedicated would exceed the development’s proportional share of the park system cost. Park Dedication Ordinance Update 5 July 14, 2016 City Council Meeting Column D of the table shows how this could be applied in the Strehler Estates example. The required land dedication was recalculated using the per capita/per household share of the park system ($1,418 X 2.8 persons per household X 3 units) divided by the land value ($10,000 per acre.) This results in a required dedication of 2.5% of the land, instead of 4%. This new language still requires the City Council to use its discretion and to negotiate park dedication requirements for an individual subdivision. However, it would provide a “safety valve” for dealing with low density subdivisions (such as the Strehler Estates example) and for any other unusual circumstances that cannot be foreseen at this time. While this new sentence would apply to all subdivisions, it is less likely to be used in an urban subdivision where densities will generally not be less than the minimum assumed by the ordinance. 4. Draft Ordinance The draft amendment to Section 955.020, Subd. 6, of the City Code reflects the alternative park dedication schedule described in the April report to the City Council. Several additional edits were made after the initial draft to ensure clarity, and the new sentence has been added to Section H has been added, as described above. The amendment includes the following changes: • The table of land dedication requirements has been revised to incorporate the new percentage requirements listed in Table 9 of the April report. • The paragraph immediately following the table has been revised to clarify that the cash-in- lieu of land dedication fee per residential unit is to be paid when the Council determines that land is not needed in the area of the proposed subdivision, and that if a lesser amount of land is needed the cash payment is based on a pro-rata share of the land dedication that would otherwise be required. • The text of Section C, Commercial and industrial land use, would be amended to change the dedication requirement from 5% to 3%, as described in the April report. • A new paragraph (new Section D) has been added to clarify that for mixed use development, park dedication requirements will be pro-rated based on the acres of land devoted to each type of land use. • The text of Section F, Determination of Fair Market Value, would be replaced with new language from the 2013 amendment of Minn. Stat. Section 462.358, Subd. 2b, as follows: “The fair market value of the undeveloped land shall be determined by the City annually based on tax valuation or other relevant data. If the City’s calculation of valuation is objected to by the applicant, then the value shall be as negotiated between the City and the applicant, or based on the market value as determined by the City based on an independent appraisal of land in a same or similar land use category.” • The following sentence has been added to Section H: “The City Council may modify the land dedication required for a subdivision if it finds that the value of the land dedicated would exceed the development’s proportional share of the park system cost.” Park Dedication Ordinance Update 6 July 14, 2016 City Council Meeting The draft findings of fact resolution incorporates portions of the April report in order to document the relationship between the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the park dedication requirements—the “essential nexus” that is required by state law. It shows that the city has done the analysis to demonstrate that “the fee or dedication must bear a rough proportionality to the need created by the proposed subdivision or development” as required by Minn. Stat. Section 462.358, Subd. 2b. Changes to the cash in lieu of land fee will also require an amendment to the City’s 2016 fee schedule. This ordinance amendment is presented as a separate agenda item for City Council action. Annually, when the City updates its fee schedule, the assessor should be consulted on any changes in land values, cost estimates should be updated for inflation, and the cash-in-lieu of land park fee recalculated. 5. Requested Action Move to adopt the following, as recommended by the Planning Commission and as modified based on Council discussion at the June 23 meeting and the recommendations of this report: a. Ordinance 2016-325 approving the updates to the park dedication requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Chapter 9 of the Corcoran City Code; b. Resolution 2016-51 approving Findings of Fact for the Ordinance Amendments; and c. Ordinance 2016-326, approving summary publication of Ordinance 2016-325. Approval of the Ordinance and Findings of Fact requires a 3/5 vote of the City Council. Approval of the Summary Publication Ordinance requires a 4/5 vote of the City Council. Attachments: • Ordinance 2016-325 • Resolution 2016-51, Findings of Fact • Summary Ordinance 2016-326 City of Corcoran County of Hennepin July 14, 2016 State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2016-325 Page 1 of 3 Motion By: Seconded By: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF CHAPTER 9 OF THE CORCORAN CITY CODE, ENTITLED CORCORAN SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE THE CITY COUNCIL OF CORCORAN ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Amendments. The text of Section 955.020, Subd. 6 of the Corcoran City Code is hereby amended by deleting the stricken material and adding the underlined material as follows: Subd. 6. Area of Dedicated Land. Subdividers shall be required to dedicate to the City for park, trail and open space the percentage of net land area or equivalent market value in cash identified below: Residential Land Uses Dedication Requirements: Land Use Category based on the Comprehensive Plan Units per acre (Density, Net – Pre- Development) Percentage of land or equivalent market value in cash Rural/Ag Residential Less than 3 10% 4% Low Density Residential 3-5 11% 15% Medium-Density Residential 6-8 12% 17% Mixed Residential 8-10 13% 27% High-Density Residential and Mixed-Use 10+ 14% 22% Commercial and Industrial N/A 5% 3% A. The City Council may will identify a maximum minimum park dedication fee per residential unit to be paid in lieu of land dedication when the Council determines that that land is not needed in the area of the proposed subdivision. If the Council determines that land is needed in the subdivision, but in a lesser amount than the required percentage, the Council will require payment of the per unit fee based on a pro-rata share of the land dedication that would otherwise be required. . The subdivider shall pay the lesser of the per unit fee or the equivalent cash market value calculated using the table above for residential land use dedication requirements. City of Corcoran County of Hennepin July 14, 2016 State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2016-325 Page 2 of 3 B.A. The City Council shall review park dedication fee requirements periodically, to ensure that the required fee remains consistent with park and trail system development costs. B. Commercial and industrial land uses: Dedication requirement is five percent (5%3%) of land or equivalent market value in cash. C. Dedication requirements for mixed use development will be pro-rated based on the acres of land devoted to each type of land use. D. Developments that include memory care and assisted living units shall apply the commercial rate to the percentage of memory care and/or assisted living units that are in the project, multiplied by the project net acres. E. Schools, religious institutions and other non-profit organizations: Dedication requirement shall be determined by the City Council based on discussion with the School District or non-profit agency. Recommendations will be based on anticipated use of City park facilities by the school or organization, and shall consider agreements for cooperative use of school recreational facilities. F. Determination of Fair Market Value. To determine the fair market value of the undeveloped land, the Developer shall submit a current appraisal at the time of preliminary plat application. The City may then obtain a review appraisal as a validation of the Developer's appraisal. If staff and the Developer are unable to agree on fair market value, the City Council will make the determination of fair market value. The fair market value of the undeveloped land shall be determined by the City annually based on tax valuation or other relevant data. If the City’s calculation of valuation is objected to by the applicant, then the value shall be as negotiated between the City and the applicant, or based on the market value as determined by the City based on an independent appraisal of land in a same or similar land use category. G. Lands Designated On Official Map or Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Where a proposed park, playground, trail or open space area indicated in the City park and trail plan or comprehensive plan is located in whole or in part within a proposed subdivision, all or part of the proposed public site shall be designated as such and City of Corcoran County of Hennepin July 14, 2016 State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2016-325 Page 3 of 3 should be dedicated to the City, based on the area of land dedication required by this ordinance. H. Deviation from Required Dedication. The dedication requirements based on the development's proportional share of the City park system are presumptively appropriate. The City Council may modify the land dedication required for a subdivision if it finds that the value of the land dedicated would exceed the development’s proportional share of the pary system cost. I. Wetlands and Ponding Areas. Existing wetlands drainage ways accepted by the City shall not be considered in the parkland and/or cash contribution to the City. (Ord. 291, passed 12-11-14) Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its publication and passage. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY Guenthner, Ken Guenthner, Ken Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike LaFave, Tonya LaFave, Tonya Hank, Pat Hank, Pat Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron Whereupon, said Ordinance is hereby declared adopted on this 14th day of July 2016. ___________________________________ Kenneth Guenthner - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise– City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator City of Corcoran July 14, 2016 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2016-51 Page 1 of 5 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINDINGS OF FACT FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF CHAPTER 9 OF THE CORCORAN CITY CODE, ENTITLED CORCORAN SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE WHEREAS, the City of Corcoran initiated an amendment to update the Subdivision Ordinance requirements for the dedication of land for park, trail and open space purposes; and WHEREAS, the dedication requirements established by Section 955.020, Subd. 6 of the City Code were reviewed in 2011 and based on the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan, and the projected costs for acquisition and construction of the planned park system; and WHEREAS, the City has updated the land values and construction cost assumptions on which the dedication requirements are based, and calculated the proportionate share of park system costs that shall be contributed by new developments to ensure that park dedication contributions are fair and adequate to fund the planned park system; and WHEREAS, the results of this analysis are summarized in Exhibit A, attached; and WHEREAS, amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance incorporate revised dedication requirements for the various land use categories of the Comprehensive Plan, clarify how dedication will be calculated for partial dedications of land and mixed land use developments, and include language regarding the determination of fair market value to reflect 2013 changes to Minn. Stat. Section 462.358, Subd. 2b; and WHEREAS, amendments to the 2016 Fee Schedule will also be necessary to adopt new park dedication fees to be paid in lieu of land dedication; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance at a duly called public hearing and recommends approval; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the Subdivision Ordinance text amendment based upon the finding that the proposed amendments would be consistent with State law, City policies and the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and compatible with other provisions of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance. City of Corcoran July 14, 2016 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2016-51 Page 2 of 5 VOTING AYE VOTING NAY Guenthner, Ken Guenthner, Ken Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike LaFave, Tonya LaFave, Tonya Hank, Pat Hank, Pat Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 14th day of July 2016. ___________________________________ Kenneth Guenthner - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise– City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator City of Corcoran July 14, 2016 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2016-51 Page 3 of 5 EXHIBIT A Summary Calculation of Park Dedication Requirements Park dedication requirements are based upon the cost of acquiring and constructing the Parks and Trails system envisioned by the City of Corcoran’s Comprehensive Plan. The share of land to be dedicated within new subdivisions, or cash to be paid in lieu of land dedication, is apportioned based on the expected demand generated by the new residents of the community. Park System Costs The components of park system costs are land and park construction costs. The assumptions on average land value are based upon consultations with the City Assessor. Table 1: Land Value Assumptions Land Use 2011 Assumption Land Value per Acre 2016 Assumption Land Value per Acre Non-MUSA Residential $ 20,000 $ 10,000 Low and Medium Density Residential (MUSA) $ 80,000 $ 80,000 High Density Residential and Commercial/Industrial $ 100,000 $125,000 In 2011, the cost of acquiring and developing the planned park system was estimated as $42,474,750. In 2016, the cost estimates were updated using the new land value assumptions, the Turner Construction cost index, and recent trail planning estimated from Hennepin County. The 2016 cost estimate for the park system is $60,216,200. Park System Demand New residential development is expected to create 95% of the need for park and recreational land and facilities in Corcoran. Projected demand for parks and trails was estimated for each type of land use, based on the density and type of dwelling units expected to be developed in each land use category of the Comprehensive Plan. Rural/Ag Residential and Low Density Residential developments are assumed to be single family detached dwellings (average household size of 2.8 persons) and the remainder area assumed to be attached dwellings (average household size of 1.9 persons.) Table 2: Expected Population Density by Land Use Category Land Use Category HH Size Units/Acre Persons/Acre Rural/Ag Residential 2.8 0.1 0.28 Low Density Residential 2.8 3 8.40 Medium Density Residential 1.9 5 9.50 Mixed Residential 1.9 8 15.20 High Density Residential/Mixed Use 1.9 10 19.00 City of Corcoran July 14, 2016 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2016-51 Page 4 of 5 Table 3 shows the maximum population at full build-out of the City at the minimum densities projected by the Comprehensive Plan Table 3: Expected Population at Build Out Land Use Category Acres Persons per Acre Population Rural/Ag Residential 1,240 0.28 347 Low Density Residential 2,716 8.40 22,814 Medium Density Residential 147 9.50 1,397 Mixed Residential 555 15.20 8,436 High Density Residential/Mixed Use 386 19.00 7,334 40,328 Each new resident’s proportionate share of the park system is the cost of the park system ($57,205,390 after deducting the 5% share for non-residential development) divided by the population served (40,328) to equal the per capita share: $1,418. The per capita share was multiplied by the number of persons per acre to determine the park dedication that must be contributed for each acre of land to be developed. Comparing that amount to the value of the land yields the new percentage of land value to be dedicated in each land use category, shown on Table 4. Table 4: Proposed Dedication by Land Use Category Land Use Category Persons per Acre Dedication per Acre ($1,418 per capita) Land Value per Acre % Land Value Rural/Ag Residential 0.28 397 $ 10,000 4% Low Density Residential 8.40 11,915 $ 80,000 13% Medium Density Residential 9.50 13,476 $ 80,000 15% Mixed Residential 15.20 21,561 $ 80,000 24% High Density Residential/Mixed Use 19.00 26,951 $ 125,000 19% For Commercial/Industrial Development, the % of land value was calculated by dividing its share of park costs (5% of the total cost, or $3,010,810) by the total acres of land (728) to yield the contribution per acre ($4,135.) This is approximately 3% of the land value ($4,135 divided by $125,000 per acre.) Table 5 compares the total potential dedication based to the projected cost of the park system. This table demonstrates that the dedication requirements are necessary and sufficient to fund the park system anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan. City of Corcoran July 14, 2016 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2016-51 Page 5 of 5 Cash in Lieu of Land Dedication If the City determines that land is not needed in the area of a proposed subdivision, a cash fee in lieu of land dedication may be required. For residential developments, the cash in lieu of land fee has been calculated based on the per capita share of park system costs as calculated above ($1,418.) The fee for single family units shall be $1,418 X 2.8 (the average household size) or $3,970. The fee for multi-family units shall be $1,418 X 1.9, or $2,694. The City will annually update its estimate of land values, as required by state law and as provided by the amended ordinance. The cost estimates and the park dedication formula and fees will be updated and amended as necessary. Table 5: Potential Park Dedication Cash Value Compared to Total Cost Land Use Category Acres % Land Dedicated Land Value Cash Value Rural/Ag Residential 1,240 4% $ 10,000 496,000 Low Density Residential 2,716 15% $ 80,000 32,592,000 Medium Density Residential 147 17% $ 80,000 1,999,200 Mixed Residential 555 27% $ 80,000 11,988,000 High Density Residential/Mixed Use 386 22% $ 125,000 10,615,000 Commercial and Industrial 728 3% $ 125,000 2,730,0 00 Total Potential Value of Land or Cash in Lieu $ 60,420,200 Approximate Cost of Park System $ 60,216,200 Difference: $ 204,000 City of Corcoran July 14, 2016 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2016-326 Page 1 of 1 Motion By: Seconded By: CITY OF CORCORAN SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 2016-325 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF CHAPTER 9 (SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE) OF THE CORCORAN CITY CODE Section 955.020, Subd. 6 of Chapter 9 of the Corcoran City Code (Subdivision Ordinance) is hereby amended to revise the dedication requirements for parks, trails and open space. A printed copy of the entire amendment to Chapter 9 is available for inspection by any person at City Hall during the City Clerk’s regular office hours. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its publication and passage. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY Guenthner, Ken Guenthner, Ken Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike LaFave, Tonya LaFave, Tonya Hank, Pat Hank, Pat Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron Whereupon, said Ordinance is hereby declared adopted on this 14th day of July 2016. ___________________________________ Kenneth Guenthner - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise– City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 9b. Council Meeting: July 14, 2016 Prepared By: Kent Torve, Kendra Lindahl, Brad Martens Topic: FEMA Required Floodplain Ordinance Update Action Required: Schedule Hearing Summary: In early May 2016, the City of Corcoran was notified that FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) recently completed an update to the FEMA maps and that the City is required to update the existing floodplain ordinance to adopt the new model floodplain ordinance. FEMA will require that the City adopt an ordinance based on the model ordinance, but will allow some modifications to address the unique characteristics of the City. The floodplain ordinance must be updated by November 4, 2016 in order to continue participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). While the update is more technical in nature, the City should begin the ordinance update as soon as possible in order to ensure that there is adequate time to for the DNR and FEMA to review the proposed update prior to November 4th. Staff has reviewed the model ordinance provided by FEMA and compared it to the existing standards in Section 1050.030 (Floodplain Overlay District) of the Zoning Ordinance. The existing ordinance was adopted based on FEMAs 2004 model ordinance. The new model is more clearly written than the previous model and will be easier for the City to interpret and implement. The new model ordinance (attached to this document) includes some updates that are required by FEMA, some clarifications and corrections to ensure we are following state and federal laws, and some of the updates are optional recommended language. Staff has not prepared a draft ordinance yet, but it is recommended that the existing Section 1050.030 be repealed in its entirety and replaced with the new ordinance language provided by FEMA (with some modifications to be consistent with other Corcoran City Code sections). The City would also need to update the Floodplain related definitions in Section 1020.020. In order to complete the work by the November 4th deadline, it is recommended that a public hearing is scheduled for the August 4th Planning Commission meeting and recommended for adoption at the August 25th City Council meeting. Financial/Budget: The City will incur costs associated with consultant time to assist in the adoption of the updated ordinance. Page 2 Alignment with Values: This item relates to the following adopted values: EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for citizen confidence in government. Options: 1. Direct staff to proceed with the required ordinance update and hold a public hearing at the August 4, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. 2. Send back to staff for further review. Recommendation: Direct staff to proceed with the required ordinance update and hold a public hearing at the August 4, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. Council Action: Consider a motion to direct staff to proceed with the required ordinance update and hold a public hearing at the August 4, 2016 Planning Commission meeting. Attachments: 1. FEMA Notification 2. Minnesota Sample Floodplain Ordinance 1 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED IN REPLY REFER TO: 19P-N May 4, 2016 The Honorable Ken Guenthner Mayor, City of Corcoran City Hall 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, Minnesota 55340 Community: City of Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota Community No.: 270155 Map Panels Affected: See FIRM Index Dear Mayor Guenthner: This is to formally notify you of the final flood hazard determination for your community in compliance with Title 44, Chapter I, Part 67, Code of Federal Regulations. On September 2, 2004, the Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) issued a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that identified the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs), the areas subject to inundation by the base (1-percent-annual-chance) flood, in the City of Corcoran, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Recently, FEMA completed a re-evaluation of flood hazards in your community. On December 31, 2005, and February 28, 2013, FEMA provided you with Preliminary copies of the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report and FIRM that identify existing flood hazards in your community. FEMA has not received any comments on the Preliminary copies of the FIS report and FIRM. Accordingly, the FIS report and FIRM for your community will become effective on November 4, 2016. Before the effective date, FEMA will send you final printed copies of the FIS report and FIRM. Because the FIS for your community has been completed, certain additional requirements must be met under Section 1361 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, within 6 months from the date of this letter. Prior to November 4, 2016, your community is required, as a condition of continued eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), to adopt or show evidence of adoption of floodplain management regulations that meet the standards of Paragraph 60.3(d) of the enclosed NFIP regulations (44 CFR 59, etc.). These standards are the minimum requirements and do not supersede any State or local requirements of a more stringent nature. It must be emphasized that all the standards specified in Paragraph 60.3(d) of the NFIP regulations must be enacted in a legally enforceable document. This includes adoption of the current effective FIS report and FIRM to which the regulations apply and the other modifications made by this map revision. Some of the standards should already have been enacted by your community in order to establish eligibility in the NFIP. Any additional requirements can be met by taking one of the following actions: 1. Amending existing regulations to incorporate any additional requirements of Paragraph 60.3(d); 2. Adopting all the standards of Paragraph 60.3(d) into one new, comprehensive set of regulations; or 3. Showing evidence that regulations have previously been adopted that meet or exceed the minimum requirements of Paragraph 60.3(d). 2 Communities that fail to enact the necessary floodplain management regulations will be suspended from participation in the NFIP and subject to the prohibitions contained in Section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 as amended. In addition to your community using the FIS report and FIRM to manage development in the floodplain, FEMA will use the FIS report to establish appropriate flood insurance rates. On the effective date of the revised FIRM, actuarial rates for flood insurance will be charged for all new structures and substantial improvements to existing structures located in the identified SFHAs. These rates may be higher if structures are not built in compliance with the floodplain management standards of the NFIP. The actuarial flood insurance rates increase as the lowest elevations (including basement) of new structures decrease in relation to the Base Flood Elevations established for your community. This is an important consideration for new construction because building at a higher elevation can greatly reduce the cost of flood insurance. To assist your community in maintaining the FIRM, we have enclosed a Summary of Map Actions to document previous Letter of Map Change (LOMC) actions (i.e., Letters of Map Amendment, Letters of Map Revision) that will be superseded when the revised FIRM panels referenced above become effective. Information on LOMCs is presented in the following four categories: (1) LOMCs for which results have been included on the revised FIRM panels; (2) LOMCs for which results could not be shown on the revised FIRM panels because of scale limitations or because the LOMC issued had determined that the lots or structures involved were outside the SFHA as shown on the FIRM; (3) LOMCs for which results have not been included on the revised FIRM panels because the flood hazard information on which the original determinations were based is being superseded by new flood hazard information; and (4) LOMCs issued for multiple lots or structures where the determination for one or more of the lots or structures cannot be revalidated through an administrative process like the LOMCs in Category 2 above. LOMCs in Category 2 will be revalidated through a single letter that reaffirms the validity of a previously issued LOMC; the letter will be sent to your community shortly before the effective date of the revised FIRM and will become effective 1 day after the revised FIRM becomes effective. For the LOMCs listed in Category 4, we will review the data previously submitted for the LOMA or LOMR request and issue a new determination for the affected properties after the revised FIRM becomes effective. The FIRM and FIS report for your community have been prepared in our countywide format, which means that flood hazard information for all jurisdictions within Hennepin County has been combined into one FIRM and FIS report. When the FIRM and FIS report are printed and distributed, your community will receive only those panels that present flood hazard information for your community. We will provide complete sets of the FIRM panels to county officials, where they will be available for review by your community. The FIRM panels have been computer-generated. Once the FIRM and FIS report are printed and distributed, the digital files containing the flood hazard data for the entire county can be provided to your community for use in a computer mapping system. These files can be used in conjunction with other thematic data for floodplain management purposes, insurance purchase and rating requirements, and many other planning applications. Copies of the digital files or paper copies of the FIRM panels may be obtained by calling our FEMA Map Information eXchange (FMIX), toll free, at 1-877-FEMA-MAP (1-877-336-2627). In addition, your community may be eligible for additional credits under our Community Rating System if you implement your activities using digital mapping files. If your community is encountering difficulties in enacting the necessary floodplain management measures, we urge you to call the Director, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Division of FEMA in Chicago, Illinois, at (312) 408-5500 for assistance. If you have any questions concerning mapping issues in general or the enclosed Summary of Map Actions, please call FMIX at the telephone number shown 3 above. Additional information and resources your community may find helpful regarding the NFIP and floodplain management, such as The National Flood Insurance Program Code of Federal Regulations, Answers to Questions About the NFIP, Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the Effect that Revised Flood Hazards have on Existing Structures, Use of Flood Insurance Study (FIS) Data as Available Data, and National Flood Insurance Program Elevation Certificate and Instructions, can be found on our website at http://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/lfd. Paper copies of these documents may also be obtained by calling FMIX. Sincerely, Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief Engineering Management Branch Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration Enclosure: Final Summary of Map Actions cc: Community Map Repository Jessica Beise, City Clerk, City of Corcoran Minnesota Sample Floodplain Ordinance Three District Ordinance This sample ordinance includes the three primary types of floodplain districts: Floodway, Flood Fringe, and General Floodplain. It can be used in a variety of situations, where all three districts or only some of them are present. Contents SECTION 1.0 STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION, FINDINGS OF FACT AND PURPOSE ....................................................... 2 SECTION 2.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS ........................................................................................................................... 2 SECTION 3.0 ESTABLISHMENT OF ZONING DISTRICTS ............................................................................................... 7 SECTION 4.0 FLOODWAY DISTRICT (FW) .................................................................................................................... 7 SECTION 5.0 FLOOD FRINGE DISTRICT (FF) ................................................................................................................ 9 SECTION 6.0 GENERAL FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT (GF) ................................................................................................. 12 SECTION 7.0 LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ..................................................................................................... 13 SECTION 8.0 PUBLIC UTILITIES, RAILROADS, ROADS, AND BRIDGES ........................................................................ 14 SECTION 9.0 MANUFACTURED HOMES, MANUFACTURED HOME PARKS, AND RECREATIONAL VEHICLES. ........... 14 SECTION 10.0 ADMINISTRATION .............................................................................................................................. 15 SECTION 11.0 NONCONFORMITIES ........................................................................................................................... 19 SECTION 12.0 PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT ........................................................................................................ 20 SECTION 13.0 AMENDMENTS ................................................................................................................................... 20 Ordinance Language Commentary SECTION 1.0 STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION, FINDINGS OF FACT AND PURPOSE 1.1 Statutory Authorization: The legislature of the State of Minnesota has, in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103F and Chapter [394/462] delegated the responsibility to local government units to adopt regulations designed to minimize flood losses. Therefore, the (City Council/ Board of Commissioners) of (community), Minnesota, does ordain as follows. 1.2 Purpose: 1.21 This ordinance regulates development in the flood hazard areas of (community). These flood hazard areas are subject to periodic inundation, which may result in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards, disruption of commerce and governmental services, extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the tax base. It is the purpose of this ordinance to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by minimizing these losses and disruptions. 1.22 National Flood Insurance Program Compliance. This ordinance is adopted to comply with the rules and regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program codified as 44 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 59 -78, as amended, so as to maintain the community’s eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program. 1.23 This ordinance is also intended to preserve the natural characteristics and functions of watercourses and floodplains in order to moderate flood and stormwater impacts, improve water quality, reduce soil erosion, protect aquatic and riparian habitat, provide recreational opportunities, provide aesthetic benefits and enhance community and economic development. SECTION 2.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS 2.1 How to Use This Ordinance: This ordinance adopts the floodplain maps applicable to (community) and includes three floodplain districts: Floodway, Flood Fringe, and General Floodplain. 2.11 Where Floodway and Flood Fringe districts are delineated on the floodplain maps, the standards in Sections 4 or 5 will apply, depending on the location of a property. 2.12 Locations where Floodway and Flood Fringe districts are not delineated on the floodplain maps are considered to fall within the General Floodplain district. Within the General Floodplain district, the Floodway District standards in Section 4 apply unless the floodway boundary is determined, according to the process outlined in Section 6. Once the floodway boundary is determined, the Flood Fringe District standards in Section 5 may apply outside the floodway. 2.2 Lands to Which Ordinance Applies: This ordinance applies to all lands within the jurisdiction of (Community) shown on the Official Zoning Map and/or the attachments to the map as being located within the boundaries of the Floodway, Flood Fringe, or General Floodplain Districts. 2.21 The Floodway, Flood Fringe and General Floodplain Districts are overlay districts that are superimposed on all existing zoning districts. The standards imposed in the overlay districts are in addition to any other requirements in this ordinance. In case of a conflict, the more restrictive standards will apply. 2.3 Incorporation of Maps by Reference: The following maps together with all attached material are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of the Official Zoning Map and this ordinance. The attached material includes the Flood Insurance Study for ______________ County, Minnesota, and Incorporated Areas, dated _____________ and the Flood Insurance Rate Map panels enumerated below, dated _______________, 1.1. is mandatory language. The zoning enabling statute reference is Chapter 394 for counties and Chapter 462 for cities and townships. “Governing body” is the City Council or County or Township Board. 1.21 7 1.22 is mandatory language 1.23 is optional language referencing the natural beneficial functions of floodplains. The types of floodplain zones present in a community will vary, depending on hydrologic conditions and the level of detail of the applicable maps. If the General Floodplain District (the A zone or other zones without a defined floodway) is not present within the community, references to it, including the provisions of Section 6, may be deleted but Section 6 should be “reserved for future use” (i.e., in case a future annexation adds an A zone). 2.21 is optional – if the community has a zoning ordinance – as most do – it’s helpful to define these districts as overlay districts. If not, then delete this statement and other overlay references. 2.3 is mandatory language. Each community must adopt the Flood Insurance Study and specific map panels that encompass its boundaries. Under Minnesota Rules 6120.5700, these all prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. These materials are on file in the (list location where maps will be filed – i.e., City Clerk’s office). (list all map panels here) 2.4 Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation: The regulatory flood protection elevation (RFPE) is an elevation no lower than one foot above the elevation of the regional flood plus any increases in flood elevation caused by encroachments on the floodplain that result from designation of a floodway. 2.5 Interpretation: The boundaries of the zoning districts are determined by scaling distances on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. 2.51 Where a conflict exists between the floodplain limits illustrated on the official zoning map and actual field conditions, the flood elevations shall be the governing factor. The Zoning Administrator must interpret the boundary location based on the ground elevations that existed on the site on the date of the first National Flood Insurance Program map showing the area within the regulatory floodplain, and other available technical data. 2.52 Persons contesting the location of the district boundaries will be given a reasonable opportunity to present their case to the (Planning Commission/Board of Adjustment) and to submit technical evidence. 2.6 Abrogation and Greater Restrictions: It is not intended by this ordinance to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or other private agreements. However, where this ordinance imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this ordinance prevail. All other ordinances inconsistent with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of the inconsistency only. 2.7 Warning and Disclaimer of Liability: This ordinance does not imply that areas outside the floodplain districts or land uses permitted within such districts will be free from flooding or flood damages.This ordinance does not create liability on the part of (community) or its officers or employees for any flood damages that result from reliance on this ordinance or any administrative decision lawfully made hereunder. materials are considered attachments to the Zoning Map. Listing of maps will vary by jurisdiction and map type. • For communities with older maps, such as Flood Hazard Boundary Maps, in addition to Flood Insurance Rate Maps, these maps should also be listed in Section 2.3. • For counties, the map index may be used in lieu of listing all the map panels individually. Cities may need to adopt other map panels to encompass areas that may be annexed in the future. Counties and townships may need to adopt city map panels to encompass areas that may be detached from cities. See Section 2.10 & 2.11 Communities may also adopt preliminary flood studies and/or other best available data for regulatory purposes. 2.4 is optional - Reiterates information in the (mandatory) definition of this term in Section 2.9. The RFPE can be increased beyond one foot to provide enhanced flood protection. (In A-O zones, add more detailed language: “Within the AO Zone, the RFPE is an elevation no lower than [the number shown on the FIRM] above the highest adjacent grade of an existing structure or proposed structure or a proposed structural addition.”) 2.8 Severability: If any section, clause, provision, or portion of this ordinance is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a court of law, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected and shall remain in full force. 2.9 Definitions: Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases used in this ordinance must be interpreted according to common usage and so as to give this ordinance its most reasonable application. 2.911 Accessory Use or Structure – a use or structure on the same lot with, and of a nature customarily incidental and subordinate to, the principal use or structure. 2.912 Base Flood Elevation – The elevation of the “regional flood.” The term “base flood elevation” is used in the flood insurance survey. 2.913 Basement – any area of a structure, including crawl spaces, having its floor or base subgrade (below ground level) on all four sides, regardless of the depth of excavation below ground level. 2.914 Conditional Use – a specific type of structure or land use listed in the official control that may be allowed but only after an in-depth review procedure and with appropriate conditions or restrictions as provided in the official zoning controls or building codes and upon a finding that: (a) Certain conditions as detailed in the zoning ordinance exist. (b) The structure and/or land use conform to the comprehensive land use plan if one exists and are compatible with the existing neighborhood. 2.915 Critical Facilities – facilities necessary to a community’s public health and safety, those that store or produce highly volatile, toxic or water-reactive materials, and those that house occupants that may be insufficiently mobile to avoid loss of life or injury. Examples of critical facilities include hospitals, correctional facilities, schools, daycare facilities, nursing homes, fire and police stations, wastewater treatment facilities, public electric utilities, water plants, fuel storage facilities, and waste handling and storage facilities. 2.916 Development – any manmade change to improved or unimproved real estate, including buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations, or storage of equipment or materials. 2.917 Equal Degree of Encroachment – a method of determining the location of floodway boundaries so that floodplain lands on both sides of a stream are capable of conveying a proportionate share of flood flows. 2.918 Farm Fence – A fence as defined by Minn. Statutes Section 344.02, Subd. 1(a)-(d). An open type fence of posts and wire is not considered to be a structure under this ordinance. Fences that have the potential to obstruct flood flows, such as chain link fences and rigid walls, are regulated as structures under this ordinance. 2.919 Flood – a temporary increase in the flow or stage of a stream or in the stage of a wetland or lake that results in the inundation of normally dry areas. 2.920 Flood Frequency – the frequency for which it is expected that a specific flood stage or discharge may be equaled or exceeded. 2.921 Flood Fringe – the portion of the Special Flood Hazard Area (one percent annual chance flood) located outside of the floodway. Flood fringe is synonymous with the term “floodway fringe” used in the Flood Insurance Study for (community), Minnesota. 2.922 Flood Prone Area – any land susceptible to being inundated by water from any source (see “Flood”). 2.8 This statement not needed if already included in zoning ordinance These definitions may already exist as part of zoning ordinance, but check for consistency. Definitions are mandatory unless otherwise indicated. 2.912 is an optional definition 2.914 is an optional definition – check against zoning ordinance. Some local ordinances – and the state rules that apply to floodplains – use the older term “special use.” 2.915 is an optional definition – see the (optional) regulation of critical facilities in Section 3.2. 2.918 is an optional definition – to be used if this type of farm fence is to be exempted from permit requirements 2.919. Optional definition 2.920. Optional definition 2.921. For cities mapped as part of county- wide flood insurance study, the county name should be inserted here. 2.922 is an optional definition – see provisions of Section 7 on flood prone areas 2.923 Floodplain – the beds proper and the areas adjoining a wetland, lake or watercourse which have been or hereafter may be covered by the regional flood. 2.924 Floodproofing – a combination of structural provisions, changes, or adjustments to properties and structures subject to flooding, primarily for the reduction or elimination of flood damages. 2.925 Floodway – the bed of a wetland or lake and the channel of a watercourse and those portions of the adjoining floodplain which are reasonably required to carry or store the regional flood discharge. 2.926 Lowest Floor – the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement). An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, used solely for parking of vehicles, building access, or storage in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building’s lowest floor; provided, that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of 44 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 60.3. 2.927 Manufactured Home – a structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when attached to the required utilities. The term “manufactured home” does not include the term “recreational vehicle.” 2.928 New Construction - Structures, including additions and improvements, and placement of manufactured homes, for which the start of construction commenced on or after the effective date of this ordinance. 2.929 Obstruction – any dam, wall, wharf, embankment, levee, dike, pile, abutment, projection, excavation, channel modification, culvert, building, wire, fence, stockpile, refuse, fill, structure, or matter in, along, across, or projecting into any channel, watercourse, or regulatory floodplain which may impede, retard, or change the direction of the flow of water, either in itself or by catching or collecting debris carried by such water. 2.930 One Hundred Year Floodplain – lands inundated by the “Regional Flood” (see definition). 2.931 Principal Use or Structure – all uses or structures that are not accessory uses or structures. 2.932 Reach – a hydraulic engineering term to describe a longitudinal segment of a stream or river influenced by a natural or man-made obstruction. In an urban area, the segment of a stream or river between two consecutive bridge crossings would most typically constitute a reach. 2.933 Recreational Vehicle – a vehicle that is built on a single chassis, is 400 square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection, is designed to be self- propelled or permanently towable by a light duty truck, and is designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use. For the purposes of this ordinance, the term recreational vehicle is synonymous with the term “travel trailer/travel vehicle.” 2.934 Regional Flood – a flood which is representative of large floods known to have occurred generally in Minnesota and reasonably characteristic of what can be expected to occur on an average frequency in the magnitude of the 1% chance or 100-year recurrence interval. Regional flood is synonymous with the term "base flood" used in a flood insurance study. 2.935 Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation (RFPE) - an elevation not less than one foot above the elevation of the regional flood plus any increases in flood 2.929. Optional definition 2.931. Optional definition 2.932. Optional definition 2.935. The one-foot elevation is mandated by state law, but a higher elevation can yield increased protection. elevation caused by encroachments on the floodplain that result from designation of a floodway. 2.936 Repetitive Loss: Flood related damages sustained by a structure on two separate occasions during a ten year period for which the cost of repairs at the time of each such flood event on the average equals or exceeds 25% of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. 2.937 Special Flood Hazard Area – a term used for flood insurance purposes synonymous with “One Hundred Year Floodplain.” 2.938 Start of Construction – includes substantial improvement, and means the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, placement or other improvement that occurred before the permit’s expiration date. The actual start is either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers, foundations, or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. For a substantial improvement, the actual start of construction means the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of a building, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the building. 2.939 Structure - anything constructed or erected on the ground or attached to the ground or on-site utilities, including, but not limited to, buildings, factories, sheds, detached garages, cabins, manufactured homes, recreational vehicles not meeting the exemption criteria specified in Section 9.22 of this ordinance and other similar items. 2.940 Substantial Damage - means damage of any origin sustained by a structure where the cost of restoring the structure to its before damaged condition would equal or exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. 2.941 Substantial Improvement - within any consecutive 365-day period, any reconstruction, rehabilitation (including normal maintenance and repair), repair after damage, addition, or other improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the “start of construction” of the improvement. This term includes structures that have incurred “substantial damage,” regardless of the actual repair work performed. The term does not, however, include either: (a) Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations of state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions. (b) Any alteration of a “historic structure,” provided that the alteration will not preclude the structure’s continued designation as a “historic structure.” For the purpose of this ordinance, “historic structure” is as defined in 44 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 59.1. 2.10 Annexations: The Flood Insurance Rate Map panels adopted by reference into Section 2.3 above may include floodplain areas that lie outside of the corporate boundaries of the (community) at the time of adoption of this ordinance. If any of these floodplain land 2.936. This is an optional definition linked to the optional provision for repetitive loss properties in Section 11.16. 2.941(b). “Historic structures” as defined in the CFR generally include sites listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and state- or locally-designated historic properties. 2.10 applies to cities only. It is optional but recommended – if not included, any areas are annexed into the (community) after the date of adoption of this ordinance, the newly annexed floodplain lands will be subject to the provisions of this ordinance immediately upon the date of annexation. 2.11 Detachments. The Flood Insurance Rate Map panels adopted by reference into Section 2.3 above will include floodplain areas that lie inside the corporate boundaries of municipalities at the time of adoption of this ordinance. If any of these floodplain land areas are detached from a municipality and come under the jurisdiction of (community) after the date of adoption of this ordinance, the newly detached floodplain lands will be subject to the provisions of this ordinance immediately upon the date of detachment. SECTION 3.0 ESTABLISHMENT OF ZONING DISTRICTS 3.1 Districts: 3.11 Floodway District. The Floodway District includes those areas within Zones AE/AO/AH (that have a floodway delineated) as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map adopted in Section 2.3. 3.12 Flood Fringe District. The Flood Fringe District includes areas within Zones AE/AO/AH (that have a floodway delineated) on the Flood Insurance Rate Map adopted in Section 2.3, but located outside of the floodway. 3.13 General Floodplain District. The General Floodplain District includes those areas within (Zone A or Zones AE/AO/AH) as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map adopted in Section 2.3. 3.2 Applicability: Within the floodplain districts established in this ordinance, the use, size, type and location of development must comply with the terms of this ordinance and other applicable regulations. In no cases shall floodplain development adversely affect the efficiency or unduly restrict the capacity of the channels or floodways of any tributaries to the main stream, drainage ditches, or any other drainage facilities or systems. All uses not listed as permitted uses or conditional uses in Sections 4.0, 5.0 and 6.0 are prohibited. In addition, critical facilities, as defined in Section 2.915, are prohibited in all floodplain districts. SECTION 4.0 FLOODWAY DISTRICT (FW) 4.1 Permitted Uses: The following uses, subject to the standards set forth in Section 4.2, are permitted uses if otherwise allowed in the underlying zoning district or any applicable overlay district: 4.11 General farming, pasture, grazing, outdoor plant nurseries, horticulture, truck farming, forestry, sod farming, and wild crop harvesting. 4.12 Industrial-commercial loading areas, parking areas, and airport landing strips. 4.13 Open space uses, including but not limited to private and public golf courses, tennis courts, driving ranges, archery ranges, picnic grounds, boat launching ramps, swimming areas, parks, wildlife and nature preserves, game farms, fish hatcheries, shooting preserves, hunting and fishing areas, and single or multiple purpose recreational trails. 4.14 Residential lawns, gardens, parking areas, and play areas. 4.15 Railroads, streets, bridges, utility transmission lines and pipelines, provided that the Department of Natural Resources’ Area Hydrologist is notified at least ten days prior to issuance of any permit. 4.2 Standards for Floodway Permitted Uses: annexation will trigger an amendment of the floodplain ordinance. Section 2.11 applies only to counties or townships that exercise zoning authority. Counties may choose to adopt specific map panels or adopt the countywide map index. 3.11. For lakes, ponds and wetlands, the floodway is usually administratively defined as the area at or below the Ordinary High Water Level. 3.12 & 3.13. If a community has floodplain delineations on the FIRM for lakes, ponds and wetland without delineated floodways, contact DNR Floodplain Program staff for specific language. Zones AO and AH are areas prone to flooding due to overland flow or small ponds, and are not typically found on most FIRMs. If not present, references in 3.12 and 3.13 can be deleted. 3.2. The last sentence is optional, but recommended language that would prohibit critical facilities in all floodplain districts. This is a higher regulatory standard intended to keep critical infrastructure and concentrations of people out of floodplain areas. 4.0. It is critical that the floodway be protected so that it can transport and store the waters of the regional (100-year) flood without increased flood heights or velocities or threats to public health and safety. Note that communities are not required to adopt all of the listed uses, but must provide for some use of the floodway land. Other similar uses may be included in this section if they meet the standards in Section 4.2. If a community wishes to restrict all floodplain districts to only these permitted floodway uses, that could be carried out through the DNR’s model “Restrictive Ordinance.” 4.15. Earlier versions of the DNR sample ordinances listed utility and transportation uses as conditional uses. In this version, these uses are permitted if DNR is notified and certain standards are met 4.21 The use must have a low flood damage potential. 4.22 the use must not obstruct flood flows or cause any increase in flood elevations and must not involve structures, obstructions, or storage of materials or equipment. 4.23 Any facility that will be used by employees or the general public must be designed with a flood warning system that provides adequate time for evacuation if the area is inundated to a depth and velocity such that the depth (in feet) multiplied by the velocity (in feet per second) would exceed a product of four upon occurrence of the regional (1% chance) flood. 4.3 Conditional Uses: The following uses may be allowed as conditional uses following the standards and procedures set forth in Section 10.4 of this ordinance and further subject to the standards set forth in Section 4.4, if otherwise allowed in the underlying zoning district or any applicable overlay district. 4.31 Structures accessory to the uses listed in 4.11 – 4.13 above and the uses listed in 4.32 - 4.33 below. 4.32 Extraction and storage of sand, gravel, and other materials. 4.33 Marinas, boat rentals, docks, piers, wharves, and water control structures. 4.34 Storage yards for equipment, machinery, or materials. 4.35 Placement of fill or construction of fences that obstruct flood flows. Farm fences, as defined in section 2.918, are permitted uses. 4.36 Travel-ready recreational vehicles meeting the exception standards in Section 9.3. 4.37 Levees or dikes intended to protect agricultural crops for a frequency flood event equal to or less than the 10-year frequency flood event. 4.4 Standards for Floodway Conditional Uses: 4.41 All Uses. A conditional use must not cause any increase in the stage of the 1% chance or regional flood or cause an increase in flood damages in the reach or reaches affected. 4.42 Fill; Storage of Materials and Equipment: (a) The storage or processing of materials that are, in time of flooding, flammable, explosive, or potentially injurious to human, animal, or plant life is prohibited. (b) Fill, dredge spoil, and other similar materials deposited or stored in the floodplain must be protected from erosion by vegetative cover, mulching, riprap or other acceptable method. Permanent sand and gravel operations and similar uses must be covered by a long-term site development plan. (c) Temporary placement of fill, other materials, or equipment which would cause an increase to the stage of the 1% percent chance or regional flood may only be allowed if the (Governing Body) has approved a plan that assures removal of the materials from the floodway based upon the flood warning time available. 4.43 Accessory Structures. Accessory structures, as identified in Section 4.31, may be permitted, provided that: 4.2. Higher standards for floodway protection could include limiting impervious coverage in the floodway, in order to facilitate infiltration of rainfall. 4.3. Note that these conditional uses are optional for the community but, if allowed, must meet the standards in Sections 4.4. Communities are encouraged to select only those conditional uses that are appropriate for their community. 4.35. Optional statement in 4.35 allows typical farm fences such as barbed wire fences that don’t obstruct flood flows as permitted uses. See also Section 10.21(c). 4.36 is optional. We recommend treating recreational vehicles as a conditional use so that road access and warning systems are carefully reviewed to ensure public safety in times of flooding. 4.4. Note that flood control projects intended to remove areas from the floodway to allow development of single or multiple structures are not permitted unless a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) can be obtained to change the floodway boundary. Contact DNR Floodplain Program staff for further information. 4.42(a) and (b) must be included if deposition or storage of fill is allowed in the floodway 4.42(c) is an optional alternative allowing temporary storage of fill or other materials that could increase flood stage, suitable for locations where adequate flood warning times will be available to allow removal of materials. (a) structures are not intended for human habitation; (b) structures will have a low flood damage potential; (c) structures will be constructed an placed so as to offer a minimal obstruction to the flow of flood waters; (d) Service utilities, such as electrical and heating equipment, within these structures must be elevated to or above the regulatory flood protection elevation or properly floodproofed; (e) Structures must be elevated on fill or structurally dry floodproofed in accordance with the FP1 or FP2 floodproofing classifications in the State Building Code. All floodproofed structures must be adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement and designed to equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls. (f) As an alternative, an accessory structure may be internally/wet floodproofed to the FP3 or FP4 floodproofing classifications in the State Building Code, provided the accessory structure constitutes a minimal investment and does not exceed 576 square feet in size. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or meet or exceed the following criteria: (1) To allow for the equalization of hydrostatic pressure, there must be a minimum of two “automatic” openings in the outside walls of the structure, with a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding; and (2) There must be openings on at least two sides of the structure and the bottom of all openings must be no higher than one foot above the lowest adjacent grade to the structure. Using human intervention to open a garage door prior to flooding will not satisfy this requirement for automatic openings. 4.44 Structural works for flood control that will change the course, current or cross section of protected wetlands or public waters are subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245. 4.45 A levee, dike or floodwall constructed in the floodway must not cause an increase to the 1% chance or regional flood. The technical analysis must assume equal conveyance or storage loss on both sides of a stream. 4.46 Floodway developments must not adversely affect the hydraulic capacity of the channel and adjoining floodplain of any tributary watercourse or drainage system. SECTION 5.0 FLOOD FRINGE DISTRICT (FF) 5.1 Permitted Uses: Permitted uses are those uses of land or structures allowed in the underlying zoning district(s) that comply with the standards in Sections 5.2. If no pre- existing, underlying zoning districts exist, then any residential or nonresidential structure or use of a structure or land is a permitted use provided it does not constitute a public nuisance. 5.2 Standards for Flood Fringe Permitted Uses: 5.21 All structures, including accessory structures, must be elevated on fill so that the lowest floor, as defined, is at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation. The finished fill elevation for structures must be no lower than one foot below the regulatory flood protection elevation and the fill must extend at the same elevation at least 15 feet beyond the outside limits of the structure. 4.43. If accessory structures are to be allowed in the floodway, items (a) through (d) are required. 4.43(e) is optional language allowing for wet floodproofing of small accessory structures that constitute a minimal investment. 4.44 is an optional provision providing notice that work in public waters requires a DNR permit. 5.1. If underlying zoning district(s) are present (as in most communities) the second sentence can be deleted. 5.21. “Lowest floor” is defined as the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area, including basements, crawl spaces, etc. See Section 2.926. 5.22 Accessory Structures. As an alternative to the fill requirements of section 5.21, structures accessory to the uses identified in Section 5.1 may be permitted to be internally/wet floodproofed to the FP3 or FP4 floodproofing classifications in the State Building Code, provided that: (a) the accessory structure constitutes a minimal investment, does not exceed 576 square feet in size, and is only used for parking and storage. (b) All portions of floodproofed accessory structures below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation must be: (i) adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement and designed to equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls, (ii) be constructed with materials resistant to flood damage, and (iii)must have all service utilities be water-tight or elevated to above the regulatory flood protection elevation (c) Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or meet or exceed the following criteria: (1) To allow for the equalization of hydrostatic pressure, there must be a minimum of two “automatic” openings in the outside walls of the structure, with a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding; and (2) There must be openings on at least two sides of the structure and the bottom of all openings must be no higher than one foot above the lowest adjacent grade to the structure. Using human intervention to open a garage door prior to flooding will not satisfy this requirement for automatic openings. 5.23 The cumulative placement of fill or similar material on a parcel must not exceed 1,000 cubic yards, unless the fill is specifically intended to elevate a structure in accordance with Section 5.21 of this ordinance, or if allowed as a conditional use under Section 5.33 below. 5.24 The storage of any materials or equipment must be elevated on fill to the regulatory flood protection elevation. 5.25 All service utilities, including ductwork, must be elevated or water-tight to prevent infiltration of floodwaters. 5.26 The storage or processing of materials that are, in time of flooding, flammable, explosive, or potentially injurious to human, animal, or plant life is prohibited. 5.27 All fill must be properly compacted and the slopes must be properly protected by the use of riprap, vegetative cover or other acceptable method. 5.28 All new principal structures must have vehicular access at or above an elevation not more than two feet below the regulatory flood protection elevation, or must have a flood warning /emergency evacuation plan acceptable to the (Governing Body). 5.29 Accessory uses such as yards, railroad tracks, and parking lots may be at an elevation lower than the regulatory flood protection elevation. However, any facilities used by employees or the general public must be designed with a flood warning system that provides adequate time for evacuation if the area is inundated to a depth and velocity such that the depth (in feet) multiplied by the velocity (in feet per second) would exceed a product of four upon occurrence of the regional (1% chance) flood. 5.30 Interference with normal manufacturing/industrial plant operations must be minimized, especially along streams having protracted flood durations. In 5.22(a). A special note that the bulk standards here slightly exceed those allowed through 6120.330(Subp 3)(H) of the Shoreland Rules. 5.22(b). If an accessory structure exceeds 576 square feet, then FEMA will not allow internal floodproofing, and the structure must be elevated on fill in accordance to 5.21 or dry floodproofed in accordance with 5.43. 5.23 is an optional provision. Treating large volumes of fill as a conditional use allows communities to require an erosion control and emergency removal plan for uses such as sand and gravel mining or dredge spoil storage. 5.28 is optional, but is mandatory for subdivisions, including manufactured home parks and recreational vehicle parks/campgrounds. See also Section 7.13. considering permit applications, due consideration must be given to the needs of industries with operations that require a floodplain location. 5.31 Manufactured homes and recreational vehicles must meet the standards of Section 9 of this ordinance. 5.3 Conditional Uses: The following uses and activities may be allowed as conditional uses, if allowed in the underlying zoning district(s) or any applicable overlay district, following the procedures in Section 10.4 of this ordinance. 5.31 Any structure that is not elevated on fill or floodproofed in accordance with Sections 5.21 and 5.22 of this ordinance. 5.32 Storage of any material or equipment below the regulatory flood protection elevation. 5.33 The cumulative placement of more than 1,000 cubic yards of fill when the fill is not being used to elevate a structure in accordance with Section 5.21 of this ordinance. 5.34 (OPTIONAL) The use of methods to elevate structures above the regulatory flood protection elevation, including stilts, pilings, parallel walls, or above-grade, enclosed areas such as crawl spaces or tuck under garages, shall meet the standards in Section 5.46. 5.4 Standards for Flood Fringe Conditional Uses: 5.41 The standards listed in Sections 5.24 through 5.30 apply to all conditional uses. 5.42 Basements, as defined by Section 2.913 of this ordinance, are subject to the following: (a) Residential basement construction is not allowed below the regulatory flood protection elevation. (b) Non-residential basements may be allowed below the regulatory flood protection elevation provided the basement is structurally dry floodproofed in accordance with Section 5.43 of this ordinance. 5.43 All areas of nonresidential structures, including basements, to be placed below the regulatory flood protection elevation must be floodproofed in accordance with the structurally dry floodproofing classifications in the State Building Code. Structurally dry floodproofing must meet the FP1 or FP2 floodproofing classification in the State Building Code, which requires making the structure watertight with the walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water and with structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and the effects of buoyancy. 5.44 The placement of more than 1,000 cubic yards of fill or other similar material on a parcel (other than for the purpose of elevating a structure to the regulatory flood protection elevation) must comply with an approved erosion/sedimentation control plan. (a) The plan must clearly specify methods to be used to stabilize the fill on site for a flood event at a minimum of the regional (1% chance) flood event. (b) The plan must be prepared and certified by a registered professional engineer or other qualified individual acceptable to the (Governing Body). (c) The plan may incorporate alternative procedures for removal of the material from the floodplain if adequate flood warning time exists. 5.3. As with conditional uses in the floodway, conditional uses in the flood fringe are optional – communities should determine which of these uses are needed and appropriate in their floodplain areas. 5.34. The DNR refers to these as “alternative elevation methods”, meaning it is an alternative to fill. This is designated optional because they are burdensome to administer – typically requiring nonconversion agreements and detailed monitoring and inspections. See 5.46. 5.44. Optional provisions to be used if placement of this amount of fill is regulated as a conditional use. 5.45 Storage of materials and equipment below the regulatory flood protection elevation must comply with an approved emergency plan providing for removal of such materials within the time available after a flood warning. 5.46 (OPTIONAL) Alternative elevation methods other than the use of fill may be utilized to elevate a structure's lowest floor above the regulatory flood protection elevation. The base or floor of an enclosed area shall be considered above-grade and not a structure’s basement or lowest floor if: 1) the enclosed area is above-grade on at least one side of the structure; 2) it is designed to internally flood and is constructed with flood resistant materials; and 3) it is used solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage. The above-noted alternative elevation methods are subject to the following additional standards: (a) Design and Certification - The structure’s design and as-built condition must be certified by a registered professional engineer as being in compliance with the general design standards of the State Building Code and, specifically, that all electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities must be at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation or be designed to prevent flood water from entering or accumulating within these components during times of flooding. (b) Specific Standards for Above-grade, Enclosed Areas - Above-grade, fully enclosed areas such as crawl spaces or tuck under garages must be designed to internally flood and the design plans must stipulate: (1) The minimum area of openings in the walls where internal flooding is to be used as a floodproofing technique. There shall be a minimum of two openings on at least two sides of the structure and the bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade. The automatic openings shall have a minimum net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding unless a registered professional engineer or architect certifies that a smaller net area would suffice. The automatic openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, valves, or other coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of flood waters without any form of human intervention; and (2) That the enclosed area will be designed of flood resistant materials in accordance with the FP3 or FP4 classifications in the State Building Code and shall be used solely for building access, parking of vehicles or storage. SECTION 6.0 GENERAL FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT (GF) 6.1 Permitted Uses: 6.11 The uses listed in Section 4.1 of this ordinance, Floodway District Permitted Uses, are permitted uses. 6.12 All other uses are subject to the floodway/flood fringe evaluation criteria specified in Section 6.2 below. Section 4.0 applies if the proposed use is determined to be in the Floodway District. Section 5.0 applies if the proposed use is determined to be in the Flood Fringe District. 6.2 Procedures for Floodway and Flood Fringe Determinations: 6.21 Upon receipt of an application for a permit or other approval within the General Floodplain District, the Zoning Administrator must obtain, review and reasonably utilize any regional flood elevation and floodway data available from a federal, state, or other source. 6.22 If regional flood elevation and floodway data are not readily available, the applicant must furnish additional information, as needed, to determine the regulatory flood protection elevation and whether the proposed use would fall 5.46. Standard tied to the optional 5.34. The DNR refers to these as “alternative elevation methods”, meaning it is an alternative to fill. This is designated optional because they are burdensome to administer – typically requiring nonconversion agreements and detailed monitoring and inspections. 6.1. If the General Floodplain District (the A zone, or the AE, AO or AH zones without a defined floodway) is not present within the community, delete the contents of this section and retitle it “Reserved for Future Use” (i.e., in case a future annexation or map update would add an A zone). 6.2. State and federal rules establish standards for this determination but do not specify a procedure to be followed. (However, the community is required under 44 CFR 60.3(b)(4) to “obtain, review and reasonably utilize” base flood elevation and floodway data.) The procedure shown here is one that DNR suggests that communities follow. DNR Floodplain Program staff can assist communities in obtaining relevant data and completing the determination. within the Floodway or Flood Fringe District. Information must be consistent with accepted hydrological and hydraulic engineering standards and the standards in 6.23 below. 6.23 The determination of floodway and flood fringe must include the following components, as applicable: (a) Estimate the peak discharge of the regional (1% chance) flood. (b) Calculate the water surface profile of the regional flood based upon a hydraulic analysis of the stream channel and overbank areas. (c) Compute the floodway necessary to convey or store the regional flood without increasing flood stages more than one-half (0.5) foot. A lesser stage increase than 0.5 foot is required if, as a result of the stage increase, increased flood damages would result. An equal degree of encroachment on both sides of the stream within the reach must be assumed in computing floodway boundaries. 6.24 The Zoning Administrator will review the submitted information and assess the technical evaluation and the recommended Floodway and/or Flood Fringe District boundary. The assessment must include the cumulative effects of previous floodway encroachments. The Zoning Administrator may seek technical assistance from a designated engineer or other expert person or agency, including the Department of Natural Resources. Based on this assessment, the Zoning Administrator may approve or deny the application. 6.25 Once the Floodway and Flood Fringe District boundaries have been determined, the Zoning Administrator must process the permit application consistent with the applicable provisions of Section 4.0 and 5.0 of this ordinance. SECTION 7.0 LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 7.1 In General: Recognizing that flood prone areas may exist outside of the designated floodplain districts, the requirements of this section apply to all land within (community). 7.2 Subdivisions: No land may be subdivided which is unsuitable for reasons of flooding or inadequate drainage, water supply or sewage treatment facilities. Manufactured home parks and recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds are considered subdivisions under this ordinance. 7.21 All lots within the floodplain districts must be able to contain a building site outside of the Floodway District at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation. 7.22 All subdivisions must have road access both to the subdivision and to the individual building sites no lower than two feet below the regulatory flood protection elevation, unless a flood warning emergency plan for the safe evacuation of all vehicles and people during the regional (1% chance) flood has been approved by the (Governing Body). The plan must be prepared by a registered engineer or other qualified individual, and must demonstrate that adequate time and personnel exist to carry out the evacuation. 7.23 For all subdivisions in the floodplain, the Floodway and Flood Fringe District boundaries, the regulatory flood protection elevation and the required elevation of all access roads must be clearly labeled on all required subdivision drawings and platting documents. 7.24 In the General Floodplain District, applicants must provide the information required in Section 6.2 of this ordinance to determine the regional flood elevation, the Floodway and Flood Fringe District boundaries and the regulatory flood protection elevation for the subdivision site. 6.24. Federal rules require that communities assess the cumulative effects of floodway encroachments on both sides of a stream. Contact Floodplain Program staff for assistance in making this assessment. 7.1 is optional – this and related provisions in 7.25 and 7.3 are designed to enable communities to manage flood risks in unmapped but flood-prone areas (i.e., wetlands, ditches, isolated basins). If these standards are not needed, Section 7 can be retitled “Subdivisions.” 7.21 – 7.24 is mandatory. These provisions can be integrated into a city or county subdivision ordinance, where one exists. Note that manufactured home and recreational vehicle parks are treated as subdivisions. 7.25 If a subdivision proposal or other proposed new development is in a flood prone area, any such proposal must be reviewed to assure that: (a) All such proposals are consistent with the need to minimize flood damage within the flood prone area, (b) All public utilities and facilities, such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems are located and constructed to minimize or eliminate flood damage, and (c) Adequate drainage is provided to reduce exposure of flood hazard. 7.3 Building Sites. If a proposed building site is in a flood prone area, all new construction and substantial improvements (including the placement of manufactured homes) must be: (a) Designed (or modified) and adequately anchored to prevent floatation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure resulting from hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads, including the effects of buoyancy; (b) Constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage; (c) Constructed by methods and practices that minimize flood damage; and (d) Constructed with electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities that are designed and/or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. SECTION 8.0 PUBLIC UTILITIES, RAILROADS, ROADS, AND BRIDGES 8.1 Public Utilities: All public utilities and facilities such as gas, electrical, sewer, and water supply systems to be located in the floodplain must be floodproofed in accordance with the State Building Code or elevated to the regulatory flood protection elevation. 8.2 Public Transportation Facilities: Railroad tracks, roads, and bridges to be located within the floodplain must comply with Sections 4.0 and 5.0 of this ordinance. These transportation facilities must be elevated to the regulatory flood protection elevation where failure or interruption of these facilities would result in danger to the public health or safety or where such facilities are essential to the orderly functioning of the area. Minor or auxiliary roads or railroads may be constructed at a lower elevation where failure or interruption of transportation services would not endanger the public health or safety. 8.3 On-site Water Supply and Sewage Treatment Systems: Where public utilities are not provided: 1) On-site water supply systems must be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and are subject to the provisions in Minnesota Rules Chapter 4725.4350, as amended; and 2) New or replacement on-site sewage treatment systems must be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharges from the systems into flood waters, they must not be subject to impairment or contamination during times of flooding, and are subject to the provisions in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080.2270, as amended. SECTION 9.0 MANUFACTURED HOMES, MANUFACTURED HOME PARKS, AND RECREATIONAL VEHICLES. 9.1 Manufactured Homes: New manufactured home parks and expansions to existing manufactured home parks are prohibited in any floodplain district. For existing manufactured home parks or lots of record, the following requirements apply: 9.11 Placement or replacement of manufactured home units is prohibited in the Floodway District. 7.25 is optional, to be used in conjunction with 7.1. 7.3 is optional, to be used in conjunction with 7.1. 8.3. MPCA oversees the Rules regulating septic systems (7080.2270) and wells (4725.4350), which regulate location and design in relation to floodplains. 9.1. This subsection is mandatory; the remainder of Section 9.0 is optional but recommended if manufactured home parks are located in any floodplain districts. 9.12 If allowed in the Flood Fringe District, placement or replacement of manufactured home units is subject to the requirements of Section 5 of this ordinance and the following standards. (a) New and replacement manufactured homes must be elevated in compliance with Section 5 of this ordinance and must be securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system that resists flotation, collapse and lateral movement. Methods of anchoring may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to ground anchors. This requirement is in addition to applicable state or local anchoring requirements for resisting wind forces. (b) New or replacement manufactured homes in existing manufactured home parks must meet the vehicular access requirements for subdivisions in Section 7.22. 9.2 Recreational Vehicles: New recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds and expansions to existing recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds are prohibited in any floodplain district. Placement of recreational vehicles in existing recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds in the floodplain must meet the exemption criteria below or be treated as new structures meeting the requirements of this ordinance. 9.21 Recreational vehicles are exempt from the provisions of this ordinance if they are placed in any of the following areas and meet the criteria listed in Section 9.22: (a) Individual lots or parcels of record. (b) Existing commercial recreational vehicle parks or campgrounds. (c) Existing condominium-type associations. 9.22 Criteria for Exempt Recreational Vehicles: (a) The vehicle must have a current license required for highway use. (b) The vehicle must be highway ready, meaning on wheels or the internal jacking system, attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities commonly used in campgrounds and recreational vehicle parks. (c) No permanent structural type additions may be attached to the vehicle. (d) The vehicle and associated use must be permissible in any pre-existing, underlying zoning district. (e) Accessory structures are not permitted within the Floodway District. Any accessory structure in the Flood Fringe District must be constructed of flood- resistant materials and be securely anchored, meeting the requirements applicable to manufactured homes in Section 9.22. (f) An accessory structure must constitute a minimal investment 9.23 Recreational vehicles that are exempt in Section 9.22 lose this exemption when development occurs on the site that exceeds a minimal investment for an accessory structure such as a garage or storage building. The recreational vehicle and all accessory structures will then be treated as new structures subject to the elevation and floodproofing requirements of Section 5.0 of this ordinance. No development or improvement on the parcel or attachment to the recreational vehicle is allowed that would hinder the removal of the vehicle should flooding occur. SECTION 10.0 ADMINISTRATION 9.2 has recently been revised to recognize MN Department of Health rules (Section 4630.0200), which prohibit mobile home parks and recreational camping areas in flood-prone areas. Placement or replacement of manufactured home units may be allowed in existing manufactured home parks or on lots of record. 9.21 – 9.23. These exemption criteria are required if recreational vehicles are allowed within any floodplain district. If this section is not used, recreational vehicle placement must be explicitly prohibited in floodplain districts. 9.22(e) is optional. Recreational vehicles in existing campgrounds may be allowed within the Floodway District, if defined as a permitted or conditional use, but we recommend they be treated as a temporary use, without accessory structures and with an emergency plan in place. 9.22 (f) and 9.23 are optional. Communities may apply a monetary limit such as $500 as a threshold for a “minimal investment,” recognizing that this threshold will vary from place to place. 10.0. Many of the standards and procedures in this section are likely to exist in other parts of the community’s zoning 10.1 Zoning Administrator: A Zoning Administrator or other official designated by the (Governing Body) must administer and enforce this ordinance. 10.2 Permit Requirements: 10.21 Permit Required. A permit must be obtained from the Zoning Administrator prior to conducting the following activities: (a) The erection, addition, modification, rehabilitation, or alteration of any building, structure, or portion thereof. Normal maintenance and repair also requires a permit if such work, separately or in conjunction with other planned work, constitutes a substantial improvement as defined in this ordinance. (b) The use or change of use of a building, structure, or land. (c) The construction of a dam, fence, or on-site septic system, although a permit is not required for a farm fence as defined in this ordinance. (d) The change or extension of a nonconforming use. (e) The repair of a structure that has been damaged by flood, fire, tornado, or any other source. (f) The placement of fill, excavation of materials, or the storage of materials or equipment within the floodplain. (g) Relocation or alteration of a watercourse (including new or replacement culverts and bridges), unless a public waters work permit has been applied for. (h) Any other type of “development” as defined in this ordinance. 10.22 Application for Permit. Permit applications must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator on forms provided by the Zoning Administrator. The permit application must include the following as applicable: (a) A site plan showing all pertinent dimensions, existing or proposed buildings, structures, and significant natural features having an influence on the permit. (b) Location of fill or storage of materials in relation to the stream channel. (c) Copies of any required municipal, county, state or federal permits or approvals. (d) Other relevant information requested by the Zoning Administrator as necessary to properly evaluate the permit application. 10.23 Certificate of Zoning Compliance for a New, Altered, or Nonconforming Use. No building, land or structure may be occupied or used in any manner until a certificate of zoning compliance has been issued by the Zoning Administrator stating that the use of the building or land conforms to the requirements of this ordinance. 10.24 Certification. The applicant is required to submit certification by a registered professional engineer, registered architect, or registered land surveyor that the finished fill and building elevations were accomplished in compliance with the provisions of this ordinance. Floodproofing measures must be certified by a registered professional engineer or registered architect. 10.25 Record of First Floor Elevation. The Zoning Administrator must maintain a record of the elevation of the lowest floor (including basement) of all new structures and alterations or additions to existing structures in the floodplain. The Zoning ordinance, and may be cross-referenced rather than repeated here. However, the community must be able to demonstrate that these procedures or comparable ones are in place. The term “Zoning Administrator” is used throughout this section for ease of reference, but in some communities the City Clerk or other official may fill this role. 10.21(c). The exemption for farm fences in (c) is optional. 10.21(g). Any change in the course, current or cross-section of public waters requires a public waters work permit from the DNR under MN Stat. 103G.245. 10.22. This section may cross-reference any other permitting requirements in the zoning ordinance. Administrator must also maintain a record of the elevation to which structures and alterations or additions to structures are floodproofed. 10.26 Notifications for Watercourse Alterations. Before authorizing any alteration or relocation of a river or stream, the Zoning Administrator must notify adjacent communities. If the applicant has applied for a permit to work in public waters pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 103G.245, this will suffice as adequate notice. A copy of the notification must also be submitted to the Chicago Regional Office of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 10.27 Notification to FEMA When Physical Changes Increase or Decrease Base Flood Elevations. As soon as is practicable, but not later than six months after the date such supporting information becomes available, the Zoning Administrator must notify the Chicago Regional Office of FEMA of the changes by submitting a copy of the relevant technical or scientific data. 10.3 Variances: 10.31 Variance Applications. An application for a variance to the provisions of this ordinance will be processed and reviewed in accordance with applicable state statutes and Section(s) _________________ of the zoning ordinance/code. 10.32 Adherence to State Floodplain Management Standards. A variance must not allow a use that is not allowed in that district, permit a lower degree of flood protection than the regulatory flood protection elevation for the particular area, or permit standards lower than those required by state law. 10.33 Additional Variance Criteria. The following additional variance criteria of the Federal Emergency Management Agency must be satisfied: (a) Variances must not be issued by a community within any designated regulatory floodway if any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge would result. (b) Variances may only be issued by a community upon (i) a showing of good and sufficient cause, (ii) a determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant, and (iii) a determination that the granting of a variance will not result in increased flood heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, create nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public, or conflict with existing local laws or ordinances. (c) Variances may only be issued upon a determination that the variance is the minimum necessary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief. 10.34 Flood Insurance Notice. The Zoning Administrator must notify the applicant for a variance that: 1) The issuance of a variance to construct a structure below the base flood level will result in increased premium rates for flood insurance up to amounts as high as $25 for $100 of insurance coverage; and 2) Such construction below the base or regional flood level increases risks to life and property. Such notification must be maintained with a record of all variance actions. 10.35 General Considerations. The community may consider the following factors in granting variances and imposing conditions on variances and conditional uses in floodplains: (a) The potential danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments; (b) The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of others; 10.31 should cross-reference all sections of the zoning ordinance that regulate processing and review of variance applications. 10.3 only contains DNR/FEMA – mandated regulatory & notification provisions. Communities that administer zoning ordinances (including floodplain ordinances) must establish a board of adjustment to hear appeals and variance requests. In many communities, the city council, county board, or planning commission serves as the board of adjustment. If a community does not have existing variance procedures or a board of adjustment, contact Floodplain Program staff for sample ordinance language. 10.33 (a-c) is language required by FEMA and must be adopted verbatim. Note specifically that the reference to “exceptional hardship” in (b)(ii) must remain in the ordinance, even though it has been replaced by the term “practical difficulties” in state zoning enabling statutes. 10.34 is required by FEMA. Section 10.35 is optional but recommended as guidance for communities in reviewing variance applications. The same factors are recommended for review of conditional use applications, below. (c) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems, if any, and the ability of these systems to minimize the potential for disease, contamination and unsanitary conditions; (d) The susceptibility of any proposed use and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner; (e) The importance of the services to be provided by the proposed use to the community; (f) The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location; (g) The availability of viable alternative locations for the proposed use that are not subject to flooding; (h) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development anticipated in the foreseeable future; (i) The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and flood plain management program for the area; (j) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles; (k) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of the flood waters expected at the site. 10.36 Submittal of Hearing Notices to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The (designated body/community official) must submit hearing notices for proposed variances to the DNR sufficiently in advance to provide at least ten days’ notice of the hearing. The notice may be sent by electronic mail or U.S. Mail to the respective DNR area hydrologist. 10.37 Submittal of Final Decisions to the DNR. A copy of all decisions granting variances must be forwarded to the DNR within ten days of such action. The notice may be sent by electronic mail or U.S. Mail to the respective DNR area hydrologist. 10.38 Record-Keeping. The Zoning Administrator must maintain a record of all variance actions, including justification for their issuance, and must report such variances in an annual or biennial report to the Administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program, when requested by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 10.4 Conditional Uses: 10.41 Administrative Review. An application for a conditional use permit under the provisions of this ordinance will be processed and reviewed in accordance with Section(s) ______________ of the zoning ordinance/code. 10.42 Factors Used in Decision-Making. In passing upon conditional use applications, the (Governing Body) must consider all relevant factors specified in other sections of this ordinance, and those factors identified in Section 10.35 of this ordinance. 10.43 Conditions Attached to Conditional Use Permits. The (Governing Body) may attach such conditions to the granting of conditional use permits as it deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of this ordinance. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: (a) Modification of waste treatment and water supply facilities. (b) Limitations on period of use, occupancy, and operation. 10.41 should cross-reference any conditional use procedures in the zoning ordinance, if these exist. If not, contact Floodplain Program staff for administrative language. Section 10.42 is optional but recommended as guidance for decisions on conditional uses (and variances, as noted above). 10.43 is also optional; conditions are intended to be specific to the particular site and proposed use. (c) Imposition of operational controls, sureties, and deed restrictions. (d) Requirements for construction of channel modifications, compensatory storage, dikes, levees, and other protective measures. (e) Floodproofing measures, in accordance with the State Building Code and this ordinance. The applicant must submit a plan or document certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the floodproofing measures are consistent with the regulatory flood protection elevation and associated flood factors for the particular area. 10.44 Submittal of Hearing Notices to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The (designated body/community official) must submit hearing notices for proposed conditional uses to the DNR sufficiently in advance to provide at least ten days’ notice of the hearing. The notice may be sent by electronic mail or U.S. Mail to the respective DNR area hydrologist. 10.45 Submittal of Final Decisions to the DNR. A copy of all decisions granting conditional uses must be forwarded to the DNR within ten days of such action. The notice may be sent by electronic mail or U.S. Mail to the respective DNR area hydrologist. SECTION 11.0 NONCONFORMITIES 11.1 Continuance of Nonconformities: A use, structure, or occupancy of land which was lawful before the passage or amendment of this ordinance but which is not in conformity with the provisions of this ordinance may be continued subject to the following conditions. Historic structures, as defined in Section 2.941(b) of this ordinance, are subject to the provisions of Sections 11.11 – 11.16 of this ordinance. 11.11 A nonconforming use, structure, or occupancy must not be expanded, changed, enlarged, or altered in a way that increases its flood damage potential or degree of obstruction to flood flows except as provided in 11.12 below. Expansion or enlargement of uses, structures or occupancies within the Floodway District is prohibited. 11.12 Any addition or structural alteration to a nonconforming structure or nonconforming use that would result in increasing its flood damage potential must be protected to the regulatory flood protection elevation in accordance with any of the elevation on fill or floodproofing techniques (i.e., FP1 thru FP4 floodproofing classifications) allowable in the State Building Code, except as further restricted in 11.13 and 11.17 below. 11.13 If the cost of all previous and proposed alterations and additions exceeds 50 percent of the market value of any nonconforming structure, that shall be considered substantial improvement, and the entire structure must meet the standards of Section 4.0 or 5.0 of this ordinance for new structures, depending upon whether the structure is in the Floodway or Flood Fringe District, respectively. The cost of all structural alterations and additions must include all costs such as construction materials and a reasonable cost placed on all manpower or labor. 11.14 If any nonconforming use, or any use of a nonconforming structure, is discontinued for more than one year, any future use of the premises must conform to this ordinance. The Assessor must notify the Zoning Administrator in writing of instances of nonconformities that have been discontinued for a period of more than one year. 11.15 If any nonconformity is substantially damaged, as defined in Section 2.940 of this ordinance, it may not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this ordinance. The applicable provisions for establishing new uses or new 11.11. Buildings and structures within the Floodway District may not be enlarged or expanded. In some cases, a floodway area can be filled without causing any rise in flood stage. In such cases, a Letter of Map Revision may be obtained that changes the floodway boundary, placing the area in the Flood Fringe. Contact Floodplain Program staff for details. 11.13. The language presented is recommended, in order to gradually eliminate nonconformities over time. Federal standards require that substantial improvement, is tracked over a one-year period. Section 11.14 reflects an optional provision in statute (462.357(Subd 1e)(1) and 394.36) – local government may impose reasonable conditions on the nonconforming use or structure. Many communities have adopted similar provisions in their zoning ordinances. Section 11.15 is specific to floodplain uses in state and federal statute, as distinct from structures in Sections 4.0 or 5.0 will apply depending upon whether the use or structure is in the Floodway or Flood Fringe, respectively. 11.16 If any nonconforming use or structure experiences a repetitive loss, as defined in Section 2.936 of this ordinance, it must not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this ordinance. 11.17 Any substantial improvement, as defined in Section 2.941 of this ordinance, to a nonconforming structure requires that the existing structure and any additions must meet the requirements of Section 4.0 or 5.0 of this ordinance for new structures, depending upon whether the structure is in the Floodway or Flood Fringe District. SECTION 12.0 PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT 12.1 Violation Constitutes a Misdemeanor: Violation of the provisions of this ordinance or failure to comply with any of its requirements (including violations of conditions and safeguards established in connection with grants of variances or conditional uses) constitute a misdemeanor and will be punishable as defined by law. 12.2 Other Lawful Action: Nothing in this ordinance restricts the (community) from taking such other lawful action as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation. If the responsible party does not appropriately respond to the Zoning Administrator within the specified period of time, each additional day that lapses will constitute an additional violation of this ordinance and will be prosecuted accordingly. 12.3 Enforcement: Violations of the provisions of this ordinance will be investigated and resolved in accordance with the provisions of Section(s)_________________of the zoning ordinance/code. In responding to a suspected ordinance violation, the Zoning Administrator and (Governing Body) may utilize the full array of enforcement actions available to it including but not limited to prosecution and fines, injunctions, after-the- fact permits, orders for corrective measures or a request to the National Flood Insurance Program for denial of flood insurance availability to the guilty party. The (community) must act in good faith to enforce these official controls and to correct ordinance violations to the extent possible so as not to jeopardize its eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program. SECTION 13.0 AMENDMENTS 13.1 Floodplain Designation – Restrictions on Removal: The floodplain designation on the Official Zoning Map must not be removed from floodplain areas unless it can be shown that the designation is in error or that the area has been filled to or above the elevation of the regulatory flood protection elevation and is contiguous to lands outside the floodplain. Special exceptions to this rule may be permitted by the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) if the Commissioner determines that, through other measures, lands are adequately protected for the intended use. 13.2 Amendments Require DNR Approval: All amendments to this ordinance must be submitted to and approved by the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) prior to adoption. The Commissioner must approve the amendment prior to community approval. 13.3 Map Revisions Require Ordinance Amendments. The floodplain district regulations must be amended to incorporate any revisions by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to the floodplain maps adopted in Section 2.3 of this ordinance. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval and publication, as required by law and/or charter. the standard provisions for nonconformities in the Chapters 394 and 462. Section 11.16 is optional but recommended, in order to gradually eliminate nonconformities that are frequently damaged but not to the “50%” level. 11.17 is a mandatory federal requirement. As defined, “substantial improvement” is monitored over a one-year period. 12.3. Cross-reference any sections of the zoning ordinance that deal with enforcement procedures. If such provisions don’t exist, contact Floodplain Program staff for sample language. Adopted by the ________________ Board/City Council (Community Name) This _____ of _______, _____ (Day) (Month) (Year) Attest: _________________________ , County Board Chairperson/Mayor (Name of Elected Official) Attest: __________________________, County Administrator/City Clerk (Name of Community Official) Stamp With Community Seal: 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. TO: Corcoran City Council FROM: Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: July 6, 2016 for the July 14, 2016 City Council Meeting RE: Temporary Family Health Care Dwellings (City File 16-021) 60-DAY REVIEW DEADLINE:N/A 1.Request Direct staff to schedule a public hearing at the August 4th Planning Commission meeting to consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to opt-out of the Temporary Family Health Care Dwelling in MN Statute §462.3593. 2.Background On May 12, 2016, Governor Dayton signed a bill creating a new process for landowners to place mobile residential dwellings on their property to serve as a temporary family health care dwelling. These are different from Accessory Dwelling Units that cities like Corcoran allow. Communities must opt out of the requirements or they will be required to allow the temporary dwellings when the law goes into effect September 1, 2016. If a city does not opt out, cities must be prepared to accept applications, must have determined a permit fee amount (if the city wants to have an amount different than the law’s default amount), and must be ready to process the permits in accordance with the short timeline required by the law. We have conferred with the City Attorney and we recommend that the City opt-out of the legislation at this time. While the City may wish to consider allowing these types of structures in the future, the legislation does not allow adequate time for a thorough analysis for the issues prior to the September 1st deadline. The City would be required to amend the Zoning Ordinance to opt out of the requirements. 3.Requested Action The City Council should direct staff to schedule a public hearing at the August 4th Planning Commission Meeting and City Council action at the August 25th meeting to amend the Zoning Ordinance to opt out of the requirements in MN Statute §462.3593. Attachments: 1.League of Minnesota Cities Memo 2.Star Tribune Article dated July 5, 2016 Agenda Item: 9c. Temporary Family Health Care Dwellings of 2016 Allowing Temporary Structures – What it means for Cities Introduction: On May 12, 2016, Governor Dayton signed, into law, a bill creating a new process for landowners to place mobile residential dwellings on their property to serve as a temporary family health care dwelling.1 Community desire to provide transitional housing for those with mental or physical impairments and the increased need for short term care for aging family members served as the catalysts behind the legislature taking on this initiative. The resulting legislation sets forth a short term care alternative for a “mentally or physically impaired person”, by allowing them to stay in a “temporary dwelling” on a relative’s or caregiver’s property.2 Where can I read the new law? Until the state statutes are revised to include bills passed this session, cities can find this new bill at 2016 Laws, Chapter 111. Does the law require cities to follow and implement the new temporary family health care dwelling law? Yes, unless a city opts out of the new law or currently allows temporary family health care dwellings as a permitted use. Considerations for cities regarding the opt-out? These new temporary dwellings address an emerging community need to provide more convenient temporary care. Cities may want to consider the below when analyzing whether or not to opt out: • The new law alters a city’s level of zoning authority for these types of structures. • While the city’s zoning ordinances for accessories or recreational vehicles do not apply, these structures still must comply with setback requirements. • A city’s zoning and other ordinances, other than its accessory use or recreational vehicle ordinances, still apply to these structures. Because conflicts may arise between the statute and a city’s local ordinances, cities should confer with their city attorneys to analyze their current ordinances in light of the new law. • Although not necessarily a legal issue for the city, it seems worth mentioning that the permit process does not have the individual with the physical or mental impairment or that 1 2016 Laws, Chapter 111. 2 Some cities asked if other states have adopted this type of law. The only states that have a somewhat similar statute at the time of publication of this FAQ are North Carolina and Virginia. It is worth noting that some states have adopted Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) statutes to allow granny flats, however, these ADU statutes differ from Minnesota’s Temporary Health Care Dwelling law. Temporary Family HealthCare Dwellings June 9, 2016 Page 2 individual’s power of attorney sign the permit application or a consent to release his or her data. • The application’s data requirements may result in the city possessing and maintaining nonpublic data governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. • The new law sets forth a permitting system for both cities and counties 3. Cities should consider whether there is an interplay between these two statutes. Do cities need to do anything to have the new law apply in their city? No, the law goes into effect September 1, 2016 and automatically applies to all cities that do not opt out or don’t already allow temporary family health care dwellings as a permitted use under their local ordinances. By September 1, 2016, however, cities will need to be prepared to accept applications, must have determined a permit fee amount 4 (if the city wants to have an amount different than the law’s default amount), and must be ready to process the permits in accordance with the short timeline required by the law. What if a city already allows a temporary family health care dwelling as a permitted use? If the city already has designated temporary family health care dwellings as a permitted use, then the law does not apply and the city follows its own ordinance. The city should consult its city attorney for any uncertainty about whether structures currently permitted under existing ordinances qualify as temporary family health care dwellings. What process should the city follow if it chooses to opt out of this statute? Cities that wish to opt out of this law must pass an ordinance to do so. The statute does not provide clear guidance on how to treat this opt-out ordinance. However, since the new law adds section 462.3593 to the land use planning act (Minn. Stat. ch. 462), arguably, it may represent the adoption or an amendment of a zoning ordinance, triggering the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 2-4, including a public hearing with 10-day published notice. Therefore, cities may want to err on the side of caution and treat the opt-out ordinance as a zoning provision.5 Does the League have a model ordinance for opting out of this program? Yes. Link to opt out ordinance here: Temporary Family Health Care Dwellings Ordinance Can cities partially opt out of the temporary family health care dwelling law? 3 See Minn. Stat. §394.307 4 Cities do have flexibility as to amounts of the permit fee. The law sets, as a default, a fee of $100 for the initial permit with a $50 renewal fee, but authorizes a city to provide otherwise by ordinance. 5 For smaller communities without zoning at all, those cities still need to adopt an opt-out ordinance. In those instances, it seems less likely that the opt-out ordinance would equate to zoning. Because of the ambiguity of the statute, cities should consult their city attorneys on how best to approach adoption of the opt-out ordinance for their communities. Temporary Family HealthCare Dwellings June 9, 2016 Page 3 Not likely. The opt-out language of the statute allows a city, by ordinance, to opt out of the requirements of the law but makes no reference to opting out of parts of the law. If a city wanted a program different from the one specified in statute, the most conservative approach would be to opt out of the statute, then adopt an ordinance structured in the manner best suited to the city. Since the law does not explicitly provide for a partial opt out, cites wanting to just partially opt out from the statute should consult their city attorney. Can a city adopt pieces of this program or change the requirements listed in the statute? Similar to the answer about partially opting out, the law does not specifically authorize a city to alter the statutory requirements or adopt only just pieces of the statute. Several cities have asked if they could add additional criteria, like regulating placement on driveways, specific lot size limits, or anchoring requirements. As mentioned above, if a city wants a program different from the one specified in the statute, the most conservative approach would involve opting out of the statute in its entirety and then adopting an ordinance structured in the manner best suited to the city. Again, a city should consult its city attorney when considering adopting an altered version of the state law. What is required in an application for a temporary family health care dwelling permit? The mandatory application requests very specific information including, but not limited to:6 • Name, address, and telephone number of the property owner, the resident of the property (if different than the owner), and the primary care giver; • Name of the mentally or physically impaired person; • Proof of care from a provider network, including respite care, primary care or remote monitoring; • Written certification signed by a Minnesota licensed physician, physician assistant or advanced practice registered nurse that the individual with the mental or physical impairment needs assistance performing two or more “instrumental activities of daily life;”7 • An executed contract for septic sewer management or other proof of adequate septic sewer management; • An affidavit that the applicant provided notice to adjacent property owners and residents; • A general site map showing the location of the temporary dwelling and the other structures on the lot; and • Compliance with setbacks and maximum floor area requirements of primary structure. 6 New Minn. Stat. § 462.3593, subd. 3 sets forth all the application criteria. 7 This is a term defined in law at Minn. Stat. § 256B.0659, subd. 1(i) as “activities to include meal planning and preparation; basic assistance with paying bills; shopping for food, clothing, and other essential items; performing household tasks integral to the personal care assistance services; communication by telephone and other media; and traveling, including to medical appointments and to participate in the community.” Temporary Family HealthCare Dwellings June 9, 2016 Page 4 The law requires all of the following to sign the application: the primary caregiver, the owner of the property (on which the temporary dwelling will be located) and the resident of the property (if not the same as the property owner). However, neither the physically disabled or mentally impaired individual nor his or her power of attorney signs the application. Who can host a temporary family health care dwelling? Placement of a temporary family health care dwelling can only be on the property where a “caregiver” or “relative” resides. The statute defines caregiver as “an individual, 18 years of age or older, who: (1) provides care for a mentally or physically impaired person; and (2) is a relative, legal guardian, or health care agent of the mentally or physically impaired person for whom the individual is caring.” The definition of “relative” includes “a spouse, parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, sibling, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece of the mentally or physically impaired person. Relative also includes half, step and in-law relationships.” Is this program just for the elderly? No. The legislature did not include an age requirement for the mentally or physically impaired dweller. 8 Who can live in a temporary family health care dwelling and for how long? The permit for a temporary health care dwelling must name the person eligible to reside in the unit. The law requires the person residing in the dwelling to qualify as “mentally or physically impaired,” defined as “a person who is a resident of this state and who requires assistance with two or more instrumental activities of daily living as certified by a physician, a physician assistant, or an advanced practice registered nurse, licenses to practice in this state.” The law specifically limits the time frame for these temporary dwellings permits to 6 months, with a one-time 6 month renewal option. Further, there can be only one dwelling per lot and only one dweller who resides within the temporary dwelling What structures qualify as temporary family health care dwellings under the new law? The specific structural requirements set forth in the law preclude using pop up campers on the driveway or the “granny flat” with its own foundation as a temporary structure. Qualifying temporary structures must: • Primarily be pre-assembled; • Cannot exceed 300 gross square feet; • Cannot attach to a permanent foundation; • Must be universally designed and meet state accessibility standards; 8 The law expressly exempts a temporary family health care dwelling from being considered “housing with services establishment”, which, in turn, results in the 55 or older age restriction set forth for “housing with services establishment” not applying. Temporary Family HealthCare Dwellings June 9, 2016 Page 5 • Must provide access to water and electrical utilities (by connecting to principal dwelling or by other comparable means 9); • Must have compatible standard residential construction exterior materials; • Must have minimum insulation of R-15; • Must be portable (as defined by statute); • Must comply with Minnesota Rules chapter 1360 (prefabricated buildings) or 1361 (industrialized/modular buildings), “and contain an Industrialized Buildings Commission seal and data plate or to American National Standards Institute Code 119.2”10; and • Must contain a backflow check valve.11 Does the State Building Code apply to the construction of a temporary family health care dwelling? Mostly, no. These structures must meet accessibility standards (which are in the State Building Code). The primary types of dwellings proposed fall within the classification of recreational vehicles, to which the State Building Code does not apply. Two other options exist, however, for these types of dwellings. If these structures represent a pre-fabricated home, the federal building code requirements for manufactured homes apply (as stated in Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1360). If these structures are modular homes, on the other hand, they must be constructed consistent with the State Building Code (as stated in Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1361). What health, safety and welfare requirements does this new law include? Aside from the construction requirements of the unit, the temporary family health care dwelling must be located in an area on the property where “septic services and emergency vehicles can gain access to the temporary family health care dwelling in a safe and timely manner.” What local ordinances and zoning apply to a temporary health care dwelling? The new law states that ordinances related to accessory uses and recreational vehicle storage and parking do not apply to these temporary family health care dwellings. However, unless otherwise provided, setbacks and other local ordinances, charter provisions, and applicable state laws still apply. Because conflicts may arise between the statute and one or more of the city’s other local ordinances, cities should confer with their city attorneys to analyze their current ordinances in light of the new law. What permit process should cities follow for these permits? The law creates a new type of expedited permit process. The permit approval process found in Minn. Stat. § 15.99 generally applies; however, the new law shortens the time frame for which the local governmental unit has to make a decision on granting the permit. Due to the time sensitive 9 The Legislature did not provide guidance on what represents “other comparable means”. 10 ANSI Code 119.2 has been superseded by NFPA 1192. For more information, the American National Standards Institute website is located at https://www.ansi.org/. 11 New Minn. Stat. § 462.3593, subd. 2 sets forth all the structure criteria. Temporary Family HealthCare Dwellings June 9, 2016 Page 6 nature of issuing a temporary dwelling permit, the city has only 15 days (rather than 60 days) (no extension is allowed) to either issue or deny a permit. The new law waives the public hearing requirement and allows the clock to restart if a city deems an application incomplete. If a city deems an application incomplete, the city must provide the applicant written notice, within five business days of receipt of the application, telling the requester what information is missing. For those councils that regularly meet only once a month, the law provides for a 30-day decision. Can cities collect fees for these permits? Cities have flexibility as to amounts of the permit fee. The law sets the fee at $100 for the initial permit with a $50 renewal fee, unless a city provides otherwise by ordinance Can cities inspect, enforce and ultimately revoke these permits? Yes, but only if the permit holder violates the requirements of the law. The statute allows for the city to require the permit holder to provide evidence of compliance and also authorizes the city to inspect the temporary dwelling at times convenient to the caregiver to determine compliance. The permit holder then has sixty (60) days from the date of revocation to remove the temporary family health care dwelling. The law does not address appeals of a revocation. How should cities handle data it acquires from these permits? The application data may result in the city possessing and maintaining nonpublic data governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. To minimize collection of protected heath data or other nonpublic data, the city could, for example, request that the required certification of need simply state “that the person who will reside in the temporary family health care dwelling needs assistance with two or more instrumental activities of daily living”, without including in that certification data or information about the specific reasons for the assistance, the types of assistance, the medical conditions or the treatment plans of the person with the mental illness or physical disability. Because of the complexities surrounding nonpublic data, cities should consult their city attorneys when drafting a permit application. Should the city consult its city attorney? Yes. As with any new law, to determine the potential impact on cities, the League recommends consulting with your city attorney. Where can cities get additional information or ask other questions. For more information, contact Staff Attorney Pamela Whitmore at pwhitmore@lmc.org or LMC General Counsel Tom Grundhoefer at tgrundho@lmc.org. If you prefer calling, you can reach Pamela at 651.281.1224 or Tom at 651.281.1266. 7/6/2016 Twin Cities subur bs opt to go their  own way on tiny 'drop homes' ­ StarTribune.com http://www.startribune.com/subur bs­opt­to­go­their­own­way­on­state­s­drop­home­law/385496261/1/2 LOCAL Suburbs opt to go their own way on state's 'drop home' law Facing a new state requirement to allow tiny trailers on residential lots, many cities are saying no.  By Erin Adler (http://www.startribune.com/erin‑adler/195633361/) and Emma Nelson(http://www.startribune.com/emma‑nelson/261800211/) Star Tribune staff writers JULY 5, 2016 — 8:41AM Metro suburbs are bypassing a new state law that would require them to allow tiny, portable houses on residential properties, saying the state mandate doesn’t work for them. The statute is intended to provide access to temporary “drop homes” for people — mostly older adults — with health care needs that require them to be close to a caregiver. But worries about resident  complaints, conflicts with local zoning ordinances and timing concerns have spurred cities to opt out of the law. Some say they already have the resources they need to meet the needs of aging residents, while others want to pass their own laws allowing temporary structures tailored to their city. The League of Minnesota Cities fought for an opt-out provision in the statute so local governments could still have control over their own zoning. Bill sponsor Rep. Roz Peterson, R-Lakeville, struggled to find a place for her elderly father to live when he got sick two years ago. It’s disappointing that cities are opting out, she said, but she acknowledged that the law isn’t one-size-fits-all. “It’s always difficult to accept change and innovation,” Peterson said. “This won’t solve everybody’s problem — this is one tool in the toolbox, so to speak.” Drop homes, sometimes called granny pods, are trailers under 300 square feet that are billed as an affordable and temporary alternative to sending sick, injured or elderly family members to a nursing home. The new law was based on similar, but less restrictive, laws in North Carolina and Virginia. In Minnesota, the law allows homeowners to have a drop home on their property for six months by paying for a $100 permit, unless their city has a specific ordinance against the homes. The Burnsville City Council voted unanimously on June 21 to opt out. Drop homes don’t meet city codes, said Mayor Elizabeth Kautz, and the city already has temporary housing options. Those options include spare bedrooms, apartments, assisted living facilities, short-term health care facilities, hotels and group homes, according to a meeting agenda report. “It’s not that we don’t have it,” Kautz said. “We want control of what happens here in Burnsville.” Some cities want to allow accessory dwelling units but are choosing to do so on their own terms. The Crystal City Council will likely vote to opt out at its next meeting, said Council Member Jeff Kolb. The decision stems largely from the nature of residential properties in Crystal, many of which may be too small to qualify for drop homes under the statute, he said. The City Council will try to pass an ordinance in the future that allows for accessory units that are better tailored to the city, Kolb said. “There was a concern that it would be perceived that by opting out, we were saying we don’t want this kind of thing around here, that it was kind of a cold-hearted decision,” he said. “The reality is it’s not that at all.” (http://stmedia.startribune.com/images/1467684122_08+678634+02NEHOUSE052216.JPG) E L I Z A B E T H  F L O R E S , S TA R  T R I B U N E John Louiselle, left, and Jesse Lammi are a pair of young New Brighton entrepreneurs that have started NextDoor Housing, a company… 7/6/2016 Twin Cities subur bs opt to go their  own way on tiny 'drop homes' ­ StarTribune.com http://www.startribune.com/subur bs­opt­to­go­their­own­way­on­state­s­drop­home­law/385496261/2/2 In Lakeville, the City  Council agreed to opt out last week but also sent the issue to city staff for further review. There were multiple concerns, said Mayor Matt Little, including aesthetics, property values and the difficulty city staff would face in having to make judgments about residents’ illnesses. “Every single city in this country is going to need to  figure out a way to start taking care of our seniors,” Little said. “There’s just a lot of issues we need to … make fair and clear.” Meanwhile, city staff in Woodbury are recommending that city officials vote to opt out in order to have more time to figure out what local needs are, said Jason Egerstrom, Woodbury’s spokesman. Under the statute, cities have until Sept. 1 to opt out. John Louiselle, co-owner of NextDoor Housing, a New Brighton-based drop home company that helped craft the law, said he doesn’t mind if cities choose a different direction. “What’s worrisome to us is when we see cities opting out and offering no alternative solution,” he said. Peterson said she would like to see cities try out the statute and see how it works. The biggest challenge, she said, is that people aren’t familiar with the drop home idea. “This is new — nobody’s really done this before,” she said. “Let’s have a conversation with the community before we just choose to abandon the idea.” Erin Adler • 612-673-1781 Erin.Adler@startribune.com  612‑673‑1781 emma.nelson@startribune.com  612‑673‑4509  emmamarienelson STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 11a. Council Meeting: July 14, 2016 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: North Hennepin Pioneer Society Request for Funds Action Required: Direction Summary: The North Hennepin Pioneer Society has submitted a letter to the City requesting financial assistance for their organization. The letter is attached to this report. In reviewing the request it was found that general funds may not be used to donate money to a non-profit as it is not a proper public purpose. However, gambling funds which the City now receives could be used for this type of purpose. It is requested that the City Council consider the request and direct staff on further action. Any decision to assist the organization financially would need to be further vetted with the City Attorney for final review. At the time the gambling ordinance was adopted, staff recommended using the funds on “activities and facilities for youth” which is one of the approved expenditures. The Council however did not adopt a resolution specifying the use so providing funds to the North Hennepin Pioneer Society is an option. Financial/Budget: The City has limited experience with revenue generation from the newly adopted gambling ordinance. It is anticipated that the City will receive approximately $24,000 - $36,000 per year. Alignment with Values: This item relates to the following adopted values: EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for citizen confidence in government. Page 2 Options: 1. Direct staff to draft documents necessary to commit funds towards the North Hennepin Pioneer Society. 2. Take no action. 3. Send back to staff for further review. Recommendation: Due to the policy nature of this request staff does not have a recommendation on whether or not to support the North Hennepin Pioneer Society financially. Staff does feel that some guidance to the gambling funds should be adopted at some point in the near future so the funds are used effectively. Council Action: Consider a motion to direct staff to draft documents necessary to commit funds towards the North Hennepin Pioneer Society. Attachments: 1. North Hennepin Pioneer Society Request STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 11b. Council Meeting: July 14, 2016 Prepared By: Director Matt Gottschalk Topic: Conditional Offer – Full-Time Police Officer Action Required: Approval Summary: At the March 10, 2016 City Council meeting staff was directed to initiate the Police Officer hiring process. The position was posted on April 13, 2016 and applications were accepted through May 13, 2016. The City received 80 applications. After scoring the applications the top nineteen candidates were offered the opportunity to move on to the first round of interviews. Sixteen applicants chose to interview. There were two first round interview panels and each candidate interviewed with both panels. One panel was composed of Lieutenant Burns, Officer Olson, Officer Hochstetler, and Administrative Assistant Steelman. The other panel was composed of Officer Warren, Officer Hunter, Officer Ekenberg and City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator Beise. The top six candidates were offered the opportunity to return for the second round of interviews. The second round interview panel was composed of Director Gottschalk, Lieutenant Burns, Administrator Martens, and Captain Jeff Swiatkiewicz from Plymouth PD. During the second round of interviews applicant Cody Vojacek clearly stood out as the top candidate. Cody is currently a Patrol Deputy in Stearns County and served as a Corcoran Reserve Officer from 2009-2013. The entire hiring process focused not only on the candidate’s aptitude as a peace officer, but also their focus on the community and their ability to build positive working relationships. A comprehensive background investigation has been conducted on Cody Vojacek and we recommend moving forward with the attached conditional offer. The conditional offer will be subject to two conditions: 1. A recommendation to hire based on a written and oral examination by a licensed psychologist; and 2. Successful completion of a physical examination by a licensed physician. The department is looking forward to getting the field training process started. The March 10, 2016 staff report projected the earliest potential start date as July 1, 2016. Based on current timelines staff anticipates a possible start date of August 15, 2016 contingent upon acceptance of the offer and subsequent conditions. Staff Report—July 14, 2016 Council Meeting Prepared by Director Gottschalk Page 2 Financial/Budget: Funding for this position was placed in the 2016 budget with an anticipated start date of July 1, 2016. The delayed start date of August 15, 2016 should result in a small decrease in full-time Police Officer wages and a small increase in part-time Police Officer wages for shift coverage. The figures in the offer are commensurate with a lateral entry for an experienced Police Officer. For specific details please review the attached conditional offer. Alignment with Values: This item relates to the following adopted values: EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for citizen confidence in government. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY We believe that every employee and citizen should be afforded an equal opportunity to participate in all aspects of employment, citizenship, and governance in the City of Corcoran based exclusively on their ability to contribute. Options: 1. Approve a conditional offer with the preferred candidate. 2. Send back to staff for further review. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the conditional offer as presented. Council Action: Consider a motion to approve the conditional offer. Attachments: 1. Conditional Job Offer for Full-Time Police Officer 1 CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 CO RD 116 ∙ Corcoran, MN 55340 763.420.2288 Email: general@ci.corcoran.mn.us Website: www.ci.corcoran.mn.us July 15, 2016 Cody Vojacek 8260 Parkington Ave NE Otsego, MN 55330 Dear Mr. Vojacek, This is a conditional job offer for the Full-Time Police Officer position with the City of Corcoran. This offer is subject to a recommendation to hire from Martin McAllister staff based on a comprehensive police officer psychological examination and a full physical examination to determine fitness for duty by a licensed physician of the City’s choice. The terms of this position are as follows: 1. This is a full-time position. This position is currently being represented by the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local 320. Your typical work week will vary and will include night and weekend hours. 2. Your beginning rate of pay will be $28.88 per hour which is the 6 Months step for this position in Pay Grade 11. You will be paid according to the City’s normal payroll calendar which includes 26 bi-weekly pay periods. You will be eligible for a step increase upon the successful completion of your six-month anniversary and annually thereafter subsequent to an acceptable performance evaluation. Hourly Pay Rate – 2016 Start 6 Months Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 $27.86 $28.88 $29.90 $30.92 $31.94 $32.96 $33.98 3. You will receive 50% of the 2016 uniform allowance totaling $437.50 and any subsequent allowance as outlined in the Labor Agreement. 4. You will accrue PTO at the rate established in the current Labor Agreement including up to 5 years of credit for complete years of service as a full-time law enforcement officer in other agencies. 5. Your first day of work is scheduled for Monday August 15th, 2016. This date may be adjusted with approval of the Director of Public Safety. 6. The City has a one-year probationary period for this position. You will receive a performance review from your supervisor at the conclusion of your probationary period. 2 7. This letter is not intended nor should it be considered as an employment contract for a definite or indefinite period of time. Assuming favorable results are received, and you choose to accept our offer, we will remove the conditional portion of the offer in writing. Please feel free to contact me in the interim should you have any questions at 763-420-8966 or mgottschalk@ci.corcoran.mn.us If you choose to accept the conditional offer, please sign, date, and return page three of this document indicating you agree to the terms and the date you will be starting your employment with the City of Corcoran. Congratulations, Matthew R. Gottschalk Director of Public Safety Enclosure: Conditional Offer Agreement 3 Conditional Offer Agreement Conditional Offer for Cody Vojacek Full-Time Police Officer Full-time, Hourly $28.88 Start Date: August 15th, 2016 I agree to the terms outlined in the above letter. ______________________________________ ____________ Candidate Date City of Corcoran 2016 City Council Schedule Agenda Item 13. July 28, 2016, • Planning Project Update • Code Compliance Report • Public Hearing – Vacation for Ravinia 5th Addition and Ravinia 6th Addition • Ravinia 5th and 6th Addition PUD Final Plan, Final Plat, and Development Contract • Financial Management Plan • Assessment and Financing Agreements – Downtown Utility and Street Improvement Project • Fee Schedule Amendment o Park Dedication o Commercial water/sewer usage fees August 11, 2016 Work Session • Road Maintenance Overview • Assessment Policy • Assessment and Financing Agreements – Downtown Utility and Street Improvement Project August 11, 2016 • Financial Performance Report • Commercial water/sewer billing fee structure • Labor Agreement Negotiation Process • Animal Control Process and Options August 25, 2016 – Brad Unable to Attend • Planning Project Update • Code Compliance Report • Night to Unite Recap • Speed Sign Implementation Report September 8, 2016 • Financial Performance Report • Preliminary Levy September 22, 2016, • Planning Project Update • Code Compliance Report • 2016 Election Canvassing Date City of Corcoran 2016 City Council Schedule Agenda Item 13. Page 2 of 2 • Corcoran Insert – 2017 Proposed Levies and Taxes Notice • Bring Your Own Device Policy (Council and staff) October 13, 2016 (Charter Commission Meeting Prior to Regular Meeting) • Financial Performance Report • Appoint Election Judges for the General Election • Public Hearing – Certifying Delinquent Fees to Hennepin County October 27, 2016, • Planning Project Update • Code Compliance Report November 10, 2016 • Financial Performance Report • Waiver of Labiality Coverage – Statutory Tort Limits Nov. Special Meeting to Canvass Election Results – See Sept 22 November 21, 2016 MONDAY • Planning Project Update • Code Compliance Report • Disseminate City Administrator Performance Evaluation • Fire Study RFP December 8, 2016 • Financial Performance Report December 19, 2016 MONDAY • Planning Project Update • Code Compliance Report • 2016 Year in Review • 2017 Fee Schedule • 2017 General Fund Budget and Property Tax Levy • 2017 Wage Schedule and Benefit Package for City Employees • 2017 Water and Sanitary Sewer Budgets • 2017 City Council Calendar • City Administrator Performance Evaluation