Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2017-01-26 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 January 26, 2017 - 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 January 12, 2016 Council Meeting* 7. Claims as Presented a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500)* b. All Other Financial Claims* 8. Staff Reports / Memos / Commissions a. Commission Representatives* b. Code Compliance Report* c. Planning Project Update* 9. Planning Business a. Site Plan and Conditional Use Permits for Motor Café at 23030 Highway 55 (PID 32-119-23- 33-0009) (city file 16-033)* b. Request for Vacation of Right-of-Way* 10. Unfinished Business a. Draft Assessment Policy* b. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Schedule* 11. New Business a. 2017 Legislative Priorities* b. Public Work Director/Engineer Recruitment Process* 12. Closed Session – Attorney Client Privilege 13. 2017 Council Schedule* 14. Council Liaison Calendar Planning Commission 2/2/17 3/2/17 4/6/17 5/4/17 6/1/17 Bottema Dejewski LaFave Keefe Thomas Parks and Trails Commission 2/21/17 3/21/17 4/18/17 5/16/17 6/20/17 Dejewski LaFave Keefe Thomas Bottema 15. Adjournment CITY OF CORCORAN City Council Meeting Minutes January 12, 2017 - 7:00pm The Corcoran City Council met on January 12, 2017 at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were Mayor Thomas, Councilor Bottema, Councilor Dejewski, Councilor Keefe, and Councilor LaFave. 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 Thomas called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. 2. Pledge of Allegiance Mayor Thomas invited all in attendance to rise and join in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Oath of Office City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator Beise administered the oaths of office to Mayor Thomas, Councilor Bottema, and Councilor Dejewski. 4. Agenda Approval City Administrator Martens noted that staff was informed of a grammatical error in the minutes related to Mayor Guenthner’s award. City Administrator Martens also noted that claims were provided at the dais for Councilmembers. MOTION: made by LaFave, seconded by Keefe to approve the agenda as presented. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) 5. Open Forum Loren Kohnen, 22755 Winchester Trail, addressed the Council. Specifically Mr. Kohnen thanked Mayor Guenthner for his service, welcomed the new Mayor and Council, and noted he looked forward to working together. 6. Presentations a. Years of Service Recognition – Steve Warren (20 Year) Mayor Thomas presented Police Officer Warren with a service award for his twenty years of service. Mayor Thomas thanked Officer Warren for his service. 7. Consent Agenda a. Draft Minutes of the December 19, 2016 Council Meeting b. Job Description Approval – Police Technician c. Elm Creek Watershed Commissioner Resignation – Jonathan Bottema d. Hennepin County Residential Grant Agreement Councilor Dejewski asked that Items 6b. and 6d. be considered separately. MOTION: made by Dejewski, seconded by Keefe to approve the consent agenda consisting of Items 6a. and 6c. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) Councilor Dejewski asked about how the Police Technician position would effect current staffing levels. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted this position would provide additional administrative support as the department’s responsibilities expand. The goal of the position is to scale as needed and provide an opportunity to extend service hours depending on the schedule of the candidate. MOTION: made by LaFave, seconded by Keefe to approve Item 6b. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) Councilor Dejewski asked about the current funding amount and the future of the program given the decrease in funding. City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator noted that current funding is approximately $14,000. City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator Beise noted that staff will be working with staff at the County to understand the program changes and will be making recommendation to the Council regarding the program. MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by Dejewski to approve Item 6d. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) 8. Claims as Presented a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500) MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by LaFave to approve escrow claims as presented. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) b. All Other Financial Claims MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Dejewski to approve all other claims as presented. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) 9. Staff Reports / Memos/Commissions a. Commissioner Representatives Mayor Thomas noted Planning Commission Chair Jacobs and Parks and Trails Commissioner Kruger were in attendance. b. City Project Update; report received. 10. Planning Business a. Expanded Grading Plan – Ravinia City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the request was withdrawn and Lennar will bring a grading plan forward with future additions. b. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Process City Planner Lindahl presented the report noting the timeline and proposed process includes Mike Pritchard taking the lead reducing but not eliminating consultant assistance. City Planner Lindahl noted in addition to the required topics to include staff anticipates policy discussion on MUSA boundary, development rights, and the transportation network. City Planner Lindahl noted the meeting and outreach efforts. Council discussed historical processes, citizen involvement, and communication of the process to citizens. Planning Commission Chair Jacobs noted that education on the plan impacts is important. Council discussed development of the Northeast district and school districts long-term plans. City Administrator Martens noted the progress of the Southwest district market study. Council discussed the market study and further discussed communications. City Administrator Martens noted that based on the discussion, the first workshop could be moved to May. City Planner Lindahl noted that the major requirements didn't change however issues such as solar and affordable housing have been framed differently. Council discussed resiliency and high density housing. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by LaFave to approve the preliminary work plan with amendments and direct the City Administrator to begin working with consulting staff to kick off the Comprehensive Plan as outlined. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) 11. Unfinished Business No unfinished business was presented. 12. New Business a. Elm Creek Watershed Commissioner Appointment City Administrator Martens presented the report noting that staff has begun to reach out to applicants. Councilor Keefe thanked Councilor Bottema for his service on the Commission. Per consensus, staff was directed to move forward with the study. b. Maintenance Operator Recruitment Process City Administrator Martens presented the report noting that position was budgeted for as part of the 2017 budget and paid for out of the sewer and water utilities. City Administrator Martens noted the new additional responsibilities for water and sewer, utility locates, and storm water and the position would assist the the additional duties. Council noted the position was budgeted for. MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by Bottema to authorize the City Administrator to begin the recruitment process for the position of Maintenance Operator. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) c. Annual Appointments Mayor Thomas noted Councilor Keefe expressed an interest in being the acting Mayor. MOTION: made by Dejewski, seconded by Keefe to adopt Resolution 2017-01 Establishing Annual Appointments for the City of Corcoran for 2017 with addition of Councilor Keefe as acting Mayor. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) d. 2017 City Council Calendar City Administrator Martens presented the report noting that due to the Thanksgiving Holiday the second meeting in November will be moved to the Monday of that week. City Administrator Martens request input if work sessions should be added to the schedule prior to the first meeting of each month. Councilor a discussed the work session and being provided a list of work session topics at the goal setting session. City Administrator Martens confirmed there was general support for work sessions and further discussion will take place as part of the goal setting process. MOTION: made by LaFave, seconded by Dejewski to adopt the 2017 City Calendar as presented. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) e. Goal Setting Process City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the process reviews the City's mission, vision and values in addition to setting the priorities for the Council. Council discussed possible dates. Per consensus, staff was directed to work with members to find a date for the goal setting session. f. Request for a Speed Study City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the speed study area, current conditions, and that he had spoken with staff at Hennepin County and the Rockford School Superintendent regarding the request. Council discussed who sets the speeds. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted that the state sets the speed based on results of the speed study and that the conditions of the road effect the speed traveled. Council discussed adding additional signage. MOTION: made by Bottema, second by LaFave direct staff to request the speed study. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) g. Recycling Forgiveness City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator Beise presented the report noting that the City received a request to waive fees and the policy decision is whether to forgive the fees. MOTION: made by Bottema to waive the recycling fees. City Administrator Martens noted the staff recommendation was to deny the request. (Motion failed, no second) Council discussed if the citizens should pay for someone not utilizing the services. MOTION: made by Keefe, second by LaFave to deny the recycling forgiveness request. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) 13. Unscheduled Items No unscheduled items were presented. 14. 2017 Council Schedule City Administrator Martens reviewed the upcoming schedule. Council discussed the state Senator and state Representative visit, a standard format for petitions, and moving forward the draft assessment policy to the January 26th meeting. 15. Council Liaison Calendar The Council liaison calendar was not reviewed, but was available in the Council Packet. 16. Adjournment MOTION: made by Dejewski, seconded by LaFave to adjourn. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave (Motion carried 5:0) Meeting adjourned at 8:23pm. ________________________________ Jessica Beise – City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator STAFF REPORT Agenda Items 7a-b. Council Meeting: January 26, 2017 Prepared By: Jessica Beise Topic: Escrow Claims and All Other Financial Claims Action Required: Informational Summary: Escrow Claims (Fund #500) and All Other Financial Claims will be provided separately to Councilmembers via email, and will be placed in the City Hall Agenda Packet and on the website separately. These will be made available by end of day Monday, January 23, 2017. 1 CITY OF CORCORAN *Check Detail Register© January 2017 q19. 01/25/17 12:44 PM Page 1 Fund Summary 10100 Farmers State Bank 602 SEWER $53.00 $53.00 P 1 ht /V' e b Y' M 5 a STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 8a. Council Meeting: January 26, 2017 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: Commission Representatives Action Required: None – Informational Summary: The advisory commission representatives for the January 26th Council meeting are as follows: Planning Commission: Alan Schultz Parks and Trails Commission: Sharon Meister 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. 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: N/A Recommendation N/A Council Action: N/A Attachments: N/A STAFF REPORT / Code Compliance Agenda Item: 8 b. Council Meeting: January 26, 2017 Prepared By: Mike Pritchard Topic: CODE COMPLIANCE REPORT – December 2016 Action Required: Information Only Code Enforcement Issues: Complaint 16-075 (11/30/2016): Road damaged from construction traffic at 91XX Shannon Lane. The City was notified that Shannon Lane was becoming impassable due to damage to the road from construction traffic during a new home build. The road was found to be in need of immediate repair. Public works scraped the tracked and damaged material off the roadway, hauled in 210 tons of material, and made the necessary repairs. The owner agreed to pay for the materials and is working with the contractor to avoid damage to the road and make repairs as needed. To prevent further damage, the road was posted for a 5 ton limit. The City has invoiced the property owner for the materials. Complaint 16-010 (4/1/2016): Home Occupation, Junk/Debris at 21XXX County Road 10. The property owner has been conducting a retail sales business from the property which is in violation of the Home Occupation Ordinance as well as an existing Conditional Use Permit on the property. The City has made multiple attempts to gain compliance, but the owner has refused to comply. This matter has been referred to the City Attorney. Complaint 16-003 (12/17/2015): Exterior Storage, Junk/Debris at 20XXX Co Rd 10 and on City Property. The property owner(s) signed an agreement on April 23rd to have the City property completely cleaned up no later than September 30, 2016. The Deadline was missed. Council passed an Abatement Order via Resolution 2016-84. The City is following up and will abate any remaining items if necessary. Complaint 15-010 (11/13/2014): Exterior Storage, Junk/Debris at 8XXX Garrison Lane. This matter was referred to the City Attorney and has been to court. As part of the agreement, the City is conducting progress inspections. Complaints Concerns Total Nuisiance Junk/Junk Vehicles Grass & Weed Control Animal Violations Home Occupations Signs Referred to Public Works, Metro West, or City Engineer Misc. Compaints Concerns Cases Referred to City Attorney Building Permits - Zoning review Building Permits Grading or Driveway Permits Misc. Permits Overweight /Ag Vehicle Permits 54 51 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 10 29 0 1 2 Complaints and Concerns Permits and Zoning Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 MEMORANDUM 105 South Fifth Street, Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net DATE January 19, 2017 TO Brad Martens CC City Council, Planning Commission, Parks & Trails Commission FROM Kendra Lindahl, City Planner RE Active Corcoran Planning Applications The following is a summary of project status for current, active projects: 1.Sawgrass Preliminary Plat, Preliminary PUD Development Plan and Rezoning for on Schendel property at 20400 County Road 10 (City file 14-027). The City Council approved the request on December 11, 2014 and granted the applicant 2 years to apply for the final plat and final PUD development plan. Peachtree Partners did not buy the property, but a different developer could still proceed with the approved plan. On December 9, 2016, the applicant submitted a written request to extend the approvals for an additional year. Staff recommended that this request be reviewed by the City Council, but adequate time was not provided to place this on a Council agenda prior to expiration. Staff administratively approved an extension until February 28, 2017 so that this request for extension could be considered at the February 23, 2017 Council meeting. 2.Interim Use Permit for a Conditional Home Occupation License for an upholstery business (Designers Choice Upholstery) located at 20125 County Road 117 (PID 02-119-23-12-0005) (city file no. 16-013). The applicant is incomplete, but will be scheduled for a public hearing at the Planning Commission and City Council review when complete. Staff is following up with applicant to complete the application. 3.Industrial Lot Standards. Staff received a request from the property owner at 19905 75th Avenue to consider changes to the minimum lot size standards in the Industrial zoning districts. Staff prepared a summary of the issues for City Council consideration at the August 25th meeting. At the September 8th Council meeting, the Council directed the City Administrator to work with Maxfield Research and have them include their analysis in the Market Study that they will complete soon. 4.Motor Café Conditional Use Permits and Site Plan at 23030 Highway 55 (PID 32-119-23-33-0009) (City File 16-033). The applicant is requesting approval of a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permits for Auto Sales/Repair and to allow more than 20% metal siding. The existing business was a non- conforming use that burned on May 24, 2016. The non-conforming status was lost and the code requires the building to be restored in conformity with the regulations of this Ordinance. The Planning Commission recommended approval after the public hearing at the January 5th meeting and action is expected at the January 26th City Council meeting. 5.2040 Corcoran Comprehensive Plan (City file 17-001). At their January 12th meeting, the City Council authorized staff and consulting staff to begin working on the required update. Staff will be creating a Comprehensive Plan update on the City website where information about the process, including opportunities for public input, will be posted and regularly updated. Staff is working to develop a more complete media outreach plan and will begin implementing that in the next few weeks. The first meeting with be a joint City Council/Commission meeting on March 16th. Agenda Item 8c. MEMORANDUM 2 6. Lennar Final Plat, and PUD Final Development Plan for “Ravinia 8th Addition” (the Schwalbe property) (PID 36-119-23-14-0001) (city file 17-002). Lennar has submitted the application for approval. Staff is reviewing the application for completeness. The application is expected to be reviewed at the March Planning Commission and City Council meetings. 7. Sunrise Solar IUP and Preliminary Plat for a Community Solar Garden on the Pouliot property on County Road 19 (PID 30-119-23-44-0003 and 29-119-23-33-0001) (city file 17-003). Sunrise Solar has submitted the application for approval. Staff is reviewing the application for completeness. If complete, the application is expected to be reviewed at the March Planning Commission and City Council meetings. Also, there are a number of projects that have been approved, but are still not filed and closed out: 1. Corcoran Business Park (City file 06-005). The City Council granted a one-year extension to the final plat approval, which expired on April 12, 2011. Staff has spoken to the applicant and is still working to close out this project. Staff has spoken to the applicant and will schedule a meeting when more information is available on the Loretto sewer project. 2. Hope Ministries Conditional Use Permit for Cemetery and Vacation of Drainage & Utility Easement at 19951 Oswald Farm Road (City file 12-002). Hope Ministries submitted a request for a conditional use permit to allow a cemetery west of the existing church. The application was approved by the City Council on March 22nd and site work had begun. The letter of credit for site improvements has been released, but we are holding the escrow pending completion of the approved landscaping. The applicant has indicated that they are considering a site plan amendment application to modify the approved plans. Staff met again with Pastor Brian Lother in December to try to finalize this issue and address some other questions or concerns from him. We hope to be able to wrap this up in the near future. 3. Commercial Door Addition at 7670 Commerce Street (City file 15-010) The City received an application for approval of a building addition, which required a conditional use permit, interim use permit, variance and site plan approval. The project was reviewed at a public hearing at the June 4th Planning Commission meeting and was approved by the City Council on June 25th. The required landscaping will be finalized and constructed after the downtown infrastructure project is completed. The City will release the remaining escrow when the planting is completed. 4. “Strehler Estates” Final Plat (PID 17-119-23-32-0004) (city file no. 16-001). The applicant submitted a request for approval of a preliminary plat to create 4 lots and an ordinance amendment to allow a private drive for property at 22900 Strehler Road. The City Council approved both items on October 8th. The final plat was approved by the City Council at the January 28th meeting. A stop work order was issued last week as the developer began construction of the private drive in advance of filing the plat. The applicant is working to address the conditions of approval and then will record the final plat at Hennepin County. 5. Private Drive Ordinance Amendment (City file 16-003). The City Council approved an ordinance amendment allowing private drives in the Rural Residential district, subject to certain conditions. However, after adoption the City Council directed staff to revisit this issue and consider an ordinance amendment to eliminate the requirement that private drives off paved roads must be paved. The City Council approved the amendment on May 26th. The Council also identified additional issues that should be reviewed and discussed at a future date. 6. IUP for Commercial Kennel for Daniel Benjamin at 19520 Stieg Road (City File 16-020). Daniel Benjamin has submitted an application for an IUP for a commercial kennel. The kennel would be located on his property, would be owned and operated by him and would have employees. The Planning Commission recommended approval after the public hearing at the August 4th Planning Commission and the request was approved by the City Council on August 25th. The applicant is working to address the conditions of approval and will then apply for a building permit. 7. Park Place Storage request for Rezoning, Variance, Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan and Preliminary Plat (City file 16-002). The City Council reviewed a sketch plan last year for expansion of the existing mini-storage facility. The applicant has submitted the application, but is working to provide MEMORANDUM 3 additional information for completeness. The Planning Commission reviewed this item at a public hearing on September 1st and voted to recommend approval. The City Council approved the request on September 22nd. The applicant has submitted a building permit, but has not yet begun work. 8. Sign Ordinance Amendment to allow Dynamic Signs in the MP District (city file 16-029). The City Council directed staff to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow dynamic signs in the MP district. This text amendment would allow Maple Hill Estates and Mobile Hope to build the sign that the Council denied the variance for on October 13th. The Planning Commission recommended approval after the public hearing on December 1st and City Council approved on December 19th. 9. Lennar request for a PUD Amendment for Ravinia 7th Addition (city file 16-030). Lennar has submitted a request for a PUD amendment to allow a different mix of lot sizes in the 7th Addition than originally proposed. The Planning Commission recommended approval on December 1st and City Council approved the PUD Amendment on December 19th. The Council tabled the request for approval of an expanded grading area and Lennar subsequently withdrew that request. 10. Interim Use Permit for a solar farm at 23710 State Highway 55. (PID 31-119-23-32-0001) (City File 16-032). The City recently amended the Zoning Ordinance to allow solar farms in certain districts. The landowners have requested approval for this site. The Planning Commission recommended approval after the public hearing on December 1st and City Council approved the request on December 19th. The applicant is currently working to address the conditions of approval. 11. Carlson Lot Consolidation at 8920 Foxline Drive and 8909 Trail Haven (PID 1611923140007 & 1611923140002) (City File 16-034). Carolyn Carlson has requested approval of a lot consolidation for two lots. This is the first lot consolidation since the City adopted the ordinance and was approved by the City Council at their December 19th meeting. 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 D ATE: January 19, 2017 for the January 26, 2017 City Council Meeting RE: Site Plan and Conditional Use Permits for Motor Cafe at 23030 Highway 55 (PID 32- 119-23-33-0009) (City File 16-033) 60-DAY REVIEW DEADLINE:February 10, 2017 1.Application Request The applicant has requested approval of a site plan, conditional use permit for auto sales/repair and conditional use permit to allow more than 20% metal siding to allow Motor Café to rebuild on their site, which was destroyed by fire on May 24, 2016. 2.Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 5, 2017. Other than the applicant there was not one present to speak on this item. At the meeting, the applicant presented material samples and revised building elevations. As these items had not been submitted for staff review, the Commission did not act on these items but noted that if these were submitted, they would recommend approval. The applicant’s site plan shows 62 stalls for vehicle sales/display, but the applicant requested that he not be required to stripe these areas. Staff stated that Corcoran, like most cities, requires sales/display areas to be delineated to ensure that minimum drive aisles are maintained for public safety and to manage the number of vehicles for sale on each site. The Commission noted that they would be open to other options for delineating these areas, but could not redesign the site at the meeting and would act on the plans submitted by the applicant. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the draft resolution with a change to condition 10.d. to require stone wainscoting on only the south, east and west elevations and only to a height of 40-inches. Revisions After the Planning Commission Meeting Following the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant submitted revised building elevations for staff review. The updated narrative from the applicant summarizes the list of changes, which address many of staff’s concerns. However, the applicant still requires a CUP to allow more than 20% of an elevation with metal siding. Agenda Item: 9a. Motor Café CUP and SP (16-033) 2 January 26, 2016 Additionally, the applicant submitted roof material samples, which show a metal roof with exposed fasteners. The applicant has requested flexibility from the standards because Morton Buildings does not offer a metal roof option with concealed fasteners as required by ordinance. This does not comply with the ordinance standards and condition 10.c of the attached resolution does require compliance with this standard either by providing concealed fasteners or using a different roof material. The City Code does allow the City to approve a conditional use permit to vary from the standards if the criteria outlined in the ordinance are met. This flexibility was not requested by the applicant originally and the public hearing did not include a discussion of this issue. Staff continues to recommend that the roof comply with the ordinance standards; however, the Council may find that the CUP standards to waive the roof requirements are met and they could modify the resolution to approve exposed fasteners on the roof. 3. Context Level of City Discretion in Decision-Making The City’s discretion in approving or denying a conditional use permit is limited to whether or not the proposed request meets the standards outlined in the City Code. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the conditional use permit. The City’s discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed request meets the standards outlined in the City Code. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the site plan. Background The site has been used as an auto dealership and repair for many years. There are a number of non-conformities on site related to parking lot setbacks and storage/display areas. The fire destroyed the building and a new conditional use permit and site plan approval is required for the site. The City records show a number of CUP amendments over the years, but no clear site plan to identify whether or not variances were granted for setbacks. Since there were approvals, staff is treating the existing non-conformities as legal, non-conformities. Zoning and Land Use The property is guided Light Industrial on the 2030 Future Land Use Plan and zoned Light Industrial. The surrounding properties to the north, east and west are guided and zoned the same. The property to the east (across Highway 55) is located in the City of Medina. Natural Characteristics of the Site The existing site is fully developed. There are existing trees around the perimeter of the back of the site. There are no other significant natural resources. Motor Café CUP and SP (16-033) 3 January 26, 2016 4. Analysis of Request Staff has reviewed the application for consistency with Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance and City Code requirements, as well as City policies. The City Engineer’s comments are incorporated into this staff report. Site Plan The applicant is requesting approval to rebuild on site with a new 7,855 sq. ft. building. The new building will be slightly larger and will shift approximately 32 feet further north than the old building. The site plan notes that there will be a small retaining wall on the back of the building, but no details have been provided. The area behind the building is fenced with a chain link fence. The plans do not show a gate on the fence or extension to enclose the rear year. The applicant’s plan does not show any improvements to the parking or storage areas. This is discussed later in the staff report. Access The existing access to Highway 55 will be maintained. The City submitted the site plan to MnDOT for review. Their review letter with conditions is attached. Staff notes that the aerial photos show the applicant has extended the paved area into MnDOT right- of-way. This is not shown on any previous plans that were approved by the City. Staff discussed this issue and is not recommending that the applicant be required to remove this paved area, but no parking or display will be permitted in this area. Utilities The property is currently serviced by well and septic. The existing well will continue to be used, but the project will require an update to the septic system. A new septic will be constructed in the northeast corner of the site. Hennepin County has reviewed and approved this new septic system. Grading Limited grading is proposed on site and will be limited to what is required to construct the new building and the septic. The City Engineer has reviewed the grading plan and finds that it is generally in compliance with ordinance requirements. Screening/Landscaping Section 1060.070 of the Zoning Ordinance provides standards for landscaping. The applicant has not provided any information about screening or landscaping. The aerial photo indicated that there are trees in the rear of the site and the septic plan shows removal of six of these trees. Outside storage is required to be screened from public streets and adjacent properties. The applicant has not Motor Café CUP and SP (16-033) 4 January 26, 2016 shown how this would be accomplished. Staff has included a condition requiring the applicant to show how the outside storage would be screened. The Zoning Ordinance requires the following: • One overstory tree per 1,000 square feet of gross building floor area or one tree per 50 lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is greater, and • One understory shrub for each 300 square feet of building or one tree per 30 lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is greater. The ordinance would require 8 new trees and 26 shrubs for the new 7,855 sq. ft. building proposed, if the City applied the less restrictive standard (using the perimeter requirement would be 27 trees and 49 shrubs). The City has used the less restrictive standard for other redevelopment sites or sites where additions to existing buildings were planned. It would be possible to accommodate the required shrubs in a landscape area between the building and parking areas or in the front setback. The 8 trees could be located in the front setback area, but would have to be carefully selected to avoid the overhead powerlines. There is no room for planting on the side lot lines, because the existing paving comes to the lot line. The landscaping could be planted along the south line of the chain link fence to screen the vehicle storage proposed in the rear yard. Staff has included a condition requiring compliance with the minimum landscape requirements. Parking/Drive Aisles Section 1060.060 of the Zoning Ordinance requires parking and drive aisles to be a minimum of 100 feet from Highway 55 and 10 feet from all other property lines. The setbacks were not dimensioned on the plans as required by ordinance, but staff estimates the front yard setback at about 10 feet and the side yard setback between zero and five feet. The Zoning Ordinance requires parking stalls to be a minimum of 9’ x 18.5’ and the drive aisles must be a minimum of 26 feet wide. The plans do not dimension drive aisles or stall dimensions but note that they are only 9’ x 18’ with 24-foot drive. This does not comply with ordinance requirements. It appears that there is adequate room to comply with these requirements and staff has included a condition requiring that the plans be revised to show compliance. The building includes 2,278 sq. ft. of office space and 5,577 sq. ft. of service bays for a total of 7,855 sq. ft. The code does not provide parking standards for auto sales/repair, but does require auto service stations to provide 4 parking spaces plus one per service bay and office requires 1 space per 200 sq. feet. The plans show 6 employee parking stalls, 9 customer stalls and 62 stalls for vehicle display/sales in the existing paved area. However, 2 of the customer stalls are located in front of the eastern service by doors and must be removed. Staff finds that the 6 employee stalls and 7 customer stalls to be adequate for this use. The building elevations provided by the applicant show 4 service bay doors. The door on the south has paved access, but the doors on the east and north do not. Staff has included a condition that Motor Café CUP and SP (16-033) 5 January 26, 2016 the access to the eastern doors must be paved. The north door opens into a landscaped area. This is not permitted. Staff recommends that a paved or concrete apron be provided in front of this door. The area behind the building is an existing gravel area that the applicant has indicated is for storage of vehicles to be serviced. This is discussed further in the conditional use permit section. Site Lighting No new lighting is proposed. Any lighting that is added must comply with the standards in Section 1060.040 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff notes that there are two existing light fixtures that are located in the middle of the parking lot. These are existing fixtures and staff is not recommending that they be moved as the applicant should understand the challenges posed by these lights in the middle of the lot. Signage There is an existing sign on site. No additional signage is proposed. Staff notes that historically, flags/banners have been strung between the light fixtures along the front lot line. The applicant has indicated that they are no longer there and staff notes that they are prohibited by the Sign Ordinance. Prior to release of the any escrow or letter of credit, staff will inspect to ensure compliance. Any additional signage must comply with the requirements in the Sign Ordinance (Chapter 84 of the City Code). Conditional Use Permit for Motor Vehicle Sales and Repair The Zoning Ordinance allows Motor Vehicle, Boat or Equipment Repair as a conditional use permit in the Light Industrial district if the following conditions are met: 1. All servicing of vehicles and equipment shall occur entirely within the principal structure. The applicant indicates that all service and repair will occur in the principal structure. 2. To the extent required by State law and regulations, painting shall be conducted in an approved paint booth, which thoroughly controls the emission of fumes, dust, or other particulated matter. The applicant has not indicated that they provide only minor mechanical repairs not painting services, but any such work shall be required to be in compliance with State law. 3. Storage and use of all flammable materials, including liquid and rags, shall conform with applicable provisions of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. The plan includes a holding tank for an inflammable waste trap which confines water from floor drains in the shop and indicates that they will continue to use O.S.I. Environmental Inc. to recycle all oil and waste fluids generated from service shop. Motor Café CUP and SP (16-033) 6 January 26, 2016 4. Parking, driveway, and circulation standards and requirements shall be subject to the review and approval of the City and shall be based upon the specific needs of the operation and shall accommodate large vehicle equipment and semi-trailer/tractor trucks. As noted in the parking section of this report, the current plans do not comply with the parking and drive aisle dimensional requirements and must be revised. If the plans are revised as required, large vehicles would be accommodated on site. 5. The storage of damaged vehicles and vehicle parts and accessory equipment must be completely inside a principal or accessory building. The applicant has indicated that they do small mechanical repairs only. No body work should occur on site, but staff has included a condition that damaged vehicles and vehicle parts must be stored inside. 6. The sale of products other than those specifically mentioned in this Section shall be subject to a separate conditional use permit The applicant is also requesting a conditional use permit for vehicle sales. The Zoning Ordinance allows Motor Vehicle, Boat or Equipment sales as a conditional use permit in the Light Industrial district if the following conditions are met: 1. All sales shall occur on one lot. All sales will occur on the subject property on the existing paved area. Historical photos show parking was occurring on the paved area within MnDOT right-of-way, which is not permitted. The applicant has indicated that this is no longer occurring. 2. Parking areas for the outside storage and sale of vehicles, boats and trailers, shall be on impervious surface, either bituminous, concrete, or approved equivalent. The existing paved area will be used for the sale of vehicles. The original submittal showed striped parking stalls for these display areas. The applicant has revised the plans to stripe the display area, but not the individual stalls, which will give him the flexibility to change the orientation of the vehicles. Staff is comfortable providing this flexibility as it will clearly define the display area, which will ensure that the drive aisle is maintained and limit the number of vehicles to the 62 permitted by the CUP. The applicant is requesting to be allowed to continue to use the existing gravel area in the rear of the building for storage of vehicles in for repair. Storage has been occurring on this gravel area for some time, but has also extended into landscaped areas (see aerial photos). Staff finds that this is an existing condition and recommends that the applicant be allowed to continue. However, the City Council could find that this is inconsistent with the ordinance standard and require the applicant to pave this storage area. Motor Café CUP and SP (16-033) 7 January 26, 2016 3. Interior concrete or asphalt curbs shall be constructed within the property to separate driving and parking areas from landscaped areas. No interior islands are proposed. However, if landscape areas are proposed around the building to accommodate the required landscaping, the plans should comply with this requirement. 4. All areas of the property not devoted to buildings or parking areas shall be landscaped in accordance with this Ordinance. As noted earlier in the staff report, additional landscaping is required and the plans will be revised to show compliance. 5. Off-street parking shall be provided for customers and employees in accordance with this Ordinance. As noted earlier in the staff report, staff finds that the number of parking stalls proposed is consistent with the purpose and intent of the ordinance. However, the plans do not comply with the dimensional requirements and must be revised. Conditional Use Permit for Building Materials The applicant is proposing to construct a metal building with stone wainscoting on the south and part of the east and west elevations. The north and part of the east and west elevations appear to have blue metal wainscoting. The original submittal includes a color rendering with a blue roof and tan siding. The plans show that the building is approximately 27 feet tall, with 40-inch wainscoting. Section 1060.050 of the Zoning Ordinance allows provides standards for building materials and restricts metal siding to not more than 20% of a wall surface. Metal roofs are allowed only if the following conditions are met: 1. Meet the standards adopted by the Minnesota State Building Code, 2. Have concealed fasteners, 3. Are high quality commercial thickness/weight, 4. Have been treated with a factory applied color coating system against any fading or degradation. The roof proposed by the applicant has exposed fasteners and does not comply. Staff recommends that they either revise the plans to show another acceptable roofing material or a metal roof with concealed fasteners. This is included as a condition of approval. The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow metal siding in excess of ordinance requirements. Section 1060.050 of the Zoning Ordinances allows a conditional use permit to be granted for exceptions to these standards fi the following conditions are met: Motor Café CUP and SP (16-033) 8 January 26, 2016 1. The proposed building and material maintains the quality, durability and value intended by the Ordinance. The building will be an improvement over the former building, but does not maintain the quality, durability and value intended by the ordinance. However, with some modifications to the building materials the building could comply. 2. The proposed building is compatible and in harmony with other existing structures within the district and immediate geographic area. The building is in an area where there are many older buildings that do not comply with current ordinance standards. The proposed building would be compatible with many of the other structures in the area. When Lano Equipment requested approval for a similar CUP for an accessory building in 2014, the Council required them to provide a minimum of 4 feet of wainscoting on the bottom, steel lap siding at the peak and a bank of windows in the middle portion with steel siding. The building also had decorative cupolas on the top. These standards were applied to an accessory building in this area and staff believes a similar standard should be applied to this principal building. The revised plans show LP siding on the office portion of the building, with wainscoting, windows with shutters and other changes that dramatically improve the appearance of the building from the original submittal. 3. The provisions of Section 1070.020 are considered and determined to be satisfied. a. Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. The use is a permitted use in the I-1 zoning district and approval of the CUPs will allow continued use of this site for auto repair and sales, which has operated on this site for years. b. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort. The use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, morals or comfort if the proposed conditions are met. c. The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. The use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted not impair property values. The building Motor Café CUP and SP (16-033) 9 January 26, 2016 standards established by the Zoning Ordinance are in important tool for maintaining property values and the conditions attached to the approval will ensure that property values are maintained. d. The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. The use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. The approval will allow the applicant to rebuild on the site and make improvements to the property. e. Adequate public facilities and services are available or can be reasonably provided to accommodate the proposed use. Public facilities and services provided or are not needed for this site, which is served by well and septic. f. The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. With the conditions proposed, the use shall conform to the applicable regulations of the I- 1 district. g. The conditional use and site conforms to performance standards as specified by this Chapter. With the conditions proposed, the use conforms to the performance standards in the Zoning Ordinance. 5. Conclusions Staff finds that the standards for a conditional use permit amendment and a site plan amendment have been met or can be addressed with the changes discussed in the staff report. We have included conditions in the draft resolution to address these issues. 6. Recommendation Move to adopt Resolution 2017-03 approving the conditional use permits and site plan, as recommended by the Planning Commission. Attachments 1. Resolution 2017-03 approving Conditional Use Permits and Site Plan 2. Site Aerial Location Map 3. City Engineer’s memo dated December 14, 2016 4. MnDOT memo dated December 23, 2106 Motor Café CUP and SP (16-033) 10 January 26, 2016 5. Applicant’s Narrative dated December 9, 2016 6. Revised Narrative received January 13, 0217 7. Septic plan received December 9, 2016 8. Revised Site plan received January 18, 2017 9. Building Plans received December 9, 2006 10. Revised Building plans received January 13, 2016 11. January 18, 2017 email from applicant 12. January 18, 2017 email from Morton Buildings City of Corcoran January 26, 2017 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2017-03 Page 1 of 4 Motion By: Seconded By: APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND SITE PLAN FOR MOTOR CAFÉ AT 23030 HIGHWAY 55 (PID 32-119-23-33-0009) (CITY FILE 16-033) WHEREAS, the landowner has requested approval of a site plan and conditional use permits to allow reconstruction of a building for auto sales and repair on property legally described as follows: That part of the Southwest Quarter of said Southwest Quarter described as follows.: beginning at the Southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence North 00 degrees, 23 minutes 25 seconds East, along the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, a distance of 375.60 feet; thence North 88 degrees 59 minutes 57 seconds East, parallel with the North right of way line of State Highway No. 55 as described in Document No. 8667797, a distance of 295.20 feet; thence South 00 degrees 23 minutes 25 seconds West, parallel with the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 379.62 feet to the South line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes 46 seconds West, along said south line. a distance of 295.13 feet to the point of beginning. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the conditional use permits and site plan at a duly called Public Hearing and recommends approval, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request for a conditional use permit amendment and site plan amendment, subject to the following conditions: 1. A conditional use permit and site plan is approved to allow construction of a new building, in accordance with the application received by the City on November 15, 2016 and revisions received on December 9, 2016, January 13, 2017 and January 18, 2017, except as amended by this resolution. 2. The existing non-conforming front and side yard setback on the east, west and south for parking and access shall be allowed to continue as permitted by Section 1030.010 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. A minimum of 13 parking stalls for employees and customers must be provided. Any change in tenants or site use could trigger a change to the parking requirements and would be revised as part of a site plan/conditional use permit amendment. 4. Employee and customer parking must be on paved, striped parking areas. Parking in gravel storage areas is not permitted. 5. Motor vehicles for sale must be in the striped display areas as shown on the plans. Parking in gravel storage areas is not permitted. Parking in MnDOT right-of-way is not permitted. City of Corcoran January 26, 2017 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2017-03 Page 2 of 4 6. All outside storage vehicles in for service must be located within the screened, fenced area approved for outside storage and shall only be located on the gravel areas. No parking of vehicles shall be allowed in landscaped areas. 7. A conditional use permit for Motor Vehicle, Boat or Equipment Repair is approved, based on the following findings: a. All servicing of vehicles and equipment shall occur entirely within the principal structure. b. The applicant does minor mechanical repairs not body work, but to the extent required by State law and regulations, any painting shall be conducted in an approved paint booth, which thoroughly controls the emission of fumes, dust, or other particulated matter. c. Storage and use of all flammable materials, including liquid and rags, shall conform with applicable provisions of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. d. Parking, driveway, and circulation standards and requirements shall be met and shall accommodate large vehicle equipment and semi-trailer/tractor trucks. The current plans do not comply with the parking and drive aisle dimensional requirements and must be revised. If the plans are revised as required, large vehicles would be accommodated on site. e. The storage of damaged vehicles and vehicle parts and accessory equipment must be completely inside a principal or accessory building. f. The sale of products other than those specifically mentioned in this Section shall be subject to a separate conditional use permit. A conditional use permit for vehicle sales is also requested. 8. A conditional use permit for Motor Vehicle, Boat or Equipment sales is approved, based on the following findings: a. All sales will occur on the subject property on the existing paved area. b. Parking areas for the outside storage and sale of vehicles, boats and trailers, shall be on impervious surface, either bituminous, concrete, or approved equivalent. Storage of vehicles in for repair shall be allowed to be stored in the existing gravel lot in the rear of the building. c. No interior islands are proposed. However, if landscape areas are proposed around the building to accommodate the required landscaping, interior concrete or asphalt curbs shall be constructed within the property to separate driving and parking areas from landscaped areas. d. All areas of the property not devoted to buildings or parking areas shall be landscaped in accordance with this Ordinance. e. Off-street parking shall be provided for customers and employees in accordance with this Ordinance. 9. A conditional use permit to allow more than 20% metal siding on all elevations is approved subject to the following findings and conditions: a. The proposed building and material maintains the quality, durability and value intended by the Ordinance. The building will be an improvement over the former building, but does not maintain the quality, durability and value intended by the ordinance. However, with some modifications to the building materials the building could comply. b. The proposed building is compatible and in harmony with other existing structures within the district and immediate geographic area. The building is in an area where there are City of Corcoran January 26, 2017 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2017-03 Page 3 of 4 many older buildings that do not comply with current ordinance standards. The proposed building would be compatible with many of the other structures in the area. c. The provisions of Section 1070.020 are considered and determined to be satisfied. i. The use is a permitted use in the I-1 zoning district and approval of the CUPs will allow continued use of this site for auto repair and sales, which has operated on this site for years. ii. The use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, morals or comfort if the proposed conditions are met. iii. The use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted not impair property values. The building standards established by the Zoning Ordinance are in important tool for maintaining property values and the conditions attached to the approval will ensure that property values are maintained. iv. The use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. The approval will allow the applicant to rebuild on the site and make improvements to the property. v. Public facilities and services provided or are not needed for this site, which is served by well and septic. vi. With the conditions proposed, the use shall conform to the applicable regulations of the I-1 district. vii. With the conditions proposed, the use conforms to the performance standards in the Zoning Ordinance. 10. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant must: a. Comply with the City Engineer’s memo dated December 14, 2016. b. Comply with MnDOT memo dated December 23, 2016. c. The materials samples submitted for the roof do not meet ordinance standards. The applicant must comply with the following standards in Section 1060.050 for the metal roof or provide another permitted roofing material for review and approval by City staff: i. Meet the standards adopted by the Minnesota State Building Code, ii. Have concealed fasteners, iii. Are high quality commercial thickness/weight, iv. Have been treated with a factory applied color coating system against any fading or degradation. d. Submit a final landscape plan for City review and approval. The landscape plan must include a minimum of 8 trees and 26 shrubs. e. The applicant shall provide information to show how the outside storage in the rear yard will be screened by landscaping, fencing or buildings. City of Corcoran January 26, 2017 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2017-03 Page 4 of 4 f. The plans must be revised to comply with the minimum parking/stall dimensional requirements, which require 9’ x 18.5’ stalls and 26-foot wide drive aisles. g. The two customer parking stalls located in front of the eastern service bay doors must be removed to allow access. h. The plans must be revised to provided paved access to the east and north service bay doors. No access over landscaping or gravel shall be allowed. i. Any damaged vehicles awaiting service and vehicle parts must be stored inside. 11. No new signage is proposed. The existing legal, non-conforming pylon sign shall remain. Flags and banners are prohibited by the sign ordinance and shall not be allowed. Noncommercial flags or any other flags displayed from flagpoles will not be considered to be signs. Flags & individual pennants (not on a string) are exempt signs. a. Record the approving resolution at Hennepin County and provide proof of recording to the City. b. Submit electronic files of the plans to the City in AutoCAD format. c. Submit a financial guarantee for the proposed work as outlined in Section 1070.050, Subd. 9 of the Zoning Ordinance. 12. Approval shall expire within one year of the date of approval unless the applicant commences the authorized use and completes the required improvements. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Dejewski, Brian Dejewski, Brian Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike LaFave, Tonya LaFave, Tonya Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 26th day of January 2017. ________________________________ Ron Thomas - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator He nn e pin Cou n ty P ro perty Ma p Da te : 12 /26/2 016 Comm en ts: 1 inc h = 1 00 fee t PAR CEL ID: 32 119 23 330 00 9 OWN ER N AME: M P & C L B lais de ll PAR CEL AD DRESS: 2 303 0 Sta te H w y No 55 , C or co ra n MN 5 53 57 PAR CEL AR EA: 2 a cr es , 8 7,117 sq f t A-T-B: Ab stra ct SAL E PR ICE: $61 5,00 0 SAL E D ATA: 0 6/20 07 SAL E C OD E: Exclu de d Fro m Ra tio Stud ies ASSESSED 20 15 , PAYABLE 201 6 PROPERT Y TYPE: C omme rcial-Pr efer re d H OM ESTEAD : N on -H ome stea d M AR KET VAL UE: $48 8,00 0 TAX TO TAL: $1 8,837 .72 ASSESSED 20 16 , PAYABLE 201 7 PRO PER TY TYPE: C omm erc ial-pr efer red HO MESTEAD: No n-h ome ste ad MARKET VALU E: $5 10 ,0 00 This data (i) is fur nish ed 'A S IS' wit h no represent at ion as t o com ple ten ess or acc urac y ; (ii) is furnis hed w it h n o war rant y of an y k ind; an d (ii i) is not sui tab le for lega l, engi neering or surv ey ing purposes . Hen nepin County s hall not be l iable fo r a ny damage, in jury or los s re sul ting f rom this dat a. COP YRIG HT © H EN N EPIN COU N TY 20 1 6 Engineer’s Memo Wenck Associates, Inc. | 1800 Pioneer Creek Center | P.O. Box 249 | Maple Plain, MN 55359-0249 Toll Free 800-472-2232 Main 763-479-4200 Email wenckmp@wenck.com Web wenck.com - To: Kendra Lindahl, City Planner From: Kent Torve, City Engineer Date: December 14, 2016 Subject: Motor Cafe - Site Plan Background The applicant is reconstructing the site on HWY 55 due to fire damage. The plans were reviewed and discussed as staff. Review The drainage pattern will not change, and the impervious is insignificant for impacting downstream drainage. No other items were identified for engineering review. 1 Kendra Lindahl, AICP Subject:FW: 23030 Hwy 55 Building Proposal From: MOTOR CAFE SALES AND SERVICE [mailto:MOTORCAFE@live.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 3:59 PM To: Michael Pritchard <mpritchard@ci.corcoran.mn.us> Subject: 23030 Hwy 55 Building Proposal Motor cafe is looking to rebuild after the fire on May 24th destroyed our building. After my conversation with Mike Pritchard and Kendra Lindahl we are seeking flexibility on the following 2 areas with this project. 1). All striping on our sales portion of the lot will be stripped to dedicated sales locations. (see Highlighted site plan) Note all retail and handicap spots will be stripped as on site plan. 2). Two parking locations have been removed from in front of overhead door on East elevation. (see modified site plan) 3). Pertaining to Section 1060.050 of zoning ordinance condition # 2. We are seeking flexibility in regards to exposed fasteners, as our builder no longer offers standing seam roof panels, due to UL guidelines. (see email from Rich Rothstein of Morton Builders Inc) 40. Updated color renderings of building will be provided before 1/24/17 If you have any further questions please give me a call. at 612‐282‐1967 Thanks Again, Tim Laurent Laurent Motor Cafe P-763-478-9802 F-763-478-9409 www.yourmotorcafe.com 23030 Hwy 55 Loretto,Mn 55357 ‐ Only minutes west of the Twin Cities 1 Kendra Lindahl, AICP Subject:FW: Standing seam roof From: MOTOR CAFE SALES AND SERVICE [mailto:MOTORCAFE@live.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 4:06 PM To: Michael Pritchard <mpritchard@ci.corcoran.mn.us> Subject: Fw: Standing seam roof Here is the attached e‐mail from Richard Rothstein of Morton Builders Inc. When he gets in the office he could send this with their company info on the e‐mail. I hope this info will help you to meet the requirements of the concealed fastener issue. Thanks, Tim Laurent Motor Cafe P-763-478-9802 F-763-478-9409 www.yourmotorcafe.com 23030 Hwy 55 Loretto,Mn 55357 ‐ Only minutes west of the Twin Cities From: Richard Rothstein <RICHARD.ROTHSTEIN@mortonbuildings.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 3:43 PM To: motorcafe@live.com Subject: Standing seam roof Morton Buildings no longer offers a standing seam roof as part of our product line. Due to increasing losses, the insurance industry is moving in the direction of requiring an underwriters Laboratory hail resistance rating on metal roofing panels. The .019" minimum thickness steel that we are proposing has a UL rating for Hail impact resistance.The standing seam roof did not have a UL rating due to thinner and more pliable steel needing to be used to accepte the intricate bending and forming needed to create the standing seam product. The other benefit it the UL rating steel is it greatly reduces what is known as "oil canning" in the finished appearance. The stainless steel fasteners are placed on top of the high rib, this type of fasteners eliminate the screw head rusting and potential leaking that has been problematic with other types of exposed fasteners. Please let me know if you need any additional technical information Sent from my iPhone STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 9b. Council Meeting: January 26, 2017 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: Request for Vacation of Right-of-Way Action Required: Direction Summary: The City has received a request from an individual for the City Council to consider vacating existing right-of-way between the properties of 7795 and 7815 Corcoran Trail West. According to the individual, he has a contract on one of the properties and would be interested in purchasing the other if they were able to be combined. Over the last several years staff has responded to many inquiries to the properties and how a home could potentially be built on the site. After reviewing the conditions, each interested party has walked away. It is requested the Council provide feedback to staff in order to work with the interested party. Staff will provide a more comprehensive update at the meeting. Financial/Budget: N/A 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. Options: 1. Provide staff direction on the request to vacate right-of-way. Recommendation: Staff will provide a recommendation at the meeting. Council Action: Provide staff direction on the request to vacate right-of-way. Attachments: 1. Request to Vacate Right-of-Way 2. Site Location Corcoran Trail West From:info@aftonbd.com To:Brad Martens Cc:info@aftonbd.com Subject:[FWD: RE: City Right - of - Way] Date:Thursday, January 19, 2017 4:07:04 PM Hi Brad, I would like to inquire as the possibility of having the city right away between the two empty lots, 7815 & 7795 Corcoran Trail West, vacated. I currently have 7815 under contract and would like to purchase 7795 and join it together as one PID . As you may know, both of these lots have had soil and water issues that have effected the ability to build anything on either lot for more than 20 years. By joining the two lots together proper drainage can be better accomplished and proper sizing of septic can be achieved. My desire would be to join together the two lots and centrally locate the new structure in the middle and where now currently is a city right of way. Please let me know if this is some thing the city would consider and allow. Thank you, Dave Johnson He nn e pin Cou n ty P ro perty Ma p Da te : 1/1 9/20 17 Comm en ts: 1 inc h = 2 00 fee t PAR CEL ID: 23 119 23 330 01 6 OWN ER N AME: Br ian To ussaint PAR CEL AD DRESS: 7 815 C or co ra n Tr W, Co rcora n MN 5 53 40 PAR CEL AR EA: 1.9 9 ac re s, 86,6 95 sq ft A-T-B: To rr ens SAL E PR ICE: $50 ,0 00 SAL E D ATA: 0 5/20 11 SAL E C OD E: Va ca nt L an d ASSESSED 20 15 , PAYABLE 201 6 PROPERT Y TYPE: Vac an t L and -R es ide ntial H OM ESTEAD : N on -H ome stea d M AR KET VAL UE: $85 ,000 TAX TO TAL: $1 ,6 61.5 4 ASSESSED 20 16 , PAYABLE 201 7 PRO PER TY TYPE: Va ca nt L an d-reside ntial HO MESTEAD: No n-h ome ste ad MARKET VALU E: $9 4,00 0 This data (i) is fur nish ed 'A S IS' wit h no represent at ion as t o com ple ten ess or acc urac y ; (ii) is furnis hed w it h n o war rant y of an y k ind; an d (ii i) is not sui tab le for lega l, engi neering or surv ey ing purposes . Hen nepin County s hall not be l iable fo r a ny damage, in jury or los s re sul ting f rom this dat a. COP YRIG HT © H EN N EPIN COU N TY 20 1 7 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 10a. Council Meeting: January 26, 2017 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: Draft Assessment Policy Action Required: Direction Summary: Attached to this report is a draft assessment policy based upon feedback from work sessions on August 11th and October 13th, and a Council meeting on November 10th. Some questions are incorporated into the policy for specific discussion however the entire proposed policy should be discussed. It is requested that the City Council review and provide feedback to staff on proposed changes to the document. Primary effort should be to review the street portion as that is most pertinent. Financial/Budget: The assessment policy will guide how cost sharing will take place for proposed improvements. 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. Provide staff direction on the draft assessment policy. Recommendation: Provide staff direction on the draft assessment policy. Council Action: Provide staff direction on the draft assessment policy. Attachments: 1. Draft Special Assessment Policy 2. Draft Special Assessment Procedures Special Assessment Policy Purpose: The City's special assessment policies and procedures have been established to: 1. Provide a stable and continuing source of funding within the financial capacity of the City, in combination with federal, state, county, and other local financial resources available to the City, to accommodate infrastructure needs for new development, redevelopment, and maintenance within the existing community in the most cost-effective manner. 2. Balance needs and costs for new and existing infrastructure to support and promote economic development and growth as well as maintenance within the existing community by providing for the equitable distribution of infrastructure costs to ensure that specific developments are financially self-supporting to the extent warranted. 3. Provide a comprehensive, well-constructed and well-maintained infrastructure system that services individual properties and takes advantage of economies on a regional scale and flexibility in the timing of infrastructure development. 4. Respond to community needs and desires for health, safety, welfare; accessibility, and mobility provided by new infrastructure and the maintenance of existing infrastructure. 5. Function in harmony with the City's comprehensive plan and growth area plans by providing the infrastructure and amenities associated with those plans thereby promoting orderly growth in areas where services are available or can be provided at the most reasonable cost. 6. Provide the City Council and staff with guidelines and methods to efficiently distribute infrastructure costs to benefiting properties in an equitable and consistent manner thereby enhancing the value of property by assigning a proportionate value of the improvements to the properties deriving benefit from the improvement. General Policy Statement: While the special assessment purposes, policies and procedures have been identified herein, the City Council may deviate from this policy when such rationale in equity arises or the law is required. I. Policy Definitions: A. Adjacent Property: A property directly adjacent to public improvements. B. Access: Properties shall be considered to have access to public street improvements when they may enter onto the improvement from their own private driveway, private road, or public street, or when the street classification would allow the property to be granted driveway access. Properties shall be considered to have access to underground utility improvements when they directly abut the property or may be available to the property by utility or road easement/ROW, and the City has included the property within a defined services area approved for immediate utility service. C. Accrued Interest (or Compounded Interest): Interest which is calculated not only on the initial principal but also the accumulated interest of prior periods. D. Adjusted Area: An area of a benefited property that has been modified by an adjustment factor to more accurately represent the true benefit that property receives from an improvement in comparison to other properties in the assessment area. The adjustment will be based on the improvement design parameters that are applicable to that parcel, as approved by the City Council. Design parameters that may be used to determine the adjustment factor include, but are not limited to, trip generation, storm water runoff coefficients, water or sanitary sewer use, needed fire flow, and zoning or future land use. E. Assessed Cost: Those costs of public improvements that have been determined to benefit specific properties. The assessed cost will be equal to the project cost minus the City cost. Project costs eligible for assessment include all costs associated with the improvements, including, but not limited to, land acquisition, demolition, construction, administration, engineering, legal, financing and other costs as determined by the City Council. The financing charges include all costs of financing the project. These costs include, but are not limited to, financial consultant's fees, bond attorney's fees, and capitalized interest. F. Assessable Footage: The assessable footage is the total front footage of all of the benefiting properties, calculated by using the front footage method. ( G. Assessment Rate: The assessment rate for improvements other than streets is determined by dividing the assessable cost of an improvement by the total number of assessment units such as the total adjusted front footage or square footage, acreage, number of lots, or number of parcels. H. Assessment Unit: Front footage, area, or unit used to compute the costs on the basis of individual assessments. I. Benefit: The increase in property value as a result of a public improvement such as a street, sidewalk, trail, curb and gutter, water main, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, park, or street landscaping. J. Deferment: A process of postponing the collection of the cost of public improvements and funding them as a system cost with the intention of collecting the cost at a later date. K. Driveway Approach: That area which lies between the existing pavement to the right- of- way line; curb cut to curb cut. For assessment purposes driveway approach refers to the road surfacing, not stormwater conveyance such as ditching or culverts. L. Front Footage: The distance measured along the right-of-way line that directly abuts an improvement, not counting Side-Lot Footage. M. Limited Access Street: A street, such as a major or minor collector street, which because of its high volume of traffic has been designated by the City for controlled access, meaning the number of access points to the street will be limited. N. Lot Definitions: 1. Corner Lot: A lot located at a street intersection having both front and side-lot footage. 2. Double Frontage Lot: A lot with access to two separate non- intersecting or intersecting streets but not a corner lot. 3. Irregularly Shaped Lot: Those lots abutting curved streets, cul-de- sacs, or other lots where there is more than five feet of difference in length between the front and back lot lines. 4. Rectangular Lot: A lot with less than five feet of difference in length between the front and back lot lines. O. Public Improvement: Improvements as allowed by State statute that provide a special benefit to properties, including but not limited to stre ets, sidewalks, trails, curb, gutter, sanitary sewer systems, storm sewer systems, water treatment and distribution systems. P. Special Assessment: A legal process whereby the benefited property is charged for all or a portion of the cost of public improvements. Q. Standards for Surface Improvements: Standards for surface improvements have been established in the City's Engineering Standards. R. Street: All public ways designed as means of access to the adjoining properties. Streets are classified into six groups and classified per a Collector or Local street status in the City's Comprehensive Plan: 1. Local Gravel – Local gravel streets have lower traffic counts as compared to collector gravel streets, have a gravel finish, and utilize rural ditches for stormwater conveyance. Examples include, but are not limited to, Hidden Ponds Drive, Meadow Circle, Nystrom Lane, Rush Meadow Lane, and Treeline Drive. 2. Collector Gravel - Collector gravel streets have higher traffic counts as compared to local gravel streets, have a gravel finish, and utilize rural ditches for stormwater conveyance. Examples include, but are not limited to, Trail Haven Road, Cain Road, Bechtold Road, Old Settlers Road, and Willow Drive. 3. Rural Local Asphalt – Rural local asphalt streets have a bituminous finish and utilize ditches for stormwater conveyance. E xamples include, but are not limited to, Cates Longhorn Road, Abilene Lane, Butterworth Lane, Hunter Road, and Dassel Lane. 4. Urban Local Asphalt – Urban local asphalt streets have a bituminous finish and utilize curb and gutter for stormwater conveyance. Examples include, but are not limited to, Bridle Path, Carriage Way, Prairie Sage Lane, and Sorrel Court. 5. Rural Collector Asphalt – Rural collector asphalt streets have higher traffic counts than local streets, have a bituminous finish, and utilize ditches for stormwater conveyance. Examples include, Oakdale Drive. 6. Urban Collector Asphalt – Urban collector asphalt streets have higher traffic counts than local streets, have a bituminous finish, and utilize curb and gutter for stormwater conveyance. Examples include, Gleason Parkway. S. Street Treatment Definitions: 1. Crack Seal and Seal Coat - Crack sealing involves patching and sealing cracks in the roadway. This is followed by seal coating, which involves spraying the road with oil and covering it with a layer of small rock. Crack sealing and seal coating is generally considered routine roadway maintenance. The recommended interval is 6-8 years with first application about 7 years after new roadway construction. 2. Mill and Overlay - Milling and overlaying consists of grinding off the upper layer of asphalt (in urban sections) and replacing it with a new layer of asphalt. This is generally done on roadways that have a fair amount of cracking and other surface distress, usually at about 60% of the street's life cycle. This is considered a structural improvement that will renew the street surface and extend its useful life. 3. Rehabilitate - Rehabilitating a roadway consists of grinding up the existing asphalt and mixing it with a portion of the underlying gravel base (typically 4"- 8"). This combination of bituminous and gravel is then used as the new road base, and a new asphalt surface is paved over this. This is generally done on roadways that have a significant amount of distress. This can be a good alternative to reconstructing a road if the existing road base appears to be structurally sufficient. 4. Reconstruct - Reconstructing a roadway consists of completely removing the existing road and underlying gravel and sand base material, and constructing a new road section. This may also include correcting any poor base material beneath the section, or updating the road to meet design standards such as width and drainage. This is often done in conjunction with utility repairs/replacement. Generally done on roadways that exhibit signs of major distress, such as rutting, cracking, and potholes. T. System Cost: That portion of the assessable cost that benefits properties whose assessments are deferred because they qualify for green acres status, are located outside of the City limits, or are unable to make use of the improvements due to factors beyond their control. The City may reimburse itself for such system costs from the benefitting properties when the basis for the deferral is no longer valid. U. Unit: A unit, for purposes of defining an assessment, may include, but is not limited to: a household; a parcel/lot; water or sewer main length and size; sidewalk or trail length, width and depth; driveway approach length, width and depth. II. Policy Implementation and Procedures: A. Assessment Classification The assessment process shall address the feasibility of physical construction and also the affordability of the improvements. In meeting these responsibilities, a classification system is established below for public improvement projects based on the design capacity and the level of use. Cost apportionment is based on the extent of use of the improvement by the benefiting property owners and City policies for street paving, curb, gutter, and sidewalk construction shall be used as a basic guide. The classification system groups improvements into the three categories: • Type I improvements consist of projects that are mostly of benefit to the abutting properties and include local streets, curb, gutter, water and sewer services, and driveway improvements. Street construction, sidewalk, paving, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water mains may be Type I if solely designed to serve the abutting properties. • Type II improvements consist of projects that benefit a larger, yet definable, area. Street construction, sidewalk, paving, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water mains may also be Type II if the improvement benefits a larger area. Collector streets, which are likely to be used by a broader segment of the public, should be proportionately assessed to a larger area. • Type III improvements consist of large-scale projects of benefit to the entire City regardless of location. The criteria for designation of any improvement as Type III are facilities that serve areas larger than a definable neighborhood or those areas separated by major identifiable barriers, such as a creeks, collector streets, or county roads. Typically, Type III improvements are financed through a combination of Federal and State appropriations and available City funds; however, special assessments may be needed to fully fund the project. If financial assistance is received by the City from the Federal Government, from the State of Minnesota, the County, or from any other source to defray a portion of the costs of a given improvement, such aid will be used first to reduce the "City cost" of the improvement. If the financial assistance received is greater than the normal "City cost", the remainder of the aid will be applied according to the terms of the assistance program or at the Council's discretion. The assessment classifications are listed in Table 1 below. The City Council may from time to time adjust the classification of improvements to maintain the equitability of the assessment cost. Table 1. Assessment Classification Type I Improvements Type II Improvements Type III Improvements Curb & Gutter Trunk Sanitary Sewers (greater than 8" diameter) Bridges Sidewalks and trails, 5 feet wide or less Trunk Water Main (greater than 8" diameter) and Looped Water Main Community Facilities Library Law Enforcement Fire Station Sanitary Sewer Laterals (less than or equal to 8" diameter) Collector Streets Water Main (less than or equal to 8" diameter) Sidewalks and trails, greater than 5 feet wide Community Parks Sewer & Water Services Storm Drainage Improvements Wastewater Treatment Facilities Local Streets/Alleys Pumping Stations Water Tower Storm Drainage Improvements Water Treatment Plant Other improvements mandated or authorized by law B. Methods of Assessment The City shall use the following methods in determining assessments for public improvements. 1. Front Footage Method This method computes the assessable frontage for the project and for each property. The assessment rate is obtained by dividing the total assessable cost by the assessable footage in an assessment district. The assessment for each parcel is then obtained by multiplying the assessment rate times the front footage for each property. Front footage is determined as follows: a. For rectangular lots, the front footage shall be the same as the front footage at the right-of-way. b. For irregularly shaped lots, the front footage will typically be calculated as the width of the lot as defined in the City's zoning ordinance, although other methods may be used at the City's discretion (such as average lot width) if they are determined to be more equitable. c. For all corner lots, street assessments, regardless of the orientation of the house, shall be based on one-half of the footage of the road being improved. d. For a rectangular corner lot, water and sewer assessments, regardless of the orientation of the house, the short side of the lot shall be considered to be the "frontage". e. Double frontage lots may be assessed for any street improvement that it has direct access to, if the lot is of such size that it could be split into multiple buildable lots. The front footage for each improvement will be determined in accordance with the above- described policies, whichever is appropriate. 2. Area Method This method computes cost on a square foot or acreage basis. The assessment rate is determined by dividing the total assessable cost by the total benefiting area. A parcel's assessment is then determined by multiplying the assessment rate times the benefiting area of the parcel. When the benefiting area includes both platted and un- platted properties, the gross benefiting area will be used to apportion the benefit among the properties. An adjustment factor reflecting land use may be applied to a parcel's benefiting area in some cases. For example, for storm sewer design, the assumed rate of runoff per acre from a commercial lot is greater than the runoff rate from a residential lot. If all uses are the same in a project area (single family, multi- family, commercial, or industrial), the assessment rate is the same for all. Where there is variation in residential density or uses, the assessment rate may be adjusted to reflect the corresponding differences in benefit. The assessable area shall include all properties legally eligible for assessments. The following items may not be included in area calculations: public right-of-ways, natural waterways, lakes or other wetlands. 3. Unit Method This method computes the costs on the basis of individual assessment units. For example, sewer and water services, sidewalks, trails, and driveway approaches are typically considered separate individual units. The total project cost is divided by the total number of assessment units to calculate the fixed cost. Assessment units could be determined on a per lot or per unit basis, or any combination thereof. For lots that may be further subdivided, the City may determine the number of assessable units based on the number of equivalent lots that could be created from a particular parcel. 4. Combination Method This method involves using one or more of the above defined methods to more equitably calculate assessments. The combination method may be considered when there is varying land use, undeveloped properties available for future development, or other circumst ances involving the defined public improvement that may provide assessment inequities. C. Determination of Assessable Costs, Rate and Term 1. Water System a. Water Mains: The assessable cost for installing new water main improvements shall be based on the level of service required by the property. In residential areas, 100% of the cost of installing water main that is 8 -inches in diameter or less shall be assessed to the benefiting properties, and up to 50% for reconstruction, see chart below. In commercial areas, 100% of the cost of installing new water main and 50% of the cost of reconstruction will be assessed, based on current design standards. The cost of over sizing the water main for general distribution purposes shall not be assessed. Where larger diameter water mains are required to serve commercial, industrial or institutional properties, the increased cost of water main installation shall be assessed to those properties. Where improvements are designed to serve an area beyond that of direct benefit, the City may postpone the assessment and fund the increased project cost as a system cost. The system cost shall be assessed to the newly developing area as a system charge together with direct benefits for other services. Reconstruction Assessments – Water System Years After First Assessment Levied1 City Share2 Assessed Share2 0-20 years 100% 0% 20-40 years 75% 25% Over 40 years 50% 50% 1First assessment refers to the original assessment for properties developed or platted at or before the time the improvement is constructed, or to the deferred assessment for properties developed or platted after the improvement is constructed. 2Percentage based on project construction cost. The assesse d share of the project cost, as listed in the above table, will be apportioned against the benefiting properties . The City Engineer will use standard procedures to determine the benefiting property for each specific project. b. Water Services: The assessable cost for the construction or replacement of water services shall be 100% of the project cost. The unit cost method will be used to calculate the assessment. c. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for sanitary sewer improvements, including new construction and replacement projects, is a maximum of twenty years. 2. Sanitary Sewer Sanitary Sewer Assessments shall be based on engineering design standards. The assessable cost for installing sanitary sewer improvements shall be based on the type of service required by the property. In residential areas, 100% of the cost of installing new sanitary sewer that is 8-inches in diameter; and up to 50% for reconstruction, shall be assessed to the abutting properties. Where larger diameter sanitary sewers are required to serve commercial, industrial or institutional properties, the increased cost of installation shall be assessed to those properties. Where improvements are designed to serve an area beyond that of direct benefit, the City may defer that portion of the assessment and fund it as a system cost. a. Sanitary Sewer Assessment Formula: Assessments to be levied against properties within the benefited area shall be distributed to those properties on the basis of the following provisions: 1. Assessment Rate: The assessment rate shall be equal to the "assessable cost" of the improvement divided by the total number of assessable units benefited by the improvement. Projects having an uneven distribution of benefits may be subdivided into separate improvements using multiple assessment methods and rates to more equitably apportion the assessments. 2. Assessable Units: The assessable units shall be determined as follows: i. Lateral Sewers. The assessment method shall be the "unit method", unless otherwise specified by the Council. ii. Trunk Sewer and Lift Station. Trunk fees shall be charged as outlined in City Code, Chapter 51: Regulating Public Sanitary Sewer and Water Within the City of Corcoran. iii. Sewer Services. The assessable cost for the construction or replacement of sewer service lines shall be 100% of the project cost. The assessment shall be based on the number of sewer services installed for each individual property. This is the unit cost method of assessment. 3. Assessment Formula for Replacement: The following table shows the cost split for replacement of sanitary sewers (trunk sewers, lateral sewers, and lift stations), if they are to be assessed. Reconstruction Assessments – Sewer System Years After First Assessment Levied1 City Share2 Assessed Share2 0-20 years 100% 0% 20-40 years 75% 25% Over 40 years 50% 50% 1First assessment refers to the original assessment for properties developed or platted at or before the time the improvement is constructed, or to the deferred assessment for properties developed or platted after the improvement is constructed. 2Percentage based on project construction cost. The assessed share of the project cost, as listed in the above table, will be apportioned against the benefiting properties. The City Engineer will use standard procedures to determine the benefiting property for each specific project. 4. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for sanitary sewer improvements, including new construction and replacement projects, is a maximum of twenty years. 3. Storm Sewer Storm sewer improvements shall be classified to include all storm sewer, storm sewer pumping stations, culverts, ditches, rain gardens, swales, street grading and any other improvement, which will facilitate drainage. The assessment for the construction of storm drainage improvements shall be based on the level of service required by the property. a. Storm Sewer Assessment Formula: Assessments to be levied against properties within the benefited area shall be distributed to those properties on the basis of the following provisions: 1. Assessment Rate: The assessment rate shall be equal to the assessable cost of the improvement divided by the total number of assessable units benefited by the improvement. Projects having an uneven distribution of benefits may be subdivided into separate improvements using multiple assessment methods and rates to more equitably apportion the assessments. 2. Assessable Units: The assessable unit, unless otherwise specified by the Council, shall be the gross area or adjusted area of the benefited properties, both present and future, as determined in the project design. 3. Assessable Cost: The assessable cost shall be 100% of the total project cost for new or expanded storm drainage improvements, and up to 50% for reconstruction, based on the chart below. 4. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for sanitary sewer improvements, including new construction and replacement projects, is a maximum of twenty years. Reconstruction Assessments – Storm Sewer Years After First Assessment Levied1 City Share2 Assessed Share2 0-20 years 100% 0% 20-40 years 75% 25% Over 40 years 50% 50% 1First assessment refers to the original assessment for properties developed or platted at or before the time the improvement is constructed, or to the deferred assessment for properties developed or platted after the improvement is constructed. 2Percentage based on project construction cost. The assessed share of the project cost, as listed in the above table, will be apportioned against the benefiting properties . The City Engineer will use standard procedures to determine the benefiting property for each specific project. 5. Assessment Formula for Replacement: The cost split for replacement of storm sewers, lift stations, and miscellaneous drainage improvements, if they are to be assessed, will be assessed in the same manner as sanitary sewer replacement as shown above. 6. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for storm sewers, lift stations, and miscellaneous drainage improvements is a maximum of twenty years. 4. New Street Construction The City's general policy and practice is to require new residential street construction during land use development applications to be constructed to City standards by the developer/applicant with no special assessments or public bonding support. 5. Street Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Mill and Overlays a. Reconstruction and Rehabilitation - The assessable cost of street reconstruction and street rehabilitation projects shall be determined by the benefit to properties affected by the project determined through a letter of benefit or similar from a licensed appraiser. The assessment shall be 90 percent of the median value of the benefit. For example, if the benefit for a direct access property was valued from $12,000-$15,000 per unit, the assessment would be $12,150 ($13,500 x .9 = $12,150). If the benefit for an indirect access property was $3,000-$5,000 per unit, the assessment would be $3,600 ($4,000 x .9 = $3,600). The method of assessment shall be based on per unit. The remaining cost shall be a City cost. 1. For properties with access to the street receiving a reconstruction or rehabilitation, each existing unused development right and newly created development right resulting from the project will be assessed an amount equal to the assessment of a direct access property. 2. Landowners receiving assessments for existing unused development rights and newly created development rights may have the option of paying the entire assessment in one lump sum or through deferral until time of plat. During the period of deferral, the City will add the Accrued Interest to the principal. Assessments will be filed with the County Recorder. b. Mill and Overlays - The assessable cost of overlays and mill and overlays shall be determined by the benefit to properties affected by the project determi ned through a letter of benefit or similar from a licensed appraiser. The assessment shall be 90 percent of the median value of the benefit. For example, if the benefit was valued from $1,500-$2,500 per unit, the assessment would be $1,800. The method of assessment shall be based on per unit. The remaining cost shall be a City cost. 1. Exception: The City has completing initial overlays on roads without assessments, the following roads will receive one overlay without an assessment in order to complete the existing program: Bluestem Trail, Cates Longhorn Road, Chisolm Trail, Country Circle, Country Road, Hage Drive, Heather lane, High Bluff Lane, Hunters Ridge, Jackie Lane, Jubert Lane, Julie Ann Drive, Larkin Road, Maple Hill Road, Meadow Creek Drive, Mohawk Road, Oswald Farm Road, Pioneer Trail, Robert Lane, Rolling Hills Road, Rush Creek Drive, Schutte Farm Road, Sunnyhill Road, Sunset Lane, and Windmill Drive. Does the Council want to use a sliding scale based upon when roads were constructed; newer roads wouldn’t get full overlay without at least a partial assessment c. Length of Assessment - The assessment period for street improvements is a maximum of twenty years. 6. SIDEWALK The front footage or unit cost method shall be the basis for assessment. The assessable cost for sidewalk improvements shall be 100% for both new construction and reconstruction up to 5 feet wide. Sidewalk maintenance and rehabilitation shall be repaired or replaced to the original standard and is the responsibility of the abutting property owner. 7. DRIVEWAY APPROACHES The assessable cost for driveway approaches, both new and reconstructed, shall be 100%. Assessments to be levied against properties within the benefited area shall be distributed to those properties on the basis of the following provisions: a. Assessment Rate: The assessment rate for each individual property shall be equal to the assessable cost of the project divided by the total number of assessable units benefited by the improvement. b. Assessable Units: The assessable unit, unless otherwise specified by the Council, shall be calculated using the area method of the benefited properties. The size and design standard of individual driveways determines the assessment for that property. c. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for driveways is a maximum of twenty years. The Council should discuss whether driveway approached are “part of the project” and not be assessed separately as described above. D. Deferred Assessments for Green Acres In cases where improvement projects are determined to benefit properties that have been certified to qualify for Green Acres exemption, the City will determine that portion of the project cost that benefits those properties, and finance that portion of the project cost as a system cost. Landowners of benefiting properties may have the option of paying the entire assessment in one lump sum or through deferral as allowed by Minnesota Green Acres statutes. During the period of deferral, the City will add the Accrued Interest to the principal. Once the benefiting properties no longer qualify for Green Acres status, the City may recover the system cost. Assessments against Green Acres Parcels will be filed with the County Recorder. E. Determination of Assessment Rate and Terms 1. Interest Rate on Assessments: The City will charge interest on special assessments at a rate specified in the resolution approving the assessment roll. If bonds were sold to finance the improvement project, the interest rate shall generally be one percent (1.0%) more than the average rate of the bonds, rounded to the nearest quarter of a percent. If no bonds were sold, the interest rate shall be set using the same formula based on the current bond market. 2. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for all improvements is subject to the requirements of the bond market at the time of project financing and thus may vary in length from the time periods proposed. F. Undeveloped Property The City shall require the developer, owner or sub-divider of any property within the City's corporate limits desiring to install street, curb and gutter, sidewalk, sanitary sewer or water main improvements to follow the City's subdivision ordinance, in addition to the following: 1. Upon written request by a developer, the City Council shall give consideration to the preparation of a feasibility report to determine the feasibility of construction for the desired improvements. The developer will prepare a plan and other such information, as the Council requires, prior to the Council making a decision on the request. 2. The developer and/or the property owner are required to sign a Developer's Agreement and Petition and Waiver Agreement prior to awarding a contract. 3. At the completion of an improvement, all improvement costs will be recorded or certified to the County per the Developer's Agreement G. Petitioned Improvement Proiects The City will consider petitioned improvement projects. However, the need for specific projects shall be determined based on engineering standards (e.g. the existing condition represents a physical or structural hazard, or is no longer cost-effective to maintain, etc.) as determined by the City Public Works Superintendent and City Engineer and approved by the City Council. The City may consider the following information in approving or denying the petition: comprehensive cost of the project; cost to individual properties; demonstrated need for the project; existing site conditions of the proposed project; geographic scope of the project area, and any other information the City deems relevant. The City Council has the authority to initiate non-petitioned improvement projects, if it is felt the improvements are in the best interest or safety of the citizens. Special Assessment Procedures Purpose: This procedure is for internal purposes to summarize statutory and administrative requirements with respect to special assessments. Changes occur statutorily on an annual basis and administratively through Council direction and administrative review on an on -going basis. Verification of any changes needs to occur prior to utilizing this document as those changes may supersede the contents of this document at the time of approval. Procedure: I. Initiation of Proceedings Either a petition from affected property owners or the Council initiates Minnesota State Statute chapter 429 proceedings. A. By Petition: If the Council chooses to proceed with an improvement based on a petition it must have the signatures of the owners of at least 50 percent in frontage of the property bordering the proposed improvements. B. By Council: The Council may act on its own initiative in proposing a local improvement and ordering a feasibility report. The Council must calculate the cost of the improvement or direct staff to do so. II. Feasibility Report Whether initiated by petition or by Council, Chapter 429 requires that the city engineer, or another person with similar skills, prepare a feasibility report. The feasibility report must cover such factors as whether the project is necessary, the availability of money in the general fund to pay the city's share of the cost, an estimate of that cost, whether the improvement is cost effective, and any other information necessary for Council consideration. The feasibility report must also include the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended. Since a reasonable estimate of the total amount to be assessed and a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for affected parcels must be available at the hearing it could be part of the commissioned report. The feasibility report is integral to the assessment process. Best practice suggests that the City Council pass a resolution receiving the report and provide preliminary notice of the improvement. Ill. Initial Considerations The law requires two public hearings commonly known as an improvement hearing and an assessment hearing; in between these two public hearings Council may order the improvement, decide how to construct the project and tabulate an assessment roll. A. Determining Benefit Districts: Determining what area benefits from improvement projects, or the area against which the City will levy assessments, is a major policy decision for the City Council. The benefit district varies with the kind of improvement. For some improvements, such as a water tank, the area benefited might be very large. In levying an assessment to finance the tank's construction the Council might assess the entire area the tank services. The special benefit test still applies. City staff, consulting engineers and attorneys may provide the basis for Council to determine what area or district to assess for a specific improvement because that area benefits from the improvement. B. City's Share: At any time before or after the City actually incurs expenses for the improvement, the Council must pass a resolution determining how much the City plans to pay and separate that from amounts to be assessed. Best practices suggest the Council work with an appraiser and an attorney to determine the appropriate City share of a particular project. The City has adopted a policy to address the methodology of the assessment calculations. C. Non-abutting Property: The Council may wish to levy assessments against adjacent, non - abutting properties if the properties benefit from the improvement. D. Service Laterals: City utility ordinance requires that property owners maintain private water and sewer service laterals. When an improvement project requires new service laterals the City may require that property owner to install or replace them. E. May Omit Improvement Hearing: The Council may omit the improvement hearing if 100 percent of the affected landowners sign the petition requesting the improvement. If the landowners are not paying 100% of the project costs the City will consider holding both public hearings. F. Two or More Simultaneous Local Improvements: When the City proposes undertaking two or more local improvements simultaneously the City does not need to issue separate notices and hold separate improvement hearings on different dates. The notice will describe each improvement separately, stating the estimated cost for each one and noting that there will be a separate hearing, even if held one after the other on each improvement. IV. Prepare for the Improvement Hearing The purpose of the first hearing is for the Council to discuss a specific local improvement before ordering it done. The Council considers all the information in the feasibility report and any other information necessary for Council deliberation. A. Publish Notice of the Improvement Hearing: The City must publish notice of the initial public hearing on the proposed project twice in the official newspaper, stating the time and place of the hearing, the general nature of the improvement, the estimated cost, and the area proposed to be assessed. The notices must appear at least one week apart. At least three days must elapse between the last publication date and the date of the hearing. B. Mail Notice of the Improvement Hearing: The City must mail a notice once to each property owner in the proposed assessment area, at least 10 days prior to the improvement hearing that states the time and place of the hearing, the general nature of the improvement, the estimated cost and the proposed assessment area. The notice must also contain a statement that a reasonable estimate of the cost of the assessment will be available at the hearing. The City will diligently make every effort to notify citizens about assessment proceedings. According to statute, failure to give mailed notice of the improvement hearing will not invalidate subsequent assessment proceedings. Notice to other governmental entities must be sent out at least two weeks before the improvement hearing, by registered or certified mail to the head of the instrumentality, department or agency having jurisdiction over the property. V. Improvement Hearing At the improvement hearing, interested persons may voice their concerns, whether or not they are in the proposed assessment area. A reasonable estimate of the total amount to be assessed and a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for affected parcels must be available at the hearing. If the Council rejects the project, it may not reconsider that same project unless another hearing is held following the required notice. The Council must prepare a record of the proceedings and make written findings. The Council may adjourn and subsequently continue the improvement hearing. To provide proper notice, before the improvement hearing is adjourned, the Council must state on record, the date, time and place of the continuation of the improvement hearing, if any. VI. Ordering the Improvement A resolution ordering the improvement may be adopted at any time within nine months after the date of the improvement hearing. A. Vote Requirements for Ordering the Improvement: If the improvement is made pursuant to a legally sufficient petition from property owners, the Council adopts the resolution by a simple majority vote of all members of the Council. If there is not a petition, adoption requires a 'super-majority' vote, meaning the council can only adopt the resolution by a four-fifths vote of all members of the Council. Does the Council want to keep this requirement of a super-majority for non-petitioned improvements? B. Time Limits for Local Improvements: The resolution ordering the improvement may be adopted at any time within nine months after the date of the improvement hearing. Either arrangements for day labor or a contract must be made within one year of adopting the resolution ordering the improvement, unless the Council specifically states a different timeframe in the resolution ordering the improvement. VII. Competitive Bidding The law permits the Council to carry out, in advance of the assessment hearing , all the steps prior to, but short of, actually issuing of a contract for the improvement. Thus, if the Council wishes to provide firm estimates of costs at the hearing, it may, in addition to the required preliminary report, prepare completed plans and specifications, advertise for bids, and open and tabulate them before the assessment hearing. Once the Council orders a public improvement, staff or consultants prepare the necessary plans and specifications and the Council either: • Contracts for all or part of the work to be performed by outside parties, or • Orders all or part of the work to be done by city staff and contracts for any necessary materials and equipment. In either case, contracting law applies. The City Attorney should coordinate the contracting process in combination with the special assessment process. VIII. Prepare the Proposed Assessment Rolls The City Clerk, with the assistance of the engineer or other staff prepares the proposed assessment rolls. The proposed assessment cannot exceed the increase in market value accruing to the property as a result of the public improvement project. Road Assessment Calculations Components: A. Future Lots within the Combined Method Calculation: The maximum potential parcels are calculated with the current zoning. B. Cemeteries: A cemetery cannot be assessed in accordance with State Statute. C. Right of Way: Parcels that are entirely right of ways will not be assessed. D. Rounding: Calculation of assessment will need to be adjusted due to rounding. Practice is that $.01 per parcel will be adjusted either positively or negatively beginning with the last parcel listed. IX. Prepare for the Assessment Hearing The purpose of the second hearing is to give property owners an opportunity to express concerns about the actual special assessment. The Council will pass a resolution setting the date and time of the assessment hearing and direct the City Clerk to publish and mail notice about the assessment hearing. A. Publish Notice of the Assessment Hearing: At least once and at least two weeks before the assessment hearing, the City must publish notice of the hearing in the city newspaper. The published notice must include the hearing time, date, place, overall project description, area to be assessed, total cost of the improvement, a description of a landowner's right to appeal the assessment, and any deferment options, if available. B. Mail Notice of the Assessment Hearing: At least two weeks before the hearing the City must mail notice of the hearing to each affected property owner. This mailed notice must include the amount of the special assessment against the individual parcels,a description of the landowner's right to appeal the assessment, possible prepayment provisions, and the interest rate on the assessments. Failure to comply with the requirements for published and mailed notice invalidates the assessments. The Clerk will execute an affidavit attesting to the mailing to property owners. X. Assessment Hearing The assessment hearing may be adjourned and continued to another time. If the assessment hearing is adjourned proper notice stating for the record, the date, time and place of the continuation of the hearing. A. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll: At the assessment hearing the Council shall hear and consider all objections to the proposed assessment, whether presented orally or in writing. The Council may change or amend the proposed assessment as to any parcel. Council must by resolution adopt the special assessment against the lands named in the assessment roll. Once the assessment roll is adopted the assessments are set and become liens against the properties listed. The Council must prepare a record of the proceedings and written findings as to the amount of the assessment roll at this hearing. B. Council Decides Interest of Special Assessments: Special assessments may bear interest at any rate the Council determines. In setting the rate the Council should make sure there is a reasonable relationship between the assessment interest rate and the bond interest rate if the City is issuing bonds to finance the project. If the city finances the project with funds on hand without using bonds, the Council will want to look at the interest rate the City would otherwise have eared on the funds. C. Council Decides Payment Timelines: The Council must also decide the number of years over which the property owners may pay the assessment. The statutes permit payment over a period of not more than 30 years. XI. Sending of Final Notice The law does not require that the City send final notice of assessment to property owners if the amount assessed is the same as that listed in the previously mailed assessment hearing notice. The City chooses to notify property owners of all final assessment amounts whether they differ from the proposed assessment or not. Staff will also notify owners by mail the interest rates and prepayment requirements as stated in the proposed assessment notice. XII. Certification of Special Assessment Rolls The City Clerk must certify the assessment rolls to the County Auditor by November 30. The Assessment Rolls need to be accompanied by Council Resolution, certificate with the city seal signed by the City Clerk and a rate card. The County Auditor spreads the assessment every year for collection with taxes. XIII. Payment of Assessments and Interest Property owners initially have two options regarding their assessment. They can either pay the total amount of their assessment immediately, or pay the assessments in annual installments with interest under the terms set by the Council. The property owner can: • Pay the entire amount of the assessment within 30 days after the Council adopts the assessment rolls with no interest. • Pay the entire amount any time after 30 days, but before any certification has been made to the County Auditor with interest accrued to the date of payment. • Any time after the certification the property owner may still pay the entire remaining unpaid amount to the City. The property owner must pay the entire remaining unpaid amount of the assessment before November 15 of any year and must also pay all interest accrued until the end of that calendar year. If the property owner elects not to pay the entire amount of the assessment at once, they may pay it in annual installments spread over the number of years the Council has allowed including interest calculated at the rate established by the Council. XIV. Postponed Assessments Postponing assessments may occur at Councils discretion for situations when the City pays the cost of the improvement but delays assessing it. Examples of situations would be: • Property is unplatted and undeveloped; the owner will subdivide or otherwise make it available for building sites in the future. • The City cannot immediately use a trunk main because of various reasons. XV. Deferred Assessments Deferred assessments are certified to the County Auditor but collection is deferred. All deferred assessments constitute liens on the property and must be paid within 30 years of the assessment levy. Property owners may request deferment provided the property owner or the property meets certain criteria. The three types of authorized deferrals are 1) undeveloped property, 2) senior citizen and disability deferral, and 3) green acre deferr al. Interest on the assessments discussed subsequently, may be paid or deferred. If interest is deferred with the assessment it will be computed on a compounding basis . A. Notice of Deferred Assessments: The City will record deferred special assessments with the County Auditor. The certificate of the deferred assessment will contain the type of deferral. B. Interest on Deferred Assessments: Property owners may pay interest either annually during the period of deferment, or when the assessment becomes payable. If interest is deferred with the assessment it will be computed on a compounded basis. { STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 10b. Council Meeting: January 26, 2017 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Schedule Action Required: Approval Summary: Attached to this report is a schedule for updating the Comprehensive Plan based upon discussion at the January 12th meeting. The below meetings are scheduled into the plan for 2017, the meetings for the Planning Commission and Parks and Trails Commission are on their regularly scheduled nights, the Council meetings are in addition to regular meetings: Community Open House April 17th August 1st (Night to Unite) August 19th (Country Daze) October 10th Joint Council/Commission March 16th City Council April 20th May 18th July 20th September 21st October 19th November 20th Planning Commission May 4th June 1st October 5th Parks and Trails Commission May 16th June 20th October 17th It is requested that the City Council provide final feedback prior to scheduling these meetings and developing our marketing plan. Additional “comprehensive plan in a box” meetings will take place throughout the summer as well. Page 2 Financial/Budget: The City is funding the updated to the Comprehensive Plan with Long Range Planning funds. The estimated cost is $90,000. 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 the scheduled for the updated to the Comprehensive Plan as presented. 2. Approve the scheduled for the updated to the Comprehensive Plan with amendments. Recommendation: Approve the scheduled for the updated to the Comprehensive Plan as presented. Council Action: Consider a motion to approve the scheduled for the updated to the Comprehensive Plan as presented. . Attachments: 1. Corcoran 2040 Comp Plan Schedule &&RUFRUDQ &RPS 3ODQ Page 1 of 2 Ex p o r t e d o n J a n u a r y 1 8 , 2 0 1 7 2 : 0 6 : 1 4 P M C S T Page 2 of 2 Ex p o r t e d o n J a n u a r y 1 8 , 2 0 1 7 2 : 0 6 : 1 4 P M C S T STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 11a. Council Meeting: January 26, 2017 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: 2017 Legislative Priorities Action Required: Approval Summary: The legislative session began on January 3, 2017. As in previous years, staff will work with legislators to promote the priorities of the City of Corcoran and to attempt to eliminate legislation hurtful to the City. Additionally, groups including the League of Minnesota Cities and Metro Cities will advocate on behalf of their member cities which includes Corcoran. In order to communicate effectively with the legislators it is requested that the City Council review a proposed legislative agenda and approve to provide staff with direction for those conversations. Attached to this report is a draft document showing recommended legislative priorities. Financial/Budget: N/A 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. Approve 2017 legislative priorities as presented. 2. Approve 2017 legislative priorities with amendments. Recommendation: Approve 2017 legislative priorities as presented. Council Action: Consider a motion to approve 2017 legislative priorities. Attachments: 1. 2017 Legislative priorities for the City of Corcoran CITY OF CORCORAN 2017 Legislative Priorities Thank you for taking the time to meet to discuss the legislative issues affecting the City of Corcoran. The City appreciates your help in furthering our mission to provide high quality public services in a cost effective, responsible, and professional manner in order to create a preferred environment to live, work, play, and transact business. Topic #1: General Government Local Control: The City opposes legislation that erodes local decision making and control. We believe that decision making happens best at the local level. Unfunded Mandates: Many bills passed by the legislature and adopted into law have direct effects on cities. Bills should include language stating that additional costs from State requirements must be paid for with State allocated funds. Additionally there are often bills introduced which require additional reporting from cities. This affects smaller communities the har dest which have the fewest staff. Existing unfunded mandates should be modified or repealed where possible; no additional statewide mandates should be enacted unless full funding for the mandate is provided; cities should not be forced to comply with unfunded mandates. Levy Limits: The City of Corcoran strongly opposes levy limits and other forms of levy restrictions imposed upon local governments. Comprehensive Planning: Updating comprehensive plans as a result of regional and legislative actions is extremely expensive, especially for small communities that rely on consultants. The City of Corcoran requests adequate financial assistance to updated plans required of other governing bodies. The 2040 update is expected to cost approximately $90,000 and the City receives $0 in assistance. Topic #2: Transportation Brockton Interchange: The City supports investment in the Brockton Interchange to spur growth in the region. Street Improvement District: The City of Corcoran operates and maintains 69 miles of roads, 33 of which are gravel. The City supports the option to create a street improvement district to dedicate funds towards transportation improvements. Topic #3: Fiscal Reform Local Government Aid: The City of Corcoran receives no local government aid despite ever increasing costs to maintain infrastructure for those who do not live in the City (commuters). Formula adjustments should be made to consider costs attributed to non-residents travelling through and utilizing infrastructure. Topic #4: Support for Regional Assets Brockton Interchange: The City of Corcoran strongly supports funding the Brockton interchange project which would expand development and job opportunities for the northwest metro region. (SF 1220 2015-2016) Regional Recreation Amenity: The City of Corcoran has an opportunity to purchase approximately 120 acres in western Corcoran to act as a regional recreation site. Currently the City is working with public and private partners to create regional attraction for northwestern Hennepin County. The City requests consideration to support $4,000,000 in acquisition and construction costs. (SF1715 HF1877 2015-2016) Topic #5: School Funding Inadequate school funding leads to discrepancies based upon which district has the highest tax capacity. Corcoran sends students to five school districts, more rural districts such as Rockford and Buffalo do not have access to resources equal to high tax capacity districts such as Wayzata and Osseo. This places an undue burden on property owners and reduces the ability to provide a high quality education without cutting important after school programs important for student development. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Brad Martens City Administrator bmartens@ci.corcoran.mn.us 763-400-7030 Corcoran City Council Mayor Ron Thomas Councilmember Jonathan Bottema Councilmember Brian Dejewski Councilmember Mike Keefe Councilmember Tonya LaFave STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 11b. Council Meeting: January 26, 2017 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: Public Works Director/Engineer Recruitment Process Action Required: Direction Summary: The 2017 budget as approved includes funds to hire a Pu blic Works Director/Engineer with a start date of July 1, 2017. It has been requested to consider possibly moving the recruitment earlier in 2017 to achieve an earlier start date. The City Council should provide staff direction on the preferred recruitment schedule for the position. Staff will bring a formal job description and recruitment process back to the Council for approval. Financial/Budget: The anticipated total annual cost for the position of Public Works Director/Engineer (salary, benefits, etc.) is $120,000. In order to support the position financially, the plan is to reduce consultant engineer time by five hours per week which reduces engineering costs by $22,500. Additionally, the position would continue to bill for plan reviews (at a lower rate of $65/hour compared to $90/hour) which would bring in $32,500 in revenue. Recap: $120,000 - $22,500 - $32,500 = $65,000 (full year). If the Council wants to escalate the hiring process, each additional month would increases costs by approximately $5,500. 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 on the preferred start date for the proposed Public Works Director/Engineer position. Recommendation: Staff supports escalating the pace of the recruitment. There is limited ability to take on another hiring process until March which would make the earliest likely start date mid- May 2017. Page 2 Council Action: Direct staff on the preferred start date for the proposed Public Works Director/Engineer position. Attachments: None City of Corcoran 2017 City Council Schedule Agenda Item 13. February 9, 2017 Councilmember LaFave unable to attend Gambling fund allocation policy Regional Recreation Amenity Discussion Bring Your Own Device Policy (Council and staff) Code Enforcement Procedures and Goals Elm Creek Watershed Appointment February 23, 2017 Planning Project Update Code Compliance Report Planning Commission Report Parks and Trails Commission Report Parks and Trails Commission Appointments Planning Commission Appointments Preliminary Plat Extension – Sawgrass 2017 Capital Improvement Plan Purchases Petition for Paving – Sundance Road (from June 9, 2016 meeting) March 9, 2017 March 23, 2017 Planning Project Update Code Compliance Report April 13, 2017 Financial Performance Report 2016 Surplus Allocation April 27, 2017 Planning Project Update Code Compliance Report May 11, 2017