Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2019-05-23 Council Agenda Packet
*Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. The complete Council Agenda Packet is available electronically on the website at www.ci.corcoran.mn.us. Corcoran City Council Agenda May 23, 2019 - 7:00 pm 1.Call to Order / Roll Call 2.Pledge of Allegiance 3.Agenda Approval 4.Commission Representatives* 5.Open Forum 6.Presentations/Recognitions a.Years of Service Recognition – Ryan Burns, 25 Years b.2018 Audit* 7.Consent Agenda a.Draft Minutes of April 11, 2019 Council Meeting* b.Draft Minutes of May 9, 2019 Council Meeting* c.Financial Claims* d.Acting City Administrator Appointment* e.Resolution 2019-39 – Sponsoring the Northwest Trails Association* f.NE Trunk Sewer Improvements – Approve Change Order 1 & Pay Request 5* g.Downtown Corcoran Sewer & Water Improvements – Approve Change Order 1 & Pay Request 15* 8.Planning Business a.Final PUD and Final Plat for Ravinia 11th Addition* b.Sketch Plan Review and Topography and Wetland Waivers for 22505 Strehler Road* c.Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments* d.City Initiated Development Rights Program and Open Space and Preservation Ordinance Amendment* 9.Unfinished Business 10.New Business a.Code Enforcement Appeal* b.Low Cost Paving Options* c.Union Negotiation Council Liaison* 11.Staff Reports a.Planning Project Update* 12.2019 Council Schedule* 13.Adjournment STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 4. Council Meeting: May 23, 2019 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: Commission Representatives Action Required: None – Informational Summary: The advisory commission representatives for the May 23rd Council meeting are as follows: • Planning Commission: Dean Jacobs • Parks and Trails Commission: Judy Strehler Financial/Budget: N/A Options: N/A Recommendation N/A Council Action: N/A Attachments: N/A City of Corcoran Corcoran, Minnesota For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Management Communication May 15, 2019 Management, Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Corcoran, Minnesota We have audited the financial statements of the governmental activities, business-type activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota (the City), for the year ended December 31, 2018. Professional standards require that we provide you with information about our responsibilities under generally accepted auditing standards, as well as certain information related to the planned scope and timing of our audit. We have communicated such information in our letter to you dated October 8, 2018. Professional standards also require that we provide to you the following information related to our audit. Our Responsibility under Auditing Standards Generally Accepted in the United States of America As stated in our engagement letter, our responsibility, as described by professional standards, is to express opinions about whether the financial statements prepared by management with your oversight are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Our audit of the financial statements does not relieve you or management of your responsibilities. Our responsibility is to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that the financial statements are free of material misstatement. As part of our audit, we considered the internal control over financial reporting of the City. Such considerations were solely for the purpose of determining our audit procedures and not to provide any assurance concerning such internal control over financial reporting. We are responsible for communicating significant matters related to the audit that are, in our professional judgment, relevant to your responsibilities in overseeing the financial reporting process. However, we are not required to design procedures specifically to identify such matters. Significant Audit Findings In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered the City's internal control to determine the audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the City’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies and therefore, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that were not identified. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, material weaknesses may exist that have not been identified 2 Compliance As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City’s financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. While our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion, it does not provide a legal determination on the City’s compliance with those requirements. As a result of our testing we noted one instance of noncompliance that is required to be reported under statutes set forth by the State of Minnesota. This instance is described below as finding 2018-001. 2018-001 Collateral Coverage Condition: Auditing of legal compliance requires a review of the City’s deposits and investments. Our study indicated an instance of non-compliance that we believe is required to be remedied. Criteria: In accordance with Minnesota Statute, section 118A.03, the City is required to have pledged collateral equal to 110 percent of the deposit not covered with insurance. Cause: The City had $348,298 of deposits uncollateralized on December 31, 2018. Effect: At year end, the City did not have sufficient collateral pledged and therefore was not in compliance with state statute. Recommendation: We recommend the City establish a more specific understanding with the bank for the needed collateral. Ultimately, it is the City’s responsibility to have adequate coverage regardless of the bank’s process. Management Response: Management is aware of the situation and has taken the appropriate action to ensure that City’s deposits are sufficiently covered by collateral throughout the year. Staff has diversified the City’s Investments and are utilizing Farmer’s State Bank and the 4M Fund, and FDIC insured CD’s. 3 Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by the City are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. The City changed accounting policies during 2018 related to accounting and financial reporting for other postemployment benefits (GASB 75). We noted no transaction entered into by the City during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period. Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumption about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive estimate affecting the financial statements were depreciation on capital assets, allocation of payroll including compensated absences and other postemployment benefits, and the liability for the City’s pensions. • Management’s estimate of depreciation is based on estimated useful lives of the assets. Depreciation is calculated using the straight-line method. • Allocations of gross wages and payroll benefits are approved by City Council within the City’s budget and are derived from each employee’s estimated time to be spent servicing the respective functions of the City. These allocations are also used in allocating accrued compensated absences payable. • Management’s estimate of its OPEB liability is based on several factors including, but not limited to, anticipated retirement age for active employees, life expectancy, turnover, and healthcare cost trend rate. • Management’s estimate of its pension liability is based on several factors including, but not limited to, anticipated investment return rate, retirement age for active employees, life expectancy, salary increases and form of annuity payment upon retirement. • The allocation of the pension liability related to Minnesota Public Employee Retirement Association (PERA) is based on the City’s proportionate share of employer contributions to the PERA cost-sharing multiple employer Coordinated pension plan. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop these estimates in determining that they are reasonable in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. The disclosures in the financial statements are neutral, consistent, and clear. Certain financial statement disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit. Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the aggregate, to each opinion unit’s financial statements taken as a whole. Disagreements with Management For purposes of this letter, professional standards define a disagreement with management as a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit. Management Representations We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated May 15, 2019. 4 Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the governmental unit’s financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor’s opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants. Other Matters We applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information (RSI) (Management’s Discussion and Analysis, the Schedules of Employer’s Share of the Net Pension Liability, the Schedules of Employer’s Contributions the Schedule of Changes in Net Pension Liability (Asset) and Related Ratios) and the Schedule of Changes in the City's OPEB Liability), which is information that supplements the basic financial statements. Our procedures consisted of inquiries of management regarding the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We did not audit the RSI and do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the RSI. We were engaged to report on the supplementary information (combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules), which accompany the financial statements but are not RSI. With respect to this supplementary information, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated the form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the supplementary information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves. We were not engaged to report on the introductory section, which accompany the financial statements but is not RSI. We did not audit or perform other procedures on this other information, and we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on it. Other Audit Findings or Issues We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City’s auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention. 5 Future Accounting Standard Changes The following Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statements have been issued and may have an impact on future City financial statements: (1) GASB Statement No. 83 - Certain Asset Retirement Obligations Summary This Statement addresses accounting and financial reporting for certain asset retirement obligations (AROs). An ARO is a legally enforceable liability associated with the retirement of a tangible capital asset. A government that has legal obligations to perform future asset retirement activities related to its tangible capital assets should recognize a liability based on the guidance in this Statement. This Statement establishes criteria for determining the timing and pattern of recognition of a liability and a corresponding deferred outflow of resources for AROs. This Statement requires that recognition occur when the liability is both incurred and reasonably estimable. The determination of when the liability is incurred should be based on the occurrence of external laws, regulations, contracts, or court judgments, together with the occurrence of an internal event that obligates a government to perform asset retirement activities. Laws and regulations may require governments to take specific actions to retire certain tangible capital assets at the end of the useful lives of those capital assets, such as decommissioning nuclear reactors and dismantling and removing sewage treatment plants. Other obligations to retire tangible capital assets may arise from contracts or court judgments. Internal obligating events include the occurrence of contamination, placing into operation a tangible capital asset that is required to be retired, abandoning a tangible capital asset before it is placed into operation, or acquiring a tangible capital asset that has an existing ARO. This Statement requires the measurement of an ARO to be based on the best estimate of the current value of outlays expected to be incurred. The best estimate should include probability weighting of all potential outcomes, when such information is available or can be obtained at reasonable cost. If probability weighting is not feasible at reasonable cost, the most likely amount should be used. This Statement requires that a deferred outflow of resources associated with an ARO be measured at the amount of the corresponding liability upon initial measurement. This Statement requires the current value of a government's AROs to be adjusted for the effects of general inflation or deflation at least annually. In addition, it requires a government to evaluate all relevant factors at least annually to determine whether the effects of one or more of the factors are expected to significantly change the estimated asset retirement outlays. A government should remeasure an ARO only when the result of the evaluation indicates there is a significant change in the estimated outlays. The deferred outflows of resources should be reduced and recognized as outflows of resources (for example, as an expense) in a systematic and rational manner over the estimated useful life of the tangible capital asset. A government may have a minority share (less than 50 percent) of ownership interest in a jointly owned tangible capital asset in which a nongovernmental entity is the majority owner and reports its ARO in accordance with the guidance of another recognized accounting standards setter. Additionally, a government may have a minority share of ownership interest in a jointly owned tangible capital asset in which no joint owner has a majority ownership, and a nongovernmental joint owner that has operational responsibility for the jointly owned tangible capital asset reports the associated ARO in accordance with the guidance of another recognized accounting standards setter. In both situations, the government's minority share of an ARO should be reported using the measurement produced by the nongovernmental majority owner or the nongovernmental minority owner that has operational responsibility, without adjustment to conform to the liability measurement and recognition requirements of this Statement. In some cases, governments are legally required to provide funding or other financial assurance for their performance of asset retirement activities. This Statement requires disclosure of how those funding and assurance requirements are being met by a government, as well as the amount of any assets restricted for payment of the government's AROs, if not separately displayed in the financial statements. This Statement also requires disclosure of information about the nature of a government's AROs, the methods and assumptions used for the estimates of the liabilities, and the estimated remaining useful life of the associated tangible capital assets. If an ARO (or portions thereof) has been incurred by a government but is not yet recognized because it is not reasonably estimable, the government is required to disclose that fact and the reasons therefor. This Statement requires similar disclosures for a government's minority shares of AROs. 6 Future Accounting Standard Changes (Continued) Effective Date The requirements of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2018. Earlier application is encouraged. How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Financial Reporting This Statement will enhance comparability of financial statements among governments by establishing uniform criteria for governments to recognize and measure certain AROs, including obligations that may not have been previously reported. This Statement also will enhance the decision-usefulness of the information provided to financial statement users by requiring disclosures related to those AROs. GASB Statement No. 84 - Fiduciary Activities Summary The objective of this Statement is to improve guidance regarding the identification of fiduciary activities for accounting and financial reporting purposes and how those activities should be reported. This Statement establishes criteria for identifying fiduciary activities of all state and local governments. The focus of the criteria generally is on (1) whether a government is controlling the assets of the fiduciary activity and (2) the beneficiaries with whom a fiduciary relationship exists. Separate criteria are included to identify fiduciary component units and postemployment benefit arrangements that are fiduciary activities. An activity meeting the criteria should be reported in a fiduciary fund in the basic financial statements. Governments with activities meeting the criteria should present a statement of fiduciary net position and a statement of changes in fiduciary net position. An exception to that requirement is provided for a business-type activity that normally expects to hold custodial assets for three months or less. This Statement describes four fiduciary funds that should be reported, if applicable: (1) pension (and other employee benefit) trust funds, (2) investment trust funds, (3) private-purpose trust funds, and (4) custodial funds. Custodial funds generally should report fiduciary activities that are not held in a trust or equivalent arrangement that meets specific criteria. A fiduciary component unit, when reported in the fiduciary fund financial statements of a primary government, should combine its information with its component units that are fiduciary component units and aggregate that combined information with the primary government’s fiduciary funds. This Statement also provides for recognition of a liability to the beneficiaries in a fiduciary fund when an event has occurred that compels the government to disburse fiduciary resources. Events that compel a government to disburse fiduciary resources occur when a demand for the resources has been made or when no further action, approval, or condition is required to be taken or met by the beneficiary to release the assets. Effective Date The requirements of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Earlier application is encouraged. How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Financial Reporting The requirements of this Statement will enhance consistency and comparability by (1) establishing specific criteria for identifying activities that should be reported as fiduciary activities and (2) clarifying whether and how business-type activities should report their fiduciary activities. Greater consistency and comparability enhances the value provided by the information reported in financial statements for assessing government accountability and stewardship. 7 Future Accounting Standard Changes (Continued) GASB Statement No. 87 - Leases Summary The objective of this Statement is to better meet the information needs of financial statement users by improving accounting and financial reporting for leases by governments. This Statement increases the usefulness of governments’ financial statements by requiring recognition of certain lease assets and liabilities for leases that previously were classified as operating leases and recognized as inflows of resources or outflows of resources based on the payment provisions of the contract. It establishes a single model for lease accounting based on the foundational principle that leases are financings of the right to use an underlying asset. Under this Statement, a lessee is required to recognize a lease liability and an intangible right-to-use lease asset, and a lessor is required to recognize a lease receivable and a deferred inflow of resources, thereby enhancing the relevance and consistency of information about governments’ leasing activities. Effective Date and Transition The requirements of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Earlier application is encouraged. Leases should be recognized and measured using the facts and circumstances that exist at the beginning of the period of implementation (or, if applied to earlier periods, the beginning of the earliest period restated). However, lessors should not restate the assets underlying their existing sales-type or direct financing leases. Any residual assets for those leases become the carrying values of the underlying assets. How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Accounting and Financial Reporting This Statement will increase the usefulness of governments’ financial statements by requiring reporting of certain lease liabilities that currently are not reported. It will enhance comparability of financial statements among governments by requiring lessees and lessors to report leases under a single model. This Statement also will enhance the decision- usefulness of the information provided to financial statement users by requiring notes to financial statements related to the timing, significance, and purpose of a government’s leasing arrangements. GASB Statement No. 88 - Certain Disclosures Related to Debt, including Direct Borrowings and Direct Placements Summary The primary objective of this Statement is to improve the information that is disclosed in notes to government financial statements related to debt, including direct borrowings and direct placements. It also clarifies which liabilities governments should include when disclosing information related to debt. This Statement defines debt for purposes of disclosure in notes to financial statements as a liability that arises from a contractual obligation to pay cash (or other assets that may be used in lieu of cash) in one or more payments to settle an amount that is fixed at the date the contractual obligation is established. This Statement requires that additional essential information related to debt be disclosed in notes to financial statements, including unused lines of credit; assets pledged as collateral for the debt; and terms specified in debt agreements related to significant events of default with finance-related consequences, significant termination events with finance-related consequences, and significant subjective acceleration clauses. For notes to financial statements related to debt, this Statement also requires that existing and additional information be provided for direct borrowings and direct placements of debt separately from other debt. Effective Date and Transition The requirements of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2018. Earlier application is encouraged. 8 Future Accounting Standard Changes (Continued) How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Accounting and Financial Reporting The requirements of this Statement will improve financial reporting by providing users of financial statements with essential information that currently is not consistently provided. In addition, information about resources to liquidate debt and the risks associated with changes in terms associated with debt will be disclosed. As a result, users will have better information to understand the effects of debt on a government’s future resource flows. GASB Statement No. 89 - Accounting for Interest Cost Incurred before the End of a Construction Period Summary The objectives of this Statement are (1) to enhance the relevance and comparability of information about capital assets and the cost of borrowing for a reporting period and (2) to simplify accounting for interest cost incurred before the end of a construction period. This Statement establishes accounting requirements for interest cost incurred before the end of a construction period. Such interest cost includes all interest that previously was accounted for in accordance with the requirements of paragraphs 5–22 of Statement No. 62, Codification of Accounting and Financial Reporting Guidance Contained in Pre- November 30, 1989 FASB and AICPA Pronouncements, which are superseded by this Statement. This Statement requires that interest cost incurred before the end of a construction period be recognized as an expense in the period in which the cost is incurred for financial statements prepared using the economic resources measurement focus. As a result, interest cost incurred before the end of a construction period will not be included in the historical cost of a capital asset reported in a business-type activity or enterprise fund. This Statement also reiterates that in financial statements prepared using the current financial resources measurement focus, interest cost incurred before the end of a construction period should be recognized as an expenditure on a basis consistent with governmental fund accounting principles. Effective Date and Transition The requirements of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Earlier application is encouraged. The requirements of this Statement should be applied prospectively. How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Accounting and Financial Reporting The requirements of this Statement will improve financial reporting by providing users of financial statements with more relevant information about capital assets and the cost of borrowing for a reporting period. The resulting information also will enhance the comparability of information about capital assets and the cost of borrowing for a reporting period for both governmental activities and business-type activities. GASB Statement No. 90 - Majority Equity Interests Summary The primary objectives of this Statement are to improve the consistency and comparability of reporting a government’s majority equity interest in a legally separate organization and to improve the relevance of financial statement information for certain component units. It defines a majority equity interest and specifies that a majority equity interest in a legally separate organization should be reported as an investment if a government’s holding of the equity interest meets the definition of an investment. A majority equity interest that meets the definition of an investment should be measured using the equity method, unless it is held by a special-purpose government engaged only in fiduciary activities, a fiduciary fund, or an endowment (including permanent and term endowments) or permanent fund. Those governments and funds should measure the majority equity interest at fair value. For all other holdings of a majority equity interest in a legally separate organization, a government should report the legally separate organization as a component unit, and the government or fund that holds the equity interest should report an asset related to the majority equity interest using the equity method. This Statement establishes that ownership of a majority equity interest in a legally separate organization results in the government being financially accountable for the legally separate organization and, therefore, the government should report that organization as a component unit. 9 Future Accounting Standard Changes (Continued) This Statement also requires that a component unit in which a government has a 100 percent equity interest account for its assets, deferred outflows of resources, liabilities, and deferred inflows of resources at acquisition value at the date the government acquired a 100 percent equity interest in the component unit. Transactions presented in flows statements of the component unit in that circumstance should include only transactions that occurred subsequent to the acquisition. Effective Date and Transition The requirements of this Statement are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Earlier application is encouraged. The requirements should be applied retroactively, except for the provisions related to (1) reporting a majority equity interest in a component unit and (2) reporting a component unit if the government acquires a 100 percent equity interest. Those provisions should be applied on a prospective basis. How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Accounting and Financial Reporting The requirements of this Statement will improve financial reporting by providing users of financial statements with essential information related to presentation of majority equity interests in legally separate organizations that previously was reported inconsistently. In addition, requiring reporting of information about component units if the government acquires a 100 percent equity interest provides information about the cost of services to be provided by the component unit in relation to the consideration provided to acquire the component unit. (1) Note. From GASB Pronouncements Summaries. Copyright 2018 by the Financial Accounting Foundation, 401 Merritt 7, Norwalk, CT 06856, USA, and is reproduced with permission. * * * * * Restriction on Use This communication is intended solely for the information and use of the City Council, management and the Minnesota Office of the State Auditor and is not intended and should not be used by anyone other than those specified parties. Our audit would not necessarily disclose all weaknesses in the system because it was based on selected tests of the accounting records and related data. The comments and recommendations in the report are purely constructive in nature, and should be read in this context. If you have any questions or wish to discuss any of the items contained in this letter, please feel free to contact us at your convenience. We wish to thank you for the continued opportunity to be of service and for the courtesy and cooperation extended to us by your staff. ABDO, EICK & MEYERS, LLP Minneapolis, Minnesota May 15, 2019 10 City of Corcoran Corcoran, Minnesota For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Annual Financial Report THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY City of Corcoran, Minnesota Annual Financial Report Table of Contents For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Page No. Introductory Section Elected and Appointed Officials 9 Financial Section Independent Auditor’s Report 13 Management’s Discussion and Analysis 17 Basic Financial Statements Government-wide Financial Statements Statement of Net Position 29 Statement of Activities 30 Fund Financial Statements Governmental Funds Balance Sheet 34 Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet to the Statement of Net Position 37 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 38 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances to the Statement of Activities 40 General Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual 41 Proprietary Funds Statement of Net Position 42 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Net Position 43 Statement of Cash Flows 44 Fiduciary Funds Statement of Fiduciary Net Position 45 Notes to the Financial Statements 47 Required Supplementary Information Schedule of Employer’s Share of Public Employees Retirement Association Net Pension Liability - General Employees Retirement Fund 76 Schedule of Employer’s Public Employees Retirement Association Contributions - General Employees Retirement Fund 76 Notes to the Required Supplementary Information - General Employees Retirement Fund 77 Schedule of Employer’s Share of Public Employees Retirement Association Net Pension Liability - Public Employees Police and Fire Fund 78 Schedule of Employer’s Public Employees Retirement Association Contributions - Public Employees Police and Fire Fund 78 Notes to the Required Supplementary Information - Public Employees Police and Fire Fund 79 Schedule of Changes in the City’s Total OPEB Liability and Related Ratios 80 Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statements and Schedules Nonmajor Governmental Funds Combining Balance Sheet 82 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 83 Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds Combining Balance Sheet 84 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 86 Nonmajor Capital Projects Funds Combining Balance Sheet 88 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 90 General Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual 92 3 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 4 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Annual Financial Report Table of Contents (Continued) For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Page No. Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statements and Schedules (Continued) Debt Service Funds Combining Balance Sheet 96 Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 97 Fiduciary Funds Combining Schedule of Net Position 98 Summary Financial Report Revenues and Expenditures for General Operations 100 Other Required Report Independent Auditor’s Report on Minnesota Legal Compliance 103 Schedule of Finding and Response 105 5 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 6 INTRODUCTORY SECTION CITY OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 7 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 8 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Elected and Appointed Officials For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Name Term Expires Title Ron Thomas 12/31/18 Mayor Jonathan Bottema 12/31/20 Council Member Mike Keefe 12/31/18 Council Member Tonya LaFave 08/31/19 Council Member Brain Dejewski 12/31/20 Council Member Alan Schutlz 09/13/18 Council Member Brad Martens City Administrator Jessica Beise City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator Joe Rotz Accountant ELECTED APPOINTED 9 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 10 FINANCIAL SECTION CITY OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 11 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 12 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Corcoran, Minnesota Report on the Financial Statements We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota (the City), as of and for the year ended December 31, 2018, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. Auditor’s Responsibility Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the City’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions. Opinion In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City as of December 31, 2018, and the respective changes in financial position and, where applicable, cash flows thereof and the respective budgetary comparison for the General fund for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. 13 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 14 Change in Accounting Standards As described in Note 7 to the financial statements, the City adopted the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standard Board (GASB) Statement No. 74, Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefit Plans Other Than Pension Plans and Statement No. 75, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefits Other Than Pensions, for the year ended December 31, 2018. Adoption of the provisions of these statements results in significant change to the classifications of the components of the financial statements. Other Matters Required Supplementary Information Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the Management’s Discussion and Analysis starting on page 17 and the schedule of Employer’s Share of the Net Pension Liability, the Schedule of Employer’s Contributions, the related note disclosures, the Schedule of Changes in Net Pension Liability (Asset) and Related Ratios and the Schedule of Changes in the City's OPEB Liability starting on page 76 be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Other Information Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements as a whole. The introductory section and combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. The combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules are the responsibility of management and were derived from and relate directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules are fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole. The introductory section has not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements, and accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on it. ABDO, EICK & MEYERS, LLP Minneapolis, Minnesota May 15, 2019 15 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 16 Management’s Discussion and Analysis As management of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota (the City), we offer readers of the City’s financial statements this narrative overview and analysis of the financial activities of the City for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018. Financial Highlights • The assets and deferred outflows of resources of the City exceeded its liabilities and deferred inflows of resources at the close of the most recent fiscal year by $16,795,812 (net position). Of this amount, $3,571,607 (unrestricted net position) may be used to meet the City’s ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors. • The City’s total net position increased by $5,472,461. Governmental activities increased by $4,895,115 and business-type activities increased $577,346. The decreases in governmental activities is mainly due to developer contributions during the year. • As of the close of the current fiscal year, the City’s governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $8,370,237, an increase of $3,505,543 in comparison with the prior year. • At the end of the current fiscal year, unassigned fund balance for the General fund was $1,882,482 or 40.2 percent of total General fund expenditures and transfer out. • The City’s total long-term liabilities increased $1,112,746 during the current fiscal year primarily as a result of the 2018A bond issuance. 17 Overview of the Financial Statements This discussion and analysis is intended to serve as an introduction to the City’s basic financial statements. The City’s basic financial statements comprise three components: 1) government-wide financial statements, 2) fund financial statements, and 3) notes to the financial statements. This report also contains other supplemental information in addition to the basic financial statements themselves. The financial statements also include notes that explain some of the information in the financial statements and provide more detailed data. The statements are followed by a section of combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules that further explains and supports the information in the financial statements. Figure 1 shows how the required parts of this annual report are arranged and relate to one another. In addition to these required elements, we have included a section with combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules that provide details about nonmajor governmental funds, which are added together and presented in single columns in the basic financial statements Figure 1 Required Components of the City’s Annual Financial Report Management's Discussion and Analysis Basic Financial Statements Required Supplementary Information Government- wide Financial Statements Fund Financial Statements Notes to the Financial Statements Summary Detail 18 Figure 2 summarizes the major features of the City’s financial statements, including the portion of the City government they cover and the types of information they contain. The remainder of this overview section of management’s discussion and analysis explains the structure and contents of each of the statements. Figure 2 Major Features of the Government-wide and Fund Financial Statements Fund Financial Statements Government- wide Statements Governmental Funds Proprietary Funds Fiduciary Funds Scope Entire City government (except fiduciary funds) and the City’s component units The activities of the City that are not proprietary or fiduciary, such as police, fire and parks Activities the City operates similar to private businesses, such as the water and sewer system Instances in which the City administers resources on behalf of someone else, such as developers Required financial statements • Statement of Net Position • Statement of Activities • Balance Sheet • Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances • Statement of Net Position • Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position • Statement of Cash Flows • Statement of fiduciary net position Accounting basis and measurement focus Accrual accounting and economic resources focus Modified accrual accounting and current financial resources focus Accrual accounting and economic resources focus Accrual accounting and economic resources focus Type of asset/liability information All assets and liabilities, both financial and capital, and short- term and long- term Only assets expected to be used up and liabilities that come due during the year or soon thereafter; no capital assets included All assets and liabilities, both financial and capital, and short-term and long-term All assets and liabilities, both short- term and long-term; fund do not currently contain capital assets, although they can Type of deferred outflows/inflow s of resources information All deferred outflows/inflows of resources, regardless of when cash is received or paid Only deferred outflows of resources expected to be used up and deferred inflows of resources that come due during the year or soon thereafter; no capital assets included. All deferred outflows/inflows of resources, regardless of when cash is received or paid. All deferred outflows/inflows of resources, regardless of when cash is received or paid Type of in flow/out flow information All revenues and expenses during year, regardless of when cash is received or paid Revenues for which cash is received during or soon after the end of the year; expenditures when goods or services have been received and payment is due during the year or soon thereafter All revenues and expenses during the year, regardless of when cash is received or paid All additions and deductions during the year, regardless of when cash is received or paid Government-wide Financial Statements. The government-wide financial statements are designed to provide readers with a broad overview of the City’s finances, in a manner similar to a private-sector business. The statement of net position presents information on all of the City’s assets and deferred outflows of resources, and liabilities and deferred inflows of resources, with the difference reported as net position. Over time, increases or decreases in net position may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the City is improving or deteriorating. 19 The statement of activities presents information showing how the City’s net position changed during the most recent fiscal year. All changes in net position are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement for some items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., uncollected taxes and earned but unused vacation leave). Both of the government-wide financial statements distinguish functions of the City that are principally supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenue (governmental activities) from other functions that are intended to recover all or a significant portion of their costs through user fees and charges (business-type activities). The governmental activities of the City include general government, public safety, public works, culture and recreation, and interest on long-term debt. The business-type activities of the City include water and sewer utilities. The government-wide financial statements include not only the City itself (known as the primary government), but also a legally separate Economic Development Authority for which the City is financially accountable. The Economic Development Authority, although legally separate, functions for all practical purposes as a department of the City, and therefore has been included as part of the primary government. The government-wide financial statements start on page 29 of this report. Fund Financial Statements. A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City, like other state and local governments, uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements. All of the funds of the City can be divided into three categories: governmental funds, proprietary funds, and fiduciary funds. Governmental Funds. Governmental funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported as governmental activities in the government-wide financial statements. However, unlike the government-wide financial statements, governmental fund financial statements focus on near-term inflows and outflows of spendable resources, as well as on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal year. Such information may be useful in evaluating a government’s near-term financing requirements. Because the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government-wide financial statements, it is useful to compare the information presented for governmental funds with similar information presented for governmental activities in the government-wide financial statements. By doing so, readers may better understand the long-term impact by the government’s near-term financing decisions. Both the governmental fund balance sheet and the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balances provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental funds and governmental activities. The City maintains numerous individual governmental funds. Information is presented separately in the governmental fund balance sheet and in the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund balances for the General fund, Debt Service fund, Downtown Improvements fund, Rockford School Land, Bellwether and the Hackamore Upgrade fund, which are considered to be major funds. Data from the other governmental funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation identified as other nonmajor governmental funds. Individual fund data for each of these nonmajor governmental funds is provided in the form of combining statements or schedules elsewhere in this report. The City adopts an annual appropriated budget for its General fund. A budgetary comparison statement has been provided for the General fund to demonstrate compliance with this budget. The basic governmental fund financial statements start on page 34 of this report. Proprietary Funds. The City maintains one type of proprietary funds. Enterprise funds are used to report the same functions presented as business-type activities in the government-wide financial statements. The City uses enterprise funds to account for its Water and Sewer funds. Proprietary funds provide the same type of information as the government-wide financial statements, only in more detail. The proprietary funds financial statements provide separate information for each of the enterprise funds which are considered to be major funds of the City. The basic proprietary funds financial statements start on page 42 of this report. Fiduciary Funds. Fiduciary funds are used to account for resources held for the benefit of parties outside the City. Fiduciary funds are not reflected in the government-wide financial statements because the resources of those funds are not available to support the City’s own programs. The accounting used for fiduciary funds is much like that used for proprietary funds. The basic fiduciary fund financial statements can be found on page 45 of this report. 20 Notes to the Financial Statements. The notes provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the government-wide and fund financial statements. The notes to the financial statements start on page 47 of this report. Other Information. The combining statements referred to earlier in connection with nonmajor governmental funds are presented following the notes to the financial statements. This report also presents certain required supplementary information concerning the progress in funding its obligation to provide pension and other postemployment benefits to its employees. Required supplementary information can be found starting on page 76 of this report. The combining and individual fund statements and schedules are presented immediately following the required supplementary information starting on page 82 of this report. Government-wide Financial Analysis As noted earlier, net position may serve over time as a useful indicator of a government’s financial position. In the case of the City, assets and deferred outflows exceeded liabilities and deferred inflows by $16,795,812 at the close of the most recent fiscal year. The largest portion of the City’s net position (46.0 percent) reflects its investment in capital assets (e.g., land, buildings, infrastructure, machinery and equipment), less any related debt used to acquire those assets that is still outstanding. The City uses these capital assets to provide services to citizens; consequently, these assets are not available for future spending. Although the City’s investment in its capital assets is reported net of related debt, it should be noted that the resources needed to repay this debt must be provided from other sources, since the capital assets themselves cannot be used to liquidate these liabilities. City of Corcoran’s Summary of Net Position Increase Increase 2018 2017(Decrease)2018 2017(Decrease)2018 Total Assets Current and other assets 10,033,822$ 6,489,474$ 3,544,348$ 3,266,234$ 2,675,215$ 591,019$ 13,300,056$ Capital assets 12,434,961 9,751,289 2,683,672 6,141,737 6,352,651 (210,914) 18,576,698 Total Assets 22,468,783 16,240,763 6,228,020 9,407,971 9,027,866 380,105 31,876,754 Deferred Outflows of Resources 1,402,006 1,602,784 (200,778) - - - 1,402,006 Liabilities Noncurrent liabilities outstanding 10,763,708 9,543,123 1,220,585 3,179,118 3,350,038 (170,920) 13,942,826 Other liabilities 896,387 766,188 130,199 54,314 80,635 (26,321) 950,701 Total Liabilities 11,660,095 10,309,311 1,350,784 3,233,432 3,430,673 (197,241) 14,893,527 Deferred Inflows of Resources 1,589,421 1,734,902 (145,481) - - - 1,589,421 Net Position Net investment in capital assets 3,707,332 2,220,827 1,486,505 4,012,870 4,087,547 (74,677) 7,720,202 Restricted 5,504,003 2,650,109 2,853,894 - - - 5,504,003 Unrestricted 1,409,938 928,398 481,540 2,161,669 1,509,646 652,023 3,571,607 Total Net Position 10,621,273$ 5,799,334$ 4,821,939$ 6,174,539$ 5,597,193$ 577,346$ 16,795,812$ Governmental Activities Business-type Activities An additional portion of the City’s net position (32.8 percent) represents resources that are subject to external restrictions on how they may be used. The remaining balance of unrestricted net position ($3,571,607) may be used to meet the City’s ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors. 21 Governmental and Business-type Activities. Governmental activities increased the City’s net position by $4,895,115 and business-type activities increased the City’s net position by $577,346. Significant changes from prior year are noted below: City of Corcoran’s Changes in Net Position Increase Increase 2018 2017(Decrease)2018 2017(Decrease) Revenues Program Revenues Charges for services 839,246$ 910,304$ (71,058)$ 174,956$ 140,089$ 34,867$ Operating grants and contributions 907,971 387,078 520,893 - - - Capital grants and contributions 4,017,920 297,087 3,720,833 1,102,683 647,033 455,650 General Revenues Property taxes 3,994,633 3,729,378 265,255 - - - Other taxes 49,030 50,475 (1,445) - - - Grants and contributions not restricted to specific programs 31,479 25,313 6,166 - - - Unrestricted investment earnings 24,671 9,820 14,851 10,916 4,288 6,628 Total Revenues 9,864,950 5,409,455 4,455,495 1,288,555 791,410 497,145 Expenses General government 1,126,861 1,038,756 88,105 - - - Public safety 1,947,168 1,997,249 (50,081) - - - Public works 1,753,734 1,699,299 54,435 - - - Culture and recreation 162,855 157,579 5,276 - - - Interest on long-term debt 234,615 182,048 52,567 - - - Water - - - 252,910 180,546 72,364 Sewer - - - 202,901 140,999 61,902 Total Expenses 5,225,233 5,074,931 150,302 455,811 321,545 134,266 Change in Net Position Before Transfers 4,639,717 334,524 4,305,193 832,744 469,865 362,879 Transfers 259,952 199,097 60,855 (259,952) (199,097) (60,855) Transfer of Capital Assets (4,554) (942,555) 938,001 4,554 942,555 (938,001) Change in Net Position 4,895,115 (408,934) 5,304,049 577,346 1,213,323 (635,977) Net Position, January 1 as Restated (Note 7)5,726,158 6,208,268 (482,110) 5,597,193 4,383,870 1,213,323 Net Position, December 31 10,621,273$ 5,799,334$ 4,821,939$ 6,174,539$ 5,597,193$ 577,346$ * GASB Statement No. 75 was implemented for the year ended December 31, 2018 and required a $73,176 restatement of beginning governmental net position. Prior year amounts were not restated causing a variance in ending net position at December 31, 2017 and beginning net position on January 1, 2018. Governmental Activities Business-type Activities Property taxes represent 40.49 percent of total revenues in 2018 in governmental activities. Significant revenues items included: • Capital grants and contributions increased $3,720,833 from prior year. The City received over 3 million dollars in 2018 related to several development agreements. • Property taxes increased in 2018 as a result of an increase in the General fund property tax levy. Significant expenses items included: • General Government expenses increased $88,105 due to increased personal services expenditures. • Interest on long-term debt increased $52,567 due to scheduled debt payments increasing. • Overall business-type expenses increased $134,266. 22 The following graph depicts various governmental activities and shows the revenue and expenses directly related to those activities. Expenses and Program Revenue - Governmental Activities $- $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 $4,000,000 $4,500,000 $5,000,000 General government Public safety Public works Culture and recreation Interest on long-term debt Expenses Program Revenues Revenues by Source - Governmental Activities Charges for services 8.51% Operating grants and contributions 9.20% Capital grants and contributions 40.73%Grants and contributions unrestricted 0.32% Property taxes 40.49% Other taxes 0.50% Unrestricted investments earnings 0.25% 23 Business-type Activities. Business-type activities increased the City’s net position by $577,346. Financial Analysis of the City’s Funds As noted earlier, the City uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements. Governmental Funds. The focus of the City’s governmental funds is to provide information on near-term inflows, outflows and balances of spendable resources. Such information is useful in assessing the City’s financing requirements. In particular, unreserved fund balance may serve as a useful measure of a government’s net resources available for spending at the end of the fiscal year. As of the end of the current fiscal year, the City’s governmental funds reported combined ending fund balances of $8,370,237, an increase of $3,505,543 in comparison with the prior year. Approximately 22.4 percent of this total amount ($1,878,803) constitutes unassigned fund balance, which is available for spending at the City’s discretion. The remainder of fund balance ($6,491,434) is not available for new spending because it is either 1) nonspendable ($73,492), 2) restricted ($5,023,552), 3) committed ($40,518), or 4) assigned ($1,353,872). For further classification refer to Note 3E on page 64 of this report. Increase Major Funds 2018 2017(Decrease) General 2,487,254$ 2,188,968$ 298,286$ Debt Service 382,541$ 431,620$ (49,079)$ Downtown Improvements 369,725$ 397,304$ (27,579)$ Rockford School Land -$ -$ -$ Bellwether 2,780,055$ -$ 2,780,055$ The Rockford School Land fund balance was new in 2018 and accounts for the capital outlay expenditures from the Rockford land purchase equaling other transfers in and bond proceeds. The Bellwether fund balance increased $2,780,055 from 2017 as it was a new fund. Developer contributions for the extension of sewer in excess of public works expenditures is the reason for the increase and ending fund balance. Fund Balance December 31, The Downtown Improvements fund balance decreased by $27,579 due to capital outlay expenditures in excess of revenues. The General fund balance increased $298,286 during the year. The increase was due to revenues exceeding budgeted expectations by $455,561. The main reason for revenues exceeding budget was increased building permits due to development in the City. The Debt Service fund has a total fund balance of $382,541, all of which is restricted for payment of future debt service. The fund balance decreased $49,079 from 2017 mainly due scheduled bond payments exceeding resources collected from taxes and special assessments. General Fund Budgetary Highlights The City’s General fund was not amended during the year. Revenues were over budget by $455,561. The largest positive variances was licenses and permits which had a positive budget variance of $206,865. Expenditures were over budget by $82,275 primarily due to the negative budget variances in public safety $70,749. The variances can both be attributed to increased building activity in the City along with conservative budgeting related to growth. 24 Capital Asset and Debt Administration Capital Assets. The City’s investment in capital assets for its governmental type activities and business-type activities as of December 31, 2018, amounts to $18,576,698 (net of accumulated depreciation). This investment in capital assets includes land, buildings, infrastructure, machinery and equipment, park facilities, roads, and highways. The City’s investment in capital assets for the current fiscal year increased 27.5% percent. Major capital events during the current fiscal year included the following: • Rolling Hills Road and Larkin Road Overlay • CR-10 & Fir Lane Turn Lane/Bass Lake Crossing Road Project • Rockford School Land • Purchase of a 2019 Mack Truck City of Corcoran’s Capital Assets (Net of Depreciation) Increase Increase 2018 2017(Decrease)2018 2017(Decrease) Land 2,870,956$ 1,416,605$ 1,454,351$ 361,762$ 361,762$ -$ Construction in Progress 274,090 1,480,693 (1,206,603) - 2,700,201 (2,700,201) Buildings 4,276,770 4,448,774 (172,004) - - - Equipment 1,337,851 1,056,061 281,790 - - - Infrastructure 3,675,294 1,349,156 2,326,138 5,779,975 3,290,688 2,489,287 Total 12,434,961$ 9,751,289$ 2,683,672$ 6,141,737$ 6,352,651$ (210,914)$ Governmental Activities Business-type Activities Major capital asset events during the current fiscal year included the following: Capital Assets Land 17.4% Infrastructure 50.9% Buildings 23.0% Equipment 7.2% Construction in Progress 1.5% Additional information on the City’s capital assets can be found in Note 3B starting on page 58 of this report. 25 Long-term Debt. At the end of the current fiscal year, the City had total bonded debt outstanding of $11,993,246, which is made up of general obligation improvement bonds and general obligation revenue bonds. City of Corcoran’s Outstanding Debt Increase Increase 2018 2017(Decrease)2018 2017(Decrease) G.O. Bonds 8,722,000$ 7,456,000$ 1,266,000$ -$ -$ -$ Revenue Bonds - - - 2,775,000 2,910,000 (135,000) Unamortized Premium on Bonds 92,128 74,462 17,666 21,011 22,248 (1,237) Notes Payable - - - 383,107 417,790 (34,683) Total 8,814,128$ 7,530,462$ 1,283,666$ 3,179,118$ 3,350,038$ (170,920)$ Governmental Activities Business-type Activities The City’s total debt increased $1,112,746 during the current fiscal year primarily as a result of the 2018A bond issuance. Minnesota statutes limit the amount of net general obligation debt a City may issue to 3 percent of the market value of taxable property within the City. Net debt is debt payable solely from ad valorem taxes. The current debt limitation for the City is $24,816,337. The City has $1,307,000 of debt subject to this limit. Additional information on the City’s long-term debt can be found in Note 3D starting on page 61 of this report. Economic Factors and Next Year’s Budgets and Rates The City’s property tax rate decreased slightly from 45.994 percent to 45.356 percent in 2018. The City continues to work towards increasing its unrestricted fund balance and remove unfunded liabilities. Property values continue to increase and new residential development is at a pace of approximately 70 homes per year. Requests for Information This financial report is designed to provide a general overview of the City’s finances for all those with an interest in the City’s finances. Questions concerning any of the information provided in this report or requests for additional financial information should be addressed to the City Administrator, City of Corcoran, 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340. 26 GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CITY OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 27 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 28 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Statement of Net Position December 31, 2018 Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Total Assets Cash and temporary investments 8,874,102$ 2,837,153$ 11,711,255$ Receivables Accounts 113,375 45,730 159,105 Interest 8,430 - 8,430 Taxes 68,023 - 68,023 Special assessments 797,133 380,150 1,177,283 Due from other governments 104,050 2,801 106,851 Prepaid items 68,709 400 69,109 Capital assets Land and construction in progress 3,145,046 361,762 3,506,808 Depreciable, net of accumulated depreciation 9,289,915 5,779,975 15,069,890 Total Assets 22,468,783 9,407,971 31,876,754 Deferred Outflows of Resources Deferred pension resources 1,402,006 - 1,402,006 Liabilities Accounts payable 701,823 18,419 720,242 Due to other governments 11,508 - 11,508 Accrued salaries payable 85,098 - 85,098 Accrued interest payable 97,958 35,895 133,853 Noncurrent liabilities Due within one year 561,468 171,291 732,759 Due in more than one year 10,202,240 3,007,827 13,210,067 Total Liabilities 11,660,095 3,233,432 14,893,527 Deferred Inflows of Resources Deferred other postemployment benefit resources 16,478 16,478 Deferred pension resources 1,572,943 - 1,572,943 Total Deferred Inflows of Resouces 1,589,421 - 1,589,421 Net Position Net investment in capital assets 3,707,332 4,012,870 7,720,202 Restricted for Debt service 949,491 - 949,491 Park dedication fees 565,954 - 565,954 Police expenditures 26,088 - 26,088 Lawful gambling 87,099 - 87,099 Capital outlay 3,875,371 - 3,875,371 Unrestricted 1,409,938 2,161,669 3,571,607 Total Net Position 10,621,273$ 6,174,539$ 16,795,812$ The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 29 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Statement of Activities For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Operating Capital Charges for Grants and Grants and Expenses Services Contributions Governmental Activities General government 1,126,861$ 94,924$ 10,287$ -$ Public safety 1,947,168 630,817 156,529 29,849 Public works 1,753,734 110,020 730,355 3,670,432 Culture and recreation 162,855 3,485 10,800 317,639 Interest on long term debt 234,615 - - - Total Governmental Activities 5,225,233 839,246 907,971 4,017,920 Business-type Activities Water 252,910 95,816 - 662,136 Sewer 202,901 79,140 - 440,547 Total Business-type Activities 455,811 174,956 - 1,102,683 Total 5,681,044$ 1,014,202$ 907,971$ 5,120,603$ General Revenues Taxes Property taxes, levied for general purposes Property taxes, levied for debt service Franchise taxes Grants and contributions not restricted to specific programs Unrestricted investment earnings Transfers Transfer of capital assets Total General Revenues Change in Net Position Net Position, January 1 as Restated (Note 7) Net Position, December 31 Functions/Programs Program Revenues The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 30 Governmental Business-type Activities Activities Total (1,021,650)$ -$ (1,021,650)$ (1,129,973) - (1,129,973) 2,757,073 - 2,757,073 169,069 - 169,069 (234,615) - (234,615) 539,904 - 539,904 - 505,042 505,042 - 316,786 316,786 - 821,828 821,828 539,904 821,828 1,361,732 3,500,000 - 3,500,000 494,633 - 494,633 49,030 - 49,030 31,479 - 31,479 24,671 10,916 35,587 259,952 (259,952) - (4,554) 4,554 - 4,355,211 (244,482) 4,110,729 4,895,115 577,346 5,472,461 5,726,158 5,597,193 11,323,351 10,621,273$ 6,174,539$ 16,795,812$ Changes in Net Position Net Revenues (Expenses) and The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 31 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 32 FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CITY OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 33 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Balance Sheet Governmental Funds December 31, 2018 100 300's 422 Debt Downtown General Service Improvements Assets Cash and temporary investments 2,486,450$ 379,002$ 700,955$ Receivables Accounts 104,947 - - Interest 8,430 - - Taxes 68,023 - - Special assessments 118,788 664,908 - Due from other governments 99,407 3,539 - Due from other funds 4,783 - - Prepaid items 68,709 - Total Assets 2,959,537$ 1,047,449$ 700,955$ Liabilities Accounts payable 188,866$ -$ 331,230$ Due to other governments 11,508 - - Accrued salaries payable 85,098 - - Due to other funds - - - Total Liabilities 285,472 - 331,230 Total Deferred Inflows of Resources Unavailable revenues - taxes 68,023 - - Unavailable revenues - special assessments 118,788 664,908 - Total Deferred Inflows of Resources 186,811 664,908 - Fund Balances Nonspendable 73,492 - - Restricted - 382,541 - Committed - - - Assigned 531,280 - 369,725 Unassigned 1,882,482 - - Total Fund Balances 2,487,254 382,541 369,725 Total Liabilities, Deferred Inflows of Resources and Fund Balances 2,959,537$ 1,047,449$ 700,955$ The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 34 423 425 Other Total Rockford School Governmental Governmental Land Bellwether Funds Funds -$ 2,949,528$ 2,358,167$ 8,874,102$ - - 8,428 113,375 - - - 8,430 - - - 68,023 - - 13,437 797,133 - - 1,104 104,050 - - - 4,783 - - - 68,709 -$ 2,949,528$ 2,381,136$ 10,038,605$ -$ 169,473$ 12,254$ 701,823$ - - - 11,508 - - - 85,098 - - 4,783 4,783 - 169,473 17,037 803,212 - 68,023 13,437 797,133 - - 13,437 865,156 - - 73,492 - 2,780,055 1,860,956 5,023,552 - - 40,518 40,518 - - 452,867 1,353,872 - - (3,679) 1,878,803 - 2,780,055 2,350,662 8,370,237 -$ 2,949,528$ 2,381,136$ 10,038,605$ The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 35 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 36 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Reconciliation of the Balance Sheet to the Statement of Net Position Governmental Funds December 31, 2018 Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net position are different because Total Fund Balances - Governmental 8,370,237$ Capital assets used in governmental activities are not financial resources and therefore are not reported as assets in governmental funds. Cost of capital assets 17,540,711 Less: accumulated depreciation (5,105,750) Long-term liabilities, including bonds payable, are not due and payable in the current period and, therefore, are not reported in the fund statements. Long-term liabilities at year-end consist of G.O. bonds payable (8,722,000) Unamortized premium on bonds (92,128) Compensated absences payable (235,154) Other postemployment benefits payable (295,076) Pension liability (1,419,350) Some receivables are not available soon enough to pay for current period expenditures, and, therefore, are unavailable in the funds. Taxes receivable 68,023 Special assessments receivable 797,133 Governmental funds do not report long-term amounts related to pensions. Deferred outflows of pension resources 1,402,006 Deferred inflows of pension resources (1,572,943) Deferred inflows of other postemployment benefit resources (16,478) Governmental funds do not report a liability for accrued interest until due and payable.(97,958) Total Net Position - Governmental Activities 10,621,273$ The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 37 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Governmental Funds For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 100 300's 422 Debt Downtown General Service Improvements Revenues Taxes 3,543,867$ 494,633$ -$ Licenses and permits 550,240 - - Intergovernmental 347,944 - - Charges for services 134,694 - - Fines and forfeitures 65,807 - - Special assessments 36,434 93,680 - Interest on investments 7,269 124 2,988 Miscellaneous 96,696 - - Total Revenues 4,782,951 588,437 2,988 Expenditures Current General government 1,099,387 - - Public safety 1,817,061 - - Public works 1,344,769 - - Culture and recreation 96,054 - - Capital outlay General government - - - Public safety - - - Public works 18,949 - 30,567 Culture and recreation 36,317 - - Debt service Principal - 569,000 - Interest and other charges - 172,800 - Total Expenditures 4,412,537 741,800 30,567 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 370,414 (153,363) (27,579) Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers in 192,872 67,080 - Transfers out (265,000) - - Bond issued - 37,204 - Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)(72,128) 104,284 - Net Change in Fund Balances 298,286 (49,079) (27,579) Fund Balances, January 1 2,188,968 431,620 397,304 Fund Balances, December 31 2,487,254$ 382,541$ 369,725$ The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 38 423 425 Other Total Rockford School Governmental Governmental Land Bellwether Funds Funds -$ -$ -$ 4,038,500$ - - - 550,240 - - 582,735 930,679 - - 267,753 402,447 - - - 65,807 - - 4,077 134,191 (70) 4,144 10,216 24,671 - 3,050,000 631,873 3,778,569 (70) 3,054,144 1,496,654 9,925,104 - 1,099,387 58,264 1,875,325 - 1,344,769 20 - 96,074 47,712 47,712 146,662 146,662 274,089 1,239,226 1,562,831 1,437,816 - 101,469 1,575,602 - - 569,000 21,940 - 2,411 197,151 1,459,776 274,089 1,595,744 8,514,513 (1,459,846) 2,780,055 (99,090) 1,410,591 250,000 - 265,000 774,952 - - (250,000) (515,000) 1,209,846 - 587,950 1,835,000 1,459,846 - 602,950 2,094,952 - 2,780,055 503,860 3,505,543 - - 1,846,802 4,864,694 -$ 2,780,055$ 2,350,662$ 8,370,237$ The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 39 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances to the Statement of Activities Governmental Funds For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities are different because Total Net Change in Fund Balances - Governmental Funds 3,505,543$ Capital outlays are reported in governmental funds as expenditures. However, in the statement of activities, the cost of those assets is allocated over the estimated useful lives as depreciation expense. Capital outlays 3,283,829 Depreciation expense (580,942) Assets constructed in the governmental funds for enterprise funds are eliminated in the government-wide statements.(4,554) Governmental funds report a gain (loss) on sale of capital assets to the extent of cash exchanged, whereas the disposition of the assets book value is included in the total gain (loss) in the statement of activities. Disposals (18,118) Depreciation on disposals 3,457 The issuance of long-term debt provides current financial resources to governmental funds, while the repayment of the principal of long-term debt consumes the current financial resources of governmental funds. Neither transaction, however, has any effect on net position. Also, governmental funds report the effect of premiums, discounts, and similar items when debt is first issued, whereas these amounts amortized in the statement of activities. Bonds issued (1,835,000) Premium on bonds issued (25,112) Amortization of bond premium 7,446 Principal repayments 569,000 Interest on long-term debt in the statement of activities differs from the amount reported in the governmental funds because interest is recognized as an expenditure in the funds when it is due, and thus requires the use of current financial resources. In the statement of activities, however, interest expense is recognized as the interest accrues, regardless of when it is due.(19,798) Certain revenues are recognized as soon as they are earned. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, they cannot be recognized until they are available to liquidate liabilities of the current period. Property taxes 5,163 Special assessments (76,759) Some expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of current financial resources and, therefore, are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds. Compensated absences 5,590 Other postemployment benefits costs (12,152) Long-term pension activity is not reported in governmental funds. Pension expense 76,080 Pension revenue 11,442 Change in Net Position - Governmental Activities 4,895,115$ The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 40 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual General Fund For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Actual Variance with Original Final Amounts Final Budget Revenues Taxes 3,519,833$ 3,519,833$ 3,543,867$ 24,034$ Licenses and permits 343,375 343,375 550,240 206,865 Intergovernmental 270,682 270,682 347,944 77,262 Charges for services 86,200 86,200 134,694 48,494 Fines and forfeitures 45,000 45,000 65,807 20,807 Special assessments - - 36,434 36,434 Interest on investments 1,500 1,500 7,269 5,769 Miscellaneous 60,800 60,800 96,696 35,896 Total Revenues 4,327,390 4,327,390 4,782,951 455,561 Expenditures Current General government 1,029,531 1,029,531 1,099,387 (69,856) Public safety 1,746,312 1,746,312 1,817,061 (70,749) Public works 1,418,732 1,418,732 1,344,769 73,963 Culture and recreation 92,687 92,687 96,054 (3,367) Capital outlay Public works 8,000 8,000 18,949 (10,949) Culture and recreation 35,000 35,000 36,317 (1,317) Total Expenditures 4,330,262 4,330,262 4,412,537 (82,275) Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures (2,872) (2,872) 370,414 373,286 Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers in 192,872 192,872 192,872 - Transfers out (190,000) (190,000) (265,000) (75,000) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)2,872 2,872 (72,128) (75,000) Net Change in Fund Balances - - 298,286 298,286 Fund Balances, January 1 2,188,968 2,188,968 2,188,968 - Fund Balances, December 31 2,188,968$ 2,188,968$ 2,487,254$ 298,286$ Budgeted Amounts The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 41 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Statement of Net Position Proprietary Funds December 31, 2018 Water Sewer Totals Assets Current Assets Cash and temporary investments 2,086,009$ 751,144$ 2,837,153$ Accounts receivable 19,594 26,136 45,730 Due from other governments 2,241 560 2,801 Prepaids 200 200 400 Special assessments 34,542 8,635 43,177 Total Current Assets 2,142,586 786,675 2,929,261 Noncurrent Assets Special assessments 269,578 67,395 336,973 Capital assets Land 235,145 126,617 361,762 Infrastructure 3,078,433 3,392,987 6,471,420 Less: accumulated depreciation (313,222) (378,223) (691,445) Net Capital Assets 3,000,356 3,141,381 6,141,737 Total Noncurrent Assets 3,269,934 3,208,776 6,478,710 Total Assets 5,412,520 3,995,451 9,407,971 Liabilities Current Liabilities Accounts payable 10,008 8,411 18,419 Accrued interest payable 15,950 19,945 35,895 Notes payable - current 36,291 - 36,291 Bonds payable - current 60,300 74,700 135,000 Total Current Liabilities 122,549 103,056 225,605 Noncurrent Liabilities Notes payable 346,816 - 346,816 Bonds payable, net of premium 1,185,321 1,475,690 2,661,011 Total Noncurrent Liabilities 1,532,137 1,475,690 3,007,827 Total Liabilities 1,654,686 1,578,746 3,233,432 Net Position Net investment in capital assets 2,040,048 1,972,822 4,012,870 Unrestricted 1,717,786 443,883 2,161,669 Total Net Position 3,757,834$ 2,416,705$ 6,174,539$ Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 42 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position Proprietary Funds For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Water Sewer Totals Operating Revenues Charges for services 95,816$ 75,436$ 171,252$ Operating Expenses Supplies 32,101 2,213 34,314 Repairs and maintenance 58,556 45,835 104,391 Depreciation 102,483 112,985 215,468 Total Operating Expenses 193,140 161,033 354,173 Operating Loss (97,324) (85,597) (182,921) Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses) Interest on investments 8,094 2,822 10,916 Other income - 3,704 3,704 Interest expense (59,770) (41,868) (101,638) Total Nonoperating Expenses (51,676) (35,342) (87,018) Loss Before Contributions and Transfers (149,000) (120,939) (269,939) Capital Contributions 471,838 440,547 912,385 Capital Contributions From Other Funds 2,052 2,502 4,554 Developer Contributions 190,298 - 190,298 Transfers Out (122,876) (137,076) (259,952) Change in Net Position 392,312 185,034 577,346 Net Position, January 1 3,365,522 2,231,671 5,597,193 Net Position, December 31 3,757,834$ 2,416,705$ 6,174,539$ Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 43 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Statement of Cash Flows Proprietary Funds For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Water Sewer Totals Cash Flows from Operating Activities Receipts from customers and users 67,387$ 56,004$ 123,391$ Payments to suppliers (119,331) (79,652) (198,983) Net Cash Used by Operating Activities (51,944) (23,648) (75,592) Cash Flows from Noncapital Financing Activities Transfers out (122,876) (137,076) (259,952) Cash Flows from Capital and Related Financing Activities Connection fees received 471,838 440,547 912,385 Special assessments received 42,814 10,704 53,518 Developer fees received 190,298 - 190,298 Principal paid on bonds (60,300) (74,700) (135,000) Interest paid on bonds (60,963) (43,038) (104,001) Net Cash Provided by Capital and Related Financing Activities 583,687 333,513 917,200 Cash Flows from Investing Activities Interest received on investments 8,094 2,822 10,916 Net Increase in Cash and Cash Equivalents 416,961 175,611 592,572 Cash and Cash Equivalents, January 1 1,669,048 575,533 2,244,581 Cash and Cash Equivalents, December 31 2,086,009$ 751,144$ 2,837,153$ Reconciliation of Operating Loss to Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities Operating loss (97,324)$ (85,597)$ (182,921)$ Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash provided (used) by operating activities Other income related to operations - 3,704 3,704 Depreciation 102,483 112,985 215,468 (Increase) decrease in assets Accounts receivable (17,001) (20,279) (37,280) Due to other governments (2,241) (560) (2,801) Special assessments (9,187) (2,297) (11,484) Prepaid items (200) (200) (400) Increase in liabilities Accounts payable 6,209 (31,404) (25,195) Notes payable (34,683) - (34,683) Net Cash Used By Operating Activities (51,944)$ (23,648)$ (75,592)$ Noncash Capital and Related Financing Activities Capital assets contributed by other funds 2,052$ 2,502$ 4,554$ Amortization of bond premium 690$ 547$ 1,237$ Business-type Activities - Enterprise Funds The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 44 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Statement of Fiduciary Net Position Fiduciary Funds December 31, 2018 500 501 Lions and Escrow Jaycees Total Assets Cash and temporary investments 981,010$ 6,000$ 987,010$ Accounts receivable 37,457 - 37,457 Total Assets 1,018,467$ 6,000$ 1,024,467$ Liabilities Accounts payable 17,980$ 6,000$ 23,980$ Deposits payable 1,000,487 - 1,000,487 Total Liabilities 1,018,467$ 6,000$ 1,024,467$ Agency The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of this statement. 45 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 46 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies A. Reporting Entity The City of Corcoran, Minnesota (the City), operates under a Home Rule Charter form of government. The charter provides for citizen input for initiative, referendum and recall. Under this plan, the government of the City is directed by a City Council composed of an elected Mayor and four elected City Council members. The City Council exercises legislative authority and determines all matters of policy. The City Council appoints personnel responsible for the proper administration of all affairs relating to the City. The City has considered all potential units for which it is financially accountable, and other organizations for which the nature and significance of their relationship with the City are such that exclusion would cause the City’s financial statements to be misleading or incomplete. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has set forth criteria to be considered in determining financial accountability. These criteria include appointing a voting majority of an organization’s governing body, and (1) the ability of the primary government to impose its will on that organization or (2) the potential for the organization to provide the specific benefits to, or impose specific financial burdens on the primary government. Blended component units, although legally separate entities, are in substance, part of the City’s operations and so data from these units are combined with data of the primary government. The City has the following component unit: Blended Component Unit The Economic Development Authority (the EDA) of the City was created pursuant to Minnesota statutes 469.090 through 469.108 to carry out economic and industrial development and redevelopment consistent with policies established by the City Council. The EDA may not exercise any of the powers enumerated by the authorizing statutes without prior approval of the Board of Commissioners. The activity of the EDA are blended and reported as a Debt Service fund due to the financial benefit/burden relationship. The EDA has no activity during the year. Separate financial statements are not issued for this component unit. B. Government-wide and Fund Financial Statements The government-wide financial statements (i.e., the statement of net position and the statement of activities) report information on all of the nonfiduciary activities of the primary government. Governmental activities, which normally are supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues, are reported separately from business-type activities, which rely to a significant extent on fees and charges for support. The statement of activities demonstrates the degree to which the direct expenses of a given function or segment is offset by program revenues. Direct expenses are those that are clearly identifiable with a specific function or segment. Amounts reported as program revenues include 1) charges to customers or applicants who purchase, use, or directly benefit from goods, services or privileges provided by a given function or segment and 2) grants and contributions that are restricted to meeting the operational or capital requirements of a particular function or segment. Taxes and other items not properly included among program revenues are reported instead as general revenues. Separate financial statements are provided for governmental funds, proprietary funds, and fiduciary funds, even though the latter are excluded from the government-wide financial statements. Major individual governmental funds and major individual enterprise funds are reported as separate columns in the fund financial statements. 47 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) C. Measurement Focus, Basis of Accounting and Financial Statement Presentation The government-wide financial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting, as are the proprietary fund financial statements. Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Property taxes are recognized as revenues in the year for which they are levied. Grants and similar items are recognized as revenue as soon as all eligibility requirements imposed by the provider have been met. Governmental fund financial statements are reported using the current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available. Revenues are considered to be available when they are collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to pay liabilities of the current period. For this purpose, the City considers revenues to be available if they are collected within 60 days of the end of the current fiscal period. Expenditures generally are recorded when a liability is incurred, as under accrual accounting. However, debt service expenditures, as well as expenditures related to compensated absences and claims and judgments, are recorded only when payment is due. Property taxes, franchise taxes, licenses, and interest associated with the current fiscal period are all considered to be susceptible to accrual and so have been recognized as revenues of the current fiscal period. Only the portion of special assessments receivable due within the current fiscal period is considered to be susceptible to accrual as revenue of the current period. All other revenue items are considered to be measurable and available only when cash is received by the City. Revenue resulting from exchange transactions, in which each party gives and receives essentially equal value, is recorded on the accrual basis when the exchange takes place. On a modified accrual basis, revenue is recorded in the year in which the resources are measurable and become available. Non-exchange transactions, in which the City receives value without directly giving equal value in return, include property taxes, grants, entitlement and donations. On an accrual basis, revenue from property taxes is recognized in the year for which the tax is levied. Revenue from grants, entitlements and donations is recognized in the year in which all eligibility requirements have been satisfied. Eligibility requirements include timing requirements, which specify the year when the resources are required to be used or the year when use is first permitted, matching requirements, in which the City must provide local resources to be used for a specified purpose, and expenditure requirements, in which the resources are provided to the City on a reimbursement basis. On a modified accrual basis, revenue from non-exchange transactions must also be available before it can be recognized. Unearned revenue arises when assets are recognized before revenue recognition criteria have been satisfied. Grants and entitlements received before eligibility requirements are met are also recorded as unearned revenue. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates. 48 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) The City reports the following major governmental funds: The General fund is the City’s primary operating fund. It accounts for all financial resources of the City, except those required to be accounted for in another fund. The Debt Service fund accounts for the resources accumulated and payments made for principal and interest on long- term general obligation debt of governmental funds. The Downtown Improvements fund tracks the Downtown Improvements project finances. The Rockford School Land fund accounts for the resources accumulated and payments made for the purchase of the Rockford School Land. The Bellwether fund accounts for resources accumulated and payments made for different developments within the City. The City reports the following major proprietary funds: The Water fund accounts for costs associated with the City’s water system and ensures that user charges are sufficient to pay for those costs. The Sewer fund accounts for the costs associated with the City’s sewer system and ensures that user charges are sufficient to pay for those costs. Additionally, the City reports the following fund types: Fiduciary funds account for assets held by the government in a trustee capacity or as an agent of behalf of others. The agency fund is custodial in nature and does not present results of operations or have a measurement focus. Agency funds are accounted for using the accrual basis of accounting. This fund is used to account for assets that the City holds for others in an agency capacity. As a general rule the effect of interfund activity has been eliminated from government-wide financial statements. Proprietary funds distinguish operating revenues and expenses from nonoperating items. Operating revenues and expenses generally result from providing services and producing and delivering goods in connection with a proprietary fund’s principal ongoing operations. The principal operating revenues of the City’s enterprise funds are charges to customers for sales and services. The City also recognizes as operating revenue the portion of tap fees intended to recover the cost of connecting new customers to the system. All revenues and expenses not meeting this definition are reported as nonoperating revenues and expenses. 49 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) D. Assets, Deferred Outflows of Resources, Liabilities, Deferred Inflows of Resources and Net Position/Fund Balance Deposits and Investments The City’s cash and cash equivalents are considered to be cash on hand, demand deposits and short-term investments with original maturities of three months or less from the date of acquisition. The proprietary funds’ portion in the government-wide cash and temporary investments pool is considered to be cash and cash equivalents for purposes of the statements of cash flows. Cash balances from all funds are pooled and invested, to the extent available, in certificates of deposit and other authorized investments. Earnings from such investments are allocated on the basis of applicable participation by each of the funds. The City may also invest idle funds as authorized by Minnesota statutes, as follows: 1. Direct obligations or obligations guaranteed by the United States or its agencies. 2. Shares of investment companies registered under the Federal Investment Company Act of 1940 and received the highest credit rating, rated in one of the two highest rating categories by a statistical rating agency, and have a final maturity of thirteen months or less. 3. General obligations of a state or local government with taxing powers rated “A” or better; revenue obligations rated “AA” or better. 4. General obligations of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency rated “A” or better. 5. Obligation of a school district with an original maturity not exceeding 13 months and (i) rated in the highest category by a national bond rating service or (ii) enrolled in the credit enhancement program pursuant to statute section 126C.55. 6. Bankers’ acceptances of United States banks eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System. 7. Commercial paper issued by United States banks corporations or their Canadian subsidiaries, of highest quality category by at least two nationally recognized rating agencies, and maturing in 270 days or less. 8. Repurchase or reverse repurchase agreements and securities lending agreements with financial institutions qualified as a “depository” by the government entity, with banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System with capitalization exceeding $10,000,000, a primary reporting dealer in U.S. government securities to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, or certain Minnesota securities broker-dealers. 9. Guaranteed Investment Contracts (GIC’s) issued or guaranteed by a United States commercial bank, a domestic branch of a foreign bank, a United States insurance company, or its Canadian subsidiary, whose similar debt obligations were rated in one of the top two rating categories by a nationally recognized rating agency. The City’s investment policy limits the term of investments to be less than five years. All other policy provisions are limited to Minnesota statutes. The broker money market investment pool operates in accordance with appropriate State laws and regulations. The reported value of the pool is the same as the fair value of the pool share. The City has the following recurring fair value measurements as of December 31, 2018: • Negotiable Certificates of Deposit of $3,456,048 are valued using a matrix pricing model (Level 2 inputs) 50 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Property Taxes The City Council annually adopts a tax levy in December and certifies it to the County for collection in the following year. The County is responsible for collecting all property taxes for the City. These taxes attach an enforceable lien on taxable property within the City on January 1 and are payable by the property owners in two installments. The taxes are collected by the County Treasurer and tax settlements are made to the City during January, July and December each year. Delinquent taxes receivable includes the past six years’ uncollected taxes. Delinquent taxes have been offset by a deferred inflow of resources for taxes not received within 60 days after year end in the governmental financial statements. Accounts Receivable Accounts receivable include amounts billed for services provided before year end. Amounts outstanding at year end are considered fully collectible. Special Assessments Special assessments represent the financing for public improvements paid for by benefiting property owners. These assessments are recorded as receivable upon certification to the County. Special assessments are recognized as revenue when they are received in cash or within 60 days after year end. All governmental special assessments receivable are offset by a deferred inflow of resources in the fund financial statements. Interfund Receivables and Payables Activity between funds that are representative of lending/borrowing arrangements outstanding at the end of the fiscal year are referred to as either “due to/from other funds” (i.e., the current portion of interfund loans) or “advances to/from other funds” (i.e., the non-current portion of interfund loans). All other outstanding balances between funds are reported as “due to/from other funds”. Advances between funds, as reported in the fund financial statements, are offset by a nonspendable fund balance account in the General fund or a restricted, committed or assigned account in applicable governmental funds to indicate the constraint on these resources. Prepaid Items Certain payments to vendors reflect costs applicable to future accounting periods and are recorded as prepaid items in both government-wide and fund financial statements. Capital Assets Capital assets, which include property, plant, equipment and infrastructure assets (e.g., roads, bridges, sidewalks, and similar items) are, reported in the governmental activities column in the government-wide financial statements. Capital assets are defined by the City as assets with an initial, individual cost of more than $5,000 (amount not rounded) and an estimated useful life in excess of five years. The City reports infrastructure assets on a network and subsystem basis. Accordingly, the amounts spent for the construction or acquisition on infrastructure assets are capitalized and reported in the government-wide financial statements. 51 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) In the case of the initial capitalization of general infrastructure assets (i.e., those reported by governmental activities) the City chose to include all such items regardless of their acquisition date or amount. The City was able to estimate the historical cost for the initial reporting of these assets through backtrending (i.e., estimating the current replacement cost of the infrastructure to be capitalized and using an appropriate price-level index to deflate the cost to the acquisition year). As the City constructs or acquires additional capital assets each period, including infrastructure assets, they are capitalized and reported at historical cost. The reported value excludes normal maintenance and repairs which are essentially amounts spent in relation to capital assets that do not increase the capacity or efficiency of the item or extend its useful life beyond the original estimate. In the case of donations the City values these capital assets at the acquisition value of the item at the date of its donation. Property, plant and equipment of the City are depreciated using the straight-line method over the following estimated useful lives: Useful Lives Assets in Years Buildings and Improvements 7 - 40 Infrastructure 15 - 50 Equipment and Machinery 5 - 60 Vehicles 3 - 50 Roads and Highways 20 - 40 Land Improvements 5 - 30 Deferred Outflows of Resources In addition to assets, the statement of net position will sometimes report a separate section for deferred outflows of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred outflows of resources, represents a consumption of net position that applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an outflow of resources (expense/expenditure) until then. The City has only one item that qualifies for reporting in this category. Accordingly, the item, deferred pension resources, is reported only in the statement of net position. This item results from actuarial calculations and current year pension contributions made subsequent to the measurement date. Compensated Absences It is the City’s policy to permit employees to accumulate a limited amount of earned but unused vacation, which is paid to the employee upon separation. A portion of unused sick leave may also be paid upon separation from City service. In governmental fund types the cost of these benefits are recognized when payments are made to the employees. The General fund is typically used to liquidate governmental compensated absences payable. Postemployment Benefits other than Pensions Under Minnesota statute 471.61, subdivision 2b., public employers must allow retirees and their dependents to continue coverage indefinitely in an employer-sponsored health care plan, under the following conditions: 1) Retirees must be receiving (or eligible to receive) an annuity from a Minnesota public pension plan, 2) Coverage must continue in group plan until age 65, and retirees must pay no more than the group premium, and 3) Retirees may obtain dependent coverage immediately before retirement. All premiums are funded on a pay-as-you-go basis. The liability was actuarially determined, in accordance with GASB Statement 75, at January 1, 2017. The General fund is typically used to liquidate governmental other postemployment benefits payable. 52 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Pensions For purposes of measuring the net pension liability, deferred outflows/inflows of resources, and pension expense, information about the fiduciary net position of the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) and additions to/deductions from PERA’s fiduciary net position have been determined on the same basis as they are reported by PERA. For this purpose, plan contributions are recognized as of employer payroll paid dates and benefit payments and refunds are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Investments are reported at fair value. The General fund is typically used to liquidate the governmental net pension liability. The total pension expense for 2018 is as follows: Public Employees Retirement Association of Minnesota (PERA)Total All GERF PEPFF Plans Pension Expense 60,009$ 45,784$ 105,793$ Long-term Obligations In the government-wide financial statements long-term debt and other long-term obligations are reported as liabilities in the statement of net position. The recognition of bond premiums and discounts are amortized over the life of the bonds using the effective interest method. Bond issuance costs are reported as an expense in the period incurred. In the fund financial statements, governmental fund types recognized bond premiums and discounts, as well as bond issuance costs, during the current period. The face amount of debt issued is reported as other financing sources. Premiums received on debt issuances are reported as other financing sources while discounts on debt issuances are reported as other financing uses. Issuance costs, whether or not withheld from the actual debt proceeds received, are reported as debt service expenditures. Deferred Inflows of Resources In addition to liabilities, the statement of net position and fund financial statements will sometimes report a separate section for deferred inflows of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred inflows of resources, represents an acquisition of net position that applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an inflow of resources (revenue) until that time. The government has only one type of item, which arises only under a modified accrual basis of accounting that qualifies as needing to be reported in this category. Accordingly, the item, unavailable revenue, is reported only in the governmental funds balance sheet. The governmental funds report unavailable revenues from two sources: taxes and special assessments. These amounts are deferred and recognized as an inflow of resources in the period that the amounts become available. Furthermore, the City has additional items which qualify for reporting in this category on the statement of net position. The items, deferred pension resources and deferred other postemployment benefit resources, are reported only in the statement of net position and results from actuarial calculations involving net differences between projected and actual earnings on plan investments and changes in proportions. 53 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Fund Balance In the fund financial statements, fund balance is divided into five classifications based primarily on the extent to which the City is bound to observe constraints imposed upon the use of resources reported in the governmental funds. These classifications are defined as follows: Nonspendable - Amounts that cannot be spent because they are not in spendable form, such as due from other funds. Restricted - Amounts related to externally imposed constraints established by creditors, grantors or contributors; or constraints imposed by state statutory provisions. Committed - Amounts constrained for specific purposes that are internally imposed by formal action (resolution) of the City Council, which is the City’s highest level of decision-making authority. Committed amounts cannot be used for any other purpose unless the City Council modifies or rescinds the commitment by resolution. Assigned - Amounts constrained for specific purposes that are internally imposed. In governmental funds other than the General fund, assigned fund balance represents all remaining amounts that are not classified as nonspendable and are neither restricted nor committed. In the General fund, assigned amounts represent intended uses established by the City Council itself or by an official to which the governing body delegates the authority. The City Council has adopted a fund balance policy which delegates the authority to assign amounts for specific purposes to the City Administrator. Unassigned - The residual classification for the General fund and also negative residual amounts in other funds. The City considers restricted amounts to be spent first when both restricted and unrestricted fund balance is available. Additionally, the City would first use committed, then assigned, and lastly unassigned amounts of unrestricted fund balance when expenditures are made. The City has formally adopted a fund balance policy for the General fund. The City’s policy is to maintain a minimum unrestricted fund balance of 35 percent of budgeted operating expenditures for cash-flow timing needs. Net Position In the government-wide financial statements, net position represents the difference between assets and deferred outflows of resources and liabilities and deferred inflows of resources. Net position is displayed in three components: a. Net investment in capital assets - Consists of capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation reduced by any outstanding debt attributable to acquire capital assets. b. Restricted net position- Consist of net position balances restricted when there are limitations imposed on their use through external restrictions imposed by creditors, grantors, laws or regulations of other governments. c. Unrestricted net position- All other net position balances that do not meet the definition of “restricted” or “net investment in capital assets” When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the City’s policy to use restricted resources first, then unrestricted resources as they are needed. 54 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 2: Stewardship, Compliance and Accountability A. Budgetary Information Annual budgets are adopted on a basis consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America for the General fund. All annual appropriations lapse at fiscal year-end. The City does not use encumbrance accounting. In July of each year, all departments of the City submit requests for appropriations to the City Administrator so that a budget may be prepared. Before September 30th, the proposed budget is presented to the City Council for review. The City Council holds public hearings and a final budget is prepared and adopted in December. The appropriated budget is prepared by fund, function and department. The City’s department heads, with the approval of the City Council, may make transfers of appropriations within a department. Transfers of appropriations between departments require the approval of the City Council. The legal level of budgetary control (i.e., the level at which expenditures may not legally exceed appropriations) is the department level. The budget was not amended during the year. B. Deficit Fund Equity The following fund had a fund equity deficit at December 31, 2018: Amount Nonmajor Shannon Lane 3,679$ Fund The deficit in the Shannon Lane fund will be eliminated with future special assessment collections. C. Excess of Expenditures Over Appropriations For the year ended December 31, 2018, expenditures exceeded appropriations in the following fund: Excess of Expenditures Over Budget ActualAppropriations General 4,330,262$ 4,412,537$ 82,275$ Fund The excess expenditures were funded by revenues in excess of budget. 55 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 3: Detailed Notes on All Funds A. Deposits and Investments Deposits Custodial credit risk for deposits and investments is the risk that in the event of a bank failure, the City’s deposits and investments may not be returned or the City will not be able to recover collateral securities in the possession of an outside party. In accordance with Minnesota statutes and as authorized by the City Council, the City maintains deposits at those depository banks, all of which are members of the Federal Reserve System. Minnesota statutes require that all City deposits be protected by insurance, surety bond or collateral. The market value of collateral pledged must equal 110 percent of the deposits not covered by insurance or bonds, with the exception of irrevocable standby letters of credit issued by Federal Home Loan Banks as this type of collateral only requires collateral pledged equal to 100 percent of the deposits not covered by insurance or bonds. Authorized collateral in lieu of a corporate surety bond includes: • United States government Treasury bills, Treasury notes, Treasury bonds; • Issues of United States government agencies and instrumentalities as quoted by a recognized industry quotation service available to the government entity; • General obligation securities of any state or local government with taxing powers which is rated “A” or better by a national bond rating service, or revenue obligation securities of any state or local government with taxing powers which is rated “AA” or better by a national bond rating service; • General obligation securities of a local government with taxing powers may be pledged as collateral against funds deposited by that same local government entity; • Irrevocable standby letters of credit issued by Federal Home Loan Banks to a municipality accompanied by written evidence that the bank’s public debt is rated “AA” or better by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., or Standard & Poor’s Corporation; and • Time deposits that are fully insured by any federal agency. Minnesota statutes require that all collateral shall be placed in safekeeping in a restricted account at a Federal Reserve Bank, or in an account at a trust department of a commercial bank or other financial institution that is not owned or controlled by the financial institution furnishing the collateral. The selection should be approved by the City. At year end, the City’s carrying amount of deposits was $9,162,322 and the bank balance was $9,350,519. A portion of the bank balance ($514,213) was covered by federal depository insurance, a portion ($9,371,640) was covered by collateral held in the City’s name, and the remaining balance ($348,298) was not sufficiently covered by either federal depository insurance or collateral held in the City’s name. 56 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 3: Detailed Notes on All Funds (Continued) Investments As of December 31, 2018, the City had the following investments that are insured or registered, or securities held by the City or its agent in the City’s name. CreditSegmented Quality/Time Ratings (1)Distribution (2)Amount Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Pooled Investments at Amortized Costs Money Market Mutual funds N/A Less than 6 months 79,895$ -$ -$ -$ Non-pooled Investments at Fair Value Brokered Certificates of Deposit N/A Less than 6 months 1,980,371 - 1,980,371 - Brokered Certificates of Deposit N/A 6 months to 1 year 1,475,677 - 1,475,677 - Total Non-pooled Investments 3,456,048 - - - Total Investments 3,535,943$ -$ 3,456,048$ -$ Types of Investments Fair Value Measurement Using (1) Ratings are provided by various credit rating agencies where applicable to indicate associated credit risk. (2) Interest rate risk is disclosed using the segmented time distribution method. N/A Indicates not applicable or unavailable. The investments of the City are subject to the following risks: • Credit Risk. Credit risk is the risk that an issuer or other counterparty to an investment will not fulfill its obligations. Ratings are provided by various credit rating agencies and where applicable, indicate associated credit risk. Minnesota statutes limit the City’s investments to the list on page 50 of the notes. • Custodial Credit Risk. The custodial credit risk for investments is the risk that, in the event of the failure of the counterparty to a transaction, a government will not be able to recover the value of investment or collateral securities that are in the possession of an outside party. The City’s investment policy does not address custodial credit risk but typically limits its exposure by purchasing insured or registered investments. • Concentration of Credit Risk. The concentration of credit risk is the risk of loss attributed to the magnitude of a government’s investment in a single issuer. The City places no limit on the amount that may be invested in any one issuer. • Interest Rate Risk. The interest rate risk is the risk that changes in interest rates will adversely affect the fair value of an investment. In accordance with its investment policy, the City manages its exposure to declines in fair values by limiting the maturity of its investment portfolio to less than five years. Cash and Investments Summary A reconciliation of cash and temporary investments as reported on the statement of net position follows: Carrying Amount of Deposits 9,162,322$ Investments 3,535,943 Total 12,698,265$ Cash and Temporary Investments Statement of Net Position 11,711,255$ Statement of Fiduciary Net Position 987,010 Total 12,698,265$ 57 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 3: Detailed Notes on All Funds (Continued) B. Capital Assets Capital asset activity for the year ended December 31, 2018 was as follows: Beginning Ending BalanceIncreasesDecreasesBalance Governmental Activities Capital Assets not Being Depreciated Land 1,416,605$ 1,454,351$ -$ 2,870,956$ Construction in progress 1,480,693 281,460 (1,488,063) 274,090 Total Capital Assets not Being Depreciated 2,897,298 1,735,811 (1,488,063) 3,145,046 Capital Assets Being Depreciated Buildings 5,937,970 40,412 - 5,978,382 Equipment 3,514,183 548,986 (18,118) 4,045,051 Infrastructure 1,930,103 2,442,129 - 4,372,232 Total Capital Assets Being Depreciated 11,382,256 3,031,527 (18,118) 14,395,665 Less Accumulated Depreciation Buildings (1,489,196) (212,416) - (1,701,612) Equipment (2,458,122) (252,535) 3,457 (2,707,200) Infrastructure (580,947) (115,991) - (696,938) Total Accumulated Depreciation (4,528,265) (580,942) 3,457 (5,105,750) Total Capital Assets Being Depreciated, Net 6,853,991 2,450,585 (14,661) 9,289,915 Governmental Activities Capital Assets, Net 9,751,289$ 4,186,396$ (1,502,724)$ 12,434,961$ 58 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 3: Detailed Notes on All Funds (Continued) Beginning Ending BalanceIncreasesDecreasesBalance Business-type Activities Capital Assets not Being Depreciated Land 361,762$ -$ -$ 361,762$ Construction in progress 2,700,201 4,554 (2,704,755) - Total Capital Assets not Being Depreciated 3,061,963 4,554 (2,704,755) 361,762 Capital Assets Being Depreciated Infrastructure 3,766,666 2,704,755 - 6,471,421 Less Accumulated Depreciation Infrastructure (475,978) (215,468) - (691,446) Total Capital Assets Being Depreciated, Net 3,290,688 2,489,287 - 5,779,975 Business-type Activities Capital Assets, Net 6,352,651$ 2,493,841$ (2,704,755)$ 6,141,737$ Depreciation expense was charged to functions/programs of the City as follows: Governmental Activities General government 44,861$ Public safety 96,919 Public works 413,418 Culture and recreation 25,744 Total Depreciation Expense - Governmental Activities 580,942$ Business-type Activities Water 102,483$ Sewer 112,985 Total Depreciation Expense - Business-type Activities 215,468$ Construction Commitments The City has two active construction project as of December 31, 2018. At year end, the City’s commitments with the contractor is as follows: SpentRemaining to Date Commitment 2018 NE Sewer District Improvements 145,480$ 2,590,877$ Project 59 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 3: Detailed Notes on All Funds (Continued) C. Interfund Balances and Transfers Interfund Balances The composition of internal balances as of December 31, 2018 is as follows: Payable Fund Purpose Amount General Shannon Lane Cash flow purposes 4,783$ Receivable Fund The interfund loan will be repaid as special assessments are collected in the Shannon Lane fund. Interfund Transfers The composition of interfund transfers as of December 31, 2018 is as follows Rockford Nonmajor General Debt ServiceSchool Land GovernmentalTotal Transfers Out General -$ -$ -$ 265,000$ 265,000$ Nonmajor Governmental - - 250,000 - 250,000 Water 96,436 26,440 - - 122,876 Sewer 96,436 40,640 - 137,076 Total 192,872$ 67,080$ 250,000$ 265,000$ 774,952$ Fund Transfers In • Transfers of $96,436 were completed from both the Water and Sewer funds to the General fund to cover staff administrative costs. • A transfer of $125,000 was completed from the General fund to the Asphalt Maintenance fund for future project costs. • A transfer out of $250,000 from the Park Capital fund to the Rockford School Land fund was made for the purchase of the Rockford School land. • A transfer out of $40,000 from the General fund to the Capital Equipment fund was made to move donation funds for the purchase of a new LED city hall sign. • The Water and Sewer fund transferred $26,440 and $40,640, respectively for utility debt service pa yments. • A budgeted transfer of $100,000 from the General fund to the Capital Equipment was made to cover future capital purchases. 60 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 3: Detailed Notes on All Funds (Continued) D. Long-term Debt General Obligation Bonds (G.O. Bonds) The City issued G.O. bonds in governmental activities for equipment purchases and the construction of the new public works facility. Both will be repaid with tax levy. Each year the tax levy equals 105 percent of the amount required for debt service. The excess of 5 percent is to cover any delinquencies in tax payments. G.O. bonds are direct obligations and pledge the full faith and credit of the City. Bonds currently outstanding are as follows: Authorized Issue Maturity Balance at and Issued Date Date Year End G.O. Capital Improvement Bonds Series 2012B 4,000,000$ 2.00 - 3.00 %11/01/1202/01/38 3,775,000$ G.O. Equipment Certificate of 2012A 410,000 0.65 - 1.75 11/01/1211/01/22 170,000 G.O. Equipment Certificate of 2014A 442,000 1.75 - 3.00 05/15/1405/15/24 277,000 G.O. Equipment Certificate of 2016A 290,000 2.00 - 3.00 05/01/1605/01/26 260,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds Series 2016A 2,625,000 2.00 - 2.40 05/01/1605/01/32 2,405,000 G.O. Equipment Certification of 2018A 600,000 3.00 - 3.125 05/31/1802/01/34 600,000 G.O. Bonds Series 2018A 1,235,000 3.00 - 3.125 05/31/1802/01/34 1,235,000 Total General Obligation Bonds 8,722,000$ Interest Description Rate Annual debt service requirements to maturity for general obligation bonds are as follows: Year Ending December 31, PrincipalInterest Total 2019 458,000$ 220,281$ 678,281$ 2020 594,000 199,853 793,853 2021 625,000 186,093 811,093 2022 637,000 171,800 808,800 2023 613,000 157,113 770,113 2024 - 2028 2,780,000 579,976 3,359,976 2029 - 2033 1,705,000 315,270 2,020,270 2034 - 2038 1,310,000 95,311 1,405,311 Total 8,722,000$ 1,925,697$ 10,647,697$ Governmental Activities 61 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 3: Detailed Notes on All Funds (Continued) G.O. Revenue Bonds The following bonds were issued to finance capital improvements, and finance acquisition and construction of capital facilities. They will be repaid from future net revenues pledged from the Water and Sewer funds and are backed by the taxing power of the City. Annual principal and interest payments on the bonds are expected to require 159 and 191 percent of revenues from the Water and Sewer funds, respectively. For 2018, principal and interest paid and total operating revenues for the Water fund were $121,263 and $95,816, respectively. For 2018, principal and interest paid and total operating revenues for the Sewer fund were $117,738 and $75,436, respectively. G.O. revenue bonds currently outstanding are as follows: Authorized Issue Maturity Balance at and Issued Date Date Year End G.O. Utility Revenue Bonds, Series 2014B 3,130,000$ 2.00 - 3.625 %08/01/1402/01/35 2,775,000$ Interest Description Rate Annual debt service requirements to maturity for G.O. revenue bonds are as follows: Year Ending December 31, PrincipalInterest Total 2019 135,000$ 84,800$ 219,800$ 2020 140,000 82,050 222,050 2021 140,000 78,550 218,550 2022 145,000 74,275 219,275 2023 145,000 69,925 214,925 2024 - 2028 815,000 278,675 1,093,675 2029 - 2033 880,000 143,966 1,023,966 2034 - 2035 375,000 13,684 388,684 Total 2,775,000$ 825,925$ 3,600,925$ Business-Type Activities Notes Payable The City has the following notes payable outstanding for water connection charges. Authorized Issue Maturity Balance at and Issued Date Date Year End Notes Payable 300,000$ 5.50 %01/01/1412/20/27 277,096$ Notes Payable 117,790 0.002/16/16 01/01/27 106,011 Total Notes Payable 383,107$ Interest Description Rate 62 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 3: Detailed Notes on All Funds (Continued) Annual debt service requirements to maturity for notes outstanding are as follows: Year Ending December 31, PrincipalInterest Total 2019 36,291$ 14,892$ 51,183$ 2020 37,658 13,525 51,183 2021 39,101 12,082 51,183 2022 40,624 10,559 51,183 2023 42,232 8,951 51,183 2024 - 2027 187,201 17,531 204,732 Total 383,107$ 77,540$ 460,647$ Business-Type Activities Changes in Long-term Liabilities Long-term liability activity for the year ended December 31, 2018 was as follows: Beginning Ending Due Within BalanceIncreasesDecreasesBalance One Year Governmental Activities Bonds Payable G.O. bonds payable 7,456,000$ 1,835,000$ (569,000)$ 8,722,000$ 458,000$ Unamortized premium on bonds 74,462 25,112 (7,446) 92,128 - Total Bonds Payable 7,530,462 1,860,112 (576,446) 8,814,128 458,000 Compensated Absences Payable 240,744 164,691 (170,281) 235,154 103,468 Pension Liability GERF 708,617 78,344 (65,774) 721,187 - PEPFF 837,074 - (138,911) 698,163 - Other Postemployment Benefits Payable 299,402 13,650 (17,976) 295,076 - Governmental Activity Long-term Liabilities 9,616,299$ 2,116,797$ (969,388)$ 10,763,708$ 561,468$ Business-type Activities Bonds Payable Revenue bonds payable 2,910,000$ -$ (135,000)$ 2,775,000$ 135,000$ Unamortized premium on bonds 22,248 - (1,237) 21,011 - Total Bonds Payable 2,932,248 - (136,237) 2,796,011 135,000 Notes Payable 417,790 - (34,683) 383,107 36,291 Business-type Activity Long-term Liabilities 3,350,038$ -$ (170,920)$ 3,179,118$ 171,291$ 63 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 3: Detailed Notes on All Funds (Continued) E. Components of Fund Balance At December 31, 2018, portions of the City’s fund balance are not available for appropriation due to not being in spendable form (Nonspendable), legal restrictions (Restricted), City Council action (Committed), policy and/or intent (Assigned). The following is a summary of the components of fund balance: Nonmajor Debt DowntownGovernmental General Service Improvements Funds Total Nonspendable Prepaid items $ 68,709 $ - $ - $ 68,709 Due from other funds 4,783 - - - 4,783 Total Nonspendable $ 73,492 $ - $ - $ - $ 73,492 Restricted for Debt service $ - $ 382,541 $ - $ - $ 382,541 Capital outlay - - - 3,961,870 3,961,870 Park dedication fees - - - 565,954 565,954 Lawful gambling - - - 87,099 87,099 Police expenditures - - - 26,088 26,088 Total Restricted $ - $ 382,541 $ - $ 4,641,011 $ 5,023,552 Committed to Police expenditures $ - $ - $ 38,977 $ 38,977 Truck safety - - - 1,541 1,541 Total Committed $ - $ - $ - $ 40,518 $ 40,518 Assigned to Long range planning $ 531,280 $ - $ - $ - $ 531,280 Capital outlay - - 369,725 452,867 822,592 Total Assigned $ 531,280 $ - $ 369,725 $ 452,867 $ 1,353,872 64 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 4: Defined Benefit Pension Plans - Statewide A. Plan Description The City participates in the following cost-sharing multiple-employer defined benefit pension plans administered by the Public Employees Retirement Association of Minnesota (PERA). PERA’s defined benefit pension plans are established and administered in accordance with Minnesota statutes, chapters 353 and 356. PERA’s defined benefit pension plans are tax qualified plans under Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code. General Employees Retirement Fund (GERF) All full-time and certain part-time employees of the City are covered by the General Employees Retirement Fund (GERF). GERF members belong to the Coordinated Plan. Coordinated Plan members are covered by Social Security. Public Employees Police and Fire Fund (PEPFF) The PEPFF, originally established for police officers and firefighters not covered by a local relief association, now covers all police officers and firefighters hired since 1980. Effective July 1, 1999, the PEPFF also covers police officers and firefighters belonging to a local relief association that elected to merge with and transfer assets and administration to PERA. B. Benefits Provided PERA provides retirement, disability and death benefits. Benefit provisions are established by Minnesota statute and can only be modified by the state legislature. Vested, terminated employees who are entitled to benefits but are not receiving them yet are bound by the provisions in effect at the time they last terminated their public service. GERF Benefits Benefits are based on a member’s highest average salary for any five successive years of allowable service, age, and years of credit at termination of service. Two methods are used to compute benefits for PERA's Coordinated Plan members. Members hired prior to July 1, 1989 receive the higher of Method 1 or Method 2 formulas. Only Method 2 is used for members hired after June 30, 1989. Under Method 1, the accrual rate for Coordinated members is 1.2 percent of average salary for each of the first 10 years of service and 1.7 percent of average salary for each additional year. Under Method 2, the accrual rate for Coordinated members is 1.7 percent for average salary for all years of service. For members hired prior to July 1, 1989 a full annuity is available when age plus years of service equal 90 and normal retirement age is 65. For members hired on or after July 1, 1989 normal retirement age is the age for unreduced Social Security benefits capped at 66. Benefit increases are provided to benefit recipients each January. Increases are related to the funding ratio of the plan. If the General Employees Plan is at least 90 percent funded for two consecutive years, benefit recipients are given a 2.5 percent increase. If the plan has not exceeded 90 percent funded, or have fallen below 80 percent, benefit recipients are given a one percent increase. A benefit recipient who has been receiving a benefit for at least 12 full months as of June 30 will receive a full increase. Members receiving benefits for at least one month but less than 12 full months as of June 30 will receive a pro rata increase. 65 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 4: Defined Benefit Pension Plans - Statewide (Continued) PEPFF Benefits Benefits for the PEPFF members first hired after June 30, 2010, but before July 1, 2014, vest on a prorated basis from 50 percent after five years up to 100 percent after ten years of credited service. Benefits for PEPFF members first hired after June 30, 2014 vest on a prorated basis from 50 percent after ten years up to 100 percent after twenty years of credited service. The annuity accrual rate is 3.0 percent of average salary for each year of service. A full, unreduced pension is earned when members are age 55 and vested, or for members who were first hired prior to July 1, 1989, when age plus years of service equal at least 90. Benefit increases are provided to benefit recipients each January. Police and Fire Plan benefit recipients receive a future annual 1.0 percent increase. An annual adjustment will equal 2.5 percent any time the plan exceeds a 90 percent funded ratio for two consecutive years. If the adjustment is increased to 2.5 percent and the funded ratio falls below 80 percent for one year or 85 percent for two consecutive years, the post-retirement benefit increase will be lowered to one percent. A benefit recipient who has been receiving a benefit for at least 12 full months as of June 30 will receive a full increase. Members receiving benefits for at least one month but less than 12 full months as of June 30 will receive a pro rata increase. For retirements after May 31, 2014, the first increase will be delayed two years. C. Contributions Minnesota statutes chapter 353 sets the rates for employer and employee contributions. Contribution rates can only be modified by the state legislature. GERF Contributions Plan members were required to contribute 6.50 percent of their annual covered salary and the City was required to contribute 7.50 percent of pay for Coordinated Plan members in fiscal year 2018. The City’s contributions to the GERF for the year ending December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016 were $68,497, $59,070 and $59,070, respectively. The City’s contributions were equal to the required contributions for each year as set by Minnesota statute. PEPFF Contributions Plan members were required to contribute 10.80 percent of their annual covered salary in calendar year 2018. The City was required to contribute 16.20 percent of pay for PEPFF members in calendar year 2018. The City’s contributions to the PEPFF for the years ending December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016 were $113,901, $106,295 and $93,418, respectively. The City’s contributions were equal to the required contributions for each year as set by Minnesota statute. D. Pension Costs GERF Pension Costs At December 31, 2018, the City reported a liability of $721,187 for its proportionate share of the GERF’s net pension liability. The City’s net pension liability reflected a reduction due to the State of Minnesota’s contribution of $16 million to the fund in 2017. The State of Minnesota is considered a non-employer contributing entity and the State’s contribution meets the definition of a special funding situation. The State of Minnesota’s proportionate share of the net pension liability associated with the City totaled $23,786. The net pension liability was measured as of June 30, 2017, and the total pension liability used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of that date. The City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability was based on the City’s contributions received by PERA during the measurement period for employer payroll paid dates from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018 relative to the total employer contributions received from all of PERA’s participating employers. At June 30, 2018, the City’s proportionate share was 0.0130 percent which was an increase of 0.0019 percent from its proportion measured as of June 30, 2017. 66 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 4: Defined Benefit Pension Plans - Statewide (Continued) City's Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability 721,187$ State of Minnesota's Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability Associated with the City 23,786 Total 744,973$ For the year ended December 31, 2018, the City recognized pension expense of $54,461 for its proportionate share of GERF’s pension expense. In addition, the City recognized $5,547 as pension expense (and grant revenue) for its proportionate share of the State of Minnesota’s contribution of $16 million to the GERF. At December 31, 2018, the City reported its proportionate share of GERF’s deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources, and its contributions subsequent to the measurement date, from the following sources: Deferred OutflowsDeferred Inflows of Resourcesof Resources Differences Between Expected and Actual Economic Experience 3,558$ 100,599$ Changes in Actuarial Assumptions 72,516 33,674 Net Difference Between Projected and Actual Earnings on Plan Investments - 26,188 Changes in Proportion 112,552 - Contributions to GERF Subsequent to the Measurement Date 34,526 - Total 223,152$ 160,461$ Deferred outflows of resources totaling $34,526 related to pensions resulting from the City’s contributions to GERF subsequent to the measurement date will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in the year ended December 31, 2019. Other amounts reported as deferred outflows and inflows of resources related to GERF pensions will be recognized in pension expense as follows: 2019 54,745$ 2020 (4,454) 2021 (7,064) 2022 (15,062) PEPFF Pension Costs At December 31, 2018, the City reported a liability of $698,163 for its proportionate share of the PEPFF’s net pension liability. The net pension liability was measured as of June 30, 2018, and the total pension liability used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of that date. The City’s proportion of the net pension liability was based on the City’s contributions received by PERA during the measurement period for employer payroll paid dates from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018 relative to the total employer contributions received from all of PERA’s participating employers. At June 30, 2018, the City’s proportionate share was 0.0655 percent which was an increase of 0.0035 percent from its proportion measured as of June 30, 2017. For the year ended December 31, 2018, the City recognized pension expense of $39,889 for its proportionate share of PEPFF’s pension expense. The City also recognized $5,895 for the year ended December 31, 2018, as pension expense and grant revenue for its proportionate share of the State of Minnesota’s on-behalf contributions to the PEPFF. Legislation passed in 2013 required the State of Minnesota to begin contributing $9 million to the PEPFF each year, starting in fiscal year 2014. 67 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 4: Defined Benefit Pension Plans - Statewide (Continued) At December 31, 2018, the City reported its proportionate share of PEPFF’s deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources, and its contributions subsequent to the measurement date, from the following sources: DeferredDeferred Outflows Inflows of Resourcesof Resources Differences Between Expected and Actual Economic Experience 28,382$ 162,365$ Changes in Actuarial Assumptions 910,697 1,027,786 Net Difference Between Projected and Actual Earnings on Plan Investments - 162,875 Changes in Proportion 182,330 59,456 Contributions to PEPFF Subsequent to the Measurement Date 57,445 - Total 1,178,854$ 1,412,482$ Deferred outflows of resources totaling $57,445 related to pensions resulting from the City’s contributions to PEPFF subsequent to the measurement date will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in the year ended December 31, 2019. Other amounts reported as deferred outflows and inflows of resources related to PEPFF pensions will be recognized in pension expense as follows: 24,927$ (33,020) (64,129) (227,269) 8,418 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 E. Actuarial Assumptions The total pension liability in the June 30, 2018 actuarial valuation was determined using the following actuarial assumptions: Inflation Active Member Payroll Growth Investment Rate of Return 2.50% per year 3.25% per year 7.50% Salary increases were based on a service-related table. Mortality rates for active members, retirees, survivors and disabilitants were based on RP-2014 tables for all plans for males or females, as appropriate, with slight adjustments to fit PERA’s experience. Cost of living benefit increases after retirement for retirees are assumed to be 1.25 percent per year for GERF and 1.0 percent per year for PEPFF. Actuarial assumptions used in the June 30, 2018 valuation were based on the results of actuarial experience studies. The most recent six-year experience study in the GERF plan was completed in 2015. The most recent four-year experience study for PEPFF was completed in 2016. Economic assumptions were updated in 2017 based on a review of inflation and investment return assumptions. 68 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 4: Defined Benefit Pension Plans - Statewide (Continued) The following changes in actuarial assumptions occurred in 2018: GERF • The mortality projection scale was changed from MP-2015 to MP-2017. • The assumed benefit increase was changed from 1.0 percent per year through 2044 and 2.50 percent per year thereafter to 1.25 percent per year. PEPFF • The mortality projection scale was changed from MP-2016 to MP-2017. • As set by statute, the assumed post-retirement benefit increase was changed from 1.0 percent per year through 2064 and 2.5 percent per year, thereafter, to 1.0 percent for all years, with no trigger. The State Board of Investment, which manages the investments of PERA, prepares an analysis of the reasonableness return on a regular basis of the long-term expected rate of using a building-block method in which best-estimate ranges of expected future rates of return are developed for each major asset class. These ranges are combined to produce an expected long-term rate of return by weighting the expected future rates of return by the target asset allocation percentages. The target allocation and best estimates of geometric real rates of return for each major asset class are summarized in the following table: Asset Class Domestic Stocks 36.00 %5.10 % International Stocks 17.00 5.30 Bonds (Fixed Income)20.00 0.75 Alternative Assets (Private Markets)25.00 5.90 Cash 2.00 - Total 100.00 % Target Long-term Expected Allocation Real Rate of Return F. Discount Rate The discount rate used to measure the total pension liability in 2018 was 7.50 percent. The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that contributions from plan members and employers will be made at rates set in Minnesota statutes. Based on these assumptions, the fiduciary net position of the GERF and PEPFF were projected to be available to make all projected future benefit payments of current plan members. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the total pension liability. 69 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 4: Defined Benefit Pension Plans - Statewide (Continued) G. Pension Liability Sensitivity The following presents the City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability for all plans it participates in, calculated using the discount rate disclosed in the preceding paragraph, as well as what the City’s proportionate share of the net pension liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate 1 percentage point lower or 1 percentage point higher than the current discount rate: 1 Percent 1 Percent Decrease (6.50%)Current (7.50%)Increase (8.50%) GERF 1,172,021$ 721,187$ 349,036$ PEPFF 1,496,904 698,163 37,636 H. Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position Detailed information about each pension plan’s fiduciary net position is available in a separately-issued PERA financial report that includes financial statements and required supplementary information. That report may be obtained on the Internet at www.mnpera.org. Note 5: Postemployment Benefits Other Than Pensions A. Plan Description The City’s defined benefit healthcare plan (“the Retiree Health Plan”) provides healthcare insurance for eligible retirees and their spouses. The Retiree Health Plan is affiliated with the healthcare plan administered through LOGIS, an agent multiple-employer postemployment healthcare plan. LOGIS is a consortium of Minnesota local government units controlled by its members. LOGIS’ Board of Directors is composed of one representative from each agency. LOGIS issues a publicly available financial report that includes financial statements and required supplementary information for the health plan. That report may be obtained by writing to LOGIS, 5750 Duluth Street, Golden Valley, MN 55422, or by calling (763) 543-2600. Inactive Plan Members or Beneficiaries Currently Receiving Benefit Payments 2 Active Plan Members 18 Total Plan Members 20 B. Funding Policy The contribution requirements of plan members and the City are established and may be amended by LOGIS’ Board of Directors. For the year ended December 31, 2018, the City’s average contribution rate was 1.0 percent of covered- employee payroll. For the year 2018, the City directly contributed $40,728 to the Plan, while implicit contributions totaled $13,650. C. Actuarial Methods and Assumptions The City’s total OPEB liability of $295,076 was measured as of December 31, 2018, and the total OPEB liability used to calculate the total OPEB liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of January 1, 2017. Roll forward procedures were used to roll forward the total OPEB liability to the measurement date. 70 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 5: Postemployment Benefits other than Pensions (Continued) The total OPEB liability in the January 1, 2017 actuarial valuation was determined using the following actuarial assumptions, applied to all periods included in the measurement, unless otherwise specified: Discount Rate 4.09% 20-Year Municipal Bond Yield 4.09% Inflation Rate 2.75% Salary Increases 3.50% Medical Trend Rate 8.50% in 2017 decreasing 0.50% per year to an ultimate rate of 5.00% The discount rate used to measure the total OPEB liability was 4.09 percent. Assets were projected using expected benefit payments and expected asset returns. Expected benefit payments by year were discounted using the expected asset return assumption for years in which the assets were sufficient to pay all benefit payments. Any remaining benefit payments after the trust fund is exhausted are discounted at the 20-year municipal bond rate. The equivalent single rate is the discount rate. Mortality rates were based on the RP-2014 White Collar Mortality Tables with MP-2015 Generational Improvement Scale. The actuarial assumptions used in the December 31, 2018 valuation were based on input from a variety of published sources of historical and projected future financial data. Each assumption was reviewed for reasonableness with the source information as well as for consistency with the other economic assumptions. D.Changes in the Total OPEB Liability Total OPEB Liability (a) Balances at December 31, 2017 299,402$ Changes for the Year: Service cost 16,488 Interset 10,632 Changes in assumptions or other inputs (17,796) Benefit payments (13,650) Net Changes (4,326) Balances at December 31, 2018 $ 295,076 E.Sensitivity of the Total OPEB Liability The following presents the total OPEB liability of the City, as well as what the City’s total OPEB liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is 1-percentage point lower (3.09 percent) or 1-percentage-point higher (5.09 percent) than the current discount rate: 1 Percent 1 Percent Decrease (3.09%)Current (4.09%)Increase (5.09%) 322,931$ 295,076$ 269,865$ 71 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 5: Postemployment Benefits other than Pensions (Continued) The following presents the total OPEB liability of the City, as well as what the City’s total OPEB liability would be if it were calculated using a Healthcare Cost Trent Rates that is 1-percentage point lower (7.50 percent decreasing to 4.00 percent) or 1-percentage-point higher (9.50 percent increasing to 6.00 percent) than the current discount rate: Healthcare Cost 1 Percent Decrease Trend Rates 1 Percent Increase (7.00% Decreasing (8.00% Decreasing (9.00% Decreasing 0.50% Per Year) 0.50% Per Year)0.50% Per Year) 259,524$ 295,076$ 337,154$ F. OPEB Expense and Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources Related to OPEB For the year ended December 31, 2018, the City recognized OPEB expense of $12,152. At December 31, 2018, the City reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to OPEB from the following sources: Deferred OutflowsDeferred Inflows of Resourcesof Resources Changes in Actuarial Assumptions -$ 16,478$ Amounts reported as deferred outflows and inflows of resources related to OPEB will be recognized in OPEB expense as follows: Year Ended December 31: 2019 1,318$ 2020 1,318 2021 1,318 2022 1,318 2023 1,318 Thereafter 9,888 Note 6: Other Information A. Risk Management The City is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts; theft of, damage to and destruction of assets; errors and omissions; injuries to employees; and natural disasters for which the City carries insurance. The City obtains insurance through participation in the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) which is a risk sharing pool with approximately 800 other governmental units. The City pays an annual premium to LMCIT for its workers compensation and property and casualty insurance. The LMCIT is self-sustaining through member premiums and will reinsure for claims above a prescribed dollar amount for each insurance event. Settled claims have not exceeded the City’s coverage in any of the past three fiscal years. Liabilities are reported when it is probable that a loss has occurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Liabilities, if any, include an amount for claims that have been incurred but not reported (IBNRs). The City’s management is not aware of any incurred but not reported claims. B. Legal Debt Margin The City’s statutory debt limit is computed as 3 percent of the taxable market value of property within the City. Long-term debt issued and financed partially or entirely by special assessments is excluded from the debt limit computation. As of December 31, 2018, the City is under the legal debt margin. 72 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Notes to the Financial Statements December 31, 2018 Note 7: Change in Accounting Principle During fiscal year 2018, the City implemented a new accounting pronouncement issued by the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB), Statement No. 75, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefits Other Than Pensions. These standards required a retroactive implementation which resulted in the restatement of beginning balances in the December 31, 2018 financial statements. Changes related to these standards are reflected in the financial statements and schedules and related disclosures are included in Note 1. As a result of the restatement of beginning balances, the following schedule reconciles the previously reported December 31, 2017 balances to the December 31, 2018 financial statements: Net Position January 1, 2018 Net Position as Previosly Prior PeriodJanuary 1, 2018 ReportedRestatement as Restated Governmental Activities 5,799,334$ $ (73,176) $ 5,726,158 Fund 73 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 74 REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION CITY OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 75 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Required Supplementary Information For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Schedule of Employer’s Share of PERA Net Pension Liability - General Employees Retirement Fund State's Proportionate City's Share of Proportionate the Net Pension Share of Liability City's Fiscal the Net PensionAssociated with Year Liability the City TotalPayroll Ending (a)(b)(a+b)(c) 06/30/180.0130 %721,187$ 23,786$ 744,973$ 876,976$ 84.9 %79.5 % 06/30/170.0111 708,617 8,921 717,538 715,840 100.2 75.9 06/30/160.0106 860,667 11,305 871,972 658,533 132.4 68.9 06/30/150.0102 528,617 - 528,617 601,092 87.9 78.2 City's Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Plan Fiduciary City's Liability as a Net Position Proportion of Percentage of as a PercentageCoveredCovered the Net Pension Payroll of the Total Liability ((a+b)/c)Pension Liability Note: Schedule is intended to show 10-year trend. Additional years will be reported as they become available. Schedule of Employer’s PERA Contributions - General Employees Retirement Fund Contributions in Relation to the StatutorilyStatutorilyContribution City's RequiredRequiredDeficiency Year ContributionContribution (Excess)Payroll Ending (a)(b)(a-b)(c) 12/31/18 68,497$ 68,497$ -$ 913,293$ 7.5 % 12/31/17 59,070 59,070 - 787,600 7.5 12/31/16 52,496 52,496 - 699,947 7.5 12/31/15 46,319 46,319 - 617,587 7.5 Covered (b/c) Contributions as a Percentage of Payroll Covered Note: Schedule is intended to show 10-year trend. Additional years will be reported as they become available. 76 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Required Supplementary Information (Continued) For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Notes to the Required Supplementary Information - General Employee Retirement Fund Changes in Actuarial Assumptions 2018 - The mortality projection scale was changed from MP-2015 to MP-2017. The assumed benefit increase was changed from 1.00 percent per year through 2044 and 2.50 percent per year thereafter to 1.25 percent per year. 2017 - The Combined Service Annuity (CSA) loads were changed from 0.8 percent for active members and 60 percent for vested and non-vested deferred members. The revised CSA loads are now 0.0 percent for active member liability, 15.0 percent for vested deferred member liability and 3.0 percent for non-vested deferred member liability. The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.0 percent per year for all years to 1.0 percent per year through 2044 and 2.5 percent per year thereafter. 2016 - The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.0 percent per year through 2035 and 2.5 percent per year thereafter to 1.0 percent per year for all future years. The assumed investment return was changed from 7.9 percent to 7.5 percent. The single discount rate was changed from 7.9 percent to 7.5 percent. Other assumptions were changed pursuant to the experience study dated June 30, 2015. The assumed future salary increases, payroll growth and inflation were decreased by 0.25 percent to 3.25 percent for payroll growth and 2.50 percent for inflation. 2015 - The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.0 percent per year through 2030 and 2.5 percent per year thereafter to 1.0 percent per year through 2035 and 2.5 percent per year thereafter. Changes in Plan Provisions 2017 - The State’s special funding contribution increased from $6 million to $16 million. 2015 - On January 1, 2015, the Minneapolis Employees Retirement Fund was merged into the General Employees Fund, which increased the total pension liability by $1.1 billion and increased the fiduciary plan net position by $892 million. Upon consolidation, state and employer contributions were revised. 77 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Required Supplementary Information (Continued) For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Schedule of Employer’s Share of PERA Net Pension Liability - Public Employees Police and Fire Fund State's Proportionate City's Share of Proportionate the Net Pension Share of Liability City's Fiscal the Net Pension Associated with Year Liability the City Total Payroll Ending (a)(b)(a+b)(c) 06/30/180.0655 %698,163$ -$ 698,163$ 689,830$ 101.2 %88.8 % 06/30/170.0620 837,074 - 837,074 631,383 132.6 85.4 06/30/160.0510 2,046,719 - 2,046,719 489,123 418.4 63.9 06/30/150.0560 636,191 - 636,191 503,609 126.3 86.6 City's Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability as a Plan Fiduciary City's Percentage of Net Position Liability ((a+b)/c)Pension Liability Proportion of Covered as a Percentage the Net Pension Payroll of the Total Covered Note: Schedule is intended to show 10-year trend. Additional years will be reported as they become available. Schedule of Employer’s PERA Contributions - Public Employees Police and Fire Fund Contributions in Relation to the StatutorilyStatutorilyContribution City's RequiredRequiredDeficiency Year ContributionContribution (Excess)Payroll Ending (a)(b)(a-b)(c) 12/31/18 113,901$ 113,901$ -$ 703,095$ 16.2 % 12/31/17 106,295 106,295 - 656,142 16.2 12/31/16 93,418 93,418 - 576,654 16.2 12/31/15 77,027 77,027 - 475,475 16.2 Covered (b/c) Contributions as a Percentage of Payroll Covered Note: Schedule is intended to show 10-year trend. Additional years will be reported as they become available. 78 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Required Supplementary Information (Continued) For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Notes to the Required Supplementary Information - Public Employees Police and Fire Fund Changes in Actuarial Assumptions 2018 - The mortality projection scale was changed from MP-2016 to MP-2017. As set by statute, the assumed post- retirement benefit increase was changed from 1.0 percent per year through 2064 and 2.5 percent per year, thereafter, to 1.0 percent for all years, with no trigger. 2017 - Assumed salary increases were changed as recommended in the June 30, 2016 experience study. The net effect is proposed rates that average 0.34 percent lower than the previous rates. Assumed rates of retirement were changed, resulting in fewer retirements. The Combined Service Annuity (CSA) load was 30 percent for vested and non-vested deferred members. The CSA has been changed to 33 percent for vested members and 2 percent for non-vested members. The base mortality table for healthy annuitants was changed from the RP-2000 fully generational table to the RP-2014 fully generational table (with a base year of 2006), with male rates adjusted by a factor of 0.96. The mortality improvement scale was changed from Scale AA to Scale MP-2016. The base mortality table for disabled annuitants was changed from the RP-2000 disabled mortality table to the mortality tables assumed for healthy retirees. Assumed termination rates were decreased to 3.0 percent for the first three years of service. Rates beyond the select period of three years were adjusted, resulting in more expected terminations overall. Assumed percentage of married female members was decreased from 65 percent to 60 percent. Assumed age difference was changed from separate assumptions for male members (wives assumed to be three years younger) and female members (husbands assumed to be four years older) to the assumption that males are two years older than females. The assumed percentage of female members electing joint and survivor annuities was increased. The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.00 percent for all years to 1.00 percent per year through 2064 and 2.50 percent thereafter. The single discount rate was changed from 5.6 percent to 7.5 percent. 2016 - The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.0 percent per year through 2037 and 2.5 percent per year thereafter to 1.0 percent per year for all future years. The assumed investment return was changed from 7.9 percent to 7.5 percent. The single discount rate was changed from 7.9 percent to 5.6 percent. The assumed future salary increases, payroll growth and inflation were decreased by 0.25 percent to 3.25 percent for payroll growth and 2.50 percent for inflation. 2015 - The assumed post-retirement benefit increase rate was changed from 1.0 percent per year through 2030 and 2.5 percent per year thereafter to 1.0 percent per year through 2037 and 2.5 percent per year thereafter. Changes in Plan Provisions 2015 - The post-retirement benefit increase to be paid after attainment of the 90 percent funding threshold was changed, from inflation up to 2.5 percent, to a fixed rate of 2.5 percent. 79 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Required Supplementary Information (Continued) For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Schedule of Changes in the City’s Total OPEB Liability and Related Ratios 2018 Total OPEB Liability Service cost 16,488$ Interest 10,632 Changes in assumptions (17,796) Benefit payments (13,650) Net Change in Total OPEB Liability (4,326) Total OPEB Liability - Beginning 299,402 Total OPEB Liability - Ending 295,076$ Covered - Employee Payroll 1,300,000$ City's total OPEB liability as a percentage of covered employee payroll 22.70 % 80 COMBINING AND INDIVIDUAL FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES CITY OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 81 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Nonmajor Governmental Funds Combining Balance Sheet December 31, 2018 Special Capital Revenue Projects Total Assets Cash and temporary investments 145,414$ 2,212,753$ 2,358,167$ Receivables Accounts 8,428 - 8,428 Special assessments - 13,437 13,437 Due from other governments - 1,104 1,104 Total Assets 153,842$ 2,227,294$ 2,381,136$ Liabilities Accounts payable 137$ 12,117$ 12,254$ Due to other funds - 4,783 4,783 Total Liabilities 137 16,900 17,037 Deferred Inflows of Resources Unavailable revenues - special assessments - 13,437 13,437 Fund Balances Restricted 113,187 1,747,769 1,860,956 Committed 40,518 - 40,518 Assigned - 452,867 452,867 Unassigned - (3,679) (3,679) Total Fund Balance 153,705 2,196,957 2,350,662 Total Liabilities, Deferred Inflows of Resources and Fund Balances 153,842$ 2,227,294$ 2,381,136$ 82 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Nonmajor Governmental Funds Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Special Capital Revenue Projects Total Revenues Intergovernmental -$ 582,735$ 582,735$ Charges for services 5,218 262,535 267,753 Special assessments - 4,077 4,077 Interest on investments 574 9,642 10,216 Miscellaneous 65,140 566,733 631,873 Total Revenues 70,932 1,425,722 1,496,654 Expenditures Current Public safety 58,264 - 58,264 Capital outlay General government - 47,712 47,712 Public safety - 146,662 146,662 Public works - 1,239,226 1,239,226 Culture and recreation - 101,469 101,469 Debt service Interest and other charges - 2,411 2,411 Total Expenditures 58,264 1,537,480 1,595,744 Excess of Revenues Over Expenditures 12,668 (111,758) (99,090) Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers in - 265,000 265,000 Transfers out - (250,000) (250,000) Bond issued - 587,950 587,950 Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) - 602,950 602,950 Net Change in Fund Balances 12,668 491,192 503,860 Fund Balances, January 1 141,037 1,705,765 1,846,802 Fund Balances, December 31 153,705$ 2,196,957$ 2,350,662$ 83 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds Combining Balance Sheet December 31, 2018 201 202 204 205 Reserve Police Firearms DWI Donation Donation Safety Forfeiture Assets Cash and temporary investments 30,086$ 9,367$ 8,891$ 10,599$ Accounts receivable - - - - Total Assets 30,086$ 9,367$ 8,891$ 10,599$ Liabilities Accounts payable -$ 137$ -$ -$ Fund Balances Restricted - 9,230 - 10,599 Committed 30,086 - 8,891 - Total Fund Balances 30,086 9,230 8,891 10,599 Total Liabilities and Fund Balances 30,086$ 9,367$ 8,891$ 10,599$ 84 206 207 208 Drug Truck Lawful Forfeiture Safety Gambling Total 6,259$ 1,541$ 78,671$ 145,414$ - - 8,428 8,428 6,259$ 1,541$ 87,099$ 153,842$ -$ -$ -$ 137$ 6,259 - 87,099 113,187 - 1,541 - 40,518 6,259 1,541 87,099 153,705 6,259$ 1,541$ 87,099$ 153,842$ 85 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 201 202 204 205 Reserve Police Firearms DWI Donation Donation Safety Forfeiture Revenues Charges for services 5,218$ -$ -$ -$ Interest on investments 123 49 35 58 Miscellaneous 2,662 4,390 9,125 500 Total Revenues 8,003 4,439 9,160 558 Expenditures Current Public safety 6,886 31,801 6,164 5,946 Net Change in Fund Balances 1,117 (27,362) 2,996 (5,388) Fund Balances, January 1 28,969 36,592 5,895 15,987 Fund Balances, December 31 30,086$ 9,230$ 8,891$ 10,599$ 86 206 207 208 Drug Truck Lawful Forfeiture Safety Gambling Total -$ -$ -$ 5,218$ 27 5 277 574 4,000 6,117 38,346 65,140 4,027 6,122 38,623 70,932 1,200 6,267 - 58,264 2,827 (145) 38,623 12,668 3,432 1,686 48,476 141,037 6,259$ 1,541$ 87,099$ 153,705$ 87 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Nonmajor Capital Projects Funds Combining Balance Sheet December 31, 2018 305 411 415 416 Asphalt Public Works Park Capital Maintenance Facility Capital Equip-Cert Assets Cash and temporary investments 201,054$ 96,106$ 565,954$ 247,560$ Special assessments receivable - - - - Due from other governments - - - - Total Assets 201,054$ 96,106$ 565,954$ 247,560$ Liabilities Accounts payable -$ -$ -$ 5,354$ Due to other funds - - - Total Liabilities - - - 5,354 Deferred Inflows of Resources Unavailable revenues - special assessments - - - - Fund Balances Restricted - - 565,954 86,499 Assigned 201,054 96,106 - 155,707 Unassigned - - - - Total Fund Balance 201,054 96,106 565,954 242,206 Total Liabilities, Deferred Inflows of Resources and Fund Balances 201,054$ 96,106$ 565,954$ 247,560$ 88 417 419 420 424 426 427 Shannon Hackamore Wetland CSAH-10 Rolling Hills Gleason/66th Lane Upgrade Restoration Fir Lane Turn Lane Larkin Overlay Parkway Total -$ 777,179$ 100,959$ 23,754$ -$ 200,187$ 2,212,753$ 13,437 - - - - - 13,437 1,104 - - - - - 1,104 14,541$ 777,179$ 100,959$ 23,754$ -$ 200,187$ 2,227,294$ -$ 66$ -$ 6,697$ -$ -$ 12,117$ 4,783 - - - - - 4,783 4,783 66 - 6,697 - - 16,900 13,437 - - - - - 13,437 - 777,113 100,959 17,057 - 200,187 1,747,769 - - - - - - 452,867 (3,679) - - - - - (3,679) (3,679) 777,113 100,959 17,057 - 200,187 2,196,957 14,541$ 777,179$ 100,959$ 23,754$ -$ 200,187$ 2,227,294$ 89 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Nonmajor Capital Projects Funds Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 305 411 415 416 Asphalt Public Works Park Capital Maintenance Facility Capital Equip-Cert Revenues Intergovernmental 3,757$ -$ -$ -$ Charges for services - - 262,535 - Special assessments - - - - Interest on investments 359 405 2,777 1,641 Miscellaneous - - - 1,976 Total Revenues 4,116 405 265,312 3,617 Expenditures Capital outlay General government - - - 47,712 Public safety - - - 146,662 Public works - 6,150 - 307,077 Culture and recreation - - 101,469 - Debt service Interest and other charges - - - 2,411 Total Expenditures - 6,150 101,469 503,862 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 4,116 (5,745) 163,843 (500,245) Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers in 125,000 - - 140,000 Transfers out - - (250,000) - Bond issued - - - 587,950 Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)125,000 - (250,000) 727,950 Net Change in Fund Balances 129,116 (5,745) (86,157) 227,705 Fund Balances, January 1 71,938 101,851 652,111 14,501 Fund Balances, December 31 201,054$ 96,106$ 565,954$ 242,206$ 90 417 419 420 424 426 427 Shannon Hackamore Wetland CSAH-10 Rolling Hills Gleason/66th Lane Upgrade Restoration Fir Lane Turn Lane Larkin Overlay Parkway Total -$ -$ -$ -$ 578,978$ -$ 582,735$ - - - - - - 262,535 4,077 - - - - - 4,077 (29) 3,183 420 651 48 187 9,642 - 1,757 - 363,000 - 200,000 566,733 4,048 4,940 420 363,651 579,026 200,187 1,425,722 - - - - - - 47,712 - - - - - - 146,662 - 379 - 346,594 579,026 - 1,239,226 - - - - - - 101,469 - - - - - - 2,411 - 379 - 346,594 579,026 - 1,537,480 4,048 4,561 420 17,057 - 200,187 (111,758) - - - - - - 265,000 - - - - - - (250,000) - - - - - - 587,950 - - - - - - 602,950 4,048 4,561 420 17,057 - 200,187 491,192 (7,727) 772,552 100,539 - - - 1,705,765 (3,679)$ 777,113$ 100,959$ 17,057$ -$ 200,187$ 2,196,957$ 91 City of Corcoran, Minnesota General Fund Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Budget and Actual (Continued on the Following Pages) For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 2017) 2017 Actual Variance with Actual Original Final Amounts Final Budget Amounts Revenues Taxes General property taxes 3,474,833$ 3,474,833$ 3,494,837$ 20,004$ 3,245,514$ Cable franchise fees 45,000 45,000 49,030 4,030 50,475 Total taxes 3,519,833 3,519,833 3,543,867 24,034 3,295,989 Licenses and permits Business 18,375 18,375 18,125 (250) 18,400 Nonbusiness 325,000 325,000 532,115 207,115 579,159 Total licenses and permits 343,375 343,375 550,240 206,865 597,559 Intergovernmental Property tax credits 20,037 20,037 20,037 - 19,475 PERA aid 1,845 1,845 1,845 - 1,845 Police state aid 65,300 65,300 80,128 14,828 59,797 State aid for streets 124,000 124,000 129,210 5,210 128,115 Other 35,000 35,000 84,953 49,953 17,918 County Recycling 14,500 14,500 15,744 1,244 16,504 Other 10,000 10,000 16,027 6,027 18,859 Total intergovernmental 270,682 270,682 347,944 77,262 262,513 Charges for services General government 31,200 31,200 63,984 32,784 58,105 Public safety 10,500 10,500 12,985 2,485 17,327 Streets and highways 40,500 40,500 50,900 10,400 51,191 Recycling 4,000 4,000 6,825 2,825 6,346 Total charges for services 86,200 86,200 134,694 48,494 132,969 Fines and forfeitures 45,000 45,000 65,807 20,807 48,086 Special assessments - - 36,434 36,434 - Interest on investments 1,500 1,500 7,269 5,769 3,256 Miscellaneous Contributions and donations 1,000 1,000 10,800 9,800 65,908 Refunds and reimbursements - - 5,585 5,585 31,637 Other 59,800 59,800 80,311 20,511 48,537 Total miscellanious 60,800 60,800 96,696 35,896 146,082 Total Revenues 4,327,390 4,327,390 4,782,951 455,561 4,486,454 Budgeted Amounts 2018 92 2017 Actual Variance with Actual Original Final Amounts Final Budget Amounts Expenditures Current General government City council Personal services 20,735$ 20,735$ 20,733$ 2$ 20,733$ Supplies 4,000 4,000 755 3,245 874 Other services and charges 70 70 67 3 66 Total city council 24,805 24,805 21,555 3,250 21,673 Newspaper/newsletter Other services and charges 10,000 10,000 8,494 1,506 7,887 Administrator Personal services 142,636 142,636 141,844 792 138,117 Supplies 5,500 5,500 5,683 (183) 5,915 Other services and charges 1,810 1,810 1,793 17 1,474 Total administrator 149,946 149,946 149,320 626 145,506 Clerk Personal services 271,702 271,702 268,467 3,235 227,682 Supplies 6,150 6,150 3,137 3,013 2,830 Other services and charges 2,600 2,600 3,425 (825) 2,270 Total clerk 280,452 280,452 275,029 5,423 232,782 Elections Supplies 8,500 8,500 9,092 (592) 2,705 Auditor/treasurer Other services and charges 30,500 30,500 25,055 5,445 45,756 Assessor Supplies 1,000 1,000 916 84 666 Other services and charges 59,250 59,250 60,799 (1,549) 57,205 Total assessor 60,250 60,250 61,715 (1,465) 57,871 Legal services Other services and charges 29,000 29,000 32,063 (3,063) 30,933 Planning administration Personal services - - - - 156 Supplies 2,250 2,250 296 1,954 292 Other services and charges 65,000 65,000 144,940 (79,940) 148,899 Total planning administration 67,250 67,250 145,236 (77,986) 149,347 Information technology Supplies 38,500 38,500 46,105 (7,605) 36,626 Other services and charges 38,000 38,000 38,563 (563) 31,653 Total information technology 76,500 76,500 84,668 (8,168) 68,279 General Fund City of Corcoran, Minnesota Budgeted Amounts Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Budget and Actual (Continued) For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 2018 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 2017) 93 2017 Actual Variance with Actual Original Final Amounts Final Budget Amounts General Fund City of Corcoran, Minnesota Budgeted Amounts Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Budget and Actual (Continued) For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 2018 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 2017) Expenditures (Continued) Current (continued) General government (continued) Code enforcement Personal services 110,233$ 110,233$ 86,237$ 23,996$ 81,065$ Supplies 4,750 4,750 1,831 2,919 2,604 Other services and charges 1,020 1,020 623 397 624 Total code enforcement 116,003 116,003 88,691 27,312 84,293 City center Supplies 24,500 24,500 27,297 (2,797) 26,361 Other services and charges 49,825 49,825 41,051 8,774 45,005 Total city center 74,325 74,325 68,348 5,977 71,366 Other general government Supplies 4,000 4,000 13,549 (9,549) 7,111 Other services and charges 98,000 98,000 116,572 (18,572) 105,292 Total other general government 102,000 102,000 130,121 (28,121) 112,403 Total general government 1,029,531 1,029,531 1,099,387 (69,856) 1,030,801 Public safety Police Personal services 1,101,149 1,101,149 1,116,161 (15,012) 1,018,339 Supplies 73,750 73,750 79,072 (5,322) 69,386 Other services and charges 113,300 113,300 129,752 (16,452) 136,693 Total police 1,288,199 1,288,199 1,324,985 (36,786) 1,224,418 Fire Other services and charges 328,113 328,113 330,212 (2,099) 298,368 Building inspection Other services and charges 130,000 130,000 161,864 (31,864) 232,171 Total public safety 1,746,312 1,746,312 1,817,061 (70,749) 1,754,957 Public works Streets and highways Personal services 701,932 701,932 668,991 32,941 568,271 Supplies 530,200 530,200 390,244 139,956 508,351 Other services and charges 125,100 125,100 128,595 (3,495) 137,921 Total streets and highways 1,357,232 1,357,232 1,187,830 169,402 1,214,543 Snow and ice removal Supplies 30,000 30,000 45,880 (15,880) 34,459 Engineering Other services and charges 22,500 22,500 99,683 (77,183) 57,918 94 2017 Actual Variance with Actual Original Final Amounts Final Budget Amounts General Fund City of Corcoran, Minnesota Budgeted Amounts Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Budget and Actual (Continued) For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 2018 (With Comparative Actual Amounts for the Year Ended December 31, 2017) Expenditures (Continued) Current (continued) Public works (continued) Recycling Supplies 3,000$ 3,000$ 3,073$ (73)$ 3,634$ Other services and charges 6,000 6,000 8,303 (2,303) 8,645 Total recycling 9,000 9,000 11,376 (2,376) 12,279 Total public works 1,418,732 1,418,732 1,344,769 73,963 1,319,199 Culture and recreation Parks Personal services 44,987 44,987 44,657 330 14,390 Supplies 31,500 31,500 41,047 (9,547) 24,890 Other services and charges 16,200 16,200 10,350 5,850 16,670 Total culture and recreation 92,687 92,687 96,054 (3,367) 55,950 Total current 4,287,262 4,287,262 4,357,271 (70,009) 4,160,907 Capital outlay Public works 8,000 8,000 18,949 (10,949) 5,441 Culture and recreation 35,000 35,000 36,317 (1,317) 34,044 Total capital outlay 43,000 43,000 55,266 (12,266) 39,485 Total Expenditures 4,330,262 4,330,262 4,412,537 (82,275) 4,200,392 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures (2,872) (2,872) 370,414 373,286 286,062 Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers in 192,872 192,872 192,872 - 162,122 Transfers out (190,000) (190,000) (265,000) (75,000) (125,000) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)2,872 2,872 (72,128) (75,000) 37,122 Net Change in Fund Balances - - 298,286 298,286 323,184 Fund Balances, January 1 2,188,968 2,188,968 2,188,968 - 1,865,784 Fund Balances, December 31 2,188,968$ 2,188,968$ 2,487,254$ 298,286$ 2,188,968$ 95 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Nonmajor Debt Service Funds Combining Balance Sheet December 31, 2018 309 311 312 G.O. Equipment 2012 Public Certificates Works Bond 2016A Bonds Total Assets Cash and temporary investments 175,129$ 103,969$ 99,904$ 379,002$ Special assessments receivable - - 664,908 664,908 Due from other governments - - 3,539 3,539 Total Assets 175,129$ 103,969$ 768,351$ 1,047,449$ Deferred Inflows of Resources Unavailable revenues - special assessments -$ -$ 664,908$ 664,908$ Fund Balances Restricted 175,129 103,969 103,443 382,541 Total Deferred Inflows of Resources and Fund Balances 175,129$ 103,969$ 768,351$ 1,047,449$ 96 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Nonmajor Debt Service Funds Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 309 311 312 G.O. Equipment 2012 Public Certificates Works Bond 2016A Bonds Total Revenues Taxes 326,594$ 168,039$ -$ 494,633$ Special assessments - - 93,680 93,680 Interest on investments 160 29 (65) 124 Total Revenues 326,754 168,068 93,615 588,437 Expenditures Debt service Principal 284,000 65,000 220,000 569,000 Interest and other charges 23,160 95,038 54,602 172,800 Total Expenditures 307,160 160,038 274,602 741,800 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 19,594 8,030 (180,987) (153,363) Other Financing Sources Transfers in - - 67,080 67,080 Bonds issued 12,050 - 25,154 37,204 Total Other Financing Sources 12,050 - 92,234 104,284 Net Change in Fund Balances 31,644 8,030 (88,753) (49,079) Fund Balances, January 1 143,485 95,939 192,196 431,620 Fund Balances, December 31 175,129$ 103,969$ 103,443$ 382,541$ 97 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Fiduciary Funds Combining Schedule of Net Position December 31, 2018 500 501 Lions and Escrow Jaycees Total Assets Cash and temporary investments 981,010$ 6,000$ 987,010$ Accounts receivable Pouliot Lot Line Adj. 18-030 12 12 Meyer Lot Line Adjust 18-039 269 269 Ravinia Street Lights 354 354 Park Place Storage 368 368 Ravinia 11/12th 18-040, 19-002 479 479 Potentia Solar Inc 622 622 Edgewater Corcoran Skch 18-018 1,157 1,157 Bass Lk CR M/I HomeEngineering 34,196 34,196 Total accounts receivable 37,457 - 37,457 Total Assets 1,018,467$ 6,000$ 1,024,467$ Agency 98 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Fiduciary Funds Combining Schedule of Net Position (Continued) December 31, 2018 500 501 Lions and Escrow Jaycees Total Liabilities Accounts payable 17,980$ 6,000$ 23,980$ Deposits payable MN Solar Decommissioning 510,819 510,819 Bass Lake Est. FP, PUD 17-036 157,536 157,536 CSAH 101 Traffic Signal 100,000 100,000 Pulte Encore - PUD Skch 17-029 64,388 64,388 United Properties 32,697 32,697 Lennar Eng Plan Review/Modific 28,848 28,848 Pheasant Ridge 2nd PP 18-029 10,607 10,607 Bass Lake Est Skch PUD 17-015 10,414 10,414 Bass Lk Est PP/PUD, CPA 17-026 6,999 6,999 Bass Lk Cross FP, FPUD, 17-022 6,821 6,821 Willow LLC Minor Subd 18-022 5,758 5,758 Ravinia 9th FP and PUD 17-042 5,168 5,168 Tombers Prelim/Final Plat 4,391 4,391 Hales Corner 2nd PP/FP, 17-025 4,095 4,095 Lennar - Phase 1 Monuments 3,800 3,800 Ravinia 8th FP and PUD 3,529 3,529 Sunrise Solar - 17-007 3,387 3,387 Met Council Grading GR18-006 3,200 3,200 Laurent Motor Caf+¬2,536 2,536 Rush Creek Run Whisney 18-001 2,519 2,519 Lennar-Phase 3 2,480 2,480 Lennar 19359 Penny Royal Court 2,450 2,450 Corcoran Land RZ/CUP/SP 18-038 2,406 2,406 Shoulak Ordinance Amend 18-020 2,067 2,067 Randahl Construction Inc 1,834 1,834 Ravinia 7th Addit - FP 17-013 1,823 1,823 Verizon Monopole 1,469 1,469 High 5 Companies CUP 18-006 1,463 1,463 Cushman/Wakefield Sewer Exten.1,380 1,380 Rush Creek Meadows 1,293 1,293 Good Dogs MN IUP-CHOL 17-021 1,239 1,239 Rush Creek Run FP 18-026 1,217 1,217 SAC Wireless-Sprint 17-040 1,187 1,187 TMR Properties 1,000 1,000 Robert Borgen 989 989 Ravinia 10th FP & PUD 18-034 946 946 Hope Ministries 12-002 877 877 Lennar-Schwalbe Comp Plan Amen 842 842 Schilling Admin Var 17-016 813 813 Strehler Estates-Final Plat 782 782 Funfar CUP 603 603 Sprint-SBA Communication 542 542 Barry Hay 542 542 Sunram 500 500 Randy Olsen Encroachment Agree 442 442 Ravinia 4th Addition 351 351 Refuge of Rush Creek FP 18-028 291 291 Sprint-Faulk & Foster 263 263 Richard/Judy Fehn 242 242 Red Barn Pet Ret. - CUP 17-028 234 234 Bass Lake Cross MI Home 17-012 192 192 Ryan 138 138 Dahlheimer Wetland Waiv 18-036 78 78 Total Deposits Payable 1,000,487 - 1,000,487 Total Liabilities 1,018,467$ 6,000$ 1,024,467$ Agency 99 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Summary Financial Report Revenues and Expenditures For General Operations Governmental Funds For the Years Ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 2018 2017 Revenues Taxes 4,038,500$ 3,785,968$ 6.67 % Licenses and permits 550,240 597,559 (7.92) Intergovernmental 930,679 277,513 235.36 Charges for services 402,447 392,679 2.49 Fines and forfeitures 65,807 48,086 36.85 Special assessments 134,191 117,394 14.31 Interest on investments 24,671 9,820 151.23 Miscellaneous 3,778,569 313,018 1,107.14 Total Revenues 9,925,104$ 5,542,037$ 79.09 % Per Capita 1,775$ 1,008$ 76.08 % Expenditures Current General government 1,099,387$ 1,030,801$ 6.65 % Public safety 1,875,325 1,785,585 5.03 Public works 1,344,769 1,319,199 1.94 Culture and recreation 96,074 55,950 71.71 Capital outlay General government 47,712 - n/a Public safety 146,662 47,150 211.05 Public works 1,562,831 1,693,430 (7.71) Culture and recreation 1,575,602 89,653 1,657.44 Debt service Principal 569,000 310,000 83.55 Interest and other charges 197,151 195,195 1.00 Total Expenditures 8,514,513$ 6,526,963$ 30.45 % Per Capita 1,523$ 1,187$ Total Long-term Indebtedness 8,814,128$ 7,530,462$ 17.05 % Per Capita 1,576 1,370 General Fund Balance - December 31 2,487,254$ 2,188,968$ 13.63 % Per Capita 445 398 The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of financial information concerning the City of Corcoran to interested citizens. The complete financial statements may be examined at City Hall, 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340. Questions about this report should be directed to Brad Martens, City Administrator at (763) 420-2288. Percent Total Increase (Decrease) 100 OTHER REQUIRED REPORT CITY OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2018 101 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 102 INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT ON MINNESOTA LEGAL COMPLIANCE Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Corcoran, Minnesota We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, financial statements of the governmental activities, business-type activities, each major fund and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota (the City), as of and for the year ended December 31, 2018, and the related notes to the financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated May 15, 2019. The Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Cities, promulgated by the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statute §6.65, contains seven categories of compliance to be tested: contracting and bidding, deposits and investments, conflicts of interest, public indebtedness, claims and disbursements, miscellaneous provisions, and tax increment financing. Our audit considered all of the listed categories. In connection with our audit, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the City failed to comply with the provisions of the Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Cities, except as noted in finding 2018-001 as identified in the Schedule of Finding and Response. However, our audit was not directed primarily toward procedures, other matters may have come to our attention regarding the City’s noncompliance with the above referenced provisions. Accordingly, had we performed additional procedures, other matters may have come to our attention regarding the City’s noncompliance with the above referenced provisions. The City’s response to the finding identified in our audit is described in the accompanying Schedule of Finding and Response. We did not audit the City’s response and, accordingly, express no opinion on it. This report is intended solely for the information and use those charged with governance and management of the City and the State Auditor and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. ABDO, EICK & MEYERS, LLP Minneapolis, Minnesota May 15, 2019 103 THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY 104 City of Corcoran, Minnesota Schedule of Finding and Response For the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Finding Description 2018-001 Collateral Coverage Condition: Auditing of legal compliance requires a review of the City’s deposits and investments. Our study indicated an instance of non-compliance that we believe is required to be remedied. Criteria: In accordance with Minnesota Statute, section 118A.03, the City is required to have pledged collateral equal to 110 percent of the deposit not covered with insurance. Cause: The City had $348,298 of deposits uncollateralized on December 31, 2018. Effect: At year end, the City did not have sufficient collateral pledged and therefore was not in compliance with state statute. Recommendation: We recommend the City establish a more specific understanding with the bank for the needed collateral. Ultimately, it is the City’s responsibility to have adequate coverage regardless of the bank’s process. Management Response: Management is aware of the situation and has taken the appropriate action to ensure that City’s deposits are sufficiently covered by collateral throughout the year. 105 CITY OF CORCORAN City Council Meeting Minutes April 11, 2019 - 7:00 pm The Corcoran City Council met on April 11, 2019 at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were Mayor Thomas, Councilor Dejewski, and Councilor Schultz. Excused was Councilor Keefe. Councilor Bottema arrived at 7:04pm. Also present were City Administrator Martens, Administrative Services Director Beise, Public Works Director Mattson, and Director of Public Safety Gottschalk . 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.Agenda Approval City Administrator Martens noted additional claims had been placed on the Council Dias and added to the house agenda packet. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Dejewski to approve the agenda as presented. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) 4.Commission Representatives Mayor Thomas noted the commission representatives were not present. 5.Open Forum No persons were present to speak at Open Forum. 6.Presentations/Recognitions a.Annual Fire Department Reports i.Hanover Fire Department Fire Chief Malewicki presented the report outlining the calls of service and response times for the City of Corcoran. Fire Chief Malewicki asked that the need for additional firefighters for the Hanover Fire Department be included in the next newsletter. ii.Loretto Fire Department Fire Chief Leuer gave a presentation outlining the calls of service and response times for the City of Corcoran including 61 calls one of which was a fire. Fire Chief Leuer noted Corcoran’s calls make up 29 percent of the total calls. Fire Chief Leuer noted there are eight members of the department who live in Corcoran and the department recently added two daytime fire fighters. Fire Chief Leuer noted other items the department is working on including a leadership academy, grant opportunities, training with other departments, and looking for fire station space. Council inquired about the fire station plans and potential locations. Fire Chief Leuer noted the department is completing a feasibility study and the location would be dependent of the model for fire service (duty crews or volunteers). Council discussed their recent work with the fire chiefs on the fire study and their passion for fire service. 7.Consent Agenda a.Draft Minutes of March 28, 2019 Council Meeting b.Financial Claims c.Award Bids for CSAH 101 and 100th Ave Turn Lane Improvements d.AED Property Disposal Council asked to consider Items 7a. and 7d. separately. 7a. MOTION: made by Dejewski, seconded by Bottema to approve the consent agenda consisting of Items 7b. and 7c. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) Mayor Thomas noted clerical errors in the minutes and asked that his changes be provided to staff and edits made. Mayor Thomas noted the edits did not change the substance of the documents. Councilors provided additional edits to staff. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Dejewski to approve Item 7a. as amended. Council discussed making business owners aware of the of the change to the animal ordinance related to bees. City Administrator Martens noted he would reach out to the affected parties. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) Council inquired about liability concerns with selling of medical equipment. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the buyers sign off the purchase, releasing the City from liability. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Bottema to approve Item 7d Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) 8. Planning Business No planning business was presented 9. Unfinished Business a. City Hall Remodel – Review of Schematic Design City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the designs presented to Council were the 15th and 16th designs staff had reviewed. City Administrator Martens introduced Joel Dunning and Derek Gallagher, Wold Architects, to present the options to the City Council. Mr. Dunning presented an overview of the process to date, outlining the various meetings and iterations of the design. Mr. Gallagher outlined the design elements of Option A. Council discussed evidence storage. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the addition of the evidence processing space and staff was balancing various needs. Council discussed ambulance lounge space. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted initial plans had dedicated ambulance space, but due to other needs it didn’t make it into the proposed versions. Mr. Dunning noted that ambulance staff could utilize the conference room as needed if it was not being utilized by other staff. Mr. Gallagher discussed the design elements in Option A. Council discussed the views to outside. Mr. Dunning reviewed the design elements in Option B and provided an overview of the cost estimates for Option A and Option B. Council discussed the designs and access to the memorial garden. Council discussed waiting to remodel and the proposed costs. City Administrator Martens noted the next steps would be to refine the design and host user groups. Council inquired about waiting to remodel the current lobby. Mr. Gallagher noted an additional remodel could be planned but would result in remodeling a recently remodeled section. Council discussed concerns with costs. City Administrator Martens noted public projects are bid in a public setting. Council discussed implementation versus design. Council inquired about the inflation number outlined in the cost estimates. Mr. Dunning noted the estimates included a four percent inflation factor. City Administrator Martens noted one of the cost increases was the utilization of the lobby space which wasn’t considered during the initial needs study. Council discussed cutting costs and creating a price point for staff to meet. City Administrator Martens noted the project would need to complete by March 3, 2020 for the next election. Council discussed the need for the lobby remodel and designs for furniture. City Administrator Martens noted Option A was preferred for the better workflow, additional conference spaces, and additional work stations. City Administrator Martens noted staff had looked at several designs to maximize the space. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk discussed the several designs and the ability for staff to utilize the spaces. Council discussed timing and sharpening pencils on the cost. Mr. Dunning noted the cost estimates are conservative and having the contractor on board will assist with pricing the project. City Administrator Martens noted interviews with construction firms are scheduled for April 23, 2019. Council discussed designing both options. Mr. Dunning noted the design was only partially complete and concerns on the cost of designing two projects. Council discussed costs, the contingency amount in the estimates, and grant opportunities. Council discussed creating a not to exceed number and movable walls. Mr. Dunning noted movable walls are significantly more expensive than the proposed sheetrock walls and haven’t been as effective for public sector clients. Council discussed the timeline for keeping the Police Department in the current building. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted an additional three to five years may be possible with the increased efficiencies in Option A. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the timeline for needing a Public Safety building would be dependent of the growth of the community. Council inquired about how much longer Option A would last than Option B. City Administrator Martens noted there would be four additional work stations but the specific timelines would be dependent on the growth of the community. Council discussed the options. City Administrator Martens noted the feedback was related to cost savings. Council discussed the efficiencies of Option A and how to reduce costs. Council discussed the timeline and furniture. Council inquired about the windows in Option A. City Administrator Martens noted the top windows in the lobby would remain and a false ceiling above the Administrator’s office would be installed. Council discussed the lobby as a future remodel. Mr. Dunning noted additional phasing could be added to the project. City Administrator Martens outlined that the design could be discussed further at the May 9th meeting when staff will be recommending a contractor. Council discussed phasing technology and other cost savings options. Per consensus, staff was directed to bring back the discussion at an upcoming meeting. 10. New Business City Administrator Martens asked that an additional Item be considered on the Agenda, Item 10d. a temporary liquor license for an event at Heidi’s Grow Haus. City Administrator Martens noted the request was received late in the day, but due to timing staff needs approval tonight to process the license with the state. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz to add Item 10d. Temporary Liquor License to the agenda. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) a. 2019 Dust Control Program City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the program was similar to years past with one additional road added to the program. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Dejewski to approve Resolution 2019-23 Calling for a Public Hearing on the Potential Assessment of Costs of Dust Control Treatments to be Applied to City Streets in 2019. Council discussed the process for adding and removing roads from the dust control program. City Administrator Martens noted staff reviews conditions and add roads as needed. If a neighborhood petitions to be included or not included the City reviews the petition and removes or adds roads to the program. Council discussed the requirement for fifty percent of residents to be included in the petition. Council discussed the policy for adding and removing roads and the budget implications. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) b. City Council Meeting Rules of Decorum City Administrator Martens presented the report outlining noting without a policy for removal it’s difficult to remove someone from a public meetthe reasoning for considering rules of decorum including providing clear expectations of the public input process. ing. Council discussed allowing for some flexibility and limits on public comments. Council discussed expectations for those asking questions of the Council and outlining the process of interaction during the meeting. Council discussed creating a consistent policy for public comment. Council discussed limiting speakers time on the same topic and receiving presentation materials in advance of the meeting. Council discussed limiting presentations. Per consensus, staff was directed to bring a draft policy back at an upcoming meeting. c. Equipment Purchase – Bobcat Loaders City Administrator Martens presented the report outlining the replacement plan. Council inquired about the review and other communities utilizing a similar program. Public Works Director Mattson noted the program is reviewed annually and that the sales representative confirmed several of the surrounding communities utilize the program. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Dejewski to approve the purchase and trade of Bobcat Loaders as recommended. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) d. Temporary Liquor License City Administrator Martens presented the item outlining the Cino de Mayo event will be hosted by Heidi’s Grow Haus and the Northwest Area Jaycees will serve the alcohol. Administrative Services Director Beise noted appropriate application materials were received and the applicant was aware of fencing and Police Security requirements. Council inquired about the timing. Administrative Services Director Beise noted the event would be on May 5th from 12pm to 4pm. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Dejewski to approve Resolution 2019-24 Approving 1 Day to 4 Day Temporary On-Sale Liquor Licenses in the City of Corcoran, Minnesota. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) 11. Staff Reports No staff reports were presented. 12. 2019 Council Schedule City Administrator Martens reviewed the Council schedule. Council discussed the sketch/concept plan which will be reviewed at the next meeting. City Administrator Martens thanked the Public Works staff for their 14 hour shift. 13. Council Liaison Calendar The Council liaison calendar was not reviewed but was available in the Council Packet. 14. Adjournment MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Bottema to adjourn. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) Meeting adjourned at 9:05 pm. ________________________________ Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director CITY OF CORCORAN City Council Meeting Minutes April 11, 2019 - 7:00 pm The Corcoran City Council met on April 11, 2019 at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were Mayor Thomas, Councilor Dejewski, and Councilor Schultz. Excused was Councilor Keefe. Councilor Bottema arrived at 7:04pm. Also present were City Administrator Martens, Administrative Services Director Beise, Public Works Director Mattson, and Director of Public Safety Gottschalk . 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. Agenda Approval City Administrator Martens noted additional claims had been placed on the Council Dias and added to the house agenda packet. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Dejewski to approve the agenda as presented. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) 4. Commission Representatives Mayor Thomas noted the commission representatives were not present. 5. Open Forum No persons were present to speak at Open Forum. 6. Presentations/Recognitions a. Annual Fire Department Reports i. Hanover Fire Department Fire Chief Malewicki presented the report outlining the calls of service and response times for the City of Corcoran. Fire Chief Malewicki asked that the need for additional firefighters for the Hanover Fire Department be included in the next newsletter. ii. Loretto Fire Department Fire Chief Leuer gave a presentation outlining the calls of service and response times for the City of Corcoran including 61 calls one of which was a fire. Fire Chief Leuer noted Corcoran’s calls make up 29 percent of the total calls. Fire Chief Leuer noted there are eight members of the department who live in Corcoran and the department recently added two daytime fire fighters. Fire Chief Leuer noted other items the department is working on including a leadership academy, grant opportunities, training with other departments, and looking for fire station space. Council inquired about the fire station plans and potential locations. Fire Chief Leuer noted the department is completing a feasibility study and the location would be dependent of the model for fire service (duty crews or volunteers). Council discussed their recent work with the fire chiefs on the fire study and their passion for fire service. 7. Consent Agenda a. Draft Minutes of March 28, 2019 Council Meeting b. Financial Claims c. Award Bids for CSAH 101 and 100th Ave Turn Lane Improvements d. AED Property Disposal Council asked to consider Items 7a. and 7d. separately. MOTION: made by Dejewski, seconded by Bottema to approve the consent agenda consisting of Items 7b. and 7c. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) Mayor Thomas noted clerical errors in the minutes and asked that his changes be provided to staff and edits made. Mayor Thomas noted the edits did not change the substance of the documents. Councilors provided additional edits to staff. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Dejewski to approve Item 7a. as amended. Council discussed making business owners aware of the of the change to the animal ordinance related to bees. City Administrator Martens noted he would reach out to the affected parties. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) Council inquired about liability concerns with selling of medical equipment. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the buyers sign off the purchase, releasing the City from liability. MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Bottema to approve Item 7d Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) 8. Planning Business No planning business was presented 9. Unfinished Business a. City Hall Remodel – Review of Schematic Design City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the designs presented to Council were the 15th and 16th designs staff had reviewed. City Administrator Martens introduced Joel Dunning and Derek Gallagher, Wold Architects, to present the options to the City Council. Mr. Dunning presented an overview of the process to date, outlining the various meetings and iterations of the design. Mr. Gallagher outlined the design elements of Option A. Council discussed evidence storage. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the addition of the evidence processing space and staff was balancing various needs. Council discussed ambulance lounge space. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted initial plans had dedicated ambulance space, but due to other needs it didn’t make it into the proposed versions. Mr. Dunning noted that ambulance staff could utilize the conference room as needed if it was not being utilized by other staff. Mr. Gallagher discussed the design elements in Option A. Council discussed the views to outside. Mr. Dunning reviewed the design elements in Option B and provided an overview of the cost estimates for Option A and Option B. Council discussed the designs and access to the memorial garden. Council discussed waiting to remodel and the proposed costs. City Administrator Martens noted the next steps would be to refine the design and host user groups. Council inquired about waiting to remodel the current lobby. Mr. Gallagher noted an additional remodel could be planned but would result in remodeling a recently remodeled section. Council discussed concerns with costs. City Administrator Martens noted public projects are bid in a public setting. Council discussed implementation versus design. Council inquired about the inflation number outlined in the cost estimates. Mr. Dunning noted the estimates included a four percent inflation factor. City Administrator Martens noted one of the cost increases was the utilization of the lobby space which wasn’t considered during the initial needs study. Council discussed cutting costs and creating a price point for staff to meet. City Administrator Martens noted the project would need to complete by March 3, 2020 for the next election. Council discussed the need for the lobby remodel and designs for furniture. City Administrator Martens noted Option A was preferred for the better workflow, additional conference spaces, and additional work stations. City Administrator Martens noted staff had looked at several designs to maximize the space. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk discussed the several designs and the ability for staff to utilize the spaces. Council discussed timing and sharpening pencils on the cost. Mr. Dunning noted the cost estimates are conservative and having the contractor on board will assist with pricing the project. City Administrator Martens noted interviews with construction firms are scheduled for April 23, 2019. Council discussed designing both options. Mr. Dunning noted the design was only partially complete and concerns on the cost of designing two projects. Council discussed costs, the contingency amount in the estimates, and grant opportunities. Council discussed creating a not to exceed number and movable walls. Mr. Dunning noted movable walls are significantly more expensive than the proposed sheetrock walls and haven’t been as effective for public sector clients. Council discussed the timeline for keeping the Police Department in the current building. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted an additional three to five years may be possible with the increased efficiencies in Option A. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk noted the timeline for needing a Public Safety building would be dependent of the growth of the community. Council inquired about how much longer Option A would last than Option B. City Administrator Martens noted there would be four additional work stations but the specific timelines would be dependent on the growth of the community. Council discussed the options. City Administrator Martens noted the feedback was related to cost savings. Council discussed the efficiencies of Option A and how to reduce costs. Council discussed the timeline and furniture. Council inquired about the windows in Option A. City Administrator Martens noted the top windows in the lobby would remain and a false ceiling above the Administrator’s office would be installed. Council discussed the lobby as a future remodel. Mr. Dunning noted additional phasing could be added to the project. City Administrator Martens outlined that the design could be discussed further at the May 9th meeting when staff will be recommending a contractor. Council discussed phasing technology and other cost savings options. Per consensus, staff was directed to bring back the discussion at an upcoming meeting. 10. New Business City Administrator Martens asked that an additional Item be considered on the Agenda, Item 10d. a temporary liquor license for an event at Heidi’s Grow Haus. City Administrator Martens noted the request was received late in the day, but due to timing staff needs approval tonight to process the license with the state. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz to add Item 10d. Temporary Liquor License to the agenda. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) a. 2019 Dust Control Program City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the program was similar to years past with one additional road added to the program. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Dejewski to approve Resolution 2019-23 Calling for a Public Hearing on the Potential Assessment of Costs of Dust Control Treatments to be Applied to City Streets in 2019. Council discussed the process for adding and removing roads from the dust control program. City Administrator Martens noted staff reviews conditions and add roads as needed. If a neighborhood petitions to be included or not included the City reviews the petition and removes or adds roads to the program. Council discussed the requirement for fifty percent of residents to be included in the petition. Council discussed the policy for adding and removing roads and the budget implications. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) b. City Council Meeting Rules of Decorum City Administrator Martens presented the report outlining noting without a policy for removal it’s difficult to remove someone from a public meetthe reasoning for considering rules of decorum including providing clear expectations of the public input process. ing. Council discussed allowing for some flexibility and limits on public comments. Council discussed expectations for those asking questions of the Council and outlining the process of interaction during the meeting. Council discussed creating a consistent policy for public comment. Council discussed limiting speakers time on the same topic and receiving presentation materials in advance of the meeting. Council discussed limiting presentations. Per consensus, staff was directed to bring a draft policy back at an upcoming meeting. c. Equipment Purchase – Bobcat Loaders City Administrator Martens presented the report outlining the replacement plan. Council inquired about the review and other communities utilizing a similar program. Public Works Director Mattson noted the program is reviewed annually and that the sales representative confirmed several of the surrounding communities utilize the program. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Dejewski to approve the purchase and trade of Bobcat Loaders as recommended. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) d. Temporary Liquor License City Administrator Martens presented the item outlining the Cino de Mayo event will be hosted by Heidi’s Grow Haus and the Northwest Area Jaycees will serve the alcohol. Administrative Services Director Beise noted appropriate application materials were received and the applicant was aware of fencing and Police Security requirements. Council inquired about the timing. Administrative Services Director Beise noted the event would be on May 5th from 12pm to 4pm. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Dejewski to approve Resolution 2019-24 Approving 1 Day to 4 Day Temporary On-Sale Liquor Licenses in the City of Corcoran, Minnesota. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) 11. Staff Reports No staff reports were presented. 12. 2019 Council Schedule City Administrator Martens reviewed the Council schedule. Council discussed the sketch/concept plan which will be reviewed at the next meeting. City Administrator Martens thanked the Public Works staff for their 14 hour shift. 13. Council Liaison Calendar The Council liaison calendar was not reviewed but was available in the Council Packet. 14. Adjournment MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Bottema to adjourn. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Schultz (Motion carried 4:0) Meeting adjourned at 9:05 pm. ________________________________ Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director CITY OF CORCORAN 1 City Council Meeting Minutes May 9, 2019 - 7:00 pm The Corcoran City Council met on May 9, 2019, at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were Mayor Thomas, Councilor Bottema, Councilor Dejewski, Councilor Keefe, and Councilor Schultz. Also present were City Administrator Martens, Public Works Superintendent Meister, and Director of Public Safety Gottschalk. 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. Agenda Approval City Administrator Martens noted the addition of Item 10f. Zamboni Purchase. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Schultz to approve the agenda as amended. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) 4. Commission Representatives Mayor Thomas noted Planning Commissioner Shoulak and Parks and Trails Commissioner Meister were present. Mayor Thomas invited them to speak on items related to their commission. 5. Open Forum Mayor Thomas invited residents to speak. No residents came forward. 6. Presentations/Recognitions a. Annual Fire Department Reports i. Rogers Fire Department Assistant Fire Chief Chris Dunleavy presented for Fire Chief Brad Feist from the City of Rogers. In 2018, the City of Rogers Fire Department responded to 448 calls, with 47 of those to Corcoran, emergency and non-emergency; with 145 medical calls, with 17 of those in Corcoran. The fire contract for 2019 remains the same, $116,319.00. Rogers Fire Fighters participated in approximately 1600 hours of training in the last year. Approximately 95 percent have training completed within the first year. In 2018, Rogers Fire Department received active shooter gear, consisting of a helmet, 3 flat jackets with increased armor with rifle plate, and first aid kit in case of active shooter incidents. Council asked if Rogers Fire Department interfaced with other fire departments. Assistant Fire Chief Dunleavy responded that yes, they do, such as barn fires, combined trainings with controlled house burns, also cross trains with EMR training with local fire departments. Council also inquired about an additional fire station in Rogers. Assistant Fire Chief Dunleavy indicated the City of Rogers is in the process of finding land for a new fire station and would be in close proximity to Corcoran. Council asked Director of Public Safety Gottschalk if the City of Corcoran was reviewing new fire station options with the City of Rogers. Director of Public Safety Gottschalk responded the City had not yet discussed the additional fire station with Rogers Fire Department. Assistant Fire Chief Dunleavy indicated the new fire station would be fire station 3 and located in closer proximity to the City of Corcoran, on the south end of Rogers. Director of 2 Public Safety Gottschalk indicated City consultants would review the station information when Rogers is ready to move on the southern station and review if there is a collaborative possibility. Council noted it would be beneficial to analyze this possibility, especially with the addition of the Rogers development in that area, along with the Bellwether development in northeast Corcoran. Councilor Bottema indicated the fire subcommittee is working with the three departments to fill the gap. Currently they do not have a solution, but the committee will review their findings with the Council. Council asked if the new tanker purchased by Rogers Fire Department has signage on it that indicates it serves the City of Corcoran. Assistant Fire Chief Dunleavy said it currently does not, but he would bring up the question to the Rogers Fire Chief Brad Feist. 7. Consent Agenda a. Draft Minutes of April 25, 2019 Council Meeting b. Financial Claims c. Ordinance Update – Water and Sewer Ordinance MOTION: made by Dejewski, seconded by Keefe to approve the consent agenda consisting of items 7b., and 7c. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) Councilor Dejewski discussed corrections to Draft Minutes item 7a., on page 4, on motion made by Schultz, second by Dejewski, on 9b Amendment, Draft Minutes report Motion carried, but Motion actually failed. MOTION: made by Dejewski, seconded by Schultz to approve item 7a. Draft Minutes with correction. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) 8. Planning Business No planning business. 9. Unfinished Business a. City Hall Remodel – Design, Finance Plan, and Contractor City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the Council supported option A, but costs associated with option A were not supported. Staff was directed to bring options back and came back with option A1 which closely matched option B costs, while maintaining the goals of Council and staff in creating efficiencies. Staff is looking for approval to move forward to approve a contractor and make additional tweaks, not approval of design. Kraus-Anderson is recommended by staff for the project because of significant experience in similar projects, and will have dedicated people from start to finish on the project. Next steps would be to send a letter of engagement to Kraus Anderson for the City Hall remodel project, and review design and complete cost estimate based upon approved pricing model. Council asked if Kraus Anderson would be asked to only provide costs on option A1. City Administrator Martens responded Kraus Anderson would be asked to provide cost analysis on all options, and with technology Kraus Anderson has in place, could include real-time adjustments/projections as needed as the project progresses. Council indicated this conversation is a continuation of an in-depth previous meeting on the City Hall Remodel project. City Administrator Martens indicated Council has not approved any designs regarding the City Hall Remodel project. Council thanked City Administrator Martens for work completed by staff to date on the City Hall remodel. Council mentioned concern of deleting technology in option A1, with biggest concern in deferring costs now, and then having costs later that may be more expensive. Council asked for clarification if the budget numbers were from Wold. City Administrator Martens answered the budget numbers are the median of the high/low estimates provided by Wold. 3 MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by Bottema to direct staff to proceed with the design of City Hall remodel based on option A1. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by Schultz to direct staff to engage Kraus Anderson for the City Hall Remodel project. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) 10. New Business a. Public Hearing – 2019 Dust Control Program City Administrator Martens discussed chloride dust control application noting the budgeted amount is $90,000 with the City’s levy covering $52,000, with the reminder billed to residents. Council asked for calculation examples. City Administrator Martens presented examples. City Administrator Martens further explained the public hearing is held so if residents do not pay, the City can utilize the 429 Assessment process if necessary on non-paid bills. One petition was received by majority of residents on Nystrom Lane to be excluded from dust control treatment. Each resident property on Nystrom Lane would still be required to pay 50 percent of collector bill of $38.50 for access to Willow Drive. City Administrator Martens recommends holding Public Hearing, and Council consider approving the Resolution ordering the improvement as is or as amended, with the removal of Nystrom with adjustment of fees. Mayor Thomas opened public hearing. Thomas Spiczka, 9103 Cain Road, spoke on discussion of benefit of residents living on road, or if the dust control is a maintenance issue. Reviewed article in the newsletter regarding maintenance, and general road usage by non-residents, which leads Mr. Spiczka believes should be paid for by City as road maintenance, not an assessment to residents who live on the road. He believes residents that live on the roads are being double taxed, and should not be charged extra for dust control assessments. Al Skagerberg, 9735 Trail Haven Road, questioned if there are plans in the future to pave the shortcut roads in Corcoran. Council explained there have been attempts for 20 years to pave collector roads, and are supported by Council, but community does not support paving of roads. Dean Vehrenkamp, 9310 Bechtold Road, expressed support of Mr. Spiczka, and understands what costs and assessment would be to pave roads. Does not support paving, does not support dust control application, as his home is 300 feet from road is not affected by dust. Would like to understand who would be responsible for paving of road, and what cost would be. Council noted that staff has reviewed costs for paving roads in Corcoran, and encouraged Mr. Vehrenkamp, and residents to get involved in the future meetings; assessments are small percentage to residents who live on the collector roads, because of the pass through traffic. Council encouraged residents to contact council members if in favor of paving roads to form an opinion base of residents who are in support of paving roads. MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by Bottema to close the Public Hearing. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) Council noted dust control is both for maintenance of roads, and also for the benefit of people who live on gravel roads. Council added the City is also reviewing alternatives to the chloride treatment currently being used on gravel roads. Council asked about eliminating dust control assessments to residents in the future. Council indicated the vote to eliminate dust control assessments to residents 4 could be taken. Council asked why two properties were listed as other, for $1,020 between the two of them, everything else is subsidized, why these two properties aren’t subsidized. City Administrator Martens indicated the two properties are not quite split equally; and when dust control is requested by property owners, the City wouldn’t normally apply treatment to, requesters pay the total cost. The golf course wanted chloride dust control treatment because of the dust by the back houses near the golf course property; Barry Hay from Maple Hills Estates requested dust control treatment because of the trailer park location. Council asked why the City wouldn’t subsidize Maple Hill Road since 10 percent of the Corcoran population lives in the trailer park. City Administrator Martens indicated from a maintenance standpoint, there is very little traffic on Maple Hill Road, so most likely, the City wouldn’t recommend dust control treatment for said road. MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by Bottema to adopt resolution 2019-38 ordering improvement of dust control treatments to be applied in city streets in 2019; and removal of Nystrom Lane from dust control treatment, but allowing for the residents to be part of the application process assessment again in future years if 50 percent of the neighborhood would request dust control treatment again. Council inquired about the dust control treatment process. Public Works Superintendent Meister explained dust control treatment is dependent on the weather. Council asked if bigger rock binds better with the chloride. Public Works Superintendent Meister said in the first two or three years the larger rocks will help. Council asked how much gravel you can purchase for $92,000. Public Works Superintendent Meister responded it is $10 per ton. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) b. Council Minutes Discussion City Administrator Martens presented the report and explained how staff drafts minutes, currently the Minutes record topics, but not individual comments made by Councilors. In past Minutes history, there was more detail, with Councilor comments, but the addition of conversations, did not add substance to the Minutes, and Council should proceed with caution. Council discussed adding more detail regarding issues discussed, primarily for review of past Minutes, to allow for future dialogue on the issue. If at any time, Councilors request something to be included in the Minutes, they would like it included as a matter of record in the Minutes. Council discussed viewing the video from the actual meeting. Council noted they have reviewed other City’s Minutes and Council videos, and it can’t be ascertained in the Minutes, what the tone and inflection of the discussions were about. Council discussed a preference to review what happened within the dialogue and what the vote was, and if review of dialogue was the objective, then review of the Council video is the best option. Council discussed including descriptive words when recording Minutes, for example, smaller setbacks or larger setbacks, rather than just setbacks. Council discussed more detail to include more transparency. Council clarified how an item discussed could be further understood, by adding more specific details. Council mentioned in the past to have something recorded in the Minutes as detail, and discovered more detail was not common practice for Minute recording in Corcoran. Council asked if the whole Council would have to approve the changes in the Minutes to reflect a specific request by a Councilor. MOTION: made by Dejewski, to clarify and include more detail and also include requests by Council members included as record on Minutes. (Motion failed, no second) MOTION: made by Dejewski, to allow comments and statements by Council in the Minutes when requested by a Council member, for transparency. Mayor Thomas indicated the Council videos are the City’s transparency. 5 (Motion failed, no second) Council asked how many requests for Council Minutes are made. Council asked if Minutes are asked to be changed by a Council member, is that reflected in the next Minutes. Council noted it is reflected in the Motion. City Administrator Martens indicated Minutes reflect the action taken at the very minimum. An example of a clerical error, a Motion would not be needed, the clerical error would be corrected. Often times the Mayor noted, after a change is a consensus change, it is reflected with an amendment as requested by consensus. c. Wildflower Park Irrigation Plan City Administrator Martens gave a brief overview of Wildflower Park and an irrigation overview. The City would need to purchase treated water from Maple Grove as there is no available storm water from ponds. Cost associated with park irrigation would be approximately $300 per year on an average rain fall year; with a no rain season, approximately $710 per year. All initial costs would be paid by the Park Dedication Fund. Ongoing costs would be paid by the parks budget. For future parks, the City will be planning to utilize storm water for watering future parks. Vision for active use parks is to have high quality sod, open space parks not. Council asked if the rain gauges really work, and Public Works Superintendent Meister responded with that rain gauges do work. Council asked what the RPZ’s were in the quotes. Public Works Superintendent Meister responded it is a backflow preventer, so the water cannot flow backwards. Council asked if the irrigation system has a remote control so you can turn them on/off. Public Works Superintendent Meister responded it is available, but not currently quoted with the proposed system. Council asked with the new irrigation system, will we have staff run out to check on the park and make sure there aren’t washouts and/or problems with the irrigation system, and does this create more costs associated with the park. Public Works Superintendent Meister said it will actually be less once an established grassy area is established. Wildflower Park will be inspected the same as the other City Parks. MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Keefe to allow staff to install irrigation equipment as requested. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) d. Planning Commission Resignation City Administrator Martens reported a resignation was received from Dorothy Theis, and also Council could fill the vacancy Motion: made by Schultz, seconded by Keefe to accept resignation of Commissioner Dorothy Theis for her time served on the Planning Commission. Councilor Schultz commented that Council appreciated her time on the Planning Commission and her experience. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) Motion: made by Keefe, seconded by Schultz to appoint Dean Verenkamp to fill Dorothy Theis’ remaining term on the Planning Commission. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) e. Maintenance Operator Recruitment City Administrator Martens discussed the status of final interviews for the position, and a preferred candidate has been selected. Staff would like Council to approve to authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to extend an offer to the preferred candidate. If the preferred candidate does not accept, allowing for the Mayor and City Administrator to extend an offer the second preferred candidate. 6 Motion: made by Keefe, seconded by Bottema to authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to extend a Maintenance Operator job offer to the preferred candidate. Council commended the Public Works Department on a job well done for Corcoran Clean Up Day on May 4. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) f. Zamboni Purchase Administrator Martens presented the opportunity for the City to purchase a replacement Zamboni through an auction for 1986 Ford liquid propane engine with 3700 hours on it. Request to bid $6,500 with a 10-year equipment lifespan. Funds for the purchase would be from the Public Works operating budget. The Zamboni the City of Corcoran currently owns is a 1974 Volkswagen air- cooled propane engine unit and has been in equipment inventory for over 8 years with over 7,000 hours on it. Parts are difficult to find and the unit currently leaks oil. Staff would like Council to authorize staff to bid up to $6,500 for a replacement Zamboni for the Corcoran ice rinks. Motion: made by Dejewski, seconded by Bottema to authorize staff to $6,500 for a replacement Zamboni for the Corcoran ice rinks. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) 11. Staff Reports a. Stieg Road Neighborhood Meeting Recap City Administrator Martens presented recap on the meeting which included updates on Stieg Road improvements with road closure, Bellwether Development, 2040 Comprehensive Plan updates for sewer and water planning, Dayton Parkway Interchange and I-94 projects and future County Road 117 extension, County Road 116 to County Road 101; meeting was well received with positive feedback, with full closure of Stieg Road during improvement supported by residents in attendance; will keep residents informed through website, CodeRed, and electronic sign updates. 12. 2019 Council Schedule City Administrator Martens reviewed the Council schedule. Councilor Bottema noted he would not be able to attend the June 13, 2019. 13. Council Liaison Calendar The Council liaison calendar was not reviewed but was available in the Council Packet. 14. Adjournment MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by Bottema to adjourn. Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and Schultz (Motion carried 5:0) Meeting adjourned at 8:28 pm. ________________________________ Michelle Friedrich – Deputy Clerk AgendaItem 7c. CouncilMeetingDate: 5/23/2019 FINANCIALCLAIMS PreparedBy: jrotz CHECKRANGE FUND #500ESCROWCLAIMSAgendaItem: 7c. Paid toAmountProject name 500-20420$179.24Wright Hennepin - BassLake Crossing StreetLights 500-20390$520.92Wright Hennepin - Ravinia StreetLights 500-20400$114.00LANDFORM - RAVINIA 6THADDITIONFINALPUD ANDPLAT16-016 500-20442$132.00LANDFORM - BASS LAKEESTATES FP, PUD17-036 500-20430$40.50LANDFORM - BASSLAKECROSSING 2NDFP, FPUD18-035 500-20461$132.00LANDFORM - POULIOTLOTLINE ADJUSTMENT18-030 500-20470$213.00LANDFORM - ROLLINGHILLSACRESPP19-004 500-20469$1,981.50LANDFORM - RAVINIA 11THFPANDFINAL PUD19-005 500-20471$415.50LANDFORM - ST. THERESE SKETCH PLAN 19-006 500-20436$3,323.50LANDFORM - PULTEBELLWETHER2ND ADDITION FINALPLATANDPUD19-001 500-20454$966.50LANDFORM - APPLEWOOD POINTE SKETCH PLAN19-007 500-20469$1,740.75LANDFORM - RAVINIA12TH FP, PUD 19-002 500-20456$1,038.75LANDFORM - LARKINROADADDITION FP19-003 (KARINIEMI/WILLOWLLC) 500-20335$15,787.50WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. - LENNAR - ENGINEERING 500-20335$46.50WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. - WESSELPROPERTY FEASIBILITY STUDY 500-20376$200.10WENCKASSOCIATES, INC. - PARK PLACE STORAGE 500-20423$4,410.94WENCKASSOCIATES, INC. - BASS LAKEESTATESSKETCH PUD17-015 500-20436$8,154.76WENCKASSOCIATES, INC. - PULTEENCORE - PUDSKETCH17-029 500-20438$3,250.16WENCKASSOCIATES, INC. - BASSLAKECROSSING M/IHOME 17-012ENGINEERING 500-20454$198.00WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. - EDGEWATERCORCORAN SKETCH 18-018 500-20456$198.00WENCKASSOCIATES, INC. - WILLOWLLCMINOR SUBDIVISION18-022 500-20471$17,645.75WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. - ST. THERESESKETCH PLAN19-006 Total 60,689.87 TotalFund #500 = 60,689.87 SeeattachedPayments Detail) ALLOTHER FINANCIAL CLAIMSAgendaItem:7c.$ 568,710.51$ 629,400.38TotalChecks Seeattached Check DetailRegister) TotalofAutoDeductions 86,213.51 TOTALEXPENDITURES FORAPPROVAL$ 715,613.89 AutoDeductions / ElectronicFundTransfer / OtherDisbursements DatePaid toAmount 5/6/2019Walmart - MapleGrove, MN$ 32.32Cleanup dayfood 5/7/2019USPS - Hamel, MN$ 500.00Postage forbulkmailpermit 5/7/2019Cub Foods - Buffalo, MN$ 58.99Cleanup dayfood 5/9/2019Walgreens - Maple Grove, MN$ 3.99Water Testing - Supplies 5/10/2019FEDEX$ 33.40WaterTesting - Shipping 5/13/2019Allied MedicalTraining$ 295.00Police Training - EMT Recertification 5/14/2019CAB Store - Rogers, MN$ 59.12Police K9Supplies 5/16/2019Chanticlear Bar & Grill - Osseo, MN$ 150.48Police Training Meeting 5/16/2019Opticsplanet Inc.$ 288.16Police Supplies 5/16/2019Cragun'sLodge andGolf - Brainerd, MN$ 342.04PoliceTraining 5/3/2019ACH FILE FEE$ 15.00Automatic sewer/waterpaymentACHfee 5/7/2019Revtrak SV9T$ 1,286.96CreditCardFees for April 5/9/2019foreigncheckfee (MNSolarCheck - Canada)$ 10.00foreigncheckfee (MNSolarCheck - Canada) 5/9/2019USBankEquipment Finance$ 317.00Copier Lease 5/9/2019ADPWageGarnishment$ 542.68Garnishment 5/9/2019Payroll Taxes$ 16,118.04payroll taxes 5/9/2019NetPayrollPP10$ 45,298.53NetpayrollPP10 5/13/2019PERA$ 13,555.14Pensionplan 5/14/2019State ofMN - MSRS$ 1,912.13State ofMNhealthcare savingsplan 5/14/2019StateofMN - Roth$ 2,640.80Deferred compensation paymenttoStateofMN 5/14/2019Optum - HSA$ 2,753.73Health savings account Total H:\\CityHallInformation\\CITYGOVERNMENT\\Council, Commissions & Committees\\CouncilInformation\\CouncilClaims\\2019ClaimsWorkbook.xls 05/17/1912:45PMCITYOFCORCORAN Page 1 Check Detail Register© May 2019 Check AmtInvoiceComment 10100 FarmersState Bank Unpaid ACME TOOLS E100-43100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$129.876582089SUPPLIES Total ACMETOOLS 129.87 Unpaid ADAMS PESTCONTROL, INC. E100-41941-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$84.272778405PEST CONTROL E100-43100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$99.002781250PESTCONTROL Total ADAMS PESTCONTROL, INC. 183.27 Unpaid ADP, LLC E100-41941-300 ProfessionalSrvs (GENERAL)$242.00535189322WORKFORCE NOWPAYROLL SOLUTIONS BUNDLE Total ADP, LLC 242.00 Unpaid ASPENMILLS E100-42100-209 Police Reserves$19.70236356UNIFORM SUPPLIES Total ASPENMILLS 19.70 Unpaid BEAUDRYOILCOMPANY E100-42100-212 Motor Fuels$1,332.491379477SQUADFUEL E100-43100-212 Motor Fuels$34.521379477GASOLINE E100-41920-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$67.921379477GASOLINE E100-43100-212 MotorFuels$1,485.001379478DIESEL Total BEAUDRYOIL COMPANY 2,919.93 Unpaid BEISE, JESSICA G100-21709 DependentCareFSAWithhold$700.00051619DEPENDENT CAREFSAREIMBURSEMENT E100-41400-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$62.18051619MILEAGE E100-41400-208 TrainingandInstruction$514.00051619TRAINING Total BEISE, JESSICA 1,276.18 Unpaid CANVASSOLUTIONSINC E100-41951-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$530.001545720558CANVAS SUBSCRIPTION ANNUAL Total CANVAS SOLUTIONS INC 530.00 Unpaid CENTERPOINT ENERGY HOUSTON E100-45200-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$40.388000014143-4NATURAL GAS - 5754177-3 E100-41941-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$35.078000014143-4NATURAL GAS - 5754460-3 E100-43100-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$369.819884559-74-1NATURALGASBASIC Total CENTERPOINT ENERGY HOUSTON 445.26 Unpaid CENTURY LINK E100-43100-321 Telephone$124.91050619LAND LINE/FIREMONITORING-9100763-498-7515 Total CENTURY LINK 124.91 Unpaid CINTAS - 470 E100-43100-417 Uniforms$43.614021514690PW UNIFORMS E100-43100-417 Uniforms$108.104021514700PWUNIFORMS E100-41941-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$82.594021514728CITY HALLRUGS 05/17/1912:45PMCITYOFCORCORAN Page 2 Check Detail Register© May 2019 Check AmtInvoiceComment E100-43100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$49.944021514733PW RUGS E100-41941-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$82.474021514734CITYHALLRUGS E100-42100-223 Building RepairSupplies$64.334021514763PD RUGS E100-43100-417 Uniforms$43.614021902805PW UNIFORMS E100-42100-223 BuildingRepairSupplies$64.334021902807PD RUGS E100-41941-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$82.594021902814CITY HALLRUGS E100-43100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$94.614021902818PW RUGS E100-41941-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$82.474021902836CITYHALLRUGS E100-43100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$93.614021902856PUBLICWORKS TOWELS E100-43100-417 Uniforms$108.104021902893FLOOR MATS Total CINTAS - 470 1,000.36 Unpaid COMCAST-INTERNET E100-41941-321 Telephone$72.42050919CITY HALL INTERNET E100-42100-321 Telephone$72.43050919PD INTERNET Total COMCAST-INTERNET 144.85 Unpaid COMPUTER INTEGRATIONTECH E100-41951-300 ProfessionalSrvs (GENERAL)$539.64114233IT MANAGED SERVICE - MTH Total COMPUTER INTEGRATIONTECH 539.64 Unpaid CORCORAN LOCKER E204-42100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$120.005652HOTDOGS - FIREARMSAFETY Total CORCORANLOCKER 120.00 Unpaid CORPORATECONNECTION E100-41900-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$9.5751155JACKETS Total CORPORATE CONNECTION 9.57 Unpaid CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER E100-41941-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$93.00114X70616608OFFICE WATER Total CULLIGAN BOTTLEDWATER 93.00 Unpaid CUMMINSNPOWER LLC E602-49450-303 Engineering Fees$673.74E4-92268SERVICE ONGENERATOR E100-41941-400 Repairs & MaintCont (GENERAL$516.81E4-92609SERVICE ONGENERATOR E602-49450-303 Engineering Fees$705.84E4-92610SERVICE ONGENERATOR E100-43100-223 BuildingRepairSupplies$1,008.45EF-92270SERVICE ON GENERATOR Total CUMMINS NPOWER LLC 2,904.84 Unpaid ECM PUBLISHERS INC E100-43100-228 DustControl$364.09691898DUST CONTROL HEARING Total ECMPUBLISHERS INC 364.09 Unpaid ENEBAKCONSTRUCTION COMPANY E425-49450-530 ImprovementsOtherThan Bldgs$135,123.26PAY52019 NE SEWERDISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS 52% OF PROJECT PAIDTO DATE Total ENEBAK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 135,123.26 05/17/1912:45PMCITYOFCORCORAN Page 3 Check Detail Register© May 2019 Check AmtInvoiceComment Unpaid FERGUSON WATERWORKS E601-49400-215 WaterMeters$1,486.350323450METERS E601-49400-215 Water Meters$1,485.260324935METERS E601-49400-215 Water Meters$1,027.280324936METERS Total FERGUSONWATERWORKS 3,998.89 Unpaid GOPHERSTATEONE CALL E601-49400-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$50.639040308SERVICE E602-49450-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$50.629040308SERVICE Total GOPHER STATE ONECALL 101.25 Unpaid GRAINGER E100-41941-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$122.019163782585SUPPLIES Total GRAINGER 122.01 Unpaid HANOVER, CITYOF E100-42200-300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL)$16,326.582019-22019 FIRE PROTECTION - 2NDQTR Total HANOVER, CITYOF 16,326.58 Unpaid HAUGO GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES LL E425-49450-530 ImprovementsOtherThanBldgs$6,102.007083PULTE BELLWETHER - NETRUNK SEWER E425-49450-530 ImprovementsOtherThanBldgs$3,206.007170PULTE BELLWETHER - NETRUNK SEWER Total HAUGO GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES LL 9,308.00 Unpaid HEALTHPARTNERS E100-41300-131 EmployerPaidHealth$410.8289674113HEALTH PARTNERS 5/19 INVOICE E100-41400-131 EmployerPaidHealth$2,448.8389674113HEALTH PARTNERS 5/19INVOICE E100-42100-131 EmployerPaidHealth$8,271.8889674113HEALTH PARTNERS 5/19INVOICE E100-42102-131 EmployerPaidHealth$677.1389674113HEALTH PARTNERS 5/19 INVOICE E100-43100-131 EmployerPaidHealth$8,229.2389674113HEALTH PARTNERS 5/19INVOICE G100-20205 Reimbursements$1,619.9089674113HEALTHPARTNERS 5/19INVOICE - HAMILTON G100-20205 Reimbursements$1,987.9789674113HEALTHPARTNERS 5/19INVOICE - SCHUTTE Total HEALTHPARTNERS 23,645.76 Unpaid HENN COSHERIFF-MC131 E100-42100-301 Prisoner$150.001000129879PRISONER FEES - BOOKING/HOUSING E100-42100-323 Radio Units$1,201.451000129903RADIO FEES - POLICE E100-43100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$173.841000129978RADIO FEES - PUBLICWORKS Total HENNCOSHERIFF-MC131 1,525.29 Unpaid HOLIDAYCOMPANIES E100-42100-212 Motor Fuels$22.16FUELPURCHFUEL PURCHASE Total HOLIDAY COMPANIES 22.16 Unpaid JOEROTZ E100-41400-208 Training and Instruction$1,026.20051319TRAINING Total JOEROTZ 1,026.20 Unpaid KUDOS AWARDS INC 05/17/1912:45PMCITYOFCORCORAN Page 4 Check Detail Register© May 2019 Check AmtInvoiceComment E204-42100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$62.08191768" x10" WALNUTFINISHPLAQUEWITH BLACK/GOLD PLATE Total KUDOS AWARDS INC 62.08 Unpaid LAMETTI & SONSINC E422-43100-530 ImprovementsOtherThanBldgs$24,696.48PAY 15DTUTILITYPROJECT - STREET37% E422-49400-530 ImprovementsOtherThanBldgs$18,689.22PAY 15DTUTILITYPROJECT - WATER 28% E422-49450-530 ImprovementsOtherThan Bldgs$23,361.53PAY15DT UTILITY PROJECT - SEWER35% G422-20610 Retainage Payable$149,729.75PAY 15DT UTILITYPROJECT Total LAMETTI & SONSINC 216,476.98 Unpaid LANDFORM E100-41920-300 ProfessionalSrvs (GENERAL)$2,975.0029032CODE ENFORCEMENT G500-20400 Ravinia5th & 6th$114.0029033RAVINIA 6THADDITION FINAL PUDAND PLAT16-016 G500-20442 Bass LakeEst. FP, PUD17-036$132.0029034BASS LAKEESTATES FP, PUD 17-036 E101-41911-300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL)$297.0029035SEDISTRICT PLAN AND GUIDELINES UPDATE 18-012 E100-41910-300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL)$978.0029035DEVELOPMENT RIGHT AND OS&PORD. UPDATE 18- 014 G500-20430 BassLkCross FP, FPUD, 17-022$40.5029035BASS LAKECROSSING2NDFP, FPUD18-035 G500-20461 Pouliot Lot LineAdj. 18-030$132.0029035POULIOT LOT LINEADJUSTMENT 18-030 G500-20470 Rolling HillsAcresPP19-004$213.0029036ROLLING HILLSACRESPP19-004 G500-20469 Ravinia11/12th18-040, 19-002$1,981.5029036RAVINIA 11TH FPAND FINALPUD 19-005 G500-20471 St. Therese SketchPlan 19-006$415.5029036ST. THERESE SKETCH PLAN 19-006 E100-41910-300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL)$5,813.2529036CORCORAN PLANNING E100-41910-300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL)$200.0029036CITY MEETINGS G500-20436 PulteEncore - PUDSkch17-029$3,323.5029036PULTE BELLWETHER2NDADDITIONFINALPLAT AND PUD19-001 G500-20454 EdgewaterCorcoran Skch18-018$966.5029036APPLEWOOD POINTE SKETCHPLAN 19-007 G500-20469 Ravinia11/12th18-040, 19-002$1,740.7529036RAVINIA 12TH FP, PUD19-002 G500-20456 WillowLLCMinorSubd18-022$1,038.7529036LARKINROADADDITION FP19-003 KARINIEMI/WILLOWLLC) Total LANDFORM 20,361.25 Unpaid MADDEN, GALANTER, HANSEN LLP E100-41600-300 ProfessionalSrvs (GENERAL)$720.00APR19LEGAL FEES Total MADDEN, GALANTER, HANSEN LLP 720.00 Unpaid MATTSON, KEVIN E100-43100-321 Telephone$50.00050319TELEPHONE REIMBURSEMENT E100-43100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$49.88050319MILEAGE Total MATTSON, KEVIN 99.88 Unpaid MENARDS MAPLEGROVE E100-43100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$171.6243771SUPPLIES Total MENARDS MAPLE GROVE 171.62 Unpaid METROPOLITANAREAMGRSASSOC E100-41300-208 Training and Instruction$25.00300MEETING Total METROPOLITAN AREA MGRS ASSOC 25.00 05/17/1912:45PMCITYOFCORCORAN Page 5 Check Detail Register© May 2019 Check AmtInvoiceComment Unpaid METROPOLITANCOUNCIL ENVIRO E602-49450-312 MCESSewage Treatment$2,165.110001096028MATERIALTREATMENT Total METROPOLITAN COUNCILENVIRO 2,165.11 Unpaid METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MCES E602-49450-310 OtherProfessional Services$44,282.70050619SAC ACTIVITY Total METROPOLITANCOUNCILMCES 44,282.70 Unpaid MID-STATETILECO. E100-43100-223 Building RepairSupplies$247.5018177REPAIR PARTS Total MID-STATETILECO. 247.50 Unpaid MILLER CHEVROLET E100-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply (GENERAL)$2.62CVW160172REPAIR PARTS Total MILLERCHEVROLET 2.62 Unpaid MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OFHEALTH E100-41941-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$40.00802404ANNUAL FEE Total MINNESOTADEPARTMENTOFHEALTH 40.00 Unpaid NAPA AUTO PARTS - CORCORAN E100-42100-220 Repair/Maint Supply (GENERAL)$273.73225732SUPPLIES E100-42100-220 Repair/Maint Supply (GENERAL)($165.09)226121SUPPLIES E100-42100-220 Repair/Maint Supply (GENERAL)$15.77229172SUPPLIES E100-42100-220 Repair/Maint Supply (GENERAL)$2.59231639SUPPLIES Total NAPAAUTO PARTS - CORCORAN 127.00 Unpaid PATNODE ELECTRIC E100-42100-220 Repair/Maint Supply (GENERAL)$570.002125PARKINGLOT & FLAG POLE LIGHTS Total PATNODE ELECTRIC 570.00 Unpaid ROGERS, CITYOF E100-42200-300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL)$29,079.78050919FIRE PROTECTION - 2NDQUARTER Total ROGERS, CITYOF 29,079.78 Unpaid SNSTEAM SALES E204-42100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$2,100.0020847ADVON CAPLOGO'D Total SNSTEAMSALES 2,100.00 Unpaid SPRINT-PD E100-42100-218 Investigations$150.00LCI-315695TOWER SEARCH: 04/17/2019 Total SPRINT-PD 150.00 Unpaid TEGRETE E100-41941-400 Repairs & MaintCont (GENERAL$365.0082889MONTHLY CITYHALL CLEANING Total TEGRETE 365.00 Unpaid TERMINAL SUPPLY CO E100-43100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$76.2030021-00SUPPLIES 05/17/1912:45PMCITYOFCORCORAN Page 6 Check Detail Register© May 2019 Check AmtInvoiceComment E100-43100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$53.8031611-00SUPPLIES Total TERMINALSUPPLY CO 130.00 Unpaid VERIZON WIRELESS E100-42100-323 Radio Units$388.509828965497RADIO UNITS - AIRCARDS MDS E100-42100-321 Telephone$374.509828965497CELL SERVICE Total VERIZONWIRELESS 763.00 Unpaid WARREN, STEVE E204-42100-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$405.86050719FIREARMS SAFETYREIMBURSEMENTS Total WARREN, STEVE 405.86 Unpaid WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. E100-43170-300 ProfessionalSrvs (GENERAL)$829.40051019GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES E100-43170-300 ProfessionalSrvs (GENERAL)$967.10051019STORM WATER - ENGINEERING E100-43170-300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL)$200.00051019WCA LGU E100-43170-300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL)$125.00051019WCA VIOLATION - E. MAYERS E101-41911-300 Professional Srvs (GENERAL)$125.000510192040 CORCORAN COMP PLAN E101-41911-300 ProfessionalSrvs (GENERAL)$7,305.55051019CITY PARK MASTER PLAN E419-43100-303 Engineering Fees$5,274.00051019HACKAMORE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 2294-0028 E422-43100-530 ImprovementsOtherThanBldgs$286.94051019DT UTILITYPROJECT - STREET37% E422-49400-530 ImprovementsOtherThanBldgs$217.14051019DT UTILITY PROJECT - WATER 28% E422-49450-530 ImprovementsOtherThan Bldgs$271.42051019DT UTILITY PROJECT - SEWER35% E425-49450-530 ImprovementsOtherThan Bldgs$7,811.00051019PULTE ENCORE - NETRUNKSEWER E425-43100-530 ImprovementsOtherThan Bldgs$3,886.46051019PULTEENCORE - TURNLANES CSAH 101 AND ENCORE E425-43100-530 ImprovementsOtherThanBldgs$1,832.90051019STIEGROAD DESIGNAND CONSTRUCTION E425-43100-530 ImprovementsOtherThanBldgs$1,182.90051019CSAH 101AND STIEG ROAD TURNLANES E427-43100-530 ImprovementsOtherThanBldgs$16,422.2005101966TH STREET DESIGN ANDCONSTRUCTION E427-43100-530 ImprovementsOtherThanBldgs$3,808.00051019CSAH 116 AND GLEASONPARKWAY TURN LANES E601-49400-303 EngineeringFees$728.90051019WATER - ENGINEERING E601-49400-303 EngineeringFees$150.00051019NE WATERSUPPLY E602-49450-303 EngineeringFees$1,435.40051019SANITARY SEWER - ENGINEERING E602-49450-303 Engineering Fees$1,156.62051019MCES SEWEREXTENSION E601-49400-303 Engineering Fees$2,339.100510192019 TRUNKWATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS G500-20335 Lennar Eng PlanReview/Modific$15,787.50051019LENNAR - ENGINEERING G500-20335 Lennar Eng PlanReview/Modific$46.50051019WESSEL PROPERTY FEASIBILITYSTUDY G500-20376 ParkPlace Storage$200.10051019PARK PLACE STORAGE G500-20423 BassLakeEstSkchPUD17-015$4,410.94051019BASS LAKE ESTATES SKETCHPUD17-015 G500-20436 PulteEncore - PUDSkch17-029$8,154.76051019PULTE ENCORE - PUDSKETCH 17-029 G500-20438 BassLkCR M/IHomeEngineering$3,250.16051019BASS LAKE CROSSING M/IHOME17-012 ENGINEERING G500-20454 EdgewaterCorcoran Skch18-018$198.00051019EDGEWATER CORCORANSKETCH 18-018 G500-20456 WillowLLCMinorSubd18-022$198.00051019WILLOW LLC MINOR SUBDIVISION18-022 G500-20471 St. Therese SketchPlan 19-006$17,645.75051019ST. THERESESKETCH PLAN19-006 Total WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. 106,246.74 Unpaid WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE E100-43100-220 Repair/Maint Supply (GENERAL)$26.87833586SERVICE 05/17/1912:45PMCITYOFCORCORAN Page 7 Check Detail Register© May 2019 Check AmtInvoiceComment E100-43232-210 Operating Supplies (GENERAL)$215.00834021CLEAN UP DAY Total WESTSIDE WHOLESALETIRE 241.87 Unpaid WRIGHT HENNEPIN COOPELECT E100-43100-381 Street/SignalLights$45.07051519CTY RD10/116 000-0100-1469 E100-45200-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$54.60051519Ballpark: 120-1246-7200 E100-45200-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$15.50051519Baseball Fields/Irrigation: 150-1693-6855 E100-42100-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$15.50051519CIVILDEFENSE: 120-1246-8000 E100-42100-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$15.73051519Maple Hill Est: 120-1246-8100 E100-41941-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$26.31051519SchoolProperty: 120-1247-9600 E100-41941-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$699.910515198200CtyRd116: 120-1255-6300 E100-42100-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$207.680515196510CtyRd116: 150-1680-4662 E601-49400-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$16.3105151919090BassLkRd:150-1687-7510 E100-43100-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$36.030515199525Cain Rd: 150-1689-5230 E602-49450-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$168.09051519Brockton Ln: 150-1689-6871 E100-43100-381 Street/SignalLights$9.82051519Cty 10/Maple Hi: 120-1246-7300 E100-43100-381 Street/SignalLights$20.25051519CTY 10/Treptaus: 120-1246-7400 E100-43100-381 Street/SignalLights$18.08051519CTY 10/StThomas:120-1246-7500 E100-43100-381 Street/SignalLights$20.25051519Cty 10/Stanchion:120-1246-7600 E100-43100-381 Street/SignalLights$20.25051519CoRd10 & 50: 120-1246-7700 E100-45200-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$10.340515198200 CtyRd116: 120-1246-7800 E100-45200-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$9.8205151975th Ave/Hwy 116:120-1246-7900 E100-41941-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$0.000515198200 CtyRd116: 150-1684-2033 E100-43100-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$27.950515199100 CtyRd19: 150-1688-8463 E602-49450-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$61.8805151920120 CTY10LIF:150-1691-6661 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$15.24051519Bridle/Gleason: 150-1690-5131 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$15.24051519Bridle/Paddock: 150-1690-5135 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.72051519PaddockLn150-1690-5137 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$15.24051519Bridle Path: 150-1690-5146 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$15.24051519Paddock/Bridle: 150-1690-5158 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$15.240515196471 Carriage: 150-1691-0155 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$15.24051519Bridle/Steeple: 150-1691-0158 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$15.24051519Bridle/Bluestem: 150-1691-0168 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$15.24051519Prairie/Bridle: 150-1691-0174 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$15.24051519Bridle Path: 150-1691-0177 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$15.24051519Elderberry Ct: 150-1691-0178 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.7205151966TH/CEDAR: 150-1692-8373 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$14.72051519Bridle/66thAve: 150-1692-8374 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$0.000515196629 CTY 101: 150-1691-8062 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$14.7205151919301 Annabelle: 150-1691-8063 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.720515196675Carriage: 150-1691-8064 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.720515196681 Bridle: 150-1691-8066 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.720515196657 Bridle: 150-1691-8079 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.7205151919130 Galloway: 150-1691-8080 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$14.7205151919065 Galloway: 150-1691-8082 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$29.960515196485Larkspur: 150-1692-0907 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$14.720515196398Larkspur: 150-1692-0908 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.7205151919437 LupineLN: 150-1693-0197 05/17/1912:45PMCITYOFCORCORAN Page 8 Check Detail Register© May 2019 Check AmtInvoiceComment G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$14.7205151919389 LupineLN: 150-1693-0199 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$14.7205151919345 Golden TR: 150-1693-0200 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$14.720515196310 Steeple LN: 150-1693-0201 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.720515196370Steeple LN: 150-1693-0202 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.7205151919367 Annabelle: 150-1693-5724 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.7205151919343 Annabelle: 150-1693-5726 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.7205151919315 Primrose: 150-1693-5731 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$14.7205151919399 Primrose: 150-1693-5732 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$14.72051519Annabelle LN/Lot5: 150-1694-0821 G500-20390 RaviniaStreetLights$14.72051519Primrose/Wildfl: 150-1693-5733 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.72051519Wildflo/Gleason: 150-1693-5734 G500-20390 Ravinia Street Lights$14.72051519Gleason/Wildflo: 150-1693-5986 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$14.72051519FIR LN/75TH AVE: 150-1693-7072 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$14.72051519FIR LNN: 150-1693-7074 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$14.72051519FIR LN/74TH AVE: 150-1693-7075 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$23.38051519FIR LN N/CR10: 150-1693-7076 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$14.7205151974THAVEN: 150-1693-7077 E100-41941-380 Utility & Services (GENERAL)$61.990515198200 CR116/SIGN: 150-1693-6612 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$23.38051519FIR LN N/CR10: 150-1694-0076 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$14.72051519FIR LNN: 150-1694-0078 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$14.72051519FIR LN N/LOT #8: 150-1694-0079 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$14.72051519FIR LNN/72ND N: 150-1694-0080 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$14.7205151972ND AVE N: 150-1694-0081 G500-20420 BassLakeCrossMIHome17-012$14.72051519FIR LN N/LOT #5: 150-1694-0082 Total WRIGHT HENNEPINCOOPELECT 2,261.52 Unpaid XCELENERGY E100-43100-381 Street/SignalLights$35.00636651247STREET LIGHTING 9525 CAINROAD E100-43100-381 Street/SignalLights$23.00636922404STREET LIGHTING CR19/CR30 Total XCEL ENERGY 58.00 10100 Farmers State Bank$629,400.38 05/17/1912:45PMCITYOFCORCORAN Page 9 Check Detail Register© May 2019 Check AmtInvoiceComment FundSummary 10100 Farmers State Bank 100GENERALFUND$98,409.99 101LONG-TERMPLANNING FUND$7,727.55 204FIREARMS SAFETY$2,687.94 419HACKAMORE UPGRADE (LENNAR)$5,274.00 422DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT$217,252.48 425 PULTEENCORE/BELLWETHERPROJEC$159,144.52 427 GLEASON/66THPARKWAY EXTENSION$20,230.20 500ESCROWHOLDING FUND$60,689.87 601WATER$7,283.83 602SEWER$50,700.00 629,400.38 CityofCorcoran ConsultantSummary 5/23/2019 NameInvoice DateAmountDue Carson, Clelland & Schreder Landform05/13/19 20,361.25 MetroWestInspection RolfEricksonEnterprises WenckAssociates05/10/19 106,246.74 Total$ 126,607.99 H:\\CityHallInformation\\CITYGOVERNMENT\\Council, Commissions & Committees\\CouncilInformation\\Council Claims\\2019ClaimsWorkbook.xls STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 7d. Council Meeting: May 23, 2019 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: Acting City Administrator Appointment Action Required: Approval Summary: It is requested that the City Council appoint Director of Public Safety, Matt Gottschalk as Acting City Administrator from June 8-14, 2019 as City Administrator Brad Martens will be on vacation. The appointment will allow for the Acting City Administrator to make any decisions which requires City Administrator authority during that time. Financial/Budget: None Council Action: Appoint Matt Gottschalk as Acting City Administrator from June 8-14, 2019. Attachments: None City of Corcoran May 20, 2019 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2019-39 Page 1 of 1 Motion By: Seconded By: RESOLUTION SPONSORING THE NORTHWEST TRAILS ASSOCIATION TO ACQUIRE STATE OF MINNESOTA DNR FUNDING (2019-2020 SEASON) WHEREAS, the City of Corcoran desires to establish a public snowmobile trail in furtherance of its public recreation program; and WHEREAS, the Northwest Trails Association has asked the City of Corcoran to act as a sponsor to help acquire, construct, and maintain its trails; and WHEREAS, the Northwest Trails Association has indicated it will help and assist the City to acquire, construct, and maintain said trail; and WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota offers financial and technical assistance to the City for the construction of an approved trail; that the trail sponsored by Corcoran would be known as the Snowmobile Trails of Northwest Hennepin County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT REOLVED BY THE CITY OF CORCORAN: 1.The City of Corcoran shall apply to the State of Minnesota, through the Department of Natural Resources, for financial and technical assistance in accordance with the laws, rules and regulations governing said assistance. 2.If said assistance is granted, the City of Corcoran shall contract with the Northwest Trails Association for the acquisition of the necessary interests in land and the subsequent construction and maintenance of the trail. 3.With the exception of the financial assistance provided by the State contract with the City, the City of Corcoran shall not be liable for any costs incurred by the club. The City shall be responsible only for the allocation of funds to the extent of the actual monies provided through the State contract. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Dejewski, Brian Dejewski, Brian Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 20th day of May, 2019. ________________________________ Ron Thomas - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director 7e. 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: Brad Martens, City Administrator From: Kent Torve, PE, City Engineer Date: May 15, 2019 Subject: Pay Request #5 – 2018 NE Sewer District Improvements Council Action Requested •Approve Pay Request #5 to Enebak Construction Company in the amount of $135,123.26 Project Summary •Contract Amount - $2,736,357.20 •Change Orders to Date 1 - $0 (Change order related to completion date only) •Projected Total - $2,736,357.20 Financing Financing is provided by developers through an escrow. Project Update This amount brings the total approved to date to 50% of the total project value before withholding the 5% retainage amount of $71,348.95 The requested amount is related to sanitary sewer pipe, manhole installation, and erosion control. Change order #1 is included with Pay Request #5. Change order #1 includes extending the substantial completion date 1 month. The developer Pulte was okay with the change order as requested. Next Steps Enebak Construction Company will continue sanitary sewer installation and establishment of site restoration. Stieg Road was closed on April 11th. Stieg Road will be closed through November with the approval of Bellwether 2nd Addition and realignment of Stieg Road. Item 7f. 5- 1 5 - 1 9 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: Brad Martens, City Administrator From: Kent Torve, PE, City Engineer Date: May 17, 2019 Subject: Pay Request #15 – 2016 Downtown Corcoran Sewer & Water Improvements Council Action Requested •Approve Change Order No. 1 and Pay Request #15 to Lametti & Sons, Inc. in the amount of $216,476.98. Project Summary •Contract Amount - $3,001,800.00 •Change Orders No. 1 - $66,747.23 •Project Total - $3,068,547.23 •Funded through utility funds, TIF, and assessments. Project Update This amount brings the total approved to date to 100% of the total project value. The 5% retainage amount on work performed of $144,047.30 is to be released with Pay Request #15. Other Retainage In addition, during the project the City had reached a non-waiver agreement with Lametti & Sons to withhold an additional 15% retainage from on-going payments to incrementally address the City’s liquidated damages claim which came to a total of $187,182.45. Retainage for liquidated damages will be held pending resolution of the City’s claim which equates to $181,500.00. Pay Request #15 releases $5,682.45 from the previously held $187,182.45 to retain $181,500.00 In summary, this pay request: •Reduce held retainage $5,682.45 •Provides additional payment for work performed $66,747.23 (Change Order No. 1) •Release retainage on work performed of $144,047.30 Total $216,476.98 The requested amount is related to Change order #1, releasing the 5% retainage, and releasing the 15% retainage to $181,500.00 Item 7g. 5/17/2019 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: Kevin Shay through Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: May 15, 2019 for the May 23, 2019 City Council Meeting RE: Final PUD Development Plan and Final Plat for U.S. Home Corporation (dba Lennar) for Ravinia 11th Addition (City File 19-005) 60-Day Review Deadline: May 31, 2019 1.Application Request Lennar submitted a request for approval of a final plat and final PUD development plan “Ravinia 11th Addition” to allow 14 single-family detached home lots and four outlots. This is modified from the 15- lot subdivision that the City reviewed in February. The proposal showing 15 lots encroached on the access easement that was originally created to allow access to the Schnell property at 19210 Hackamore Road. The access easement is unimproved as the Schnell property has a driveway from Hackamore Road. No agreement could be obtained between the properties to vacate the easement and the loss of a lot with this plan is to keep the access easement free of improvements. 2.Planning Commission The Planning Commission reviewed the Final PUD Development Plan at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 2, 2019. The applicant was the only person to speak on the item. The Commissioners discussed the access easement and the reduced lot number. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Final PUD Development Plan with one revision to staff’s recommendation to allow only Landmark homes on the 65-foot wide lots, consistent with the Council’s action on the 12th Addition. 3.Context Level of City Discretion in Decision-Making The City’s discretion in approving a final PUD development plan is limited to whether the proposed plan is in substantial conformance with the approved preliminary PUD development plan. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the final PUD development plan. The City’s discretion in approving a final plat is limited to whether the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the City’s subdivision and zoning ordinance and the conditions of preliminary plat approval. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the final plat. Agenda Item: 8a. Lennar Final Plat and PUD – Ravinia 11th Addition (19-005) 2 May 23, 2019 Background The City Council approved the Ravinia rezoning to PUD (Planned Unit Development), Preliminary PUD Development Plan and Preliminary Plat on December 23, 2013. The Final PUD Development Plan and Final Plat for Phase I was approved by City Council on April 24, 2014. There have been ten phases of Ravinia granted final approval and several PUD amendments since the 2014 approval. The homeowners submitted a sketch plan for this property in November of 2016, which received Council feedback and general support. The Planning Commission and City Council reviewed the Lennar request for Preliminary Plat, Rezoning to PUD and Preliminary PUD Development Plan at their meetings on February 7, 2019 and February 28, 2019. 3. Analysis of Request Staff has reviewed the application for consistency with the approved preliminary plans, as well as City policies. The City Engineer’s comments are incorporated into this staff report and resolution and the detailed comments are included in the attached engineering memo dated April 19, 2019. Staff has included a condition that the applicant must comply with the memo. Final PUD Development Plan Architecture The applicant submitted a series of house plans and color palettes for the project with the preliminary PUD development plan. Both the 55- and 65-foot wide lots with the 2-car and 3-car Discovery home products are proposed to be built in this phase. However, as noted during the 12th Addition review, staff expressed concerns that the 3-car Discovery does not meet the architectural standards established for the Ravinia development. The Council did approve the garage-forward 2- car Discovery unit for some phases, based on the finding that smaller homes and lower price points met a market demand that the other homes did not. As part of the original Ravinia submittal, Lennar asked for flexibility to allow the face of the garage to exceed the 55% limit for the building face. Lennar indicated in their narrative that to offset the larger garage, the garage would remain flush with the home. Staff believes this was an important component of the PUD by providing this higher quality architecture. While reviewing the 12th Addition, staff and Planning Commission recommended that the home models be limited to those where the garage is located at or behind the front elevation of the home. The Council reviewed this item at their April 25th meeting and allowed only the Landmark homes models on the 65-foot wide lots. Staff has included the same condition for the 11th Addition as well. Lennar Final Plat and PUD – Ravinia 11th Addition (19-005) 3 May 23, 2019 The City will review each house plan to ensure that the homes are compatible with the standards in the original approvals for both design and materials. Streets These streets have a 50-foot right-of-way and will be required to be stubbed to the south property line so that they can be extended to the adjacent properties in the future. This is consistent with City Engineering standards for residential streets. Parking will be allowed on one side of these local streets. Larkspur Lane (the western street) will have a temporary cul-de-sac for public safety and public works turnarounds, with Road 2 utilizing a temporary turnaround. The lot/outlot with turnarounds are unbuildable, as the buildable area is used for these turnarounds. The temporary turnarounds will be removed if the easement is vacated, the property to the south is developed and the streets are extended. At that time Lot 1, Block 3 would be buildable and Outlot C will remain unbuildable. This is consistent with the preliminary approvals. Street Lights The applicant has not submitted street lighting details. Staff recommends that the street lighting approved for previous Ravinia phases be provided in this development. This is consistent with Section 945.020, Subd. 17, which requires ornamental poles. A uniform style of light fixture should be used throughout the site and the applicant will be required to indicate which style will be used in their final development plan application. Driveway Locations Driveway locations are not indicated on the plans submitted. As a condition of approval, the City requests revised plans that demonstrate the location of all proposed driveways for this phase of development. Staff will review the driveway location to ensure that there are no conflicts with planned infrastructure and landscaping. Staff will also review the plans to ensure that there is a minimum of 22 feet between the garage and the right-of-way. Sidewalks and Trails The plans show sidewalks on one side of the street as required. The Comprehensive Plan shows an on-road trail on County Road 101. This trail will be built when County Road 101 is improved, but the applicant must show how the trail can be accommodated, prior to release of the final plat. Hennepin County has requested an additional 5-foot trail easement to be dedicated on the west side of County Road 101. This is consistent with the previous phases of Ravinia. Setbacks The previous phases have approved the following dimensional requirements for the 55- and 65-foot wide lots: Lennar Final Plat and PUD – Ravinia 11th Addition (19-005) 4 May 23, 2019 55-foot lots 65-foot lots Front, From County Road 101* 100 feet 100 feet Front, From all other streets 20 feet 20 feet Front Porch (≤ 120 square feet) 15 feet 15 feet Side 5 feet 5 feet Rear 25 feet 25 feet Maximum Principal Building Height 35 feet 35 feet Landscaping The applicant’s plans show 42 trees where 14 are required for the residential lots. Half of the trees are planted at the edge of the front drainage and utility easement and are evenly spaced along the residential street to create an attractive streetscape with a mix of Princeton Elm and Autumn Blaze Maple. The two trees shown in the access easement will need to be moved or removed from the plans. The remaining 21 trees are planted in the rear yard of Lots 5 and 6 adjacent to County Road 101 to provide screening from the county road. The screening contains a mix of Prairie Rose Crab, Colorado Green Spruce and White Pine. As a condition for approval, no certificate of occupancy will be issued for home that does not have street trees planted as shown on the landscape plan submitted to the city. Mail Delivery One centralized mailbox location should be shown on the landscape plans. The location of mailboxes must be approved by the US Postal Service. The applicant will need to provide proof of the approved location to the City. Park Dedication A cash in lieu of land fee has been calculated based on the per capita share of park system costs at $3,970 per single family unit (14 x $3,970 = $55,580 based on the current fee schedule). Final Plat The applicant is requesting approval of a final plat to create 14 lots and four outlots. The final plat will need to be revised to plat the right of way to the edge of the plat, along with extending some lots to contain the Schnell driveway easement. Lennar Final Plat and PUD – Ravinia 11th Addition (19-005) 5 May 23, 2019 If this subdivision is approved, it would bring the total number of platted lots to 361 of 480 approved: • Phase 1 = 38 Units • Phase 2 = 36 units • Phase 3 = 27 units • Phase 4 = 44 units • Phase 5 = 47 units • Phase 6 = 23 units • Phase 7 = 37 units • Phase 8 = 20 units* • Phase 9 = 49 units • Phase 10 = 26 units • Phase 11 = 14 units** Total Units = 361 units (75% of the approved lots) *The Ravinia 8th Addition added land and units to the Ravinia project and the total increased from 446 to 466 units and 268.07 gross acres to 274.07 gross acres. **The Ravinia 11th Addition added land and units to the Ravinia project and the total increased from 466 to 480 units and 274.07 gross acres to 279.68 gross acres. Conclusion Staff has reviewed the plan for consistency with the applicable standards outlined in the preliminary approvals, Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. 4. Recommendation Move to adopt the following, as recommended by the Planning Commission: 1. Resolution 2019-40 approving the Final PUD Development Plan 2. Resolution 2019-41 approving the Final Plat and Development Contract Attachments a. Resolution 2019-40 approving the Final PUD Development Plan b. Resolution 2019-41 approving the Final Plat and Development Contract c. Draft Development Contract d. Location Map e. Engineer’s Memo dated April 19, 2019 f. Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Memo dated April 25, 2019 g. Site Graphics dated March 19, 2019 h. Final Plat dated March 19, 2019 i. Phasing Plan dated March 19, 2019 City of Corcoran May 23, 2019 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2019-40 Page 1 of 3 Motion By: Seconded By: APPROVING FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PLAN FOR “RAVINIA 11TH ADDITION” FOR THE LENNAR CORPORATION (PID 36-119-23-44-0012) (CITY FILE 19-005) WHEREAS, The Lennar Corporation (“the applicant”) has requested approval of a final PUD plan for 14 single family homes and four outlots on property legally described as: The East 780 feet of the part of the Southeasterly ¼ of the Southeasterly ¼ of Section 36, Township 119, North Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying Northerly of the South 1,010.00 feet, Hennepin County Minnesota. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the plan at a public meeting 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 final PUD development plan, subject to the following conditions: 1. A final PUD plan is approved to allow the creation of 14 single family lots for Ravinia 11th Addition on 5.59 acres, in accordance with the application materials and plans received by the City on March 19, 2019, except as amended by this resolution; 2. Approval is contingent upon City Council approval of the final plat and development contract. 3. The development shall be subject to all conditions of the “Ravinia 11th Addition” preliminary PUD development plan approval (Resolution 2019-09). 4. The approval is subject to the review and approval by the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission. The applicant shall comply with any conditions of approval from the watershed. Where the standards of the City and Watershed conflict, the more restrictive standard shall apply. 5. The application shall comply with all conditions in the City Engineer’s memo dated April 19, 2019. 6. The plans must be revised to extend the street right-of-way to the edge of the plat for both streets. 7. The HOA documents must note that the 15-foot wide driveway easement exists along the south lot line and no encroachments are permitted. 8. The PUD is hereby approved to allow 55- and 65-foot wide lots in this plat. All platted residential lots shall comply with the following: City of Corcoran May 23, 2019 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2019-40 Page 2 of 3 55-foot lots 65-foot lots Minimum Lot Area 7,776 square feet Front, From County Road 101 100 feet 100 feet Front, From all other streets 20 feet 20 feet Front Porch (≤ 120 square feet) 15 feet 15 feet Side 5 feet 5 feet Rear 25 feet 25 feet Maximum Principal Building Height 35 feet 35 feet 9. All garages must have a minimum 22-foot parking area in front of the garage that does not overlap into sidewalks, drives or streets. Plans should be revised to indicate all driveway locations to ensure compliance. 10. A temporary cul-de-sac easement shall be submitted for the temporary cul-de-sac on the south end of Larkspur Lane for review and approval by the City. 11. The applicant shall submit revised plans showing how the planned on-road trail on County Road 101 can be accommodated. 12. Hennepin County requires an additional 5-foot trail easement to be dedicated on the west side of County Road 101. This easement must be submitted in a recordable form. 13. The plans must show centralized mailbox locations. These mailbox locations shall be approved by the US Postal Service and proof of the approved locations shall be provided to the City, prior to issuance of building permits. 14. The project is subject to the PUD standards, which were amended to allow flexibility in building materials and were granted PUD flexibility to allow the face of the garage to exceed 55% of the building face, subject to certain standards as outlined in the PUD approvals. 15. Two-car Discovery units are permitted on the 55-foot lots. 16. The 65-foot lots are approved for all Landmark home types, which are designed with garages flush with the home. No three-car discovery units are permitted. 17. The applicant shall submit a street lighting plan and details for review by city staff. 18. Trees shall be planted outside of the right-of-way in the easement to ensure even spacing along the street. All homes must have street trees planted as shown in the landscape plan before a certificate of occupancy will be issued. 19. All permanent wetland buffer monument signs must be erected along the wetland buffer line as required by Section 1050.010, Subd. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance. a. Wetland signs shall be purchased from the City. b. The final locations must be inspected and approved by City staff. City of Corcoran May 23, 2019 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2019-40 Page 3 of 3 c. Monuments and signs shall be installed prior to approval of the building permit. 20. The development shall comply with the City’s requirements regarding fire access, fire protection and fire flow calculations, the location of fire hydrants, fire department connections and fire lane signage. 21. The following conditions be met prior to issuance of building permits: a. The applicant must record the approving resolutions and associated documents at Hennepin County and provide proof of recording to the City. b. The applicant shall provide the approved preliminary and final plan drawings to the City in an electronic (AutoCAD) format. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Dejewski, Brian Dejewski, Brian Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 23rd day of May 2019. ________________________________ Ron Thomas - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director City of Corcoran May 23, 2019 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2019-41 Page 1 of 2 Motion By: Seconded By: APPROVING FINAL PLAT AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR “RAVINIA 11TH ADDITION” FOR THE LENNAR CORPORATION (PID 36-119-23-44-0012) (CITY FILE 19-005) WHEREAS, The Lennar Corporation (“the applicant”) has requested approval of a final plat for 14 single family homes and four outlots on property legally described as: The East 780 feet of the part of the Southeasterly ¼ of the Southeasterly ¼ of Section 36, Township 119, North Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying Northerly of the South 1,010.00 feet, Hennepin County Minnesota. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA, that the Corcoran City Council approves the request for a final plat; and; FURTHER, that the development contract for said plat shall be completed by city staff and the Mayor and that the City Administrator be authorized to execute the development contract on behalf of the City; and FURTHER, that the approval is granted based on the following findings and conditions: 1. A final plat is approved to allow the creation of 14 lots and three outlots in accordance with the application materials and plans received by the City on February 19, 2019 and revisions received on March 19, 2019, except as amended by this resolution. 2. Development is subject to the Ravinia preliminary approvals and amendments, except as otherwise amended. 3. The developer must submit a final plat for each future phase of development. No final approvals are granted at this time for future phases. 4. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the City Engineer’s memo, dated April 19, 2019. 5. The following conditions must be met prior to release of the final plat for recording: a. The development contract must be executed by the developer and the City and must be filed with the final plat. b. Park dedication shall be cash in lieu of land for the 14 new lots. The park dedication fee is subject to the fee schedule in place at the time the final plat is released for filing. c. A lighting plan must be submitted for review and approval by the City. City of Corcoran May 23, 2019 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2019-41 Page 2 of 2 6. The following conditions be met prior to issuance of building permits: a. The applicant must file the final plat at Hennepin County within 2 years of the date of approval or the approval shall expire. b. The applicant must record the approving resolutions and associated documents at Hennepin County and provide proof of recording to the City. c. Wetland buffer monument signs must be purchased from the City and installed by the applicant in accordance with the standards in Section 1050.010. d. The applicant shall provide the approved preliminary and final plan drawings to the City in an electronic (AutoCAD) format. 7. The following conditions be met prior to release of remaining escrow: a. Lot corner monuments shall be installed as required by the Subdivision Ordinance. As part of the development contract, a financial guarantee is required to ensure installation per city requirements. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Dejewski, Brian Dejewski, Brian Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 23rd day of May 2019. ________________________________ Ron Thomas - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director (reserved for recording information) DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT (Developer Installed Improvements) RAVINIA 11TH ADDITION CONTRACT dated ____________________, 2019, by and between the CITY OF CORCORAN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”), and U.S. Home Corporation (dba Lennar) (the “Developer”). This is an amendment to the Ravinia Development Contract dated June 12, 2014. 1. REQUEST FOR PLAT APPROVAL. The Developer has asked the City to approve a plat for Ravinia 11th Addition (referred to in this Contract as the "plat"). The land is situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, and is legally described in Exhibit A. 2. CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL. The Developer shall enter into this Contract, furnish the security required by it, and record the plat upon City approval with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles. 3. RIGHT TO PROCEED. Unless separate written approval has been given by the City, within the plat or land to be platted, the Developer may not grade or otherwise disturb the earth, remove trees, construct sewer lines, water lines, streets, utilities, public or private improvements, or any buildings until all the following conditions have been satisfied: 1) this agreement has been fully executed by both parties and filed with the City Clerk, 2) the necessary security has been received by the City, 3) the plat, development contract and other associated documents have been recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder's Office and proof of recording has been provided to the City, and 4) the City has issued written notice that all conditions have been satisfied and that the Developer may proceed. However, the Developer may be allowed to begin grading the site when items 1, 2 and 4 of the previous sentence have been satisfied. 4. PHASED DEVELOPMENT. If the plat is a phase of a multi-phased preliminary plat, the City may refuse to approve final plats of subsequent phases if the Developer has failed to fulfill all obligations in this Contract and the failure has not been remedied. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until Development Contracts for such phases are approved by the City. Park charges and area charges for sewer and water referred to in this Contract are not being imposed on outlots, if any, in the plat that are designated in an approved preliminary plat for future subdivision into lots and blocks. Such charges will be calculated and imposed when the outlots are final platted into lots and blocks. 5. PRELIMINARY PLAT STATUS. If the plat is a phase of a multi-phased preliminary plat, the preliminary plat approval for all phases not final platted shall lapse and be void unless final platted into lots and blocks, not outlots, within nine (9) years after preliminary plat approval. - 2 – 6. CHANGES IN OFFICIAL CONTROLS. For nine (9) years from the date of this Contract, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan or official controls shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications of the approved final plat unless required by state or federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Contract to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by state law, the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Contract. 7. DEVELOPMENT PLANS. The plat shall be developed in accordance with the following plans. The plans shall not be attached to this Contract. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Contract, the written terms shall control. The plans are: Exhibit A – Legal Description Plan A – Final Plat, dated 3/19/19 Plan B – Final Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan, dated 3/19/19 Plan C – Final Tree Preservation and Reforestation Plan, dated 3/19/19 Plan D – Plans and Specifications for Public Improvements, dated 3/19/19 Plan E – Final Street Lighting Plan, _____ Plan F – Final Landscape Plan, dated 3/28/19 Plan H – Revised Preliminary Plat, dated 3/19/19 8. IMPROVEMENTS. The Developer shall install and pay for all of the following improvements: • Streets • Sanitary Sewer • Watermain • Surface Water Facilities (pipe, ponds, rain gardens, etc.) • Grading and Erosion Control • Sidewalks/Trails • Street Lighting • Underground Utilities • Street Signs and Traffic Control Signs • Landscaping Required by Section 1060 of the Zoning Ordinance • Tree Preservation • Wetland Mitigation and Buffers • Monuments Required by Minnesota Statutes • Miscellaneous Facilities The Developer shall submit plans and specifications which have been prepared by a competent registered professional engineer to the City for approval by the city engineer or designee. The Developer shall instruct its engineer to provide full-time field inspection personnel in order for the Developer's engineer to be able to certify that the construction work meets the approved City standards as a condition of City acceptance. In addition, the City may, at the City's discretion and at the Developer's expense, have one or more City inspectors and a soil engineer inspect the work on a full or part-time basis. The Developer, its contractors and subcontractors, shall follow all instructions received from the City's inspectors. The Developer and/or the Developer’s engineer shall provide for on-site project management. The Developer's engineer is responsible for design changes and contract administration between the Developer and the Developer's contractor. The Developer or his or her - 3 – engineer shall schedule a pre-construction meeting at a mutually agreeable time at City Hall with all parties concerned, including the City staff, to review the program for the construction work. All labor and work shall be done and performed in the best and most workmanlike manner and in strict conformance with the approved plans and specifications. No deviations from the approved plans and specifications will be permitted unless approved in writing by the city engineer or designee. The Developer agrees to furnish to the City a list of contractors being considered for retention by the Developer for the performance of the work required by the contract. The Developer shall not do any work or furnish any materials not covered by the plans and specifications and special conditions of this contract, for which reimbursement is expected from the City, unless such work is first approved in writing by the city engineer or designee. The Developer shall be responsible for construction of all improvements in conformance with the approved plans and specs. 9. CONTRACTORS/SUBCONTRACTORS. City Council members, City employees, and City Planning Commission members, and corporations, partnerships, and other entities in which such individuals have greater than a 25% ownership interest or in which they are an officer or director may not act as contractors or subcontractors for the public improvements identified in Paragraph 8 above. 10. PERMITS. The Developer shall obtain or require its contractors and subcontractors to obtain all necessary permits, including but not limited to: • Hennepin County for County Road Access and Work in County Rights-of-Way • Minnesota Department of Health for Watermains/Wells • NPDES Permits • MPCA for Sanitary Sewer and Hazardous Material Removal and Disposal • City of Corcoran for Building Permits and Building Demolition • Watershed Permits 11. TIME OF PERFORMANCE. The Developer shall install all required public improvements in this phase by October 31, 2019, with the exception of the final wear course of asphalt on streets. The City will not accept new public streets in phase I until 80% of the homes in phase I have received a certificate of occupancy and the streets have weathered a full winter season. Final wear course placement outside of this time frame must have the written approval of the City Engineer. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 12. LICENSE. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the plat to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City in conjunction with plat development. 13. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS. Construction traffic access and egress for grading, public utility construction, and street construction is restricted to access the subdivision via County Road 101. No construction traffic is permitted on other adjacent local streets. - 4 – 14. GRADING PLAN. The plat shall be graded in accordance with the approved grading drainage and erosion control plan, Plan "B". The plan shall conform to City of Corcoran Engineering Design Standards. 15. EROSION CONTROL. Prior to initiating site grading, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented by the Developer and inspected and approved by the City. Erosion control practices must comply with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Best Management Practices. The City may impose additional erosion control requirements if they would be beneficial. All erosion control shall comply with Section 950 (Erosion Control) of the Corcoran City Code and the Corcoran Engineering Design Standards. No development, utility or street construction will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the plat is in full compliance with the approved erosion control plan. 16. STREET MAINTENANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION. The Developer shall be responsible for all street maintenance until the streets are accepted by the City. Warning signs shall be placed when hazards develop in streets to prevent the public from traveling on the same and to direct attention to detours. If and when streets become impassable, such streets shall be barricaded and closed. In the event residences are occupied prior to completing streets, the Developer shall maintain a smooth surface and provide proper surface drainage to ensure that the streets are passable to traffic and emergency vehicles. The Developer shall be responsible for keeping streets within and without the subdivision swept clean of dirt and debris that may spill, track, or wash onto the street from Developer’s operation. 17. OWNERSHIP OF IMPROVEMENTS. Upon completion of the work and construction required by this Contract and acceptance of the work by the City, the improvements lying within public easements or right-of-way shall become City property. Prior to acceptance of the improvements by the City, the Developer must furnish the following affidavits: • Contractor’s Certificate • Engineer’s Certificate • Land Surveyor’s Certificate 18. PARK DEDICATION. Prior to release of the final plat, the Developer shall satisfy the amount of the park dedication requirements by a cash contribution of $55,580. The charge was calculated in accordance with Section 955 of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance. 19. WATERMAIN / STORAGE TRUNK LINE AREA CHARGE (TLAC). This plat is subject to a watermain/storage trunk line area charge (TLAC). The charge is calculated as follows: 4.85 net acres (based on pre-developable area) 5,948.00 per acre = $28,847.80 for Ravinia 11th Addition. Future phases shall be cash with the final plat for each future phase subject to the then-current rates. 20. WATER CONNECTION CHARGE. This plat is subject to a water connection charge calculated as follows: 14 units x $1,182.00 per unit = $16,548.00. The fees shall be paid at the time of building permit. Future development shall be cash at the time of issuance of each building permit at the then- current rates. The developer will be responsible for payment of the then-current water connection charge set by the City of Maple Grove. - 5 – 21. SANITARY SEWER TRUNK LINE AREA CHARGE (TLAC). This plat is subject to a sanitary sewer trunk line area charge (TLAC). The charge is calculated as follows: The charge is calculated as follows: 4.85 net acres (based on pre-developable area) x $3,925.00 per acre = $19,036.25 for Ravinia 11th Addition. HOWEVER, as part of the 2014 Ravinia PUD approvals, the City and developer entered into a Recapture and Reimbursement Agreement dated April 24, 2014 for reimbursement of the cost of certain required off-site infrastructure improvements. The agreement required “Benefitted Properties” to pay the City a Recapture Fee in the amount of sanitary sewer TLAC fees and those fees shall be passed onto Lennar. This was one of the Benefitted Properties. However, since the Benefitted Property is now being developed by Lennar, the City will waive TLAC fees on this site in lieu of the payment/recapture anticipated. Future phases shall be cash with the final plat for each future phase subject to the then-current rates. The developer will also be responsible for payment of the then-current SAC fee set by the Metropolitan Council. 22. SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION CHARGE. This plat is subject to a sanitary sewer connection charge calculated as follows: 14 units x $1,182.00 per unit = $16,548.00. The fees shall be paid at the time of building permit. Future development shall be cash at the time of issuance of each building permit at the then-current rates. 23. BUILDING PERMITS/CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY. A. Curbing, and one lift of asphalt shall be installed on all public and private streets prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, except one model home on a lot acceptable to the City Planner may be issued a certificate of occupancy if needed for the Parade of Homes. B. The Developer shall comply with the City of Corcoran Engineering Design Standards. C. Prior to issuance of building permits, wetland buffer monuments shall be placed in accordance with the City’s zoning ordinance. Specifications for the monuments are available from the City Planner. D. Failure to fulfill any of the terms of this Contract by the Developer, including nonpayment of billings from the City, shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties, and the halting of all work in the plat. E. If building permits are issued prior to the acceptance of public improvements, the Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion of public improvements and damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, their contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, employees, agents, or third parties. No sewer and water connection permits may be issued until the streets needed for access have been paved with a bituminous surface and the utilities are tested and approved by the City Engineer. 24. STREET REGULATORY SIGNS/TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS. Street name signs shall be installed by the Developer in accordance with the City of Corcoran Engineering Design Standards. - 6 – The Developer shall install traffic control signs in accordance with the plan approved by the City Engineer and Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. All signs must be installed prior to final building inspection approval or earlier if necessary as determined by the City Engineer. 25. STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION AND OPERATION COSTS. The developer shall pay for and install all street lights. The street light shall be of a design approved by the City. The developer shall be responsible for street light operation and maintenance costs until such time as the City accepts the public street where the streetlights are located. After the acceptance the City shall be responsible for all costs, subject to the street lighting policy. The costs of operation are dependent upon the operation costs for Wright Hennepin Electric under contract franchise with the City of Corcoran. 26. RESPONSIBILITY FOR COSTS. A. Except as otherwise specified herein, the Developer shall pay all costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the development of the plat, including but not limited to legal, planning, engineering and inspection expenses incurred in connection with approval and acceptance of the plat, the preparation of this Contract, review of construction plans and documents, and all costs and expenses incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting development of the plat. The City may require Developer to post funds in an escrow account, at its discretion. In the event the cash escrow amount is insufficient, Developer shall post additional escrow funds as determined by the City Planner within ten (10) days of written demand. Failure to make payment of the additional escrow amount shall permit the City to supplement those amounts from any other sureties posted by Developer. B. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers, employees, and agents harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat approval and development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers, employees, and agents for all costs, damages, or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorneys' fees. C. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the enforcement of this Contract, including engineering and attorneys' fees. D. The Developer shall pay, or cause to be paid when due, and in any event before any penalty is attached, all special assessments referred to in this contract. This is a personal obligation of the Developer and shall continue in full force and effect even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it. E. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Contract within thirty (30) days after receipt. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of eight percent (8%) per year. F. In addition to the charges and special assessments referred to herein, other charges and special assessments may be imposed such as but not limited to sewer availability charges ("SAC"), City water connection charges, City sewer connection charges, and building permit fees. 27. SPECIAL PROVISIONS. The following special provisions shall apply to plat development: - 7 – A. Compliance with the conditions of the original approvals, PUD Amendments, including the PUD Final Development Plan (Resolution 2019-40) and Final Plat approval (Resolution 2019- 41), which are attached as Exhibit B. B. Before the City signs the final plat, the Developer shall convey the Park to the City by warranty deed, free and clear of any and all encumbrances. Before the City signs the final plat, the developer shall convey the required trail easements to the City in a form satisfactory to the City C. The Developer shall post a $1,400.00 security for the final placement of interior subdivision iron monuments at property corners. The security was calculated as follows: 14 lots at $100.00 per lot. The security will be held by the City until the Developer's land surveyor certifies that all irons have been set following site grading and utility and street construction. In addition, the certificate of survey must also include a certification that all irons for a specific lot have either been found or set prior to the issuance of a building permit for that lot. D. The Developer must obtain a sign permit from the City Building Official prior to installation of any subdivision identification signs. E. The Developer shall supply a complete set of the approved construction plans in an AutoCAD.DWG electronic file format before the preconstruction conference. F. The Developer shall include the “City of Corcoran’s Standard Detail Specifications” (all applicable sections) in the contract documents of their improvement project. 28. MISCELLANEOUS. A. The Developer may not assign this Contract without the written permission of the City Council. The Developer's obligation hereunder shall continue in full force and effect even if the Developer sells one or more lots, the entire plat, or any part of it. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in conjunction with a sale of the entire land, the Developer may, without the consent of the City, assign this Contract to a limited liability company or other entity in which the Developer or an affiliate thereof has a controlling membership or other controlling ownership interest, provided that such assignee assumes in writing the obligations of Developer under this Contract. B. Certain retaining walls will require a Building Permit. Retaining walls that require a building permit shall be constructed in accordance with plans and specifications prepared by a structural or geotechnical engineer licensed by the State of Minnesota. Following construction, a certification signed by the design engineer shall be filed with the Building Official evidencing that the retaining wall was constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. All retaining walls identified on the development plans or by special conditions referred to in this Contract shall be constructed before any other building permit is issued for a lot on which a retaining wall is required to be built. C. Appropriate legal documents including, but not limited to, those regarding Homeowner Association documents, conservation easements, covenants and restrictions, as approved by the City Attorney, shall be filed with the Final Plat. - 8 – D. Developer shall take out and maintain or cause to be taken out and maintained until six (6) months after the City has accepted the public improvements, public liability and property damage insurance covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise out of Developer's work or the work of its subcontractors or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Limits for bodily injury and death shall be not less than $500,000 for one person and $1,000,000 for each occurrence; limits for property damage shall be not less than $200,000 for each occurrence; or a combination single limit policy of $1,000,000 or more. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the policy, and the Developer shall file with the City a certificate evidencing coverage prior to the City signing the plat. The certificate shall provide that the City must be given thirty (30) days advance written notice of the cancellation of the insurance. The insurance shall be primary and non-contributory as to any policy maintained by the City. E. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Contract. F. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Contract is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Contract. G. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a waiver or release. H. This Contract shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. The Developer covenants with the City, its successors and assigns, that the Developer has fee title to the property being final platted and/or has obtained consents to this Contract, in the form attached hereto, from all parties who have an interest in the property; that there are no unrecorded interests in the property being final platted; and that the Developer will indemnify and hold the City harmless for failure to fulfill any of the foregoing covenants. I. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so existing may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. J. The Developer represents to the City that the plat complies with all city, county, metropolitan, state, and federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances, and environmental regulations. If the City determines that the plat does not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow construction or development work in the plat until the Developer does comply. Upon the City’s demand, the Developer shall cease work until there is compliance. 29. DEVELOPER’S DEFAULT. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer, except in - 9 – an emergency as determined by the City, is first given notice of the work in default, not less than 48 hours in advance. This contract is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, assess the cost in whole or in part. 30. WARRANTY/PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE. The Developer warrants all improvements required to be constructed by it pursuant to this Contract against poor material and faulty workmanship. The Developer shall submit either 1) a warranty/maintenance bond for 100% of the cost of the improvement, or 2) a letter of credit or performance bond for twenty-five percent (25%) of the amount of the original cost of the improvements. A. The required warranty period for materials and workmanship for the utility contractor installing public sewer and water mains shall be two (2) years from the date of final written City acceptance of the work. B. The required warranty period for all work relating to street construction, including concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, materials and equipment shall be subject to one (1) year from the date of final written acceptance, unless the wearing course is placed during the same construction season as the bituminous base course. In those instances, the subdivider shall guarantee all work, including street construction, concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trails, material and equipment for a period of two (2) years from the date of final written City acceptance of the work. C. The required warranty period for sod, trees, and landscaping is one full growing season following installation. Following construction, a certification signed by the design landscape architect shall be filed with the City evidencing that the was installed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. 31. SUMMARY OF SECURITY REQUIREMENTS. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this contract, payment of special assessments, payment of the costs of all public improvements, and construction of all public improvements, the Developer shall furnish the City with a letter of credit, in a form acceptable to the City, from a bank, cash escrow or a combination cash escrow and Letter of Credit ("security") for $657,113.89, which represents 100 percent of the estimated cost of the Improvements. The letter of credit shall include an automatic renewal clause. The letter of credit shall guarantee to the City the construction and satisfactory completion of all items to be completed by the developer; that the letter of credit shall be reduced from time to time as work is performed and accepted in a satisfactory manner; that the city engineer may reduce the letter of credit to the amount reasonably estimated by the City engineer to be necessary to cover the remaining construction obligations; however, the letter of credit shall not be reduced below the amount estimated by the City to cover all obligations of development including payment of costs and expenses incurred by the City for legal, engineering, planning and any other costs until a maintenance bond for period of one year, satisfactory to the city attorney and the city engineer has been provided by the developer or its subcontractor. The amount of the security was calculated as follows: - 10 – ESTIMATED COSTS City Project Developer ITEM No._______(1) Installed (2) Private (3) Total Street Construction* $118,102.50 $118,102.50 Sanitary Sewer System $53,084.54 $53,084.54 Watermain System $51,654.50 $51,654.50 Storm Sewer System $70,769.00 $70,769.00 Boulevard and Drainage Swale Sod $0 $0 Pond Construction $0 $0 Rain Garden $0 $0 Street and Traffic Control Signs $0 Sidewalk Improvements $0 Trail Improvements $0 $0 Landscaping $12,300.00 $12,300.00 Street Lighting $0 Site Grading & Drainage Imp.** $301,128.25 $301,128.25 Setting Iron Monuments $1,400 $1,400 Tree Preservation and Reforestation $0 Wetland Buffer Monuments $0 SUB-TOTAL: $608,438.79 $608,438.79 Design, Admin, Insp, As-Builts (8%) $48,675.10 $48,675.10 Total: $657,113.89 $657,113.89 Total Project Cost $657,113.89 (1) Public Improvement/City Project. City to own and maintain after development complete. (2) Developer Installed Public Improvements. City to own and maintain after development complete. (3) Private - Property owner and/or property owners' association to maintain after development completed. *Street Construction includes costs for sidewalk and trail improvements **Note: If a grading permit was issued and the financial guarantee released and/or expired, these monies may be used for the required maintenance of the erosion and sediment control plan. 32. This breakdown is for historical reference; it is not a restriction on the use of the security. The bank shall be subject to the approval of the City Administrator. The City may draw down the security, without notice, for any violation of the terms of this contract or if the security is allowed to lapse prior to the end of the required term. If the required public improvements are not completed at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the security, the City may also draw it down. If the security is drawn down, the proceeds shall be used to cure the default. Upon receipt of proof satisfactory to the city engineer or designee that work has been completed and financial obligations to the City have been satisfied, with city engineer or designee approval the security may be reduced from time to time by 75% of the financial obligations that have been satisfied. Twenty-five percent (25%) of the amounts certified by the Developer's engineer shall be retained as security until: (1) all improvements have been completed; (2) - 11 – iron monuments for lot corners have been installed; (3) all financial obligations to the City satisfied; (4) the required "record" plans have been received by the City; (5) a warranty security is provided; and (6) the public improvements are accepted by the City. 33. SUMMARY OF CASH REQUIREMENTS. The following is a summary of the cash requirements under this Contract which must be furnished to the City at the time of final plat approval: Water Supply Trunk line area charge (TLAC) $ 28,847.80 Engineering Escrow 50,000.00 Park Dedication 55,580.00 TOTAL CASH REQUIREMENTS LEVIED: $ 134,427.80 34. NOTICES. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by certified mail at the following address: _______________________________ _______________________________ _______________________________ Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by certified mail in care of the City Administrator at the following address: Corcoran City Hall, 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340. The Developer shall notify the City within five (5) days of change of address. CITY OF CORCORAN: BY: ______________________________________ Ron Thomas, Mayor (SEAL) AND _____________________________________ Brad Martens, City Administrator STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of ________________, 20____, by Ron Thomas and by Brad Martens, the mayor and city administrator of the City of Corcoran, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. ______________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DEVELOPER: By: ______________________________________ Its: ______________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of ________________, 20____, by __________________________________ the ____________________________________ of ______________________________________ on its behalf. ______________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 FEE OWNER CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT _______________________________________________________, fee owners of all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, affirm and consent to the provisions thereof and agree to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property owned by them. Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2_____. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________, 2____, by ______________________________________________________. ________________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 MORTGAGE CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT _______________________________________________________, which holds a mortgage on the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, agrees that the Development Contract shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2_____. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ________________, 2_____, by __________________________________________________________________________. ________________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 CONTRACT PURCHASER CONSENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT _______________________________________________________________, which/who has a contract purchaser's interest in all or part of the subject property, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Development Contract, hereby affirms and consents to the provisions thereof and agrees to be bound by the provisions as the same may apply to that portion of the subject property in which there is a contract purchaser's interest. Dated this _____ day of ____________, 2_____. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ________________, 2____, by ____________________________________________________________________________. ________________________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 EXHIBIT “A” TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT Legal Description of Property Being Final Platted as RAVINIA 11TH ADDITION The East 780 feet of the part of the Southeasterly ¼ of the Southeasterly ¼ of Section 36, Township 119, North Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying Northerly of the South 1,010.00 feet, Hennepin County Minnesota. EXHIBIT “B” TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT APPROVING RESOLUTIONS Henn e p in Co unty Prop erty Map Da te : 1/3 0/2019 Com ments: 1 inc h = 8 00 feet PAR C EL ID: 36 11923440012 OWN ER N AME : J O Nic ho ls & D L Nichols PAR C EL AD DR E SS: 6 351 C o R d No 101, Corcoran MN 55340 PAR C EL AR EA: 5.2 4 ac re s , 228,073 sq ft A-T-B: Ab s trac t SAL E PR ICE: $52,000 SAL E D ATA: 09/1988 SAL E C OD E: Wa rranty Deed ASSESS ED 2 017 , PAYABLE 2018 PR OPERT Y TYPE: Res idential H OM ESTEAD : Homes tead M AR KET VA L UE: $465,000 TAX TO TAL: $6,740.38 ASSESS ED 2 018 , PAYABLE 2019 PRO PER TY TYPE : Residential HO MESTEAD: Homestead MARKE T VALU E: $489,000 This dat a (i) is fur nished 'AS IS' wit h no repres ent at ion as to com pletenes s or acc ura cy; (ii) is furnis hed with no war rant y of an y k ind; an d (i ii) is not s uit able for lega l, engi neering or s urv ey ing purposes . Hen nepin C ounty s hall not be liable f or any dam age, in jury o r los s r esu lting f rom t his data. CO PYRIG HT © HENNEPIN CO UN TY 2 0 19 Technical Memo Wenck | Colorado | Georgia | Minnesota | North Dakota | Wyoming Toll Free 800-472-2232 Web wenck.com To: Kevin Mattson, PE, Director of Public Works From: Kent Torve, P.E. Nicholas Wyers Rowdy Schmidt Date: April 12th, 2019 Updated April 19th for Packet Subject: Ravinia – 11th Addition Plan Review Lennar submitted plans for the Ravinia development 11th Addition for City of Corcoran review. Plans dated December 18th, 2018 have been revised March 19th, 2019 for the proposed Ravinia development. The following comments are regarding the plans submitted and should be considered and addressed. A more detailed memo is transmitted to developer separately, which documents changes already made. 1.0 Transportation 1.1 Raise northwest corner of temporary cul-de-sac to provide more coverage over 21” storm pipe. 1.2 Install curb and gutter around temporary cul-de-sac 1.3 South end of Larkspur will need a radius transition on south end to accommodate traffic entering and exiting temp turn around. Review with Engineer. 1.4 Due to curve on Road 2, City recommends extending temporary turn around further into Outlot B. Shift temporary turn around to avoid CBMH 4. Coordinate with Engineer. 1.5 Temporary turnaround on Road 2 does not meet city requirements from City detail plate STR-22 on page 14. 1.6 No Parking sign to be placed at all temporary turnarounds. 2.0 Trails 2.1 No remaining comments 3.0 Sewer 3.1 Lot 1 Block 3 does not have sewer and water services. Verify with City whether it should be considered an Outlot. 3.1.1 Plat shows this lot as a platted lot. 3.1.2 Since no water service being installed to this property, remove sewer service from plans. 3.2 Verify depth of Lot 6 Block 1 sewer service with watermain crossing. Engineer’s Memo April 19, 2019 2 \\MSPFSV02\Studios\Planning & Urban Design Studio\City of Corcoran\COR19005 - Ravinia 11th FP and Final PUD\Engineers Plan Reivew_Streamlined for Planning Packet.docx 4.0 Water 4.1 No remaining comments 5.0 Grading and Stormwater Storm Sewer 5.1 Provide OCS detail for OCS 15. 5.1.1 Show draintile connection in OCS detail 5.1.2 Show pipe from structure to filtration basin in plan view. 5.1.2.1 Install flared end section as inlet pipe to infiltration basin 21. 5.2 Revise detail for OCS 15. 5.2.1 For example the inlet pipe is shown with an invert of 975.5 and drawn below the NWL at 975.2. 5.3 Relocate FES 13 to avoid the easement owned by adjacent property owner. 5.3.1 Discussions with City will involve constructability of hydrant, retaining wall, and RCP pipe/FES 13 in this area 5.4 EOF swale is acceptable for current proposed conditions. If area to the south is developed, a second pipe will need to be installed to act as the EOF for Wetland 16. 5.4.1 Show route of future EOF pipe from Wetland 16 to ensure lateral and vertical clearance. 5.5 Sump manhole to be moved from CBMH 3 to be CBMH 4. Wetland 14 / Wetland 18 This area has some uncertainty due to the expansion of the original Ravinia to include Phase 11 (Nichols). The model will require additional clarification. See attached figure. 5.6 Provide City updated topographic survey shots of this berm area with overflow elevations, pipes or other elevation controls 5.7 Revise the NWL and starting water elevation for Wetland 14. The model’s starting water elevation of 976.0 does not appear to be accurate based on the site ALTA and LiDAR. Additionally, it appears that the 972.9 EOF may be lower than the actual EOF/berm. Confirm with additional survey. 5.8 Wetland 18 storage starts at 972.0. Outlet pipe is shown as 969.8. Wetland 15/ Wetland 16/ Wetland 17 5.9 Revise the NWL and starting water elevation for Wetland 15. The starting water elevation (985.5) and outlet (986.8) do not correspond with the previously submitted NWL of 986.0 for Wetland 15. Provide topographic survey of wetland berm and sheet pile. Engineer’s Memo April 19, 2019 3 \\MSPFSV02\Studios\Planning & Urban Design Studio\City of Corcoran\COR19005 - Ravinia 11th FP and Final PUD\Engineers Plan Reivew_Streamlined for Planning Packet.docx 5.10 Set model starting elevation at the constructed outlet control elevations for Wetland 16 using the FES 12 invert elevation of 983.5. Filtration Basin 5.11 Remove Device 3 as an outlet for the filtration basin or clarify its function Other 5.12 Stormwater plan will need watershed approval. 5.13 Infiltration basin access shows coming off existing driveway off County Road 101. Confirm with county that this access will be allowed to remain. 5.14 When property to the south develops, a permanent access will be required from Road 2. 5.15 Raise basement floor of Lot 2 Block 3 to 1 ft above HWL of Wetland 16. 5.16 Locate and label all onsite and offsite EOFs 5.17 Locate and label EOF elevation for Wetland 16 5.18 Revise grading for EOF swale to direct future runoff within project limits. 5.19 Grading on east side of filtration basin is to be contained on Lennar property. 6.0 Erosion Control 6.1 No remaining comments 7.0 General 7.1 Add street lighting plan. 7.1.1 Street light on the end of road 2 to be installed between Outlot C and Lot 1 Block 2. 7.1.2 Confirm with public safety for street lighting on Larkspur Lane 7.1.3 City staff to review lighting plan prior to installation. 7.2 Lot 1 Block 2, provide clarification on platting needs to stay out of driveway easement. 7.3 Update detail plates to most recent City standards. elm creek Watershed Management Commission ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE TECHNICAL OFFICE 3235 Fernbrook Lane Hennepin County Public Works Plymouth, MN 55447 Department of Environment and Energy PH: 763.553.1144 701 Fourth Ave. South, Suite 700 E-mail: judie@jass.biz Minneapolis, MN 55415 PH: 612.348.7338 E-mail: james.kujawa@hennepin.us CHAMPLIN • CORCORAN • DAYTON • MAPLE GROVE • MEDINA • PLYMOUTH • ROGERS Ravinia 11th Addition Corcoran, Project #2019-011 Project Overview: This project is a 5.6-acre, rural residential lot located on CR 101, approximately ¼ north of the four-corner intersection Maple Grove, Plymouth, Medina and Corcoran. Lennar Homes is proposing to subdivide the property into 14 single-family residential lots. This project triggers the Commission’s review for Stormwater Management (Rule D), Erosion and Sediment Controls (Rule E), Wetland Alteration (Rule G), and Buffer Strips (Rule I) to their 3rd Generation STWMP Rules and Standards. Applicant/Agent: US Home Corporation, Attention Paul Tabone. 16306 36th Ave. N Suite 600, Plymouth MN 55446. Phone: 952-247-3086. Email; Paultabone@lennar.com Engineer; Sathre-Bergquist Inc., Attention Charles Wiemerslage, 150 South Broadway, Wayzata, MN 55391. Phone; 952-476-6000. Email; cwiemerslage@sathre.com Exhibits: 1) ECWMC Request for Plan Review and Approval with fee, received April 10, 2019 2) Ravinia 11th Addition Preliminary Site Plans by Sathre-Bergquist Inc. dated December 18, 2018 with last revision date of March 19, 2019. a. Sheet 1 of 16, Title Sheet b. Sheet 2-3 of 16, Final Street Plan c. Sheets 4-5 of 16, Final Sanitary Sewer & Watermain Plan d. Sheets 6-7 of 16, Final Storm Sewer Plan e. Sheet 8 of 16, Final Grading Plan f. Sheet 9 of 16, Final Erosion Control Plan g. Sheets 10-16 of 16 Details h. Sheet TS, Tree Survey i. Sheet 1 of 1, Alta/NSPS Land Title Survey dated December 4, 2018. j. Sheets 1-2 of 2, Ravinia 11th Addition Plat k. Sheet 1 of 1, Ravinia 11th Addition, Preliminary Plan with last revision date of March 19, 2019. l. Ravinia 11th Addition lot tabulation 3) Wenck (city consultant) Ravinia 11th Addition review dated January 28, 2019 with redline response 4) Geotechnical Evaluation Report for Nichols Property dated January 7, 2019. 5) Nichols Stormwater Management Plan, by Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services dated March 15, 2019. 6) Ravinia overall density and phasing plan. Findings; 1) A complete application was received on April 10, 2019. The initial decision period, per MN Statute 15.99 expires on June 9, 2019. 2) This site is in the Elm Creek watershed basin. It drains south and east under CR 47 and through a series of wetlands and floodplains before reaching Elm Creek in Plymouth, just east of Peony Lane. 3) The existing land use is a rural, single family residential lot. It has 0.53 acres of impervious surfaces and 5.06 acres of grass/woods/wetland/ponding areas. 4) The proposed land use will have 1.65 acres on new impervious surfaces (note, this includes 0.31 acres from future development to the south that will be treated in filter basin 21) and 4.06 acres of lawns/grass/woods/wetlands/ponding area. Stormwater Management 5) One onsite filter basin is proposed in this addition. 6) There are three existing wetlands on this site that will not be impacted by this development. a. Wetland 16 is along the west side of the development. A 21” pipe will route water from wetland 16 east into wetland 17. b. Wetland 17 is on the south side of this development and drains to the south off site. c. Wetland 15 is on the east side of the site and drains into an existing ditch/culvert on CR 110 that runs east into the Fieldstone development in Maple Grove. i. The filter basin will drain into Wetland 15. 7) There are two discharge points from this development. a. Water flowing into wetland #17 then south off site b. Water flowing into Wetland #15 then into the CR 101 ditch culvert system. 8) Wetlands and filter basins will have drainage and utility easements placed over them as part of the platting process 9) The City of Corcoran requires landowners maintain stormwater basins. Lennar will be forming a Homeowners Association to operate and maintain this onsite filter basin. a. An operation and maintenance agreement between the city and HOA must be approved and recorded on the land title. 10) When the area south of this development is platted, it is presumed that Road 2 in the 11th addition will terminate into a cul-de-sac with five additional lots on that property. The stormwater filter basin on the 11th addition is proposed to treat this future development for rate, quantity and quality controls. 11) Rate controls will meet the Commission standards for 2, 10- and 100-year discharges. Based on the 2 main discharge points on this site, the rates will be as follows; 2-yr (cfs) 10-yr (cfs) 100-yr (cfs) Pre-Development Rates South (into Wetland 17) 6.3 13.1 22.5 Post-Development Rates South (into Wetland 17) 5.4 11.0 19.3 Pre-Development Rates East (into CR 101 ditch) 10.1 20.0 29.6 Post-Development Rates East (into CR 101 ditch) 7.6 19.6 28.3 12) Abstraction requirements will be for 1.65 acres new impervious areas on site and 0.31 acres of proposed new impervious areas for the future development to the south that will drain into the new filter basin in Ravinia 11th Addition. Total filtered abstraction required in this basin will be 1.96 new impervious areas, or 7,826 cubic feet. Actual filtration volume proposed will be 9,675 cubic feet, which will meet our abstraction requirements. a. Drawdown on the filter basin will be 23.7 hours. b. A forebay will be constructed as part of this basin. Its size was based on 10% of the filtration volume, or 976 cubic feet. 13) Phosphorus and Total Suspended solids were analyzed using P8 for pre and post development. Both loads will be reduced after development vs pre-development. This will meet the Commission standard. Water quality and abstraction will be as follows; Condition (based on 5.67 acres) TP Load (lbs/yr) TSS Load (lbs/yr) Abstraction (cu. ft.) Filtration (cu. ft.) Annual Volume* (ac. ft.) Pre-development (baseline) 2.3 733 N/A N/A 4.04 Post-development without BMPs 5.0 1547 7826 Post-development with BMPs 1.9 151 9675 4.65 Net Change -0.4 -582 N/A -1797 N/A 14) Buffer widths on the wetlands do not appear to meet the Commission standard of 10’ minimum, 25’ average. 15) The City of Corcoran is the LGU in charge of administering the MN WCA. There does not appear to be any impacts to the wetlands in this parcel. 16) Grading and erosion control plans meet the Commission’s requirements. Recommendation: An operation and maintenance agreement between the city and HOA must be approved and recorded on the land title. Wetland Buffers must meet the ECWMC requirements. Hennepin County Department of Environment and Energy Advisor to the Commission 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: JP Mansolf through Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: May 15, 2019 for the May 23, 2019 City Council Meeting RE: Sketch Plan Review and Topography and Wetland Waivers for property at 22505 Strehler Road (PID 20-119-23-14-0001) (City File 19-008) 60-DAY REVIEW DEADLINE:July 7, 2019 1.Application Request Ebert Construction, on behalf of the Diann C Strehler Trust, has submitted a request for review of a Sketch Plan for a subdivision that would create a 78.64 acre lot (Lot 1) and a 36.59 acre lot (Lot 2) from an existing 118.25 acre property. The applicant is also requesting approval of waivers for the Topography and Wetland Delineation requirements for subdivisions. 2.Context The existing 118.25-acre property has one existing home and several accessory structures associated with its current agricultural use. The property currently has four development rights . The applicant has indicated that three development rights will be assigned to Lot 1 and one to Lot 2 if the subdivision is approved. Zoning and Land Use The project site is guided Rural/Ag Residential (on both the 2030 and 2040 Comprehensive Plan), and zoned RR (Rural Residential). The property is located outside of the MUSA (Metropolitan Urban Service Area). Surrounding Properties The properties to the south and east are Guided Rural/Ag Residential (on both the 2030 and 2040 Comprehensive Plan). The properties to the Northwest, North, and West are guided Agricultural Preserve (on both the 2030 and 2040 Comprehensive Plan). All the surrounding properties are zoned as RR (Rural Residential). Natural Characteristics Hennepin County maps and the 2030 and 2040 Comprehensive Plan indicate a number of probable and potential wetlands throughout the site. A 100-year Floodplain is also shown on the property. Agenda Item: 8b. Strehler Sketch Plan and Topo and Wetland Waiver (19-008) 2 May 23, 2019 Parks and Trails The 2030 Parks and Trails Map shows a proposed north/south horseback trail along the border of the proposed Lots 1 and 2 that is not included on the 2040 Parks and Trails Map. Both the 2030 and 2040 Parks and Trails map show a proposed on-road trail along Strehler to the north of the site, proposed off-road trail along the border of proposed Lots 1 and 2 and proposed OSP/Nature Park directly south of the site. 3. Analysis of Request Sketch Plan Lot Standards The lot standards for the RR district are as follows: Minimum Standard Lot 1 Lot 2 Minimum Lot Area 2 acres 78.64 acres 39.59 acres Minimum Lot Width 200 feet 1,300 feet 1,320 feet Minimum Lot Depth 300 feet 2,607 feet 1,309 feet The proposed lots would meet all required lot dimensions. The subdivision ordinance requires all new lots to have frontage and access on an improved public street. Lot 2 would not meet this requirement as it does not currently have access or frontage on the only adjacent public road (Strehler). The applicant has indicated that poor soils and a drainage ditch make providing access to the north difficult. The applicant intends to provide a single driveway access to Lot 2 through a 66-foot wide easement across the adjoining property (PID 2111923130005). A variance would be required to plat Lot 2 without street frontage and allow this access via easement. The applicant would need to provide a copy of the draft easement from the adjacent property owner (Donald and Joyce Kienitz) with the preliminary plat application. The property currently has four development rights and has indicated three would be assigned to Lot 1 and one would be assigned to Lot 2. If Lot 2 is platted as an OS&P plat with permanent preservation and/or restoration, there is a possibility of creating two developable lots with the one development right. • If the Council supports the plat to create Lot 2 without frontage, they may wish to consider whether they would support more than one lot to be created in the future. While non-binding, any feedback would be helpful to the future homeowner. • Staff notes that if the development rights map is updated as proposed on the June 25th Council meeting, this property would be assigned 12 development rights. The applicant has indicated that Lot 2 would be assigned one development right, even with the increase from the updated OS&P ordinance. However, it is possible that more development rights could be assigned to Lot 2 when the preliminary plat is submitted and City Council should consider if Strehler Sketch Plan and Topo and Wetland Waiver (19-008) 3 May 23, 2019 more than one future developed lot is a desirable outcome for this property with access via an easement. If Lot 2 is developed with more than one lot, the single driveway access would be considered a private drive. City Council may approve private drives in the RR district only if they find that a public street connection is not required for the public street network and the design standards of Section 945.010, Subd. 20 are met. Streets The proposed Lot 1 would retain access off Strehler Road to the North. The sketch plan shows a 33- foot right-of-way for Strehler Road, which is not consistent with the City’s right-of-way standards. To provide space for future bicycle/pedestrian accommodations, staff recommends that an additional seven feet of right-of-way be dedicated to increase the ½ right-of-way to 40 feet total. This will be consistent with the right-of-way provided in the Plat for Strehler Preserve to the northwest and other recent subdivisions on Minor Collector streets like Strehler. This would be a condition of preliminary plat approval. Utilities The property is outside of the MUSA and will be served by individual wells and septic. Parks and Trails According to the subdivision ordinance, 4% of the total land area for Lot 2 would be required to be dedicated for park, trails and open space. A 20-foot easement would be required to be dedicated for the proposed off-road trail, which would count towards the required land dedication. The City Council could decide to accept cash-in-lieu of land dedication for a remaining park dedication requirement. Topography and Wetland Waiver The applicant has requested a waiver for the topographic survey and wetland delineation requirements for the site. The site is not being developed at this time and will require a topographic survey and wetland delineation when a building permit is requested for Lot 2 or further subdivision is requested. Section 930.020, Subd. 6(B)2 of the City Code allows the City Council to waive the topography requirements for lots greater than 3 acres and the City Council has previously granted exemptions from the wetland delineation requirements. Staff recommends approval of the topography and wetland waivers because no new development is proposed at this time. There is a floodplain and several potential and probable wetlands that should be indicated on the preliminary and final plats, but delineating the wetlands is not necessary. Strehler Sketch Plan and Topo and Wetland Waiver (19-008) 4 May 23, 2019 Next Steps If the waiver requests are approved, the applicant would proceed with a variance, preliminary plat and final plat to allow subdivision of the property. If the applicant chooses to proceed with the application, they would need to submit applications for: • Variance • Preliminary Plat • Final Plat Summary The Council should provide feedback on the applicant’s proposal and whether there are additional issues to be addressed or items that would not be desirable in this subdivision. The applicant would take those comments under advisement as they prepare a formal submittal. • Is the Council supportive of a variance to allow creation of a lot without frontage on a public street? • Is the Council comfortable with the potential development scenarios that result from the updated OS&P ordinance and could include more than one lot without frontage on a public street? • Would the City be comfortable allowing a private drive if more than one lot is developed in the future? Staff finds that the request to waive the topographic survey and wetland delineation requirements is reasonable and recommends City Council approve the request. 4. Action Move to adopt Resolution 2019-42 to approve the topographic survey and wetland delineation waivers for the site. The applicant is requesting comments on this sketch plan. Any comments given by the City Council are advisory in nature and non-binding. While the comments are non-binding, the applicant will consider the comments from the City Council when they prepare their formal submittal. Strehler Sketch Plan and Topo and Wetland Waiver (19-008) 5 May 23, 2019 Attachments a. Resolution 2019-42 approving waivers b. Aerial Location Map c. Hennepin County Natural Resources Map d. 2030 Parks and Trails Map e. 2040 Parks & Trails Map f. Applicant’s Narrative dated May 8, 2019 g. Sketch Plan Graphics dated and May 8, 2019 City of Corcoran May 23, 2019 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2019-42 Page 1 of 2 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY AND WETLAND DELINEATION WAIVER FOR “STREHLER” SUBDIVISION (PID 20-119-23-14-0001) (CITY FILE 19-008) WHEREAS, Ebert Construction, on behalf of the Diann C Strehler Trust, (“the applicant”) has requested a waiver from the topographic survey and wetland delineation requirements for a subdivision as allowed in Section 930.020, Subd. 6(B)3 of the Corcoran Subdivision Ordinance for property legally described as follows: The west ½ of the northeast ¼ of Section 20 and the southwest ¼ of the northwest ¼ of Section 21 all in Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County Minnesota. WHEREAS, the Corcoran City Council reviewed this item and provided feedback on a Sketch Plan for the “Strehler” Subdivision at their meeting on May 23, 2019; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Corcoran City Council approves the topographic survey and wetland delineation waiver based on the following findings and conditions: 1. At this time there is no new construction proposed for the two proposed lots. 2. A topographic survey and wetland delineation exemption for the proposed parcel is granted subject to the following: a. A topographic survey and wetland delineation shall be required prior to issuance of a building permit or future subdivision on either lot. 3. The existing use is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 4. The use is generally consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. 5. No other exemptions or variances are granted. 6. Granting the wetland delineation exemption neither grants nor implies approval of any plat. City of Corcoran May 23, 2019 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2019-42 Page 2 of 2 VOTING AYE VOTING NAY Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Dejewski, Brian Dejewski, Brian Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 23rd day of May 2019. ___________________________________ Ron Thomas - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director Henn e p in Co u nty Prop erty Map Da te : 5/1 4/2019 Com ments: 1 inc h = 1 ,6 00 feet PAR C EL ID: 20 11923140001 OWN ER N AME: D ian n C St re hler Revoc Trust PAR C EL AD DR ESS: 2 250 5 Str eh ler Rd, Corc oran MN 55340 PAR C EL AR EA: 11 8.25 acres , 5,151,152 sq ft A-T-B: Torrens SAL E PR ICE: SAL E D ATA: SAL E C ODE: ASSESSED 2 018 , PAYABLE 2019 PR OPERT Y TYPE: Farm H OM ESTEAD : Homes tead M AR KET VAL UE: $842,000 TAX TO TAL: $6,198.64 ASSESSED 2 019 , PAYABLE 2020 PRO PER TY TYPE: Farm HO MESTEAD: Homestead MARKET VALU E: $852,400 This dat a (i) is fur nished 'AS IS' wit h no represent at ion as t o com plet enes s or acc ura cy ; (ii) is furnis hed with no war rant y of an y k ind; an d (i ii) is not s uit able for lega l, engi neering or s urv ey ing purpos es . Hen nepin C ounty s hall not be liable f or any damage, in jury o r los s r esu lt ing f rom t his data. CO PYRIG HT © HENNEPIN CO UN TY 20 19 He nn e pin Co u n ty Na tur al Resources Map Da te : 5/1 3/2019 Co mm ents: Th is data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to co mp le te ness or accu r acy; (ii) is furnished with no wa rra nty of a ny kin d; an d (iii) is n otsuitable for leg al, eng ine erin g or surveying p urposes. Hennepin County shall n ot be liable for a ny d amage, injury or loss re sulting from this data. CO PYRIGHT © HENNEP IN COUNTY 2019 1 inch = 1 ,6 00 feet Le ge nd FEM A Floodp lai ns - 100 Ye ar A AE FL OODPLAIN AH AO AE FL OODW AY We tlands Poten tial Wetland - HCW I Pr obab le We tland - HCW I Pr obab le We tland - NW I PID: 2 011 9231 4000 1 Add re s s: 2 250 5 ST REHLER RD, C OR C ORAN O wne r N am e: D IAN N C ST REHL ERREVOC T RUST Acr es: 11 8.2 5 ¯ ROAD SCHUTTE GLEASON ROAD JUBERT LAKE MEISTER ROAD O L D S E T T L E R S R D HORSESHOE TRAIL STI E G R D WI L L O W D R I V E TR A I L H A V E N R O A D CA I N R O A D OAKDALE D R STREHLER ROAD PI O N EE R TR COUNTY ROAD 117 RO L L L I N G H I L L S R D LARKIN RD CI T Y O F G R E E N F I E L D CI T Y O F M A P L E G R O V E SCOTT LAKE BE C H T O L D R O A D EiGH EsGH E¢GH IïKL IöKL EiGH E¼GH EsGH MORIN LAKE GOOSE LAKE COOK LAKE RUS H C R E E K OSP OSP OSP OSP T OSP OSP NP CP NP NP OSP NP NP NP OSP OSP OSP NP OSP ASA ASA ASA ASA T June 2, 2011 Parks & Trails Plan I:/504/50408144/GIS/ComPlan/Maps/Final Maps/2030 parks and trails.mxd 4 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet City ofCORCORAN 2030 Comprehensive Plan Figure 12 Existing Parks and Trails Proposed Parks and Trails Regional Trail Proposed County Bike Trail Existing On Road Trail Proposed On Road Trail City Hall/Memorial Park Community Park Existing Ball Fields/School Property Existing Park (Private/Lion's Park) Golf Course Open Water Wetlands Off Road Trail Off Road Trail outside 2030 Development Area Horseback Trail Proposed County Road 50 Natural Gas Pipeline Easement Trail (Potential) ASA - Athletic Search Area City Square OSP/Nature Park Neighborhood Park Trailhead Search Area Greenway Corridor (Bonus Eligible Resource Corridor) ASA OSP NP *Proposed park and trails locations represent the general search areas for parks and trails. The City will work with developers and landowners to identify the exact location and size of parks and trail alignments as development or park acquisition is proposed. City Limit 2030 MUSA 79 City of Greenfield City of Maple Grove City of Medina City of Rogers % Trailhead Morin Lake Scott Lake Jubert Lake Cook Lake 456710 456750 456719 456730 County Road 116 Oakdale Dr B r i d l e Pa t h J e f f r e y L n Abilene Ln Trail Ln Hunters Rdg County Road 30 He a t h e r Ln Pioneer Trl Trail Haven Rd County Road 10 Horseshoe Trl Robert Ln H o r s e s h o e Bend D r C o u n t y R o a d 5 0 Larsen Rd Gleason P k w y Willow Dr Hunter Rd County Road 19 ES t Homestead Trl Maple Hill Rd Cain Rd Rolling Hills Rd S u n d a n c e Rd Country Rd Mohawk Dr El mSt Larkin Rd Foxline Dr Strehler Rd Ca in Pl 6 5 t h Pl N Dassel Ln Old Se t t le rs R d County R o a d 1 1 7 Stieg Rd Bechtold Rd Kalk Rd S c hu t t e R d Meister Rd F o x V a l l e y Dr M y s t i q u e Dr H a g e Dr 93rd Ave N Sc hut t e P l Br a n d y w i n e Rd Chisholm T r l Tessmer Rd HighBluffLn Winc hest erTrl JubertLn R u s h C re e k RushCreek County Ditc h N u m b e r S i x t e e n Co u n t y Ditch N u mber Three SouthFor k R u s h C r e e k NP NP NP NP NP NP NP ASA ASA ASA ASA OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet ± Path: L:\2294\100\2040CompPlan\Parks and Trails Map.mxd Date: 1/15/2019 Time: 1:22:31 PM User: S huJC0243 Map 5-1Parks and Trails Plan Existing Parks and TrailsRegional TrailExisting On Road TrailCity ParkTrailheadPrivate Park/Open Space Proposed Parks and TrailsProposed On Road TrailProposed Off Road TrailProposed Off Road Trail outside 2040 Development AreaNeighborhood ParkCommunity ParkGreenway CorridorMunicipal Boundaries2040 MUSAFuture MUSA Expansion AreaParcel BoundariesStreamsLake/Open WaterWetlands NP Plan Narrative Sketch Plan Review Strehler Subdivision Sketch Plan Review for 2 lots on PID 20-119-23-14-0001 including a waiver of Topography and wetland delineation for a preliminary plan. Application proposes assigning 1 development right to the newly created 39.59 acres. The applicant is arranging a private easement from the adjoining property PID 2111923130005 to create frontage access to Strehler Road. 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. TO: Corcoran City Council FROM: Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: May 14, 2019 for the May 23, 2019 City Council Meeting RE: City initiated Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments 1.Background In 2003, the first iteration of the Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments was developed for the City of Corcoran. This guidebook facilitated a driving tour of 11 residential developments within the Twin-Cities Metro Area. Users of the guidebook were asked to take note of the lot sizes, densities, setbacks and street widths within the different developments. This was important as the City had recently adopted the first Comprehensive Plan that included municipal sewer and water services and would lead to the first urban development. In 2019, City Council asked staff to update the Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments. This version of the guidebook focused specifically on low-to-medium density urban (sewered) single family residential development. The task was to determine how other communities are dealing with similar concerns of the City of Corcoran, mainly side yard setbacks, lot size and lot widths. The tour was updated to give the Council real world examples of a variety of residential developments with different densities and design constraints. 2.Guidebook The 2019 guidebook contains three sections: a.The first includes summaries of nine residential developments and a location map for self-tour like the 2003 guidebook. Each residential development includes a summary sheet, a location map and the development plat. The summary sheet for each development notes the key elements for consideration. Approved lot sizes, lot widths and side setbacks were noted. Some developments maintained consistent metrics, while others provide multiple lot sizes and building setbacks to accommodate a variety of housing types. b.The second analyses contained in the guidebook are summary sheets of urban single-family zoning districts for all the metropolitan communities featured in the development summaries. While many of the projects were approved as Planned Unit Developments (PUD), staff felt that the standard zoning district summary would be helpful as a tool for comparison with the developments toured and with the City of Corcoran’s urban single-family zoning standards. c.An exhibit is also included in the guidebook to provide an analysis of the effect of zoning regulations and design standards on lot sizes and lot widths in Corcoran. As a common consideration before the Council with low-density planned unit developments, the exhibit focuses on design guidelines and their compatibility with the goals for density in low-density zoning districts. Agenda Item: 8c. Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments May 23, 2019 3. Analysis for the Guidebook The overall intent of the driving tour is to gain an understanding of what other communities in the Twin- Cities Metro Area are approving in single-family development and neighborhood design and to gain a better understanding of how these neighborhoods look and feel by experiencing them firsthand. Staff performed the requested analysis and drew the following conclusions: Zoning District Regulations, Planned Unit Developments, or Both Staff found through their analysis of single-family low-to-medium density developments in the Twin Cities Metro Area that most development is a PUD. Of all the communities profiled in the Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments, Martin Farms was the sole development that did not require any flexibility from the zoning ordinance. This mirrors what the City of Corcoran has experienced; the last four developments in the city were planned unit developments that required flexibility from zoning district regulations. Some cities, such as Dayton and Stillwater, have chosen to update or create new zoning districts to allow for PUD-like development. However, this does not seem to be replacing the need for PUDs and PUD overlays continue to be sought by developers in these cities. The primary reason seems to be to reduce required lot sizes and setbacks. From the community’s perspective, the PUD process allows more flexibility for the City to work with developers on other factors, such as site amenities, natural resources and open space planning, transportation systems planning, and utility planning, including the opportunity for oversizing which can benefit the city’s overall system. We can draw different conclusions from the common use of the PUD and ultimately it is up to each city to define how they will use PUDs and what they expect from these negotiated zoning districts. Evolution of Single-Family Development The developments in the guidebook were constructed pre- and post-recession. Multiple developments began construction prior to the recession and have come back to their respective cities to request PUD amendments post-recession. Developers are seeking to attract buyers who are interested in a different sort of housing product at different price points. Housing types such as villas and detached townhomes are growing in popularity, as is the option for a Homeowners Association (HOA) that covers property maintenance. Developers are seeking flexibility from cities for smaller lot sizes, lot widths and setbacks. It is not unusual to see requests for lots as small as 6,000 square feet, 50- or even 45-foot lot widths and 4- and 5-foot side yard setbacks. 4. Summary The 2040 Comprehensive Plan commits to providing opportunities for low density (3-5 units per acre) single-family development in the City. It is the now the Council’s prerogative to approve development standards that will not only implement the Comprehensive Plan but will also reflect their vision for the City. Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments May 23, 2019 Staff recommends that the City Council take the time to tour the developments highlighted in the Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments and to compare these developments with the zoning standards of their respective communities. Many cities in the Twin Cities Metro Area face the same development and density pressures as the City of Corcoran and have allowed development to occur in a manner that creates quality neighborhoods. 5. Action No Council action is requested. The Council should tour the developments and begin thinking about development standards that are important to implement the Comprehensive Plan and the City’s vision. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan is being reviewed by the Metropolitan Council and once approved, the City will have nine months to update the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance to implement the plan. This is the first step in the process to help the Council begin thinking about design priorities. Attachments 1. Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 13, 2019 Mayor and Council Members City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 RE: Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments This guidebook has been created to facilitate a driving tour of nine residential developments within the Twin-Cities Metro Area, including two in the City of Corcoran. The developments included in the tour are numbered on the Route Map. Within the guidebook is a summary sheet, a location map, and the plat for each development. The summary sheet for each development notes the key elements for your consideration. The intent of the tour is to give the Council real world examples of a variety of residential developments with different densities and design. Please take note of the lot sizes, lot widths and side setbacks within each development. Some developments maintain consistent metrics, while others provide multiple lot sizes and building setbacks to accommodate a variety of housing types. Also included within the guidebook are summary sheets of urban single-family zoning districts for a number of metropolitan communities for comparison. Please use these summaries as a tool for comparison with the developments you tour and with the City of Corcoran’s urban single-family zoning standards. The overall intent of the driving tour is to gain an understanding of what other communities in the Twin- Cities Metro are regulating in single-family development and neighborhood design and to gain a better understanding of how these neighborhoods look and feel by experiencing them first hand. If you have any questions about this guidebook, please contact me at 612.638.0225 or klindahl@landform.net. Sincerely, LANDFORM Kendra Lindahl, AICP Principal COPY: Council Members and Planning Commissioners Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Martin Farms, Otsego, MN River Hills, Dayton, MN Bass Lake Crossing, Corcoran, MN Ravinia, Corcoran, MN Maple Brook, Maple Grove, MN Seven Greens, Plymouth, MN Legacy Oaks, Minnetonka, MN Residential Developments LEGEND 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 6 7 8 954 Dancing Waters, Woodbury, MN Liberty and Legends, Stillwater, MN 8 9 Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Martin Farms, Otsego LOCATION Martin Farms Avenue RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Design Overview: Martin Farms is a multi-phase development in Otsego, MN. Phase 1 was approved in 2004 and Phase 2 was approved in 2013. The total development encompasses 306.09 acres. Phase 2 of Martin Farms consisted of 132 homes approved to be constructed in phases. Both phases conform to the R-6 zoning for the city, which is notable and unique. Many large- scale developments require the flexibility of a Planned Unit Development. Single-family and villa homes are required to follow 35-foot front yard setbacks. Side yard setbacks of 7 feet are required for interior lots. The average lot size for homes is 9,000 square feet (net). Lots for the 25 villa homes are typically around 7,000 square feet. The neighborhood includes preserved open space, a trail network, a park area with sports courts and a playground and sidewalks throughout the development. Development Standards, Single Family Homes Lot Size: 9,000 square feet (net) Lot Depth: 100 feet Minimum Lot Width: Interior: 60 feet Corner: 90 feet Setbacks: Front yard: 35 feet Side yard, interior: 7 feet Side Yard, corner: 30 feet Rear: 20 feet Wetland: 40 feet Road Widths: Primary: 28 feet Secondary: 24 feet with parking on one side Number of Units: 132 single-family and villa (Phase 2) Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Location Map • Martin Farms, Otsego, MN River Hills River Hills Martin FarmsMartin Farms Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE River Hills, Dayton LOCATION County Road 144 and River Hills Parkway RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Design Overview: River Hills in Dayton, MN is a development of 204 single-family homes, including villa style homes, which were originally referred to as Village Homes. The development was approved in 2013. The PUD for River Hills allowed the developer to propose a large variety of lot sizes. For single-family homes, the largest lot proposed was 23,565 square feet and the smallest lot proposed was 7,860 square feet. The Village Home lots were a minimum of 6,000 square feet. Lot widths and setbacks were also reduced from what was required by the zoning code. For the lot sizes proposed, the zoning standards would have required 80-foot and 60-foot lots. River Hills contains lots with widths of 60 feet, 65 feet, 70 feet, 80 feet and 85 feet. Homes in River Hills require 18-foot front yard setbacks, and 20-foot front yard setbacks for garages. Side yard setbacks between single-family homes are 5 feet, and the minimum distance between homes is 10 feet. In order to gain the level of PUD flexibility allowed by the City of Dayton, the developer consistently went above and beyond the minimum zoning requirements with landscaping, trails connections, parkway development, and other public improvements. Development Standards Minimum Lot Size: 6,000 square feet Standard Lot Width: 50 feet (interior) 65 feet (corner) Lot Depth: 120 feet Setbacks: Front yard, home: 18 feet Front yard, garage: 20 feet from sidewalk to garage door Front yard, garage to sidewalk: 24 feet from sidewalk to garage door Front yard, side street corner lot: 20 feet Side yard: 5 feet Rear yard: 20 feet Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Location Map • River Hills, Dayton, MN River Hills River Hills Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Bass Lake Crossing, Corcoran LOCATION Maple Hill Road and County Road 10 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Design Overview: Bass Lake Crossing in Corcoran, MN is a planned unit development constructed on 51.26 acres. The PUD and Preliminary Plat approvals to subdivide the area were approved in 2017. Phase 2 was approved in 2018. The initial approval was for 97 single family detached homes. Subsequent amendments to the PUD brought the total number of homes down to 95. The PUD was requested to allow flexibility to construct “villa” type single-family housing, which sits on smaller lots with smaller setback requirements than the zoning district allowed. Similar to the Ravinia development, the developer requested flexibility from the requirement to limit garages from comprising more than 55% of the viewable ground floor street facing linear building frontage. This flexibility was requested so that three-car garages could be constructed on lots with a 50-foot minimum lot width. The initial approval allowed for 33% of homes to exceed the standard, which amounted to 32 homes. In Phase 2, the developer asked for a larger percentage of homes to exceed the 55% garage standard. The City compromised with the builder by allowing 41% of the homes to exceed the 55% garage standard, which amounted to 38 homes. However, in both phases there could not be more than three contiguous homes that exceed the 55% garage standard. Development Standards, Single Family Homes Minimum Lot Area: 6,500 square feet Minimum Lot Width: 50 feet Setbacks: Front, from major roadways: 50 feet Front, from all other roadways: 25 feet Front Porch: NA Side, living: 5 feet Side, garage: 5 feet Rear: 25 feet Road Widths: Local: 30 feet Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Location Map • Bass Lake Crossing, Corcoran, MN Bass Lake CrossingBass Lake Crossing Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Maple Brook, Maple Grove LOCATION Bass Lake Road and County Road 101 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Design Overview: Maple Brook in Maple Grove, MN is a development that was approved in 2012 for 56 single-family homes. Homes in Maple Brook require 25-foot front yard setbacks, and 5-foot side yard setbacks, with a minimum of 15 feet between single- family homes. The minimum lot size proposed was 10,00 square feet. All lots in the development met or exceeded the zoning requirements for lot size and width but flexibility was granted for side-yard setbacks. Sidewalks were constructed on both sides of all streets within the development and walking and bike trails connected the development to the City of Maple Grove via three trail connections. A 5.73-acre outlot was designated as a park for the development; two baseball fields, a basketball court, and a playground were constructed on the outlot. The development also includes a pool and pool house. A minimum of 12 housing styles was agreed upon during the PUD approval process, which rates developments against a project points system. Developments with 6+ architectural styles are awarded points. The developer also agreed to provide a minimum of 33% of homes with front porches, and to set garages back father than the front face of the home or provide side loaded garages for a small percentage of homes. Maple Brook is unique in that four builders sold lots within the development: Pulte Homes, Creek Hill Custom Homes, Gonyea Homes and Donnay Homes. Development Standards, Single Family Homes Minimum Lot Size: 10,000 square feet Minimum Lot Width: 80 feet Setbacks: Front: 25 feet Side: 5 foot minimum, 15 feet between buildings Rear: 30 feet Rear, along creek: 20 feet from wetland buffer Units: 56 single-family Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Location Map • Maple Brook, Maple Grove, MN Maple BrookMaple Brook Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Ravinia, Corcoran LOCATION Gleason Parkway and County Road 101 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Design Overview: Ravinia in Corcoran, MN is a planned unit development constructed on 264.5 acres. The PUD and Preliminary Plat approvals to subdivide the area were approved in 2013. Originally, a total 426 single family detached homes were proposed; however, phases 8 and 11 added land to the original development area. The PUD provided a mix of lot sizes: 60-foot wide lots, 65-foot wide lots, and 75-foot lots. Lot areas ranged from 7,739 square feet to 28,724 square feet. The developer proposed 20-foot front setbacks. In the R-2 zone, the zoning ordinance required a 15-foot minimum separation between structures on adjacent parcels, however the developer requested PUD flexibility to reduce this separation to 10 feet in some cases. An amendment to the PUD approval altered the development standards to allow for 65- and 75-foot lots to have 5-foot setbacks. The developer also requested flexibility from the requirement to limit garages from comprising more than 55% of the viewable ground floor street facing linear building frontage. This flexibility was requested so that three-car garages would be allowed. 2-car garages were developed on 60-foot lots; if the homebuyer wanted additional garages, a larger lot was required to be selected. The Ravinia development also included an OSP park, a neighborhood park, a private park and private community room and pool, sidewalks and trails. Street trees were also included to add to the design value of the streetscape. Subsequent phases of Ravinia required PUD amendments, a common occurrence for master-planned communities that are developed in phases, as developers want to build new housing types and styles to appeal to buyers. Development Standards, Single Family Homes 60-foot lots 65-foot lots 75-foot lots Minimum Lot Width: 60 feet 65 feet 75 feet Setbacks: Front, from major roadways: 20 feet Front, from major roadways: 20 feet Front, from major roadways: 20 feet Front, from all other roadways: 15 feet Front, from all other roadways: 15 feet Front, from all other roadways: 15 feet Side, living: 7.5 feet Side, living: 5 feet Side, living: 5 feet Side, garage: 7.5 feet Side, garage: 5 feet Side, garage: 5 feet Rear: 25 feet Rear: 25 feet Rear: 25 feet Road Widths: Local: 50-foot right-of-way Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Location Map • Ravinia, Corcoran, MN RaviniaRavinia Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Seven Greens, Plymouth LOCATION NE Quadrant of Schmidt Lake Road and Vicksburg Lane RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Design Overview: Seven Greens in Plymouth, MN is a planned unit development that was initially approved for development in 2001. Homes in Seven Greens are single-family and two-family. For both housing types, homes require 15-foot front yard setbacks and 25-foot front yard setbacks for garages to de-emphasize the garage on the appearance of the home (15-foot front yard setbacks were allowed for side-loaded garages). Side yard setbacks for single-family homes are 10 feet and six feet required for garages. The average lot size for single-family homes is 15,325 square feet, although the minimum lot size proposed was 9,262 square feet. The neighborhood is designed to promote walkability and “neighboring” by creating walkable parks connected by trails and sidewalks and placing homes closer to the street and emphasizing front entrances and porches in the architectural design. Approximately 28% of the site was preserved as open space. The following principles of traditional neighborhood design were used: 1. A network of interconnected streets that vary in width from 28 to 24 feet. 2. Sidewalks on both sides of all streets. 3. Homes that are closer to the street with reduced emphasis on the garages. 4. Parks or greens within a two- to three-minute walk of each home. Development Standards, Single Family Homes Minimum Lot Size: 9,626 square feet Average Lot Width: 100 feet Setbacks: Front yard: 15 feet from sidewalk with a minimum elevation of two feet above the curb Front yard, garage: 25 feet when front-loaded, 15 feet when side loaded Side yard, garage: 6 feet Side Yard, building: 10 feet Road Widths: Primary: 28 feet Secondary: 24 feet with parking on one side Number of Units: 70 single-family and 50 two-family Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Location Map • Seven Greens, Plymouth, MN Seven GreensSeven Greens Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Legacy Oaks, Minnetonka LOCATION Parkers Lake Road RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Design Overview: Legacy Oaks in Minnetonka, MN is a planned unit development on the 24-acre Jondahl Farm property. The developer, Ron Clark Construction, worked closely with the City of Minnetonka on the issues of lot depth and setbacks so as not to limit the option for front- and side-load garages, screened porches or decks. Rear and side setbacks for this project were particularly important as the site was designed around several delineated wetlands and within a floodplain area. The PUD flexibility offered by the city for setbacks and lot depth resulted in the builder being able to offer a larger variety of home styles and streetscapes. The project included 34 single-family homes and 32 twin homes. Minimum development standards were not developed for overall development. Rather, they were applied based on the preliminary plat and any changes to the standards shown would require a PUD amendment. The development also included three proposed condo buildings, and sidewalks and trails to link residents with 11+ acres of open space and wetlands. Development Standards, Single Family Homes Minimum Lot Size: 6,079 square feet Average Lot Width: NA Setbacks: Front yard: flexible. Minimum of 10 feet. Regulated by street the lot fronts onto. Front yard, garage: 20 feet when front-loaded, 10 feet when side loaded Side yard, garage: 5 feet Side Yard, building: 7 feet Rear Yard, Primary: flexible Rear Yard, Accessory and Deck: 5-20 feet, 25 feet from wetland edge Road Widths: Primary: 28 feet Secondary: 24 feet with parking on one side Number of Units: 34 single-family, 32 twin-homes Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Location Map • Legacy Oaks, Minnetonka, MN Legacy OaksLegacy Oaks Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Dancing Waters, Woodbury LOCATION North of Valley Creek Road and East of St. John’s Drive RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Design Overview: Dancing Waters in Woodbury, MN is a planned unit development constructed on 459 acres. The development was constructed in six phases. The PUD was approved in 2002. Dancing waters is comprised of 15 “areas.” The number of areas allowed the developer to propose a variety of single- family housing size options and multi-family residences, including detached townhomes, 7- to 12-plex units and Urban Flats. Each area has different requirements for lot size and setbacks. General standards were determined for single-family housing types by width of lots. Throughout the single-family home areas, front setbacks are required to be 20 feet, with 25 feet for garages, and side setbacks are required to be 5 feet until lots reach a width of 80 feet, at which time the total width between structures must be 15 feet, a 5-foot increase. Single family lots and detached townhomes comprised 660 units. 40 units of affordable housing was also included. Streets, sidewalks and trails connect development areas and parks together. Public open space consists of approximately 100 acres, combined with private open space of 127 acres, 28% of the site is open space. Development Standards, Single Family Homes 50-foot lots 65-75-foot lots 80-85-foot lots 100-110-foot lots Average Lot Size: 5,750 square feet 8,125 square feet 10,000 square feet 14,000 square feet Minimum Lot Width: 50 feet 65 feet 80 feet 100 feet Setbacks: Front: 20 feet Front: 20 feet Front: 20 feet Front: 20 feet Front, garage: 25 feet Front, garage: 25 feet Front, garage: 25 feet Front, garage: 25 feet Side: 5 & 5 feet Side: 5 & 5 feet Side: 5 & 10 feet Side: 5 & 10 feet Rear: 20 feet Rear: 20 feet Rear: 20 feet Rear: 20 feet Road Widths: Local: 28 feet, 26 feet on cul-de-sacs. Dancing Waters Parkway: 56 feet including planted median Settlers Ridge Parkway: 72 feet including planted median Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Location Map • Dancing Waters, Woodbury, MN Dancing WatersDancing Waters Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Liberty & Legends, Stillwater LOCATION SE corner of Manning Avenue and County Road 12 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Design Overview: Liberty of Stillwater and Legends of Stillwater were designed to offer a variety of single-family homes and townhomes, including “cottages,” which are smaller homes on smaller lots. The development was designed with neighborhood character in mind; the relationship of the road to the front of the residences was of central importance. To accomplish this, even large lot homes were required to have a maximum 25-foot front yard setback and 5-foot side yard setbacks. A total of 350 homes were constructed in Liberty and 156 homes were constructed in Legends. Expansion Area design guidelines and new and revised residential zoning districts were created to facilitate the development of Liberty and Legends as a PUD. The zoning districts were CR (Cottage Residential), TR (Traditional Residential), TH (Townhouse) and LR (Lakeshore Residential). Guidelines called for homes to have a functional front porch, and most houses were required to sit 15-to-20 feet from streets. A design review committee reviewed architecture and landscaping requirements for all proposed development. The overall development also contained a commercial parcel, in keeping with Traditional Neighborhood Development practices. Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net MEMORANDUM DRAFT 2 Development Standards, Detached Single Family Homes Traditional Residential Cottage Residential Townhouse Lakeshore Residential Average Lot Size: 10,000 square feet 6,000 square feet 5,000 square feet (minimum) 20,000 square feet Lot Width 65 feet 50 feet NA 80 feet Frontage 35 feet 30 feet NA 35 feet Lot Depth NA NA NA 170 feet Setbacks: Front, house: 20 feet Front, house: 15 feet Front, house: 20 feet Front, house: 25 feet Front, garage (front facing): 27 feet Front, garage (front facing): 20 feet Front, garage (front facing): 25 feet Front, garage (front facing): 32 feet Front, garage (side facing): 20 feet Front, garage (side facing): 5 feet Front, garage (side facing): 20 feet Front, garage (side facing): 20 feet Side, interior (house): 10 feet Side, interior (house): 5 feet Side: 25 feet Side, interior (house): 10 feet Side, interior (garage): 5 feet, 3 feet if in rear yard Side, interior (garage): 5 feet Side, between buildings: 15 feet Side, interior (garage): 5 feet Side, corner (house): 15 feet Side, corner (house): 15 feet Side, corner (house): 25 feet Side, corner (garage): 20 feet Side, corner (garage): 15 feet Side, corner (garage): 25 feet Rear, house: 25 feet Rear, house: 25 feet Rear: 25 feet Rear: 85 feet (from OHW) Rear, garage: 3 feet Rear, garage: 3 feet Road Widths: 28 feet in 66-foot right-of-way and 24 feet in 46-foot right-of-way Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. May 2019 Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN Location Map • Liberty and Legends, Stillwater, MN Liberty and LegendsLiberty and Legends Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE SUMMARIES Memorandum 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. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Urban Single-Family Zoning Regulations LOCATION Corcoran, MN SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE SUMMARY Zoning Code Overview: The City of Corcoran regulates residential development primarily through eight residential zoning districts. Of those eight, two zoning districts regulate the development of new single-family housing in urban (sewered) areas consistent with low-to-medium density residential development. They are the RSF-2 Single Family District and the RSF-3 Single and Two-Family District. A summary of the regulations for these zoning districts can be found in the chart on the following page. The RSF-2 Single Family District requires an 11,000 square foot minimum lot area and an 85-foot minimum lot width. The RSF-3 Single and Two Family District requires a 6,500 square foot minimum lot area and a 65-foot minimum lot width. Both districts require 100-foot front yard setbacks for structures from major roadways and 20-foot front yard setbacks for structures from all other roads. 10-foot side yard setbacks are required for living spaces, and 5-yard side setbacks are required for garages. A minimum of 15 feet distance is required between structures on adjacent parcels. The City of Corcoran also requires that residential development in these districts adhere to design guidelines. However, the four most recent developments have requested Planned Unit Development (PUD) flexibility from these standards, specifically from the side yard setback standard. Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net ME MORANDUM DRAFT 2 Corcoran Zoning Regulations – Single Family, Low-to-Medium Density Urban Zoning Districts Zoning RSF-2 Single-Family Residential District RSF-3 Single-Family Residential District Minimum Lot Area 11,000 square feet 7,500 square feet Minimum Lot Width 85 feet 65 feet Minimum Lot Depth NA NA Setbacks – Front 100 feet from major roadway 20 feet from all other streets 15 feet from front porch 100 feet from major roadway 20 feet from all other streets 15 feet from front porch Setbacks – Side 10 feet, living 5 feet, garage Minimum separation between structures on adjacent parcels shall be 15 feet 10 feet, living 5 feet, garage Minimum separation between structures on adjacent parcels shall be 15 feet Setbacks – Rear 30 feet 30 feet Additional Building Requirements Must follow Section 1040.040, Subd. 8 Design Requirements Must follow Section 1040.040, Subd. 8 Design Requirements ME MORANDUM DRAFT 3 Land Use Plan Overview: The City of Corcoran Land Use Plan within the DRAFT 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies the Low Density Residential category as the district where traditional single family homes would be constructed. This district is summarized as follows: Low Density Residential: “This land use category identifies areas for single-family detached residential development at an average density of 3 to 5 units per acre. This land use category will be Corcoran’s predominant land use inside the 2040 MUSA boundary. Residential development within or adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas will be guided as Low Density Residential to reduce development impacts to these areas. This category also includes Shamrock Golf Course and Pheasant Acres Golf Course. Low Density Residential areas will also be located contiguous to Ag/Rural Residential areas to help create a transition from the rural environment to a more urbanized land use pattern.” Zoning District Purpose: RSF-2 Single Family Residential District: “The purpose of the RSF-2 district is to provide urban sized lots for single family homes and directly related complementary uses. New development within this district will be allowed only when a full range of municipal services and facilities are available to serve the area. New development is intended to create low- density residential areas in moderate lot sizes to meet overall density requirements and provide greater variety in the housing choices. Areas zoned RSF-2 are guided Low Density of the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan.” RSF-3 Single and Two Family Residential District: “The RSF-3 district is intended to provide for new single-family neighborhoods with a lot area that is smaller than the City’s traditional single-family lot as well as directly related, complementary uses. This zoning district is intended to be the primary single-family zoning district for future residential developments. The smaller lot area will make efficient use of the City’s land supply and investment in public utilities and allow the City to efficiently protect and preserve its natural resources such as wetlands and woodlands. In addition, the smaller lot area will help the City meet its density goal for new single-family homes. Single family homes, as well as two- family dwellings are allowed in this district. New development within this district will be allowed only when a full range of municipal services and facilities are available to serve the area. Areas zoned RSF-3 are guided Low Density on the City’s 2030 Comprehensive plan. Development within this district is required at a minimum density of 3.0 units per net acre up to a maximum of 5.0 units per acre.” Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Urban Single-Family Zoning Regulations LOCATION Otsego, MN SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE SUMMARY Zoning Code Overview: The City of Otsego regulates residential development through ten residential zoning districts. Of the ten residential zoning districts, two regulate low-to-medium density residential development in urban (sewered) areas. These districts are the R-4 Residential- Urban Single-Family District and the R-5 Residential-Single- and Two-Family District. A summary of the regulations for these zoning districts can be found in the chart on the following page. The R-4 district allows for slightly larger lot sizes and setbacks than the R-5 district. In the R-4 Residential-Urban Single-Family District, the minimum lot area is 12,000 square feet and lot width minimums are 75 feet. Front yard setbacks from neighborhood streets are 65 feet and side yard setbacks are 10 feet. The R-5 Urban Residential District regulations are more like a traditional urban neighborhood, with minimum lot area requirements of 9,000 square feet and lot width minimums of 60 feet. Front yard setbacks are 25 feet from the right-of-way on neighborhood streets, and side yard setbacks are 7 feet. Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net ME MORANDUM DRAFT 2 Otsego Zoning Regulations – Single Family, Low-to-Medium Density Urban Zoning Districts Zoning R-4 Single Family Detached Dwelling District R-5 Urban Residential Minimum Lot Area 12,000 square feet 9,000 square feet Minimum Lot Width 75 feet (interior) 100 feet (corner) 60 feet (interior) 90 feet (corner) Minimum Lot Depth 100 feet 100 feet Setbacks – Front 130 feet (building from centerline, principal arterial or minor arterial) 65 feet (building from right-of-way, principal or minor arterial) 130 feet (building from centerline, principal arterial or minor arterial) 65 feet (building from right-of-way, principal or minor arterial) 25 feet (principal building from right-of-way, on local street) 55 feet (principal building from centerline, on local street) 30 feet (garage face from right-of-way, on local street) 60 feet (garage face from centerline, on local street) Setbacks – Side 10 feet (side, interior) As required for front yard (side, corner lot) 7 feet (side, interior) As required for front yard (side, corner lot) Setbacks – Rear 20 feet (rear, interior) As required for front yard (rear, through lot) 20 feet (rear, interior) As required for front yard (rear, through lot) Additional Building Requirements NA NA ME MORANDUM DRAFT 3 Land Use Plan Overview: The City of Otsego Land Use Plan within the 2012 Comprehensive Plan identifies one land use category with densities to support low-to-medium density housing development in the range of 3-5 units per acre: Low to Medium Density Residential. The Land Use Plan describes this Land use: Low-Medium Density Residential Uses: “This category of residential land uses is intended to allow for development of small lot detached single family uses, twinhomes or low intensity townhouses (consisting of horizontally oriented dwelling units with not more than two common walls for each dwelling unit) and an overall development density of three to six dwelling units per acre. The intent is that these low-medium density residential areas will develop primarily with single family dwellings on smaller urban lots. The City may allow at its discretion development of less intense twinhome or townhouse dwellings. Factors to be considered in evaluating development proposals for areas guided for low-medium density residential uses include the type and mix of housing in the immediate area, the balance of housing in the community at the time of the proposal, the proximity of environmentally sensitive areas, the design quality of the proposed development and the proposed dwelling units, capacity of streets serving the area and the impact of the proposed development to the City’s service capabilities. The burden of demonstrating that a proposed development is appropriate for a particular area shall be the responsibility of the land owner or developer. Development of these more compact urban land uses will encourage continued diversification of the housing supply within the City, provide for land use transitions between traditional single family neighborhoods and more intensive uses and major roadway corridors. Development of non-single family uses within these areas is intended to be subject to the performance standard recommendations outlined in the following section.” Zoning District Purpose: R-4 Residential-Urban Single-Family District: “The purpose of the R-4 Residential-Urban Single-Family District is to provide for high density single-family dwelling units within public or semipublic sewered areas of the community at a relatively dense urban scale and to be established only when such services are available.” R-5 Single- and Two-Family District: “The purpose of the Single and Two Family Dwelling District (RSF4) is to provide transitional areas that will allow a mixing of two family dwellings and/or single family dwellings on smaller lots where property is adjacent to arterial streets and/or where property is adjacent to higher intensity development. Directly related, complementary uses are also appropriate. A full range of public services and facilities shall be available to RSF-4 areas.” Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Urban Single-Family Zoning Regulations LOCATION Dayton, MN SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE SUMMARY Zoning Code Overview: The City of Dayton regulates residential land uses through eight residential zoning districts. Of these eight districts, the urban single- family zoning districts that support low-to-medium density housing development are the R1-A Single-Family Residential District and the R-3 Single Family Attached and Detached District. A summary of these districts can be found in the chart on the following page. Of the two districts, the R-3 Single-Family Attached and Detached Residential District is denser, allowing for minimum lot areas of 6,000 square feet, minimum lot widths of 80 feet at setback, 20-foot front yard setbacks for homes, and 7.5-foot side yard setbacks. The R1-A Single-Family Residential District requires a minimum lot area of 10,890 square feet, and a minimum lot width of 65 feet. The zone also requires front yard setbacks of 20 feet for homes and 7.5-foot side yard setbacks. Both zoning districts have additional design guidelines that allow for flexibility in regulations to allow for greater variety of home design and the preservation of natural areas. Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net MEMORANDUM DRAFT 2 Dayton Zoning Regulations – Single Family, Low-to-Medium Density Urban Zoning Districts Zoning R1-A Single-Family Residential District R-3 Single-Family Attached and Detached Residential District Minimum Lot Area 10,890-12,500 6,000 – 10,000 square feet Minimum Lot Width 65 feet (at setback) 50 feet (at street) 65 feet (at setback) Minimum Lot Depth NA NA Minimum Frontage 60 feet (at street) 75 feet (corner lots) 50 feet (at street) 75 feet (corner lots) Setbacks – Front 20 feet (living area) 20 feet (side loaded garage) 25 feet (garage front) 15 feet (front porch) 20 feet (living area or side loaded garage) 25 feet (garage front) 20 feet (front porch) Setbacks – Side 7.5 feet (interior) 20 feet (corner) 7.5 feet (interior) 20 feet (corner) Setbacks – Rear 15 feet 20 feet MEMORANDUM DRAFT 3 Zoning R1-A Single-Family Residential District R-3 Single-Family Attached and Detached Residential District Additional Building Requirements Lot area: Total lot area of individual lots may vary to accommodate variety in subdivision design and layout provided the overall lot sizes in the development maintains an average of at least 12,500 square feet (except for lots located in exception as described in Subdivision 2(7)) and no lots shall fall below 10,890 square feet. Various lot sizes shall be distributed throughout the development. All development in R-1A shall follow the same special minimum requirements as listed in the R-1 district Subd. 1 (6). Minimum lot requirements: 1. Lot area. Total lot area of single family detached lots may vary to accommodate variety in subdivision design and layout provided the development includes public and private open space, increased protection of natural resources and/or on-site amenities above what is required by ordinance. 2. Minimum single family detached lot shall be 10,000 square feet Developments providing elements as indicated in the categories listed in Subdivision 5(5) b. may include a variety of lots sizes, including lots below 10,000 square feet provided the lot area of all proposed lots, within a single development, maintains an average of 10,000 square feet and no single family lots shall be below 6,000 square feet. Various lot sizes shall be distributed throughout the development. Elements. All R-3 developments shall incorporate four (4) of the following elements into the development plan at time of Preliminary Plat. 1. Public or private open space accessible and useable by the neighborhood. 2. Increased park land dedication of 2% beyond the required park dedication amount when land is required by the ordinance; 3. Expansion of existing open space or open space corridors and/or linking open space corridors beyond borders of the site; 4. Preservation of existing natural resources, woodlands and unique topographical features if they exist 5. Increased landscape buffer along roadways beyond minimum requirements of the ordinance. MEMORANDUM DRAFT 4 6. Increased internal landscaping throughout the site beyond minimum requirements of the ordinance. 7. Private parks furnished with commercial grade playground equipment approved by City Staff, 8. Enhanced pedestrian scale and decorative street lighting, 9. Construction of trails (above what is required by ordinance), 10. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the street. 11. Recreational facilities, pool or other on-site amenities which serve the entire development. 12. Monument signage with decorative lighting, and enhanced entry landscaping surrounding the monument; 13. Water feature at entry or used in storm water ponds 14. Innovative street designs that encourages a variety of building orientation along roads 15. Architectural detail beyond minimum requirements of the ordinance; 16. Unique environmentally friendly development characteristics or building techniques; When a development contains a mixture of attached and detached dwelling units a transition area shall be provided through means of landscaping berming, buffering, or other manner. Special minimum requirements: A private 2 car garage with a minimum floor area of 440 square feet shall be required to be built concurrent with the principal structure. The maximum footprint of the garage shall not exceed the footprint of the living area of the principal structure. 1. Two surface parking spaces shall be provided in a driveway location. MEMORANDUM DRAFT 5 2. For non-residential permitted or conditional uses, parking shall be as required in Subsection 1001.19. All developed properties shall display the street address on at least 1 street frontage. Newly constructed single-family homes (detached) shall be constructed with the design elements as required in R-1 Single Family Residential District. MEMORANDUM DRAFT 6 Land Use Plan Overview: The City of Dayton Land Use Plan within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies two land use categories with densities that correspond to low-to-medium density residential. The Land Use Plan describes these land uses: Low Density Residential: “This category identifies areas for single-family detached residential development at a density of 2.3 units/acre except for property within the Critical Area which will be limited to 2.2 units/acre. This land use category identifies areas for single family detached residential development at a density of 2.3 to 4 units per acre. This land use category will be Dayton’s predominant land use in 2030, accounting for 20% of the City’s total area. Development in these areas should be sensitive to the environment and efforts must be made to preserve the community’s significant natural features.” Low-Medium Density Residential: “This category identifies areas primarily for single-family detached homes with some twin- or townhomes at a slightly higher density of 4 to 8 units/acre. This land use will account for approximately 5% of Dayton’s total net land use in 2030. Typically these areas are located to provide a buffer with low density residential development and more intense residential development at higher densities. Similar to the low density residential category the implementation of Parks, Trails, and Open Space Plan will be an integral component to the design and review process of future low-medium residential developments.” Zoning District Purpose: R1-A Single-Family Residential District: “The purpose of the R-1A, Single-Family Residential District with Lot Averaging is to provide for development of low-density neighborhoods with varying lot width and lot sizes that is planned in a manner that maintains the natural topography of the site, preserve more open space than what would otherwise be achieved, and preserves or enhances natural features on the site within private common and public open space.” R-3 Single Family Attached and Detached District: “The purpose of the R-3, Single-Family Attached and Detached District is to allow a mix of single-family detached and single-family attached housing (with a maximum of 4 units per building) at a more moderate single-family density. The R-3 District will also support a range of lot sizes of single-family detached, including villas, to accommodate natural topography of the site, preserve open space, natural features and provide shared amenities on site with a variety of lot width and sizes that support a greater variety in home design within a single development that is served by municipal sewer and water. A maximum of 30% of the lots shall be villa lots.” Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Urban Single-Family Zoning Regulations LOCATION Maple Grove, MN SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE SUMMARY Zoning Code Overview: The City of Maple Grove regulates single-family development in urban (sewered) areas through four residential zoning districts. Of those four, three zoning districts regulate the development of low-to-medium density single-family housing. They are: • R-2 Single Family Residential District • R-2b Single Family Residential District • R-3 Single and Two-Family Residential District A summary of the regulations for these zoning districts can be found in the chart on the following page. All three zones have the same regulations for lot size and setbacks. The minimum lot area for all three zones is 10,000 square feet, with an average of 11,000 square feet. Front yard setbacks are 25 feet, and side yard setbacks are a minimum of 5 feet, with a minimum of 15 feet between buildings. Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net ME MORANDUM DRAFT 2 Maple Grove Zoning Regulations – Single Family, Low-to-Medium Density Urban Zoning Districts Zoning R-2 Single-Family Residential District R-2b Single-Family Residential District R-3 Single- and Two-Family Residential Minimum Lot Area 10,000 square feet; 11,000 square feet average 10,000 square feet; 11,000 square feet average 10,000 square feet; 11,000 square feet average Minimum Lot Width 80 feet; 85 feet average 80 feet; 90 feet average 80 feet; 85 feet average Minimum Lot Depth NA NA NA Setbacks – Front 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Setbacks – Side 5 feet; 15 feet minimum combined total for both side yards (interior lot) 5 feet interior; 15 feet abutting a public right-of- way; 25 feet abutting a major street (corner lot) 5 feet; 15 feet minimum combined total for both side yards (interior lot) 5 feet interior; 15 feet abutting a public right-of- way; 25 feet abutting a major street (corner lot) 5 feet; 15 feet minimum combined total for both side yards (interior lot) 5 feet interior; 15 feet abutting a public right-of- way; 25 feet abutting a major street (corner lot) Setbacks – Rear 30 feet 20 feet (if rear lot lines are adjacent to, or contain wetland or floodplain, or adjacent to public or common open space) * 30 feet 20 feet (if rear lot lines are adjacent to, or contain wetland or floodplain, or adjacent to public or common open space) * 30 feet 20 feet (if rear lot lines are adjacent to, or contain wetland or floodplain, or adjacent to public or common open space) * Additional Building Requirements No structure in the R-2 district shall exceed three stories or 35 feet in building height, whichever is greater. *Rear setback: No principle structure shall be built any nearer that 60 feet to the buildable area of any adjacent lot No structure shall exceed three stories or 35 feet in building height, whichever is greater. A private garage capable of accommodating at least two vehicles shall accompany each dwelling. *Rear setback: No principle structure shall be built any nearer that 60 feet to the buildable area of any adjacent lot No structure in the R-3 district shall exceed three stories or 35 feet in building height, whichever is greater. *Rear setback: No principle structure shall be built any nearer that 60 feet to the buildable area of any adjacent lot ME MORANDUM DRAFT 3 Land Use Plan Overview: The City of Maple Grove Land Use Plan within the DRAFT 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies one land use category for single- family detached homes: Low-Medium Density Residential. The Land Use Plan describes it as follows: Low-Medium Density Residential: “The mainstay of this district is single-family detached houses. Townhouses and other residential buildings having individual exterior entrances, but not apartments, are permitted but are limited to 10% of the total number of units in a development. The density range is 1 to 4 units per net acre. Density bonuses are available for affordability. Smaller lot single family-detached layouts can be considered at the discretion of the City Council if clustering and resourceful use of storm water infrastructure, clearly demonstrated preservation of trees, slopes, and wetlands is provided to create meaningful open space. “ Zoning District Purpose: R-2 Single-Family Residential District: “The purpose of the R-2 single-family district is to provide for low density single- family detached residential dwelling units and directly related complementary uses.” R-2b Single-Family Residential District: “The purpose of the R-2b single-family district is to provide for larger low density single-family detached residential dwelling units and directly related, complementary uses.” R-3 Single- and Two-Family Residential District: “The purpose of the R-3 single- and two-family residential district is to provide for low to moderate density one- and two-unit dwellings and directly related complementary uses.” Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Urban Single-Family Zoning Regulations LOCATION Plymouth, MN SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE SUMMARY Zoning Code Overview: The City of Plymouth regulations residential land uses through ten residential zoning districts. Of these ten districts, the zoning districts that regulate urban low-to-medium density single-family development are the RSF-2, RSF-3 and RSF-4 zoning districts. A summary of the zoning regulations for these districts can be found in the chart on the following page. The RSF-2 zoning district has a minimum lot size of 12,500 square feet, smaller than the City’s traditional single-family lot. The minimum lot width in the district is 80 feet, and front yard setbacks onto neighborhood streets are 25 feet. Side yard setbacks are 10 feet for single-family residences. Both the RSF-3 zoning district and the RSF-4 zoning district have a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet and require a minimum lot width of 65 feet. Front yard setbacks onto neighborhood streets are a minimum of 25 feet, and 50 feet is required when lots abut a major arterial street. Side setbacks require a six-foot minimum setback for garages, and an eight-foot minimum setback for structures. Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net MEMORANDUM DRAFT 2 Plymouth Zoning Regulations – Single Family, Low-to-Medium Density Urban Zoning Districts Zoning RSF-2 Single Family Detached Dwelling District RSF-3 Single Family Detached Dwelling District RSF-4 Urban Residential Minimum Lot Area 12,500 square feet 7,000 square feet 7,000 square feet Minimum Lot Width 80 feet 65 feet 65 feet Minimum Lot Depth None None None Setbacks – Front 50 feet (abutting arterial street) 25 feet (abutting any other street type) 50 feet (abutting arterial street) 25 feet (abutting any other street type) 50 feet (abutting arterial street) 25 feet (abutting any other street type) Setbacks – Side 10 feet (single-family) 6 feet (garage) 8 feet (single-family) 6 feet (garage) 8 feet (single-family) 6 feet (garage) 16 feet (Between residential structures within the same development site) Setbacks – Rear 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 40 feet (Between residential structures within the same development site) Additional Building Requirements NA NA NA MEMORANDUM DRAFT 3 Land Use Plan Overview: The City of Plymouth Land Use Plan within the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies two urban land use categories with low- to-medium residential densities in the range of 3-5 units per acre: Living Area 1 (LA-1) and Living Area 2 (LA-2). The Land Use plan describes these land uses: Living Area 1 (LA-1): “Living Area 1 (LA-1) identifies low density neighborhoods and directly related complementary uses such as churches, schools and recreational facilities. Lot sizes in areas guided LA-1 will reflect the City’s goal to develop new homes at a minimum of two units per acre as well as make reasonable use of the City’s investment in public utilities and the limited supply of available land. This means that lots in future LA-1 developments may be smaller than is the case in some LA-1 guided neighborhoods today. Because LA-1 guiding is characterized by large, individual lots that typically offer less opportunity to preserve significant natural resources on individual sites, the City may allow townhomes up to three units per acre on a case by case basis. The City may allow townhomes if a developer can demonstrate that townhomes could preserve a significant natural resource that would be lost through conventional development of detached homes.” Living Area 2 (LA-2): “Living Area 2 (LA-2) identifies areas for detached and attached homes and townhomes, and directly related complementary uses such as churches, schools and recreational facilities. The primary intent behind the LA-2 designation is to respond to a need for smaller homes on smaller lots. The City needs to offer the opportunity for this type of housing alternative to expand opportunities for people seeking more affordable detached home living and to respond to changing demographics. As the population ages, there will be a growing need for smaller homes for empty nesters and for smaller households. LA-2 also offers the opportunity for townhomes, which provide additional life cycle housing opportunities. Townhomes in LA-2 neighborhoods offer residents a housing option with less maintenance than a typical detached home, while still being located in a familiar residential setting.” Zoning District Purpose: RSF-2 Single Family Detached Dwelling District 2: “The purpose of the Single Family Detached Dwelling District 2 (RSF-2) is to provide for new single family neighborhoods with a lot size that is smaller than the City’s traditional single family lot as well as directly related, complementary uses. The smaller lot size will make better use of the City’s shrinking land supply and investment in public utilities and allow the City to better protect and preserve its natural resources such as wetlands and woodlands. In addition, the smaller lot size will help the City meet its two unit per acre density goal for new single family homes. A full range of public services and facilities shall be available to RSF-2 areas.” RSF-3 Single Family Detached Dwelling District 3: “The purpose of the Single-Family Dwelling District 3 (RSF3) is to provide opportunities for smaller single-family homes on smaller lots and directly related, complementary uses. This in turn will provide opportunities for the development of more affordable single family homes and homes that address the needs of an aging population in a more compact development pattern that makes more efficient use of the City’s land supply and investment in public utilities as well as help the City meet its density goal for new single family homes. A full range of public services and facilities shall be available to RSF-3 areas.” RSF-4 Urban Residential District: “The purpose of the Single and Two Family Dwelling District (RSF4) is to provide transitional areas that will allow a mixing of two family dwellings and/or single family dwellings on smaller lots where property is adjacent to arterial streets and/or where property is adjacent to higher intensity development. Directly related, complementary uses are also appropriate. A full range of public services and facilities shall be available to RSF-4 areas.” Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Urban Single-Family Zoning Regulations LOCATION Minnetonka, MN SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE SUMMARY Zoning Code Overview: The City of Minnetonka regulates residential land uses through five residential zoning districts. Of these residential zoning districts, the only zoning district that regulates urban single-family land uses with low-to-medium housing densities is the R-1 Low Density Residential District. A summary of the regulations for this zoning district can be found in the chart on the following page. The R-1 Low Density Residential District regulates development in a manner that supports a variety of lot sizes to further the goals of the comprehensive plan, including to preserve natural resources and open space and to meet affordable housing goals. The minimum lot area required in the district is 15,000 square feet, however lots under 15,000 square feet can be developed if they meet certain criteria. Front yard setbacks are 35 feet and the sum of the side yard setbacks shall not be less than 30 feet, with a minimum setback of 10 feet. Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net MEMORANDUM DRAFT 2 Minnetonka Zoning Regulations – Single Family, Low-to-Medium Density Urban Zoning Districts Zoning R-1 Low Density Residential District Minimum Lot Area 15,000 square feet (lots less than 15,000 square feet must meet the exceptions for qualifying small lots) Minimum Lot Width NA Minimum Lot Depth NA Setbacks – Front 35 feet (local and neighborhood collector streets, from right-of-way) 50 feet (railroad lines, major collector or arterial roadways, from right-of-way) *In a case of a corner lot, one front yard setback may be reduced by 10 feet **On double frontage lots, the setback may be reduced by 10 feet towards the direction perceived by the city planner to be the rear yard. Setbacks – Side the sum of the side yard setbacks shall not be less than 30 feet, with a minimum setback of 10 feet Setbacks – Rear 40 feet, or 20 percent of the depth of the lot, whichever is less Additional Building Requirements Minimum setbacks for principal buildings on lots-behind-lots: 40 feet or 20% of the average distance between opposite lot lines, whichever is less, but no less than 25 feet. The city council may reduce all or some of these setbacks to no less than 25 feet, where: 1) the new home would be substantially screened from homes on adjacent lots or from the buildable area of adjacent undeveloped lots; 2) a home cannot be built on a lot adjacent to the side with the proposed reduced setback; or 3) an existing home on a lot-behind-lot is adjacent to the side with the proposed reduced setback and has a setback on that side that is less than those required above minimum setback for detached, accessory buildings: 10 feet. All dwellings, including manufactured homes, shall have a depth of at least 20 feet for at least 50 percent of their width. All dwellings, including manufactured homes, shall have a width of at least 20 feet for at least 50 percent of their depth. Off-street parking shall be provided for at least two vehicles for all single family dwellings. A suitable location for a garage measuring at least 20 feet by 24 feet which does not require a variance shall be provided and indicated as such on a survey or site plan to be submitted when applying for a building permit to construct a new dwelling or alter an existing garage. Each lot must have a buildable area as defined by this ordinance and established in section 400 of the code. The purpose for a buildable area is to ensure that each lot has a reasonable area for the location of a house, attached garage, and associated decks or patios and that there is MEMORANDUM DRAFT 3 sufficient room for the location of the house to be positioned to minimize the physical impacts on the lot and to be consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. This does not require that a house pad occupy the entire buildable area. Each lot must comply with the following: 1) The buildable area must be designated by the applicant and approved by the city council at the time of the subdivision creating the lot. For pre-existing lots, the buildable area will be designated by the city planner based on the standards contained in this ordinance and section 400 of this code. 2) The city may require that construction within the buildable area be located where the city determines it would reasonably: a. minimize the amount of adverse impacts to the physical environment on the lot, including such things as significant trees, grading, erosion, and surface water drainage, and b. be consistent with the location of the structures in the surrounding neighborhood. 3) No principal structure, or any portion of it, may be located outside the buildable area, except when intrusions into setbacks are allowed by this code. 4) If a home exists on a lot with less than the minimum buildable area, the home may be enlarged or rebuilt within the applicable setbacks without a variance from the buildable area standard. MEMORANDUM DRAFT 4 Land Use Plan Overview: The City of Minnetonka Land Use Plan within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies one land use category with densities in the range of 3-5 units per acre: Low Density Residential at 2-4 units per acre. The Land Use Plan describes this land use: Low-density Residential: “Most residential neighborhoods that contain existing single-family homes in the city are designated for low-density residential uses. Although low-density uses include detached single family housing types other residential housing types such as duplexes and attached townhomes are included provided that the overall density does not exceed four units per acre. This land use district is established to recognize the primary residential development pattern in the city and accommodate housing goals, including affordable and mid-priced housing.” Zoning District Purpose: R-1 Low Density Residential District: “The purpose of the R-1 district is to provide a district for single family detached dwellings in those areas where such development is consistent with the low density residential designation of the comprehensive plan and compatible with surrounding land use characteristics. Development within this district shall occur at densities not exceeding four dwelling units per acre. The allowed density for a piece of property will be determined by the city at the time of the development application. The determination will be based upon the site specific characteristics of the property and the requested development. Factors to be considered in increasing or decreasing the allowed density include the existing environmental conditions such as wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes, and significant trees; the specific site plan; the type of housing units proposed, including whether greater density is desirable because the development contains affordable housing that is consistent with the city’s affordable housing goals but that avoids unacceptable concentrations of such housing; the requested zoning; the minimum standards of this ordinance; the potential impact from traffic generated by the development; and the surrounding area. The burden of establishing the appropriateness of the high end of the density range will be on the applicant.” Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Urban Single-Family Zoning Regulations LOCATION Woodbury, MN SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE SUMMARY Zoning Code Overview: The City of Woodbury regulates residential development through three zoning districts. Of those zoning districts, only one district regulates the development of low-to-medium density single-family housing in sewered areas. This zoning district is the R-4 Urban Residential District. A summary of the regulations for the R-4 Urban Residential District can be found in the chart on the following page. The R-4 district has a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet, allowing approximately 4 units to be constructed per acre. The zoning district standards require a minimum lot width of 80 feet, and front yard setbacks of at least 35 feet. Side yard setbacks require a five-foot minimum setback for garages, and a ten-foot minimum setback for structures. Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net ME MORANDUM DRAFT 2 Woodbury Zoning Regulations – Single Family, Low-to-Medium Density Urban Zoning Districts Zoning R-4 Urban Residential Minimum Lot Area 10,000 square feet Minimum Lot Width 80 feet Minimum Lot Depth 125 feet 160 feet (abutting a collector or arterial street) Maximum Lot Depth 3x lot’s width Setbacks – Front 35 feet 50 feet (abutting collector or arterial street, future or existing) Setbacks – Side 10 feet (interior) 5 feet (interior, garage) 20 feet (residential street) 50 feet (major road) Setbacks – Rear 35 feet 50 feet (abutting collector or arterial street, future or existing) Additional Building Requirements When the garage and the living unit align, or a portion of the living unit is above the garage, the side yard setback to the structure on the garage side shall be five feet. ME MORANDUM DRAFT 3 Land Use Plan Overview: The City of Woodbury Land Use Plan within the DRAFT 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies two land use categories that support low-to-medium density housing development with densities in the range of 3-5 units per acre: "Places to Live, Low Density Residential" and "Places to Live, Medium Density Residential." The Land Use Plan describes these land uses: Places to Live, Low Density Residential: “Low Density Mixed Residential, the largest category of residential use, reserves land for densities from 2 to 3.5 units per net acre. Densities up to 5.5 units per net acre may be permitted through the density bonus program. This category is intended to continue the City’s present practice of mixing attached and detached single-family housing types (including single-family detached homes, twin homes, townhomes and detached townhomes). Very large developments should be planned around a central place or element that gives an identity that is unique to its location. Smaller developments, on the other hand, are intended to be integrated into a larger neighborhood rather than define their own unique identity. In all cases, pedestrian and open space connections should be provided to achieve a relationship with the larger community rather than as a stand-alone or buffer element. The residential density for low density residential is 2-3.5 units / acre. A density bonus is also available.” Places to Live, Medium Density Residential: “Medium Density Residential is intended to reserve land for moderately higher densities ranging from 4.5 to 8 units per net acre. Densities up to 10 units per net acre may be permitted through the density bonus program. Housing types in this land use category would typically include lower density attached housing and higher density single family detached housing units. Some forms of stacked housing (condominiums and apartments) could be integrated into Medium Density Residential areas but would need to be surrounded by additional open space to meet the density requirements. The residential density for medium density residential is 4.5-8 units / acre. A density bonus is also available.” Zoning District Purpose: R-4 Urban Residential: “This district is created to provide an adequate amount of land to meet the demand for urban residential development. These areas will require public sewer and water systems which will be extended to encourage staged and orderly growth in the city in conformance to the comprehensive plan or amendments thereto. These lands are shown as "Places to Live, High Density Residential", "Places to Live, Medium Density Residential" or "Places to Live, Low Density Residential" on the comprehensive plan or amendments thereto. Maximum density shall be consistent with the base density in the comprehensive plan unless increased using a density bonus through an approved planned unit development.” Landform®, SensiblyGreen® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. 1 DATE May 13, 2019 FROM Sara Woolf, through Kendra Lindahl, Landform TO Corcoran City Council RE Urban Single-Family Zoning Regulations LOCATION Stillwater, MN SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING ORDINANCE SUMMARY Zoning Code Overview: The City of Stillwater regulates residential development through twelve residential zoning districts. Of those districts, the zoning districts that correspond to low-to-medium density residential development in urban areas are: • RA One Family • TR Traditional Residential • CR Cottage Traditional Residential • CCR Cove Cottage Residential A summary of the regulations for these zoning districts can be found in the chart on the following page. The four zones allow for a variety of densities and housing types and maintain different regulations for lot sizes and setbacks. The zone with the smallest minimum lot area and setback requirements is the Cottage Residential zoning district, which allows for a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet. Front yard setbacks in the CR zoning district are 15 feet for a home and 20 feet for a garage, and side yard setbacks are a minimum of 5 feet. In comparison, the zoning district that allows for the largest lots and setbacks is the RA One Family District, which has a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet, front yard setback minimums of 30 feet, and side yard setbacks of 10 feet for a home and five feet for a garage. Memorandum 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 Fax: 612-252-9077 www.landform.net MEMORANDUM DRAFT 2 Stillwater Zoning Regulations – Single Family, Low-to-Medium Density Urban Zoning Districts Zoning RA One Family TR Traditional Residential CR Cottage Residential CCR Cottage Cove Residential Minimum Lot Area 10,000 square feet 10,000 square feet (when part of a PUD, average lot area) 6,000 square feet (when part of a PUD, average lot area) 7,000 square feet 10,000 square feet (average) Minimum Lot Width 75 feet 65 feet 50 feet 60 feet (at building front) 30 feet (at street) Minimum Lot Depth 100 feet NA NA NA Setbacks – Front 30 feet 20 feet (house) 27 feet (garage, front facing) 20 feet (garage, side facing) 15 feet (house) 20 feet (garage, front facing) 15 feet (garage, side facing) 20 feet Setbacks – Side 10 feet (interior) 5 feet (garage, interior. Must be 15 feet from nearest structure) 30 feet (corner) 10 feet 5 feet (garage) 15 feet (corner, house) 20 feet (corner, garage) 5 feet (interior, house and garage) 25 feet (corner, house and garage) 7.5 feet (interior) 20 feet (corner) Setbacks – Rear 25 feet 25 feet (house) 3 feet (garage) 25 feet (house) 3 feet (garage) 25 feet MEMORANDUM DRAFT 3 Zoning RA One Family TR Traditional Residential CR Cottage Residential CCR Cottage Cove Residential Additional Building Requirements Frontage requirement: 35 feet (Where two or more adjacent lots do not meet street frontage requirements, the driveways must be combined.) Maximum garage area: 1,000 square feet If there are two garages on site, a minimum of one garage shall not face the street or streets if a corner lot. Driveways: Where two or more adjacent lots do not meet street frontage requirements, the driveways must be combined.) For single-family residences: a minimum of 25 percent of lots must have garages completely recessed (more than six feet from front of a building or porch), a minimum of 25 percent of lots must have the garages set back two feet or more and a maximum of 50 percent of garages may project a maximum of six feet out from the front wall of the residence. Of that 50 percent, 25 percent must have habitable space above the garage and 25 percent must have front porches extending in front of the residence. House and garage setbacks are strongly encouraged to meet special design guidelines for variety of garage types and locations (front loaded, side loaded and recessed) and front and exterior side house elevations. Attached garages shall be regulated as follows: (1) On 70% of the lots, garages must be set back a minimum of 6 feet behind the front wall or the front porch of the residence. (2) On 30% of the lots, garages may extend beyond the front line of the dwelling. These garages may be side loaded. (3) Third car garages may be side entry or separated from the main garage, at an angle to the main garage, or otherwise screened by a portion of the house, porch, or facade. (4) Corner lots may have side loaded garages. (5) Garages may be no larger than three stalls. MEMORANDUM DRAFT 4 Land Use Plan Overview: The City of Stillwater Land Use Plan within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies two land use categories with densities in the range of 3-5 units per acre: Low Density Residential (LDR) and Low-Medium Density Residential (LMDR). The Land Use Plan describes these land uses: Low Density Residential: “This classification provides a range of lower density residential opportunities. This land use category is the largest in the city with 1,612.2 acres. It is the predominant land use type in western Stillwater. Single family homes are the main use found in the LDR category. Other uses that relate well to single family homes are permitted (usually by Special Use Permit) including parks, playgrounds, churches and schools. The zoning districts that are consistent with the LDR category have a density range of 1 to 4.4 homes per acre. Much of the LDR category is already fully developed.” Low-Medium Density Residential: “This classification provides a broad range of low and medium density residential opportunities and is the second largest in terms of acres (936.6). This category encompasses a range of zoning districts that aim to provide flexibility in lot size and density. LMDR guided areas will develop at 4.4 to 9.7 units per acre. This classification has been applied to all the existing lower to medium density properties zoned RB in the older neighborhoods of the city, as it best reflects the density at which development has occurred in these traditional neighborhoods. In addition, many of the remaining vacant parcels in western Stillwater have been guided Low Medium Density Residential to provide the most flexibility in new neighborhood design and in promoting increased density.” Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN May 2019 Zoning Analysis: Design Standards Effect on Lot Sizes Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN May 2019 Zoning Analysis: Corcoran Design Standards Effect on Lot Sizes City of Corcoran:Traditional and Small-Lot Single Family Districts (Sewered) RSF-2 RSF-3 (Single Family) Minimum Lot Area 11,000 square feet 7,500 square feet Minimum Lot Width 80 feet 65 feet Minimum Principal Structure Setbacks Front, from Major Roadway 100 feet 100 feet Front, from all other streets 20 feet 20 feet Front Porch (< 120 square feet)15 feet 15 feet Side (living)10 feet 10 feet Side (garage)** 5 feet 5 feet Rear 30 feet 30 feet Maximum Principal Building Height 35 feet 35 feet **Minimum separation between structures on adjacent parcels shall be 15 feet. Garage Requirements: Section 1040 Subd. 8 Design Requirements Garages 1. The garage shall not comprise more than 55 percent of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage. This standard is based on the measurement of the entire garage structure and not on a measurement of the garage door or doors only. Corner lots are exempt from this requirement on one street elevation. Analysis, RSF-3 Zone: 1. A typical one-car garage accounts for 14 linear feet of ground floor building frontage. To account for 55% of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage, an additional 25 square feet of ground floor street-facing linear building frontage is required. 2. A typical two-car garage acounts for 18-22 linear feet of ground floor building frontage. To account for 55% of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage, an additional 32 linear feet of ground floor street-facing linear building frontage is required. 3. A typical three-car garage accounts for a minimum of 32 feet of linear ground floor building frontage. To account for 55% of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage, an additional 58 linear feet of ground floor street- facing linear building frontage is required. 20 front yard setback 10 foot side yard setback (living) 30 foot rear yard setback 5 foot side yard setback (garage) Example: 65’ lot width, RSF-3 Standards applied. 3-car garage. max remaining width: 18 feet Does not meet 55% garage standard. Analysis, side yard setbacks: Compliance with required setbacks limits the available width for linear building frontage, particularly for homes with three-car garages. Developers are seeking the flexibility to construct smaller homes on narrower lots, with lot widths as small as 40-50 feet, limiting the remaining building frontage available to meet the 55% garage standard if 2- or 3-car garages are desired. typical 3-car garage width: 32 feet Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN May 2019 Zoning Analysis: Design Standards Effect on Lot Sizes Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. Guidebook for Self-Tour of Residential Developments • Corcoran, MN May 2019 Zoning Analysis: Corcoran Design Standards Effect on Lot Sizes 3-Car Garage: 50 foot wide home. Does not comply with Corcoran’s 55% garage standard. Complies with materials standards. Example Corcoran Development - Single-Family Home Development with 2- and 3-car garages. A3-CR2G 2FS.11 2-Car Garage: 45 foot wide home. Complies with 55% garage standard. Does not comply with materials standards. 2-Car Garage: 34 foot wide home. Does not comply with Corcoran’s 55% garage standard. Complies with materials standards. A3-CR2G 2FS.5 ELEVATION CR2G ATTIC VENT SCHEDULE VENTILATION REQUIRED AND SUPPLIED IS BASED ON POT VENT VALUES AND RIDGE VENT VALUES SHOWN IN TABLE ABOVE** CONTRACTORS INSTALLING VENTILATION ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING THAT VENTS USED WILL SUPPY VENTILATION TO MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS* SCHEDULE HAS BEEN CALCULATED ASSUMING EAVE VENTILATION AT 50-60% OF TOTAL AND RIDGE AT 40-50% OF TOTAL REQUIRED VENTILATION ROOF AREA "A"SQ FTG 2190 AT / NEAR RIDGE AT / NEAR EAVE VENT TYPE SQ. FT. REQUIREDRANGE SQ. FT.SUPPLIED PERCENT OF TOTALSUPPLIED POT LARGE (SQ. IN. EACH) POT SMALL (SQ. IN. EACH) RIDGE VENT (SQ. IN. PER LF) EAVE VENT (SQ. IN. EACH) CONT. VENT (SQ. IN. PER LF) 61.0040.0018.0028.0010.00 HIGH - POTVENTS ONLY 2.923.653.3946.128 0 AT EAVE 4.383.653.9653.88 0 57.00 TOTAL (MIN)7.307.307.35100.00 HIGH -RIDGE VENT 2.923.653.2544.230 0 26.00 AT EAVE 4.383.654.10 55.77 0 59.00 TOTAL (MIN)7.307.307.35100.00 ADDITIONAL POT VENTS MAY BE REQUIRED IF THERE IS INSUFFICIENT RIDGE AVAILABLE Example Development, Twin Cities Metro Area - Single-Family Home, 3-car garages. Complies with 55% garage standard. 37.5 feet (55% linear facade width) 30.6 feet (45% linear facade width) 105 South Fifth Avenue Suite 513 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Tel: 612-252-9070 www.landform.net Landform® and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC. TO: Corcoran City Council FROM: Kevin Shay through Kendra Lindahl, Landform DATE: May 15, 2019 for the May 23, 2019 City Council Meeting RE: City initiated Development Rights Program and Open Space & Preservation Ordinance Amendment (City File 18-014) 60-DAY REVIEW DEADLINE:N/A 1.Background April 25th Council Summary The Council directed staff to change the ordinance to allow one development right per 10 acres. Council directed staff that the change to the development rights would be based on the existing development rights and simply assuming that all lots with access on a gravel road would increase the existing development rights by three times the number. One development right was subtracted from the total amount for any property with an existing household. The development rights map was adjusted using this method for the existing development rights on a property. An example of the previous calculation is outlined below: 8100 Strehler Road – three existing development rights; 1.This parcel has an existing home. 2.Under the one per 30 acres calculation, the property would have had 6 development rights in addition to the existing home. It appears that three parcels were subdivided from the property, which leaves the three development rights. 3.Three development rights is multiplied by three for the assumption of a paved road. This gives nine development rights. 4.The nine development rights is decreased by one for the existing household on the property to provide a total of eight development rights. However, the simple multiplication method recommended by staff and Council resulted in more “winners and losers” than originally anticipated. At the meeting, Council directed staff to review each parcel and analyze the existing development rights and determine the new development rights on a lot by lot basis based on today’s lot size and any previous subdivision actions. 2.Analysis of Request Development Rights Map The revision to the development rights map on a lot by lot basis involves calculating the total acreage of the parcel and dividing the number by 10 to determine the total possible development rights. Each Agenda Item: 8d. Ordinance Amendment – DR and OSP (City File 18-014) 2 May 23, 2019 parcel is then researched to identify any previous subdivision actions that have occurred since the development rights program was adopted. Any subdivision actions decrease the total amount of possible development rights. Existing homes on a property are not accounted for in the total development rights but will use one development right when the property develops. This effectively reduces the number of new home sites that can be created by one for all lots with an existing home. This method requires more staff time to complete and is anticipated to be presented at the June 27th Council meeting. However, we wanted to provide a copy of the draft map for Council review. An example of the revised calculation is outlined below: 8100 Strehler Road – three existing development rights; 1. The development rights were increased using a calculation based on the existing acreage for all properties with existing development rights the example property would have; a. 183.43 acres / 10 = 18 development rights 2. The 18 development rights get reduced by one for the previous subdivisions that occurred since the development rights program was adopted for a total of 17 development rights. a. Existing households are not accounted for in the number shown but do use one development right. Therefore, in the example property 16 new home sites could be developed. 3. Recommendation Provide comments on the draft map and ask question then direct staff to finalize the development rights map for the June 27th Council meeting. Attachments 1. 2018-12-05 Existing Development Rights Map 2. Development Rights Map from April 25th Council meeting 3. Draft Development Rights Map $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ ROAD SCHUTTE GLEASON ROAD JUBERT LAKE MEISTER ROAD O L D S E T T L E R S R D HORSESHOE TRAIL STIE G R D WI L L O W D R I V E TR A I L H A V E N R O A D CA I N R O A D OAKDALE DR STREHLER ROAD PIO N E E R T R COUNTY ROAD 117 RO L L L I N G H I L L S R D LARKIN RD TOWNSHIP OF HASSAN CI T Y O F G R E E N F I E L D CI T Y O F M A P L E G R O V E SCOTT LAKE BE C H T O L D R O A D MORIN LAKE GOOSE LAKE COOK LAKE RUS H C R E E K 3 5 4 4 7 4 3 3 9 8 8 8 8 3 8 3 8 8 8 3 13 3 8 3 3 8 4 8 3 8 8 3 8 8 3 8 8 3 8 8 7 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 3 7 7 7 2 8 13 3 2 11 4 7 2 7 7 2 12 5 2 8 8 12 7 77 1 12 6 7 5 6 6 7 10 6 6 6 3 5 6 2 6 4 2 2 10 2 2 2 5 5 2 2 4 5 5 1 45 4 4 1 4 1 4 4 1 1 4 4 1 1 4 1 1 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 3 1 4 6 2 1 7 4 1 4 3 4 4 1 1 1 4 1 4 4 1 6 4 4 1 4 4 3 1 3 1 3 1 2 3 1 3 1 2 3 4 1 3 2 4 5 1 42 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 11 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 10 19 30 55 50 116 117 101 Development Rights Map* 4 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet 2030 Metropolitan Urban Service Area Parcels Parcels Enrolled in the Ag Preserve Program City ofCORCORAN Current as of December 5, 2018 *Existing vacant lots of record which show no building rights may have one building right remaining. Please confer with the City Planner to confirm the actual number of building rights. Existing Map $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ ROAD SCHUTTE GLEASON ROAD JUBERT LAKE MEISTER ROAD O L D S E T T L E R S R D HORSESHOE TRAIL STI E G R D WI L L O W D R I V E TR A I L H A V E N R O A D CA I N R O A D OAKDALE DR STREHLER ROAD PIO N E E R T R COUNTY ROAD 117 RO L L L I N G H I L L S R D LARKIN RD TOWNSHIP OF HASSAN CI T Y O F G R E E N F I E L D CI T Y O F M A P L E G R O V E SCOTT LAKE BE C H T O L D R O A D MORIN LAKE GOOSE LAKE COOK LAKE RUS H C R E E K 3 5 4 4 7 4 3 3 9 8 8 8 8 3 8 3 8 8 8 3 13 3 8 3 3 8 4 8 3 8 8 3 8 8 3 8 8 3 8 8 7 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 3 7 7 7 2 8 13 3 2 11 4 7 2 7 7 2 12 5 2 8 8 12 7 77 1 12 6 7 5 6 6 7 10 6 6 6 3 5 6 2 6 4 2 2 10 2 2 2 5 5 2 2 4 5 5 1 45 4 4 1 4 1 4 4 1 1 4 4 1 1 4 1 1 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 3 1 4 6 2 1 7 4 1 4 3 4 4 1 1 1 4 1 4 4 1 6 4 4 1 4 4 3 1 3 1 3 1 2 3 1 3 1 2 3 4 1 3 2 4 5 1 42 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 11 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 8 3 9 9 149 8 8 8 8 8 9 8 8 8 911 11 6 9 6 5 20 0 0 5 6 6 5 5 6 6 12 3 2 11 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 0 2 8 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 20 3 3 2 2 2 3 11 0 2 0 3 3 0 1 3 2 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 0 10 19 30 55 50 116 117 101 Proposed Development Rights Map* 4 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet Parcels Parcels Enrolled in the Ag Preserve Program City ofCORCORAN Current as of April xx, 2019 *Existing vacant lots of record which show no building rights may have one building right remaining. Please confer with the City Planner to confirm the actual number of building rights. April 25 Proposed Map $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ ROAD SCHUTTE GLEASON ROAD JUBERT LAKE MEISTER ROAD O L D S E T T L E R S R D HORSESHOE TRAIL STIE G R D WI L L O W D R I V E TR A I L H A V E N R O A D CA I N R O A D OAKDALE DR STREHLER ROAD PIO N E E R T R COUNTY ROAD 117 RO L L L I N G H I L L S R D LARKIN RD TOWNSHIP OF HASSAN CI T Y O F G R E E N F I E L D CI T Y O F M A P L E G R O V E SCOTT LAKE BE C H T O L D R O A D MORIN LAKE GOOSE LAKE COOK LAKE RUS H C R E E K 17 3 168 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 12 7 7 12 20 12 10 0 10 0 7 5 5 5 7 5 5 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 10 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 22 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 0 2 1 4 0 2 1 3 5 4 4 7 4 3 3 9 8 8 8 8 3 8 3 8 8 8 3 13 3 8 3 3 8 4 8 3 8 8 3 8 8 3 8 8 3 8 8 7 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 3 7 7 7 2 8 13 3 2 4 7 2 7 7 2 12 5 2 8 8 12 7 77 1 12 6 7 5 6 6 7 10 6 6 6 3 5 6 2 6 4 2 2 10 2 2 2 5 5 2 2 4 5 5 1 5 4 4 1 4 1 4 4 1 1 4 4 1 1 4 1 1 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 3 1 4 2 1 7 4 1 4 3 4 4 1 1 1 4 1 4 4 1 6 4 4 1 4 4 3 1 3 3 1 2 3 1 3 1 2 3 4 1 3 2 4 5 42 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 19 30 55 50 116 117 101 Draft Development Rights Map* 4 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet Parcels Parcels Enrolled in the Ag Preserve Program City ofCORCORAN Current as of May 16, 2019 *Existing vacant lots of record which show no building rights may have one building right remaining. Please confer with the City Planner to confirm the actual number of building rights. Black Text is Existing Development Rights Red Text is Proposed Development Rights Building rights shown do not account for existing homes on the lot. Existing homes will count as using one of the allowed development rights. May 23 Draft Map STAFF REPORT Agenda Item. 10a. Council Meeting: May 23, 2019 Prepared By: Mike Pritchard Topic: Code Enforcement Appeal Action Required: Appeal Ruling, Direction Summary: On May 1, 2019 the City’s Code Enforcement Contractor noted multiple nuisance violations at 9605 County Road 101. A Notice of Violation was sent to the property owner. The property owner, David Schodde, made a formal written appeal of the nuisance designation on May 7, 2019. Staff conducted a follow-up visit on May 13, 2019 to take more complete site photos and confirmed the following violations to exist on site: 82.04 Subd. 3. Storage Nuisance C. A recreational vehicle, personal recreational vehicle, ORV, and unoccupied trailer is considered a storage nuisance when remaining in the same location for 72 hours. Except that recreational vehicles, personal recreational vehicles, ORVs and unoccupied trailers may be stored in the side or rear yard, provided they comply with a minimum setback of 10 feet. 82.04 Subd. 3. Storage Nuisance D. Vehicles may be stored in the side or rear yard, provided they comply with a minimum setback of 10 feet and are screened according to Chapter 1060.070. 82.04 Subd. 3. Storage Nuisance E. In accordance with City Code governing junk vehicles there shall be no collection of junk or inoperable vehicles as defined in chapter 80, unused or unusable motor vehicle bodies, parts and engines and related accessories, with the exception of appropriately licensed pioneer, classic or collector vehicles as defined in Minn. Stat. § 168.10. 80.05 Violation to Store Inoperable Vehicle or Junk Motor Vehicle No person shall store, outside of an enclosed garage or similar building, any inoperable or junk motor vehicle on his or her property. The property owner shall not give permission to store inoperable junk vehicle(s) on his or her property. The property owner shall be responsible for compliance with this section and shall be guilty of a misdemeanor if violated. Vehicles on the premises of junkyards and automobile graveyards that are defined, maintained, and licensed in accordance with Minn. Stat. §161.242, or that are maintained in accordance with local laws and zoning regulations, may be stored on the business property. INOPERABLE VEHICLE. Any car, truck, van, recreational vehicle, motorcycle, snowmobile or other vehicle typically powered by an engine or motor, excepting properly licensed and registered watercraft, that has been in a stationary position for more than 30 calendar days, is apparently inoperable or requires repairs in order to be operable, or is unable to move a significant distance under its own power on a flat surface, or on which there are displayed neither valid license plates nor a valid registration decal. JUNK VEHICLE. Any motor vehicle which cannot meet all of the following criteria: 1. The vehicle must be able to be driven or propelled under its own power upon demand in its existing condition; and 2. The vehicle must be able to be driven or propelled under its own power in a safe manner and not be wrecked, junked, or dismantled at the time of inspection and/or abatement; and 3. The vehicle must have current license plates and tabs; and 4. The vehicle must have current proof of liability insurance, as required by state law. 82.04 Subd. 3. Storage Nuisance F. The accumulation of rubbish, waste matter, disused furniture, appliances, machinery, automobiles and parts thereof, accumulations, which may become a harborage for rats, snakes or vermin or which may be conducive to fire, or which endangers the health, safety or welfare of the public or otherwise not allowed by Section 1060.010. 82.04 Subd. 4. Parking Nuisance A. A person must not cause, undertake, permit, or allow the outside parking of vehicles on residential property unless it complies with the following requirements: 2. Vehicles stored outside on residential property must be owned by a person who resides on that property. Students who are away attending school for periods of time but still claim the property as their legal residence will be considered residents on the property. 82.04 Subd. 8. Garbage and Refuse Nuisance A. The existence of refuse or garbage, noxious substances or hazardous wastes, accumulated, piled, left, deposited, buried or discharged upon, or in, or flowing from any property, structure or vehicle, except for refuse or garbage deposited at places designated and provided for that purpose by the City. REFUSE. All putrescible and non-putrescible solid waste (except body waste) including, but not limited to, garbage, rubbish, ashes, street cleanings, abandoned automobiles, automobile parts, tires, demolition and construction debris, and market and industrial solid waste. Options: 1. Confirm Staffs findings (all or in part) as laid out above and decline Mr. Schodde’s appeal and direct staff to continue enforcement. 2. Confirm Mr. Schodde’s appeal (all or in part) as submitted and direct staff to abandon enforcement. Recommendation: Confirm Staff’s findings as laid out in this report and decline Mr. Schodde’s appeal and direct staff to continue enforcement. Council Action: Consider a motion denying Mr. Schodde’s appeal. Attachments: 1. Notice of Violation 2. Written Appeal 3. May 13, 2019 Site Photos www.gocanvas.com 1 751C47CD-54F5-41AE-A0B1-0864938352D1 COMP# 2019 0028 NOTICE OF VIOLATION & ORDER TO ABATE/DESTRUCTION ORDER Date: 05/01/2019 Time: 01:39 PM COMP# 2019 0028 Location of Violation: 9605 Co Rd No 101 City: Corcoran Zip: 55340 Employee: JP Mansolf Owner/Occupant: David William Schodde Owner/Occupant email: PID: 1211923410005 Notice Delivery: Mailed Contact codeenforcement@ci.corcoran.mn.us or 763-400-7026 with questions or to schedule a re-inspection. You are hereby notified as the property owner or occupant of the above listed property that the condition of said property is in violation of the following city ordinance(s): Garbage and Refuse (82.04 Subd. 8) Storage Nuisance (82.04 Subd. 3) Inoperable vehicles stored on property. Garbage and refuse stored out in open You are hereby ordered to make the following corrections within 30 days of this notice: Corrections to be made: Dispose of any inoperable vehicles. Any vehicles that are operable must be stored in the rear or side yards with a 10 foot setback from any lot line. Any garbage or refuse must be disposed of or stored in an appropriate container. The property must be brought into full compliance and will be re-inspected on or after: www.gocanvas.com 2 751C47CD-54F5-41AE-A0B1-0864938352D1 06/05/2019 at 01:47 PM The property owner shall have until the date and time specified to abate the nuisance or the matter may be presented to the City Attorney to seek compliance by injunctive action or other appropriate criminal or civil remedy. Weed nuisances which are noticed and not abated within the timeline provided shall be abated by the City and the costs of the same shall be the responsibility of the owner of the applicable property. The owner, occupant, or other responsible party has the right to appeal the nuisance designation by submitting a written appeal to the City Clerk: 1) For weed nuisances: within 48 hours of the notice, excluding weekends and holidays; or 2) For all other nuisances: before the compliance date listed above or within seven calendar days of the date of the notice, whichever comes first. If no written appeal is filed within the applicable timeline, the right to appeal the designation shall be deemed to have been waived. 82.06: PENALTY. With the exception of noise violations under this chapter, all violation of this chapter shall be punishable as a misdemeanor under the Minnesota State Statutes and punishable up to the maximum sentence allowed therein. In addition, the City may enforce any provision of this chapter by injunctive action or other appropriate civil remedy. A noise violation of section 82.04 subd. 5 shall constitute a petty misdemeanor, and upon conviction, shall be punishable up to the maximum sentence allowed for a petty misdemeanor offense under Minnesota law. The City’s remedies under this chapter shall be cumulative. Please see attached information for Enforcement, Appeals, and Weed Nuisance abatement procedure. A full version of the City of Corcoran Nuisance Ordinance (Chapter 82) is available at City Hall or on-line at: www.ci.corcoran.mn.us www.gocanvas.com 3 751C47CD-54F5-41AE-A0B1-0864938352D1 82.05: ENFORCEMENT. Subd. 1. Generally. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter regarding enforcement and in conjunction therewith, any violation of this chapter may be enforced by the enforcement officer or designee providing a notice of violation in an attempt to have the violation voluntarily abated. If the violation continues, the matter may be presented to the City Attorney. The City Attorney is authorized to seek compliance by injunctive action or other appropriate criminal or civil remedy. Subd. 2. Enforcement procedure. A. Whenever the enforcement officer or other designated official determines that a public nuisance is being maintained or exists on the premises in the City, the official shall notify, in writing, the owner of record or occupant of the premises of such fact and order that the nuisance be terminated or abated. If the premises are not occupied, the owner of record is unknown, or if the owner of record or occupant refuses to accept notice, notice of the violation shall be served by posting it on the premises. The notice shall state: 1. The property location of the public nuisance; 2. The nature of the public nuisance, with reference to the appropriate chapter provision; 3. The steps to be taken to abate the nuisance and a reasonable amount of time within which the nuisance is to be abated; 4. If the owner, occupant or other responsible party does not comply with the notice within the time specified, the City may provide for abating the nuisance; 5. The owner, occupant or other responsible party has the right to appeal the designation as a public nuisance by submitting a written appeal to the City Clerk before the date by which abatement must be completed or within seven calendar days after provision of the notice, whichever comes first. Subd. 3. Abatement (Weed Nuisance ONLY) A. Abatement shall be used as the enforcement method for violation of Section 82.04, Subd. 7 (Weed Nuisance). All other violations shall be processed according to the enforcement procedures in Subd. 2 of this Section. B. Upon receiving notice of the probable existence of weeds or tall grass in violation of this subchapter, a person designated by the City Council shall make an inspection and submit a written report regarding the condition. Written notification in the form of a Destruction Order including information contained in within the records of the City Clerk or any other city agency shall be forwarded to the property owner. The notice shall be served in writing by mail or in person to the last known address of the property owner and shall request that within 10 regular business days after the date of notice, the property owner shall remove the designated violation. The owner of record or occupant of the property responsible for the nuisance may request an extension to the abatement deadline by submitting written explanation of how the nuisance will be abated. Staff may grant an extension to the abatement deadline if sufficient reasons were submitted. C. The property owner may appeal by filing written notice of objection with the City Clerk within 48 hours of the notice, excluding weekends and holidays. It is the property owner's responsibility to demonstrate that the matter in question is shrubs, trees, cultivated plants or crops or is not otherwise in violation of this subchapter, and should not be subject to destruction under the subchapter. An appeal by the property owner shall be brought before the City Council and shall be decided by a majority vote of the Council Members in attendance and being at a regularly scheduled or special meeting of the City Council. D. In the event that the property owner fails to comply with the Destruction Order within ten regular business days and has not filed a notice within 48 hours to the City Clerk of an intent to appeal, the city may www.gocanvas.com 4 751C47CD-54F5-41AE-A0B1-0864938352D1 employ the services of city employees or outside contractors to remove the weeds to conform to this subchapter by all lawful means. E. The property owner shall be liable for all costs of removal, cutting or destruction of weeds. The property owner is responsible for all collection costs associated with weed destruction, including but not limited to, court costs, attorney's fees and interest on any unpaid amounts incurred by the city. If the city uses municipal employees, it shall set and assign an appropriate per hour rate for employees, equipment, supplies and chemicals that may be used. All sums payable by the property owner are to be paid to the City Clerk and to be deposited in a general fund as compensation for expenses and costs incurred by the city. All sums due and not paid within 30 days of mailed billing notice to the property owner’s last known address shall be certified to the county and assessed against the property, along with interest and a surcharge as set from time to time by City Council resolution or ordinance. Subd. 4. Recovery of costs. A. The owner of the premises on which a nuisance has been abated by the City, or a person who has caused a public nuisance on property not owned by that person, shall be personally liable for the cost to the City of the abatement, including administrative costs. All fees shall be charged against the property as a special tax. Abatement costs shall include the cost of the abatement, the cost of the investigation, such as title searches, inspections and testing, the costs of the notification and filing costs. Subd. 5. Nothing in this section shall prevent the City, without notice or other process, from immediately abating any condition that poses an imminent and serious hazard to human life or safety. www.gocanvas.com 5 751C47CD-54F5-41AE-A0B1-0864938352D1 PHOTOS Photo Photo www.gocanvas.com 6 751C47CD-54F5-41AE-A0B1-0864938352D1 Rear of Property (from West) Northeast Side Property (from North) Northeast Side Property (from East) Front Side Property (from East) Front Side Property (from East) Front Side Entrance to Property (from East) Front Side Entrance to Property (from East) Google Earth Aerial (April 28, 2018) STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 10b. Council Meeting: May 23, 2019 Prepared By: Kevin Mattson Topic: Low Cost Paving Options Action Required: Direction Summary: At the direction of City Council, staff has begun an evaluation process to identify potential low cost paving options for existing gravel roads. Included in this report is a preliminary summary for City Council review and discussion. Staff primarily focused on establishing the goals for any potential program which include life expectancy of the road, cost effectiveness, and implementation/street selection recommendations. The information below summarizes the paved street improvement options. Options Improvement Depth Cost/LF Maint. Demand Shape & Pave 3 inches $50-$55 High Stabilize Base & Pave 18 inches $80-$90 Moderate Full Reconstruct 30 inches $150-$200 Standard Note – it is recommended to install draintile with all street improvement options (cost is included in the estimates). Staff recommends a combination of Shape & Pave and Stabilize Base & Pave. All road sections are inherently different and existing site conditions should be evaluated in the field on an individual basis for the best-value improvement option. The next step is to develop criteria for establishing a street Capital Improvement Program for paving gravel roads. Examples of criteria options include: • Higher traffic collector roads o Trail Haven Road o Willow Drive • Incomplete paved road segments o Corcoran Trail East and West o Cain Road • Isolated gravel roads o Wagon Wheel Lane o Park Trail Road • Rural MUSA roads with increasing traffic volumes o Horseshoe Trail Page 2 Financial/Budget: Using an average cost of $75/LF, staff estimates that it will cost $400,000 on average to pave a mile of gravel road to achieve a 15-20 year life expectancy. Council Action: Discuss the information presented on low cost paving options and direct staff to continue analysis if desired. Attachments: 1. Staff Report on Road Surface Cost Comparison – Gravel vs Paved Roads (July 26, 2018) STAFF REPORT Council Meeting: July 26, 2018 Prepared By: Kevin Mattson Topic: Road Surface Cost Comparison – Gravel vs Paved Roads Action Required: Discussion Summary: At the direction of the City Council, staff has begun an analysis of the cost of maintaining gravel roads as compared to maintaining paved roads. Attached to this report is an initial summary table for City Council review and discussion. In order to complete a comparison, many assumptions had to be developed. Below is a recap of the approach: Assumptions/Inputs •Based on a one mile stretch of road •No geometric improvements or road widening o 24-foot wide roads o 3 inches of gravel per application o 3 inches of gravel and 3.5 inches of pavement for residential capital improvement o 3 inches of gravel and 4.5 inches of pavement for collector capital improvement •2018 costs o Construction o Staffing/Equipment •Application frequencies based on typical staff/equipment hours and recommended intervals Other •Compared collector and residential streets individually •Costs do not include inflationary adjustments or factor in the application timeline over the 35-year road life expectancy Findings Based on these assumptions, the analysis indicates that paved roads have less average annual maintenance costs compared to gravel roads for both collector and residential settings ($8,600 less for collector and $2,700 less for residential). This difference results from the number of grading and gravel applications required on average to maintain a similar level of service. When the cost of the initial capital improvement is considered in the average annual cost the results are mixed. It is still more advantageous from a cost perspective to pave collector roads ($800 less), however, costs for residential roads do not break even Page 2 ($3,500 more). It should be noted that this does not include any revenue from possible special assessments which could decrease the initial capital improvement costs. It is important to note that all road sections are inherently unique often making direct comparisons difficult. Overall, gravel roads that require increased grading work and/or supplemental gravel applications should be considered for pavement improvements. Financial/Budget: There are a variety of financial impacts depending on the approach to improving and maintaining roads. Alignment with Values: This item relates to the following adopted values: Efficient and Effective Service Delivery We believe providing services to residents and businesses in an efficient and effective manner makes government easier to work with and creates a business friendly environment. Fiscal Responsibility We believe that the prudent stewardship and opportunistic investment of public funds is essential for confidence in government and to position the City for future success. Transparency We believe that open an honest communication is essential for an informed and involved citizenry. Processes and decision making should include opportunities to educate citizens and receive feedback. Responsible Decision Making We believe it is the responsibility of the City to address difficult issues now in order to avoid larger more difficult issues in the future. Options: 1. Discuss results of the road surface cost comparison and direct staff to continue the analysis. 2. Discuss results of the road surface cost comparison and take no action. Recommendation: Discuss results of the road surface cost comparison and direct staff to continue the analysis if desired. Page 3 Council Action: Discuss results of the road surface cost comparison and direct staff to continue the analysis if desired. Attachments: 1. Road Surface Cost Comparison Summary & Background Information Summary Maintenance Items - Gravel Collector Residental Collector Residental Collector Residental Grading 756.00$ 756.00$ 4 2 3,024.00$ 1,512.00$ Gravel 25,896.00$ 25,896.00$ 0.50 0.33 12,948.00$ 8,545.68$ Dust Control 4,716.00$ 4,716.00$ 1 1 4,716.00$ 4,716.00$ 20,688.00$ 14,773.68$ Maintenance - Gravel Maintenance Items - Paved Crack Fill 2,560.00$ 2,560.00$ 0.33 0.33 844.80$ 844.80$ Shouldering 10,080.00$ 10,080.00$ 0.1 0.1 1,008.00$ 1,008.00$ Striping 369.60$ 369.60$ 0.2 0.2 73.92$ 73.92$ Seal Coat 18,480.00$ 18,480.00$ 0.15 0.15 2,772.00$ 2,772.00$ Overlay 105,300.00$ 105,300.00$ 0.07 0.07 7,371.00$ 7,371.00$ 12,069.72$ 12,069.72$ Maintenance - Paved Capital Improvement Items - Paved Initial Paving w/Gravel 260,500.00$ 207,525.00$ 0.03 0.03 7,815.00$ 6,225.75$ 19,884.72$ 18,295.47$ Capital Improvement + Maintenance - Paved 8,618.28$ 2,703.96$ Difference of Gravel/Paved Maintenance Only 803.28$ (3,521.79)$ Difference Total Applications Per Year Average Annual Cost Per MileTotal Application Cost Per Mile Collector Material Price Cost Equipment Rate Cost ($/HR)Labor Rate Cost ($/HR)Hours/mile Total Cost Per Application Applications per Year Average Cost per Year Grading 6 80.00$ 480.00$ 6 46.00$ 276.00$ 1 756.00$ 4 3,024.00$ Gravel 2325 10.00$ 23,250.00$ 6 80.00$ 480.00$ 6 46.00$ 276.00$ 3.5 25,896.00$ 0.50 12,948.00$ Dust Control 5280 0.75$ 3,960.00$ 6 80.00$ 480.00$ 6 46.00$ 276.00$ 1 4,716.00$ 1 4,716.00$ 20,688.00$ Maintenance Crack Fill 5280 0.25$ 1,320.00$ 1 80.00$ 80.00$ 5 46.00$ 230.00$ 4 2,560.00$ 0.33 844.80$ Shouldering 525 18.00$ 9,450.00$ 5 80.00$ 400.00$ 5 46.00$ 230.00$ 1 10,080.00$ 0.1 1,008.00$ Striping 5280 0.07$ 369.60$ 369.60$ 0.2 73.92$ Seal Coat 5280 3.50$ 18,480.00$ 18,480.00$ 0.15 2,772.00$ Overlay 1620 65.00$ 105,300.00$ 105,300.00$ 0.07 7,371.00$ 12,069.72$ Maintenance Initial Paving 3650 65.00$ 237,250.00$ 260,500.00$ 0.03 7,815.00$ & Gravel 2325 10.00$ 23,250.00$ 19,884.72$ Capital Improvement + Maintenance Residential Material Price Cost Equipment Rate Cost ($/HR)Labor Rate Cost ($/HR)Hours/mile Total Cost Per Application Applications per Year Average Cost per Year Grading 6 80.00$ 480.00$ 6 46.00$ 276.00$ 1 756.00$ 2 1,512.00$ Gravel 2325 10.00$ 23,250.00$ 6 80.00$ 480.00$ 6 46.00$ 276.00$ 3.5 25,896.00$ 0.33 8,545.68$ Dust Control 5280 0.75$ 3,960.00$ 6 80.00$ 480.00$ 6 46.00$ 276.00$ 1 4,716.00$ 1 4,716.00$ 14,773.68$ Maintenance Crack Fill 5280 0.25$ 1,320.00$ 1 80.00$ 80.00$ 5 46.00$ 230.00$ 4 2,560.00$ 0.33 844.80$ Shouldering 525 18.00$ 9,450.00$ 5 80.00$ 400.00$ 5 46.00$ 230.00$ 1 10,080.00$ 0.1 1,008.00$ Striping 5280 0.07$ 369.60$ 369.60$ 0.2 73.92$ Seal Coat 5280 3.50$ 18,480.00$ 18,480.00$ 0.15 2,772.00$ Overlay 1620 65.00$ 105,300.00$ 105,300.00$ 0.07 7,371.00$ 12,069.72$ Maintenance Initial Paving 2835 65.00$ 184,275.00$ 207,525.00$ 0.03 6,225.75$ & Gravel 2325 10.00$ 23,250.00$ 18,295.47$ Capital Improvement + Maintenance STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 10c. Council Meeting: May 23, 2019 Prepared By: Brad Martens Topic: Union Negotiation Council Liaison Action Required: Direction Summary: The existing labor agreement representing police officers expires at the end of 2019. Staff would like to begin discussion with the union and requests direction from the Council on whether or not a member of the City Council would like to act as a Council liaison for those discussions. Financial/Budget: A new labor agreement will outline various items which have an impact on salaries and benefits. Options: 1. Provide staff direction on whether or not a Councilmember would like to act as a liaison for union negotiations. Recommendation: Staff recommends that at least one member of the City Council act as a liaison for union negotiations. Council Action: Consider a motion to appoint up to two members of the City Council as liaisons for union negotiations. Attachments: None 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 May 13, 2019 TO Brad Martens CC City Council, Planning Commission, Parks & Trails Commission FROM Kendra Lindahl, City Planner RE Active Corcoran Planning Applications Projects/Comments in blue italics are new Project marked with an * have moved from active to approved The following is a summary of project status for current, active projects: 1.Development Rights and OS&P ordinance updates (city file 18-014). One of the implementation strategies from the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan was to consider amendments to the OS&P ordinance to better reflect City goals. The Council is also considering changes to the development rights program. Staff presented the City Council with a work plan and schedule at the May 24th meeting. The Council discussed at the October 11th Work Session and the January 24th Work Session. The Council directed staff to schedule a public hearing. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 4th and recommended approval. The City Council tabled this item on April 25th. A revised map will be presented at the May 23rd meeting. The ordinance is expected to be adopted on June 25th. 2.Preliminary Plat, Preliminary PUD and Rezoning for “Pheasant Ridge Second Addition”. (PID 0311923310003, 0311923430005, 0311923410002) (City File 18-029). The Council has reviewed and provided feedback to the applicant on a PUD sketch plan. This formal application for an OS&P subdivision is currently incomplete. Upon receipt of the missing items, staff will schedule this request for Council action. 3.Meyer Lot Line Adjustment at 10740 Bechtold Road (City File 18-039). The application is currently incomplete. Additional right-of-way is required for the lot line adjustment and this item will be scheduled for Council action when deemed complete. 4.Rolling Hills Acres Preliminary Plat at 6730 Rolling Hills Road (City file 19-004). This application for a four-lot subdivision is incomplete and will be scheduled for a public hearing at the Planning Commission and City Council action when deemed complete. 5.Ravinia 11th Final Plat and Final PUD Plan (city file 19-005). The request is for 14 lots on the Nichols property. The preliminary approvals were granted on February 28th. The Planning Commission reviewed the item on May2nd and recommended approval. The Council is expected to take action at the May 23rd meeting. 6.Strehler Sketch Plan and Topo/Wetland Waiver at 22505 Strehler Road (city file 19-008). The applicant is requesting Council comments on a potential subdivision to create a lot without frontage on a public street. Additionally, the applicant is requesting approval of a topographic survey and wetland delineation waiver. The Council is expected to take action at the May 23rd meeting. Agenda Item 11a. MEMORANDUM 2 7. Tabor Initiation of Expiration of Agricultural Preserve at 19450 Gleason Road (city file 19-009). The Tabors are initiating expiration of agricultural preserve. The Council is expected to take action at the June 25th meeting. Also, there are several 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 July 2017 to discuss the outstanding issues and future expansion plans on the property. 3. Sawgrass Preliminary Plat, Preliminary PUD Development Plan and Rezoning for 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. At that meeting, the City Council approved a one year extension. The City Council approved another one year extension at the January 25, 2018 meeting. The applicant was granted another extension at the February 28, 2019 Council meeting. 4. 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. 5. 2040 Corcoran Comprehensive Plan (City file 17-001). This year-long process was kicked off with a joint City Council/Commission work session on March 16th followed by three community open houses/events and several commission meetings and Council work sessions. The Parks and Trails Commission reviewed at their March 20th meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 5th and on April 26th the City Council approved the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for distribution to adjacent jurisdictions for comment. The adjacent jurisdictions have six months to review and comment and then Corcoran will send to the Metropolitan Council to review for compliance with regional systems. The final draft was approved at the March 14th meeting and submitted to the Metropolitan Council. 6. Natural Resource Protection Ordinance (city file 18-010). The Council directed staff to look at options to preserve trees and natural resources to maintain the rural character of the community in both rural and urban areas. Staff presented for Council review at the May 24th meeting and the Council tabled this item. 7. *Southeast District Master Plan and Design Guidelines update (city file 18-012). The draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan anticipates significant changes to the transportation network that make it necessary to update this plan, which is adopted as Appendix B of the Zoning Ordinance. At the April 26th meeting, the Council authorized staff to begin this work . This item was discussed at the November MEMORANDUM 3 8th Council Work Session. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 4th and recommended approval. The City Council approved the amendment on April 25th. 8. Sketch Plan for “Edgewater of Corcoran” at 19220 County Road 10 (PID 25-119-23-14-0003 and 25-119-23-14-0002) (City file 18-018). Trek Development, Inc. has submitted a sketch plan for a residential development with a senior living continuum of care complex, apartment and single family homes. The Council reviewed the sketch plan at the May 24th meeting and indicated support. 9. Final Plat for “Rush Creek Run” at 7320 Rolling Hills Road (PID 28-119-23-22-0003) (city file 18- 026). A request for final plat approval was been submitted. The preliminary plat for this project was approved on April 26th. This final plat was approved at the October 25th Council meeting. 10. Peter and Jean Dahlheimer request for Topography Exemption and Wetland Delineation Exemption at 20702 County Road 50 (PID 22-119-23-41-0001) (City File No. 18-036). The application was reviewed and approved by the City Council action on November 8th. 11. Kariniemi Preliminary Plat for two lots at 20801 Larkin Road. (PID 2711923410009) (City File 18- 037). There was an error in the public hearing notice, so the Planning Commission opened the public hearing at the January 3rd Planning Commission meeting and continued it to February 7th. City Council approved the request on February 14th. 12. Corcoran Land Holdings L.L.C. Rezoning, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan at the SW corner of CR 19 and CR 10 (PID 18-119-23-12-0001) (City File 18-038). The request is currently incomplete, but if the missing information is received the item could be scheduled for Planning Commission and Council review in February. The item was withdrawn. 13. Rezoning, Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD for U.S. Home Corporation (dba Lennar) for “Ravinia 11th Addition” (PID 36-119-23-44-0012) (City File 18-040). Lennar has filed a plat for 15 lots at 6351 CR 101 (the Nichols property) and is proposing to the property to Ravinia. The landowner submitted a sketch plan for Council review in 2017. A public hearing was held on February 7th and the City Council approved on February 28th. 14. Preliminary plat, final plat, and variances for “Dahlheimer Farms” on property located at 20702 County Road 50 (PID 22-119-23-41-0001) (City File 18-041). The Council approved a wetland waiver for a portion of this property in 2018. The applicants are proposing to subdivide the existing farm to create a 5-acre lot for the farmstead and the fields will be platted as an outlot. A public hearing was held on February 7th and the City Council approved on February 28th. 15. *Bellwether 2nd Addition Final Plat and Final PUD Development Plan (City file 19-001). The application is for PUD final plan approval for 79 lots and final plat approval of 50 lots. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 4th and recommended approval. The City Council approved the request on April 25th. 16. *Ravinia 12th Final Plat and PUD Amendment (City file 19-002). The application for final plat would dedicate the remaining right-of-way for Gleason Parkway. The PUD Amendment is a request for a change in unit type. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 4th and recommended approval. The City Council approved the request on April 25th. 17. *Larkin Road Final Plat (City file 19-003). This is a request for preliminary plat for a two-lot subdivision with a private drive. The item was approved by the Council on April 25th. 18. *Applewood Point Sketch Plan at 19220 County Road 10 (PID 25-119-23-14-0003) (City File 19- 007). Trek Development, Inc. has submitted a sketch plan for a residential development with a multi- family building and single-family homes. The Council reviewed a different sketch plan at the May 24, 2018 meeting and indicated support. The Council reviewed this item and provided comments on April 25th. City of Corcoran 2019 City Council Schedule Agenda Item 12. June 13, 2019 – Councilmember Bottema, Brad unable to attend • Annual Liquor License and Tobacco Renewal • 2019 Clean-up Day report • Non-chloride options for dust control • Test Well Approval June 27, 2019 – Councilmember Dejewski unable to attend • Planning Project Update • 2020 Budget Direction • Water Supply Planning Report – Progress/next steps • OSP & Building Rights Update July 11, 2019 • Campaign Sign Enforcement Policy • Compost Site Options • Long Range Planning Fund Overview • City Council Rules of Decorum July 25, 2019 • Planning Project Update • Code Compliance Quarterly Report • Financial Management Plan Update • Financial Performance Report • Rolling Hills Acres Preliminary Plat • Ravinia 13th Addition August 8, 2019 • Draft 2020 Budget August 22, 2019 • Planning Project Update September 12, 2019 • 2020 Preliminary Levy • 2020 Proposed Levies and Taxes Insert • Night to Unite Recap