The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1995-10-17 CC Packet . . . REVISED AGENDA ** CITY OF STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO. 95-34 October 17, 1995 . SPECIAL MEETING REGULAR MEETING 4:30 P.M. 7:00 P.M. 4:30 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. Workshop: Fiscal Impact Analysis 2. Livable Communities - Presentation by Metropolitan Council 7:00 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 3, 1995 Regular and Recessed Meetings; October 10, 1995 Special Meeting PETITIONS. INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS 1. Citizen Commendation: Melvin E. Rustin 2. Petition for Dedication Acceptance of City Street - McKusick Road Lane N. 3. Territorial Coalition, Inc. (Old Prison developers) Petition for feasibility study related to drainage improvements OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting to address Council on subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation. of the concerns expressed. CONSENT AGENDA * -'41 1. Resolution: Directing Payment of Bills. (Resolution No. 95-*) 2. Resolution: Approving Lawful Gambling Premises Permit at Canelakes Bar & Restaurant North St. Paul Lions Club, applicant. 3. Contractors License - Buelow Excavating C 4. Resolution: Accept bid and authorize sale of two squad cars 5. Approving sewer bill adjustment 6. Submit claims to insurance carrier 7. Approving upgrade of administration department computers City Council Agenda No. 95-34 STAFF REPORTS 1. Finance Director 2. Police Chief . 3. Public Works Director 4. Community Dev. Director 5. Parks & Recreation 6. City Engineer 7. Consulting Engineer 8. City Clerk 9. Fire Chief 10. Building Official 11. City Attorney 12. City Coordinator . PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider an appeal of Planning Commission approval of Case No. DP/SUP/95-60, Special Use PermitlDesign Permit for a 20 housing unit townhouse project located east of Benson Blvd. on West Orleans Street in the RCM, Medium Density Residential District, Komovich Development Company, applicant. Notice of the hearing was placed in the Stillwater Gazette on October 13, 1995, and notices mailed to affected property owners. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Update of Deer Path issue 2. Possible second reading of ordinance amending Stillwater City Code Chapter 41, Sec. 41.04 Subd. 3 by increasing license fee for cigarette sales. 3. Possible second reading of ordinance amending Stillwater City Code Chapter 30, Sec. 30.01 Sub. 8 by increasing fee for recycling. 4. Possible second reading of ordinance amending Stillwater City Code relating to kennels. . NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution: Approving Programmatic Agreement with U.S. Army Corp of Engineers for Stillwater Flood/Retaining Wall Project 2. ETC Enterprises, Inc. - Request relating to footing and foundation permit for Country Inn & Suites 3. Proposal from Ed Cain, Legislative Associates,for providing support for Mighty Ducks grant application. PETITIONS. INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS (continued) COMMUNICA TIONS/REOUESTS COUNCIL REOUEST ITEMS STAFF REPORTS (continued) ADJOURNMENT * All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one . motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. ** Items in italics are additions to the agenda eTO: FROM: MEMORANDUM Mayor and Council City Clerk DATE: October 17, 1995 SUBJECT: Additions to Council Packet ADDITION TO AGENDA 1. Consent Agenda Item No.5 Item No. 6 Item No. 7 Approving sewer bill adjustments Approval to submit claims to insurance carrier Approving memory upgrade to Administration Dept. computers (memo was in packet, but not included on agenda) Proposal for providing support for Mighty Ducks grant application ADDITIONS TO COUNCIL PACKET 2. New Business Item No.3 .1. . Consent Agenda Item No.1: Item No.4: Item No, 5: Item No.6: 2. New Business Item No.3: List of Bills Memo and Resolutions - sale of squad cars Memo - sewer bill adjustments Claims against the City Memo: Proposal from Ed Cain, Legislative Associates for providing support for "Mighty Ducks" grant application 3. FYI: FYI: FYI: FYI: FYI: FYI: Stillwater Area Schools - Purchase of property for elementary school Metropolitan Council calendar of meetings MN Pollution Control Agency - Adoption of Revolving Fund 1995 Minutes - Stillwater Town Board, Oct. 12, 1995 MN NAHRO 1995 Community Development Conference Washington County Historical Society Fall Dinner and Annual Meeting AGENDA CITY OF STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO. 95-34 October 17, 1995 ~ e SPECIAL MEETING REGULAR MEETING 4:30 P.M. 7:00 P.M. 4:30 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. Workshop: Fiscal Impact Analysis 2. Livable Communities - Presentation by Metropolitan Council 7:00 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 3, 1995 Regular and Recessed Meetings; October 10, 1995 Special Meeting PETITIONS. INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS 1. Citizen Commendation: Melvin E. Rustin 2. Petition for Dedication Acceptance of City Street - McKusick Road Lane N. 3. Territorial Coalition, Inc. (Old Prison developers) Petition for feasibility study related to drainage improvements OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting to address Council on subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. CONSENT AGENDA * d.'11 1. Resolution: Directing Payment of Bills. (Resolution No. 95-~) 2. Resolution: Approving Lawful Gambling Premises Permit at Canelakes Bar & Restaurant North St. Paul Lions Club, applicant. 3. Contractors License - Buelow Excavating 4. Resolution: Accept bid and authorize sale of two squad cars e City Council Agenda No. 95-34 STAFF REPORTS 1. Finance Director 2. Police Chief 3. Public Works Director 4. Community Dev. Director 5. Parks & Recreation 6. City Engineer 7. Consulting Engineer 8. City Clerk 9. Fire Chief 10. Building Official 11. City Attorney 12. City Coordinator e PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider an appeal of Planning Commission approval of Case No. DP/SUP/95-60, Special Use PermitlDesign Permit for a 20 housing unit townhouse project located east of Benson Blvd. on West Orleans Street in the RCM, Medium Density Residential District, Kornovich Development Company, applicant. Notice of the hearing was placed in the Stillwater Gazette on October 13, 1995, and notices mailed to affected property owners. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Update of Deer Path issue 2. Possible second reading of ordinance amending Stillwater City Code Chapter 41, Sec. 41.04 Subd. 3 by increasing license fee for cigarette sales. 3. Possible second reading of ordinance amending Stillwater City Code Chapter 30, Sec. 30.01 Sub. 8 by increasing fee for recycling. 4. Possible second reading of ordinance amending Stillwater City Code relating to kennels. NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution: Approving Programmatic Agreement with U.S. Army Corp of Engineers for Stillwater Flood/Retaining Wall Project 2. ETC Enterprises, Inc. - Request relating to footing and foundation permit for Country Inn & Suites PETITIONS. INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS (continued) COMMUNICATIONS/REQUESTS COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS STAFF REPORTS (continued) ADJOURNMENT · All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. el e e , MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director f1-/ DA: October 13, 1995 RE: LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT PRESENTATION Linda O'Connor and Bill Byers from the Metropolitan Council will present the Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Program. The program sets up three funding accounts to help implement the act. To be eligible for the funds, communities must indicate their intent to participate with the program by November 15. The three accounts are: Tax Base Revitalization Account, Demonstration Account and The Housing Incentive Account. The Maple Island site may qualify for tax base revitalization funding. Stillwater, with its Comprehensive Plan Update and housing stock and actions over the past years, is a good position to participate in the program. Attached is a handout with some commonly asked questions regarding the Livable Communities Act. ::;4 ~ ^' -r ; I e -E~ ~~ LIVABLE COMMUNITIES QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 1. What is the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act? The Metropolitan Livable Communities Act ("Act") was enacted in June 1995 and is the Legislature's attempt to address various issues facing the seven-county metropolitan area. The Act establishes a Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which consists of three accounts: the Tax Base Revitalization Account; the Livable Communities Demonstration Account; and the Local Housing Incentives Account. Metropolitan municipalities are not required to participate in the programs under'the Act, but the Act provides incentives and funding to those municipalities that do participate. 2. What is the incentive to participate? The benefits are clear. Cities, towns and, in some cases, counties have access to resources that will improve their communi~es and neighborhoods. In addition, the legislation puts local units of govern- ment in the driver's seat. Communities can not only choose whether to participate,' they also have flexibility in determining ~ow they're going to u~e the resources available. 3. What is the incentive to provide lower-cost housing in our community? Affordable housing is an investment in communities and their residents. It fulfills a commitment to young families, single people and older residents that they can find a home they can afford in the com- munity of their choice. 4. What are "affordable" housing and "life-cycle" housing? - Housing is "affordable" if it costs no more than 30 percent of afamily's income. For ownership hous- ing this income amount is 80 percent of median, an amount that in 1994 could afford a home costing t approximately $115,000. For rental housing this income is 50 percent of median. In 1990 this was approximately $500 per month. e It Life-cycle" housing refers to housing available for people at all stages of their lives, offering a choice and variety of housing types and cost to accommodate people ~ changing needs and preferences as their incomes and circumstances change. 5. What are the affordable and life-cycle housing opportunities amount? The Affordable and Life-Cycle Housing Opportunities Amount (ltAlROA amount") is an amount, established by formula in the Act, that a participating municipality must spend to create affordable and life-cycle housing or to maintain existing affordable and life- cycle housing. A participating municipality~ AlROA amount is established each year. 6. Does the ALHOA amount have to be a property tax levy? No. The AlROA amount can be derived from a levy, or it can be derived from fundsfrom another source. Regardless of the source offundsfor the municipality~ AlROA amount, a participating munici- pality that did not meet its negotiated affordable and life- cycle housing goals, and did not spend 85 percent of its AlHOA amount to create affordable and life- cycle housing opportunities in the previous year, must distribute the entire AlROA amount to a local housing and redevelopment authority to create affordable and life-cycle housing opportunities in the municipality, or to the Metropolitan Councilfor distribution through the Local Housing Incentives Program. 7. If my municipality elects by November 15, 1995, to participate in the Local Housing Incen- tives Account Program, must the municipality spend an ALHOA amount in calendar year 1996? No. Because of various timing provisions in the Act, the AlHOA amount requirement does not apply until your municipality ~ election to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program made by November 15, 1996, for calendar year 1997. 8. If my municipality elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program by November 15, 1995, but is unable to agree on housing goals with the Metropolitan Council, must the municipality participate in the program? e ~ I 'f ~ f' No. A municipality is not participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program unless two conditions have been met: e a. The municipality has elected to participate in the program; and b. The Metropolitan Council and the municipality have negotiated and agreed on affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the municipality. If the municipality and the Metropolitan Council do not successfully negotiate housing goals, your municipality may not participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program. 9. Must my municipality participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program? No. Participation in the program is voluntary, but a municipality that does not participate may at some later time elect to participate in the program. However, a municipality which later elects to participate must establish that it has spent or agrees to spend on affordable and life-cycle housing an amount equivalent to what it would have spent on affordable and life-cycle housing had goals been established for the period in which the municipality was not participating. .'~ 10. If my municipality has met its housing goals in the previous calendar year, may my munici- pality participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program? Yes. However, your municipality will not be eligible to receive grants from the Local Housing Incentives Account Program if it met its affordable and life-cycle housing goals. Your municipality still will be eligible for grants and loans under the Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account programs. 11. What if my municipality chooses not to participate in the Local Housing incentives Ac- count Program? Municipalities that elect not to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program are not eligible to participate in the Tax Base Revitalization Account and Livable Communities Demonstration Account programs under the Act. The Metropolitan Council is required by the Act to take into account your municipality's participation in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program when making e discretionary funding decisions. In addition, your municipality will not be eligible to apply for funds under the Department of Trade and Economic Development's polluted sites clean-up program if your . municipality is not participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program. 12. If my municipality elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program, e but does not have the capacity to create ad~tional affordable and life- cycle housing opportunities, can my municipality give its ALHOA amounts to other municipalities to meet negotiated housing goals? Yes. A mu~cipality that has negotiated housing goals, but might not have adequate resources to create or maintain affordable. and life-cycle housing opportunities still could be considered a participating mu- nicipality. However, the municipality would be required to distribute its ALHOA amount to the Metro- politan Council for distribution to other participating municipalities or distribute its ALHOA amount to a local housing and redevelopment authority for creating affordable and life-cycle housing opportunities within the municipality. The Act permits municipalities to enter into agreements with adjacent municipali- ties to cooperatively provide affordable and life-cycle housing. The Metropolitan Council will work with municipalities to help municipalities create affordable and life-cycle housing opportunities and avail themselves of the incentives and funding available under the Act and from other sources. 13. . If my municipality is using local resources to make payments on a mortgage for an afford- able or life-cycle housing opportunity created prior to the Act, can these resources count toward expenditures of the municipality's ALHOA amount? Yes. As long as the use of the funds is directly related to your municipality s efforts to meet its afford- able and life-cycle housing goals, these local resources can be considered an expenditure of ALHOA amounts. 14. Are the goals for affordable and life-cycle housing, as proposed by the Metropolitan Coun- cil, achievable? The goals proposed by the Metropolitan Council are intended to be "long-term" goals. Your munici- pality will establish an action plan that identifies the steps your municipality intends to take to move toward its long-range goals. Beginning in 1998, your municipality s annual progress in meeting its negotiated affordable and life-cyclehousing goals will be measured against the annual goals your municipality sets forth its action plan. Progress toward the goals will depend on private marketplace efforts, the availability of affordable and'life-cycle housing resources and the use of local controls to create an environment to meet goals. el (' f e e to 15. Do the Metropolitan Council and a municipality negotiate and set housing goals annually? No. The Act envisions negotiated housing goals as a one-time process. That is why the goals are long term in nature. The Metropolitan Council will propose affordable and life-cycle housing goals that encourage your municipality to address key housing benchmarks. 16. After the Metropolitan Council and a municipality negotiate and set affordable and life- cycle housing goals for the municipality, what happens next? The municipality must prepare an action plan that describes how it intends to meet its negotiated goals. The municipality has until June 30, 1996, to submit the action plan to the Metropolitan Council. 17. Does the Metropolitan Council have to approve the action plan? The Act does not require the Metropolitan Council to approve a municipality~ action plan. However, the Metropolitan Council will comment on the plan ~ content in relation to the negotiated goals that have been established, and it will attempt to identify potential resources available to the municipality to help the municipality meet its negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goals." 18. What should the action plan look like? The suggestedfonnat will be modeled after the one used for the housing element of your comprehensive plan. Regular Meeting STILL WATER CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 3, 1995 4:30 p.m. e The Meeting was called to order by Mayor Kimble. Present: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Absent: Councilmember Thole Also Present: City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson Community Development Director Russell Police Chief Beberg Public Works Director Junker City Engineer Eckles Fire Chief Ness Consulting Engineer Moore Building Official Zepper City Clerk Weldon Press: Julie Kink, The Courier Mike Marsnik, Stillwater Gazette STAFF REPORTS 1. Police Chief - Chief Beberg reported that street lights are needed in the area north of Myrtle Street and east of Water Street, the Maple Island parking lot, Mulberry Point, and the lights at Lowell Park are malfunctioning. He will work with the City Engineer on lighting issues. Chief Beberg reported that bids for the sale of two squads will be received October 13 and brought to Council October 17. He also reported that money was received from the Safe and Sober Grant and will provide funds for approximately 200 hours of overtime for officers. Chief Beberg reported that the Police Department does not support the American Federation of Police, Miami, Florida, currently soliciting (by mail) contributions in the City for widows and orphans of officers killed in the line of duty. -e Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate resolution approving the contract with Washington County Sheriffs Department for lease of mobile data terminal for 1996 at a cost of $11 ,400. (Resolution 95-217) Stillwater City Council Minutes Regular Meeting October 3, 1995 e Ayes - Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate Resolution authorizing submission of grant application for Community Focus Crime Project. (Resolution 95-218) Ayes - Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 2. Community Development Director - Motion by Councilmember Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate resolution authorizing the City Attorney to negotiate a purchase agreement for the purchase of approximately six acres, contingent upon Colonial Craft relocation. (Resolution 95- 219) Ayes - Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 3. Fire Chief - Chief Ness updated Council on the purchase of a fire pumper. 4. Buildinll Official - Motion by Councilmember Zoller, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to approve the purchase of CD ROM for the Inspection Department computer at a cost of$250. All in favor. DEER PATH TRAFFIC STUDY Council met with Glen VanWormer, traffic consultant for Short Elliott Hendrickson, to discuss the Deer Path Traffic Study. Motion by Councilmember Zoller, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to direct staff to study placing a cul-de-sac on the south end of Deer Path, and the feasibility of upgrading Brick Street. All in favor. 2 -- e e Stillwater City Council Minutes Regular Meeting October 3, 1995 Motion by Councilmember Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to direct staff to provide a preliminary cost estimate of constructing a new connection between Myrtle Street and County Road 5. All in favor. RECESS Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to recess the meeting at 6:25 p.m. All in favor. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Resolutions: 95-217 - Contract with Washington Co. Sheriffs Department for lease of mobile data terminal 95-218 - Authorizing submission of grant application for Community Focus Crime Project 95-219 - Authorizing City Attorney to negotiate purchase agreement for six acres for relocation of Colonial Craft 3 Recessed Meeting STILL WATER CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 3, 1995 e 7:00 p.m. The Meeting was called to order by Mayor Kimble. Present: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Absent: None Also Present: City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson Community Development Director Russell City Engineer Eckles Fire Chief Ness Consulting Engineer Moore City Clerk Weldon Press: Julie Kink, The Courier Mike Marsnik, Stillwater Gazette APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 19, 1995, and the Special Meeting of September 26, 1995. All in favor. CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to approve the consent agenda of October 3, 1995, including the following: (All in favor) 1. Resolution 95-216 Directing Payment of Bills. 2. Resolution 95-220 Accepting dedication of easement for public roadway and utility purposes. 3, Resolution 95-221 Approving Change Orders - UBC Building. 4. Resolution 95-222 Approving permanent employment of Cindy Geis as Assistant Building Inspector. 5. Submit claim against the City to insurance carrier. 6. Contractor's License - Kingwood Management, General Contractor renewal. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Resolution Accepting Bid and awarding contract for construction of basketball court at Staples Field. e 1 e Stillwater City Council Minutes Recessed Meeting October 3, 1995 Motion by Councilmember Zoller, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to refer the bids for construction of basketball court at Staples Field back to the Parks and Recreation Board. All in favor. 2. Resolution Accepting Bid and authorizing purchase of fire apparatus. Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to accept the bid and authorize the purchase of fire apparatus from Pierce Manufacturing Company, at a cost not to exceed $319,030. All in favor. The City Attorney was directed to prepare a purchase agreement for a fire pwnper. 3. Resolution Accepting Bid and awarding contract for Good Samaritan Storm Water Proiect. L.I. 317. Motion by Councilmember Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Thole to adopt the appropriate resolution awarding the contract for Good Samaritan Storm Water Project, L.I. 317, to Fuhr Trenching of Hugo, MN. (Resolution 95-224) Ayes - Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 4. Possible second reading of an ordinance amending City Code relating to Hwnan Rights Commission. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to have a second reading of an ordinance amending the Stillwater City Code by Changing the Hwnan Rights Ordinance. Ayes - Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 5. Resolution acce,pting offer and authorizing sale of City owned property located at 1004 South Holcombe Street. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate resolution accepting the offer of $29,555 and authorizing the sale of city owned property located at 1004 South Holcombe Street. (Resolution 95-225) e 2 , Stillwater City Council Minutes Recessed Meeting October 3, 1995 e Ayes - Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None NEW BUSINESS 1. Review of request for on-site septic system at 1921 North 1st Street. Kevin Tilka. applicant. SS/95-3. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to approve, contingent upon conditions, the request by Kevin Tilka, for an on-site septic system at 1921 North 1st Street, Case No. SS/95-3. Ayes - 3; Nays - 2, Councilmembers Bealka and Cummings. 2. Final.Plat approval for lot split located at 619 West Anderson Street. David Harvieux. apJllicant. Motion by Councilmember Cummings seconded by Councilmember Thole to adopt the appropriate resolution approving the final plat for a lot split located at 619 West Anderson Street, David Harvieux, applicant. (Resolution 95-226) Ayes - Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble. Nays - None 3. PreapJ'lication for Tax Increment Financing assistance for purchase ofland and development of a grocety store - Joan Ahrens. Supervalu. applicant. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to direct staff to work with SuperValu on developing a response to the request for TIF assistance. Ayes - 4; Abstain - 1, Councilmember Bealka. 4. ApJlroval of architectural services contract for City Hall Buildin~ Proiect - BWBR. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adopt the appropriate resolution approving the contract with BWBR Architects for Phase II design/construction services for City Hall remodeling and expansion. (Resolution 95-227) Ayes- Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 5. Possible first reading of an ordinance relatin~ to license fees for ci~arette sales. 3 e l e Stillwater City Council Minutes Recessed Meeting October 3, 1995 Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to have a first reading of an ordinance amending Stillwater City Code Chapter 41, Section 41.04 Sub. 3 by increasing the license fee for cigarette sales. All in favor. 6. Possible first readinfl of an ordinance relatinfl to recyclinfl fees. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to have a first reading of an ordinance amending Stillwater City Code Chapter 30, Section 30.01 Sub. 8 by increasing the fee for recycling. All in favor. STAFF REPORTS Motion by Councilmember Zoller, seconded by Councilmember Thole to set a Special Meeting for 4:30 p.m. on October 17 for a workshop on the fiscal analysis impact study. All in favor. Motion by Councilmember Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Thole to adopt the appropriate resolution supporting the Mighty Ducks Ice Arena grant application. (Resolution 95- 228) Ayes - Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to endorse the St. Croix Valley Area Sports Facilities Commission and confirm Councilmember Cummings as the representative of the City of Stillwater on the Commission. All in favor. Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Thole to adopt the appropriate resolution approving the change order for 1995 Street Projects, L.I. 312, to include improvements of alleyways and parking areas between Commercial Street and Myrtle Street, contingent upon owners signing release/waivers. (Resolution 95-229) Ayes - Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilmember Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m. All in favor. e 4 , Stillwater City Council Minutes Recessed Meeting October 3, 1995 e MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Resolutions: 95-216 - Directing Payment of Bills 95-220 - Accepting dedication of easement for public roadway and utility purposes 95-221 - Approving Change Orders - UBC Building 95-222 - Approving permanent employment of Cindy Geis as Asst. Building Inspector 95-223 - Accepting bid and authorizing purchase of fire apparatus 95-224 - Accepting bid and awarding contract for Good Samaritan Storm Water Project, L.I. 317, to Fuhr Trenching 95-225 - Accepting offer and authorizing sale of city owned property located at 1004 South Holcombe Street 95-226 - Final plat approval for lot split located at 619 West Anderson Street 95-227 - Approving contract with BWBR Architects for Phase II design/construction services for City Hall project 95-228 - Supporting Mighty Ducks Ice Arena grant application 95-229 - Approving change order, 1995 Street Projects, L.I. 312 5 e i Special Meeting STILL WATER CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 10, 1995 7:00 p.m. e The Meeting was called to order by Mayor Kimble. Present: Councilmembers Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble. Absent: Councilmember Bealka Also Present: City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson City Engineer Eckles Engineering Technician Moore City Clerk Weldon Press: Mike Marsnik, Stillwater Gazette ASSESSMENT HEARINGS 1. This is the day and time for the assessment hearing for L.I. 312, 1995 Street Improvements. Notice of the hearing was placed in the Stillwater Gazette on September 26, 1995, and notices mailed to affected property owners. City Engineer Eckles explained the project and method of calculation. Assessments were made on per lot basis, except for comer lots, which are assessed at half. A resident questioned where the sewer work was done in the project. Mr. Eckles reported that the sewer work was done in Marine Circle. Mr. Eckles reported a correction to the roll: Delete line 125 (duplicate assessment of property on line 124). Mayor Kimble closed the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate resolution adopting the assessment, L.I. 312, 1995 Street Improvement, as amended. (Resolution 95-230) Ayes - Councilmembers Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None e 2. This is the day and time for the assessment hearing for L.I. 307, Myrtle Street Pavement Rehabilitation. Notice of the hearing was placed in the Stillwater Gazette on September 26, 1995, and notices mailed to affected property owners. .. Stillwater City Council Minutes Special Meeting October 10, 1995 e Phil Eastwood, representing Dorothy Berge, 301 E. Myrtle Street, stated the improvement did not extend the entire frontage of property but ended approximately 12 feet into the property. Council directed that the frontage measurements for Parcel #9326-2550 be re- examined. David Stone, 12850 N. McKusick Road, questioned how the assessment was calculated for comer lots (Parcel #9800-7300, 820 Myrtle Street). Mr. Richert, 315 West Myrtle, questioned replacement of a section of sidewalk. Mayor Kimble closed the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Cummings seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate resolution adopting the assessment, L.I. 307, Myrtle Street Pavement Rehabilitation, as amended. (Resolution 95-231) Ayes - Councilmember Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 3. This is the day and time for the assessment hearing for L.I. 306, Highlands of Stillwater Sixth Addition. Notice of the hearing was placed in the Stillwater Gazette on September 26, 1995, and notices mailed to affected property owners. Mayor Kimble closed the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate resolution adopting the assessment, L.I. 306, Highlands of Stillwater Sixth Addition. (Resolution 95-232) Ayes - Councilmembers Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 4. This is the day and time for the assessment hearing for L.I. 304, Myrtlewood. Notice of the hearing was placed in the Stillwater Gazette on September 26, 1995, and notices mailed to affected property owners. Richard Huelsmann, 12610 62nd Street (developer of project) stated he was not serving notice of objection to the assessment, but requesting that amounts be apportioned to specific . 2 ., e Stillwater City Council Minutes Special Meeting October 10, 1995 lots as indicated in the letter he distributed to Council. In addition, he requested the City comply with terms of development agreement by completing the storm sewer project and providing him with cost and computation data. Council directed that the assessment be reapportioned as requested by Mr. Huelsmann. Terese Koenig, 212 Birchwood Drive, and James Podratz, 218 Birchwood Drive, expressed concern with drainage/pooling issues. Mayor Kimble closed the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adopt the appropriate resolution adopting the assessment, L.I. 304, Myrtlewood, as amended. (Resolution 95-233) Ayes - Councilmembers Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 5. This is the day and time for the assessment hearing for L.I. 279-4, 1995 Water Board Assessments. Notice of the assessment was mailed to affected property owners. Mayor Kimble closed the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adopt the appropriate resolution adopting the assessment L.I. 279-4, 1995 Water Board Assessments. (Resolution 95-234) Ayes - Councilmembers Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 6. This is the day and time for the assessment hearing for L.I.274-3, Sidewalk Improvements. Notice of the hearing was placed in the Stillwater Gazette on September 26, 1995, and notices mailed to affected property owners. Patrick and Patricia Pudlik, 423 North 3rd Street, questioned if the comer will be made handicap accessible. Mr. Eckles reported it will be done this year. Mayor Kimble closed the public hearing. e Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate 3 " Stillwater City Council Minutes Special Meeting October 10, 1995 e resolution adopting the assessment, L.I. 274-3, Sidewalk Improvements. (Resolution 95-235) Ayes - Councilmembers Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 7. This is the day and time for the assessment hearing for L.I. 274-2, Sidewalk Improvements. Notice of assessment mailed to affected property owners. (Waiver on file) Mayor Kimble closed the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate resolution adopting the assessment, L.I. 274-2, Sidewalk Improvements. (Resolution 95-236) Ayes - Councilmembers Cummings, thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None OTHER BUSINESS 1. Approving Agreement with Abrahamson Nurseries for landscaping services, L.I. 317, Good Samaritan Center. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate resolution approving the agreement with Abrahamson Nurseries for landscaping services, L.I. 317, Good Samaritan Center. (Resolution 95-238) Ayes - Councilmembers Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 2. Approving payment to Open Space Committee for survey work performed by Decision Resources, Inc. Motion by Councilmember Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate resolution approving payment to the Open Space Committee for survey work performed by Decision Resources, Inc. (Resolution 95-239) Ayes - Councilmembers Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 3. Adopting Assessment for Delinquent Sewer and Garbage charges, L.I. 001. 4 e ~ e Stillwater City Council Minutes Special Meeting October 10, 1995 Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt the appropriate resolution adopting the Assessment for Delinquent Sewer and Garbage charges, L.I. 001. (Resolution 95-237) Ayes - Councilmembers Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 4. Approval of Purchase Agreement Addendum between St. Croix Catering, Inc., Richard Anderson and the City. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adopt he appropriate resolution approving the purchase agreement addendum between St. Croix Catering, Inc., Richard and Judith Anderson, and the City of Stillwater. (Resolution 95-240) Ayes - Councilmembers Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays - None 5. Approval of reimbursement to Richard Zimmerman for fIre hydrant installation. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to ratify payment of $1,317 to Richard Zimmerman upon installation of fIre hydrant for Stillwater retail center. All in favor. OTHER BUSINESS Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to authorize the City Coordinator to negotiate the sale of the Council chairs. All in favor. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to reschedule the October 24 joint meeting of Council and Planning Commission for Wednesday, October 25 at 7:00 p.m. All in favor. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adjourn the meeting at 9 p.m. All in favor. e 5 '" ... <', " Stillwater City Council Minutes Special Meeting October 10, 1995 e MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Resolutions: 95-230 - Adopting assessment, L.I. 312, 1995 Street Improvements, as amended 95-231 - Adopting assessment, L.I. 307, Myrtle Street Pavement Rehabilitation, as amended 95-232 - Adopting assessment, L.I. 306, Highlands of Stillwater Sixth Addn. 95-233 - Adopting assessment, L.I. 304, Myrtlewood, as amended. 95-234 - Adopting assessment, L.I.279-4, 1995 Water Board Assessments. 95-235 - Adopting assessment, L.I. 274-3, Sidewalk Improvements. 95-236 - Adopting assessment, L.I. 274-3, Sidewalk Improvements. 95-237 - Adopting Assessment for Delinquent Sewer and Garbage Charges, L.I. 001. 95-238 - Agreement with Abrahamson Nurseries for landscaping services, L.I. 317, Good Samaritan 95-239 - Approving payment of Open Space Committee, survey work by Decision Resources 95-240 - Purchase agreement addendum between St. Croix Catering, Inc., Richard and Judith Anderson, and City of Stillwater. 6 e ~~~ ~~~D~~ City of Stillwater ~~~ PC~=;ndation ~.:; t. The City of Stillwater and the Stillwater Police Department recognizes that MELVIN E. RUSTIN I ", I ---.......---P~edi -- manner as to reflect credit upon the citizens of the I ~f rr-;qi'ijot~tillwater. /~: On October 4, 1995Ji'a{';~proXi.Y 10:00 a.m., while you wer-e-in you-t7-.boat---on ! ~ilY Lak~.in the qi!y'~f'i,~t.!ll~C1ter yo';1 n~tice~ a person that ~~s-f1fllY cl~~hed,,, i -:,..n:9;"~:q~~e,,.. :2~~,~eet f'IJ~~.tR~_.fJ.Sh~,n9 J?,l..er on t,...he-east---Sl.de of ,_tpe :.take. '--. I ~tOU9~.::=,;I:?~'X;,,~Y;C:c.c~rfn~, Y?~~~~!lt to tne-atd. of th'is pe;:son. and ,w~pe'.;able to "'-I 'ke~~'-: ~~l.J!~~/:'~l::9jm-"f";4,;:'?Jf'<t"_",,,~'~I~;~._~~:SJ~~rson was brop9ht-tO .lhe':hcrsP:L.ta~.;~p~.su!t:red /' ' o~4YTf~o~,h!~otb:l1!1;"JlUa t~f~1l\.~e~n ~ 'he',~:'cold watFr. _.,...-1 ~::;~ifrjt~~l,-.~_~~,,~;:~';::(~-- '~i~1tf~ . l~';~~f,a~h ' . .. .;.sen,~. . _ "~'e~!~~~;~~?[P~ili~~~!il1lt4~ ' artments l.n thl.~_ Cl.ty~ th .OW.:?i.YQU,- kn-ow, you-:b.ave ..:1.'Ong~15een::.:~uppor.ler:~of"'~:'-;,:'" ! ~_., J<~ -____v~. ::~,_,.-<. ,-='.', _ _ ~,"':''t..,'.~':!: "- - . ~ -~_..-" ; , - - - -._; :-'. ~', -' - - ---'- -~- ",:y-.'::':;-' -::- ~.--_. . YOU~ ~~~~j:~:~~,'~;'~~ec~f~i~:-~{t;~~~~~~~i ::t:~~~:~~a~~-~~{!;-~~t:::-;t~i'~: -- - - Department=~~ves.:.":::me"-"great' pleasure to present you with this Citizens Commendation. '&~/~ff' ~'h _~.~~ October 17. 1995 Dale ." 4 e PETITION TO CONFIRM DEDICATION ACCEPTANCE OF CITY STREET TO: The City Council of the City of Stillwater WHEREAS, the undersigned are all property owners having property fronting on the street known as McKusick Rd. Ln. No. WHEREAS, the Petitioners are informed that at the time the City of Stillwater approved said plats for the Gardens and the Greens (see attached map), the City and the developers agreed that the noted portions of the street (see attached map) would be held by the developer as a private street; and, WHEREAS, since that time, the Petitioner's residences have been constructed on the lots abutting said portions of Subject Street and Petitioners have occupied residences and used the portions of subject street as public street; and, WHEREAS, the Petitioners, as taxpayers and residents of the City of Stillwater, believe that for their safety and convenience, the City should accept or confirm dedication of all portions of Subject Street as a public street and maintain it as such; thereby, providing to the Petitioners the same street services as other taxpayers and residents of the City of Stillwater enjoy; Petitioners, accordingly, petition the City Council to take the following action: 1. Accept or confirm dedication of noted portions of Subject Street as a public street and maintain it as such; thereby, providing to the Petitioners the same street services as other taxpayers and residents of the City of Stillwater enjoy. In support of this petition, Petitioners tender herewith, a Quit Claim Deed conveying all of their interest, if any, in the noted portions of the Subject Street to the City of Stillwater for street purposes. e . We, the undersigned residents of THE GARDENS, hereby petition the City of 'stillY>ater to take over the care and maintenance of all roads known as McKusick Road Lane North. e 9/20/95 NUMBER STREET NAME NAMES __ ~ I __ ..-~~~--.~:~.._._.~~~~~..__....-~it~~A~"-- 911 TO\^Jl\lEClRCLE WINDMILLER, WES ~'h .It 'I.. /~ 919 TO\^Jl\lECIRCLE WANGERIN, MARSHALL c~~ _ff #/~~~ .-,,~ ~ -.....---.. "~.. .....-- .. . . --:;;-- .~~.-...-........ ;;:;~;,~---..---..-.--~@~.~.i: ~.-:...- 931 TOWNEClRCLE OTTO, BERTHA - _ Q D JJ rJ-AlJ .~ )tIt", 939 TO\^Jl\lECIRCLE SYMINGTON, SARAH - Ji:L - L A 'J -..;,., "",f~ ..--:.~;- ~_._..-.- ~~~~;:~~;------~>~*~~1!;1;--- 951 TO\^Jl\lE CIRCLE FLETCHER, MARY J '- \4 ~~ ~ ~-\5\: ~ ... 959 TO\^Jl\lE CIRCLE CHANDLER, CAROLE (& SHELLEY) vip A AI)/ ().A- .Jl) j .~~._~~~~~-~ ~;:~I!.J~_.__..____ j{-;(~ ~-""-f-'- 1 009 MCKUSICK ROAD lANE N. NEWCOM, MARTHA 2:: ~ /J ~n~ >>ft ..- ... 1013 MCKUSICK ROAD lANE N. EDSTROM, LOIS v '1.P~ ~. II.......... ~ -~.~~ ~~:.~~~~__l~~..~~~. '~~1~.;'~-' 1025 MCKUSICK ROAD lANE N. DELAHUNT, RON & BARBARA (& COLLEEN(:Z?:- 7:2 Y it ~~ ", ~.~ 1029 MCKUSICKROADlANEN. ~.RGS.!EDT, VICKI & CROSS. DAVID .._Q..,~. .:-_ ~ '7 - . 11a:~ .~~._ ~~~.~~~~~2'--_.____~;:~~ ~...__.._ _ 1 041 MCKUSICK ROAD lANE N. FOSSE. VERN n . I.. ~ J" A , 1045 MCKUSICK ROAD lANE N. ELLINGSON, JANE & FREDRICKSON, BILL '";?_ "if .::z ~ .., ~ J~.s 1049 MCKUSICK ROAD lANE N. PRINCE, J. DAVID (& MICHAEL & PETER) .... /11 u".J J. \ (' ..J. ;:, II ~ ~ ~~~~-;;~:-7~r!!?j/~~i~~~ 1 061 MCKUSICK ROAD lANE N. ~A. eu~~ tZ. '- V P. LL. ~ ,. b. V ht .ts,"f> e..Ul.. 1100 MCKUSICK ROAD lANE N. TUFT,' LOWELL & EIDA. .t-A () ut.P. ~ $Ill 7:. J) ~7~~' ;-:-;~~~~~~~L~::~..J12~. 1107 MCKUSICK ROAD lANE N. CREIGHTON, CONNIE & HOLLEY, NORM ~ CJ::.. W' c}l)c.r~ _ 111 2 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. ERDAl, NORRIS & ALYCE ~7'- A - _ dk.../ /J' R_n ~../ / ~ - We, the undersigned residents of THE GARDENS, hereby petition the City of stillwater to take over the care and maintenance of all roads known as McKusick Road Lane North. r 9/20/95 e NUMBER STREET NAME NAMES J _...~--~~~.~ ~~~~~;--~~r-P~~~--- 1119 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. KIEL. RON & JOY (& TRAVIS) ~ i- 'f>-y K;JJJ 1124 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. OFFERMAN. DOUG & LILLIAN iJ ~-"'~~ ?/J//- A ...- _ __ ~ "- ~;;~ ~:~~;~~~~~~~~~._--_...._~~~.. 1131 MCKUSICKROADLANEN. HERR. PATRICIA & JACOBSON. AL .,..~~ '~ :.. ..;.~... ~.I~ 1136 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. MERENESS. CHUCK & CAROL. :(7:1- {J~, ~~_ ~ _ - - _..:.~~--~;~~~~~~~;~.~.._--!~),'~?~;f-~ 1143 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. GOZZI. SONORA & SCHULZ. MANNY ~vJ 2-. :fA" .::"A:tPZ:,:1-,/ 1148 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. DOOLITTlE, KAREN & NEU. NANCY .. ----:i. If:: A. A V~? 1149 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. OLESON. LEN & JANE ~_ ^. ~~ /' /~...... ./ ....................- ............................................................. .....................................-..........-...........................-........._....~ . ..~'!:7'......... ,.~_........ ;.lwt'..........._. 1154 MCKUSICKROAD LANE N. PEDERSEN,KEN&NANCY ~ 7L ..1 .It -_r?;(~J" ~/ 1155 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. SWANSON. JIM & LAURIE ~ <1"1.. .. r7.. '" .- 1160 MCKUSICKROAD LANE N. FELLAND, KEN & IRMA C ~...~--~~_~ ( ) ._..:..;;;- ;~~~~~: .~:~~--_.__..-B: &{-a~..:-~~.__. 1178 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. DULON. JAROLD & DOROTHY 1"-1"'\ ..... ri. ~~ . D__ 1200 MCKUSICKROADLANEN. GASSER. MARY !~~ r~~ t!.- J ..--- -..-----..-.. --.--......--... .....77..-.. ::J!!:.. -=- ._-;~;~~.~~~~ .~~!:..~~..~~-_..~~?y-_...- 1236 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. FELSCH. JOHN & CHRISTINE : ~ i.J:. .: )(' -t. .d /~ ./ .R 1 239 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. HANSEN, DON & MARION ~ ? ~^ l1 rJ-,DI1l d,0 ~ ./l ""-_ 1248 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. COCHRANE. WILLARD & MARY ~ 'jJ '~1;'1 (~ (jrt:J(J\ 11 .AO ._..~ ;~~~~.~~:'. ~:~~~~~;;;;;------ ~;;~Ei~!!~ 1 266 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. CROOKS, RANDY & DEANNA ~~ -; .A AI A.o A , t1'A A .I j, A ~ 1 284 MCKUSICK ROAD LANE N. SCHMIDT. BOB & PHYLLIS /) "l.1 j}/ ~ ~ A . C,b , No el -- Residents living on McKusick Rd. Ln. No. e Anderson, Don & Karen 1309 McKusick Rd. Ln. No. S~water, ~~ 8'iJ . / c-/SjJ~E/l 01 _(f7~t1X-/ ~~. ~ ~e er, Chuck & Millie 1365 McKusick Rd. Ln. No. Stillwater, MN 55082 Romness, Art & Elvera 1279 McKusick Rd. Ln. No. StiIlwater,M 55082 i1 Schaefer, Jim & Anne 1347 McKusick Rd. Ln. No. Stillwater, MN 55082 ./ Costello, Howard & Carol 1317 McKusickRd. Ln. No. ~~MN~50 / ;; - ... .~CV( d~1f. ~ Fletcher, Bill & Pat 1301 McKusick Rd. Ln. No. Stillwater, MN 55082 kfJ:tefffh Schultz, oward & Gloria 1333 McKusick ReI. Ln. No. Stillwater,. MN)5082 J!:;~ Burnett, Hardand & Dar ene 1289 McKusick Rd. Ln. No. Stillwat~r, M~5082 h~~\'& ~\~ ~~~vJ-: Grundtner, John & Shirley 1269 McKusick Rd. Ln. No. S~w.ater, ~55082 -d . C{, Eyler, Gary and Connie 1359 McKusick Rd. Ln. No. ,. ware~:- Pritchard, Doug & Jan 1299 McKusick Rd. Ln. No. St>>la~r,~~82 t1n1'-< if ['f2J?:=C-U JC Jtl/1cl..,t- -. -/" ~,-;-:7;; /'./ LOCATION MAP ~ ,. tUI IUILDtHG PU.N' .011 DINIHI.GNU TYPICAL LOT p ", J', I, ;) i i i " < L', I I ! I I L j I I . , I r ! t II . LJ ~~ C w: .- &: r ...=>. =~l 1 Ill!: I . ~; = I ~ !l,): .-l- V)~..; <lJ12,: E w.:: :z: ,~ z.: : m "\~; --.. K: . . ~ . . . " . z. 0: -~ I-J lIlZ ~= z~ z ~: WCI < a:- O~ ...IE 0 ~ rr.o..tU. <0 z"; l?!<< ~ :: i ~~ in :g; I-~ g~ ~ a:r ~ m_ U :l :l! : w ~ . ... Z o . . tSI AOOIllOtf ::::: 'liD ADCM rtON 1&1 O.U.! 10tAL . MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBAC Ir 10. rr ... 'I 1I....WH I.. e..,. :tAl[ . . . 0 'th".SIOHS :~~rn ""'" UClCU5ICIC ""'" 1lfN\.0Cll.l' CXUlSE INDEX t. 1M PINt . 1.~~CClNIIIOI.""" I. utUTY rt.Nf ~ IMOSCArII'lAN ;~ . ~ . ~~... ., · . to -...._ t.~. ,;'f>>~ l.\jf. "''''''('1 ,., 0'4' rea.I NO I I., I: . I ' I ,: ~ e . REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION ROLL CALL ~PPROVAL OF MINUTES - Special Meeting of August 31 and September 1, 1992. 1111 ~- ~ ;),,--31 AGENDA STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL September 22, 1992 7:00 P.M. "'5TAFF REPORTS INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS ~1. Discussion of Harold Teasdale's request for reduction of taxes at Cottages /. j>f/StilJwater. (d, ~u.- ~ , PUBLIC HEARINGS ' v/l. This is the day and time for a Public Hearing, and possible second reading, of a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment reg~rding the regulation of exterior produced noise in the Central Business Dist., Case No. ZAT/92-2, City of Stillwater, Applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on September 10, 1992. I I ~ UNFINISHED BUSINESS ~1. Continued Discussion of Kalish/Edstrom fence dispute. ~. ~j. /l. ..h. Petition to Confirm Dedication Acceptance of City Street - by Greens Townhome Ass'n. Discussion of City Intersection Concerns. Staff report on Annexation Petition for approximately 440 acres. Presentation by Rolf Anderson of Stillwater Jr. High Reuse Study Report. NEW BUSINESS viI. Consideration of request for rephasing the stoplight at Main & Chestnut Streets. ~. /3. /4. ~5. Application for Payment No.1, Gloves Add., L.I. 283. Change Order No.2, Construction of Manhole & Catch Basin for L.I.257/259, Lowell Inn & No. Main St. Parking Lots. Change Order No.3, designation of public portion of Lowell Inn Parking area as "Permit Parking". Application for Payment No.3, Highlands of Stillwater, 2nd Add.,L.I.276. Establishment of Solid Waste Advisory Committee as permanent Standing Committee. "i ~., " '. . : 'l , ;1 ;' t. .] " 'oj .. ) ) , '" , ; j . f " , i i 1 I . .' . ,! i ) 'i, I~ o~ i , " ,~ I: 1 j . i; " , ;) ,~ .. " ,1 I Ii, I )" 1 " r V ! ," " , I i j I I ~~ r. , , " . ......~ ..... ,..... ~.. " . . ~ ~>> )1~';,?i . ~." 'I' if, ," ~o ,,,, '.'~ 1 I . -'. "'-,'"'ic.~'.,;. .' . ~ ! 1 t,~'~!;'1 ~+, ~":"1 i . ~ !;~l!!f!:\i. i :", ", ".;": 'U . ~ ,IY,~l" ';"j 'j .j t'.,~ , .' .~ . .~. . h ~ .. . . c;/ do 0/ '1 :J.. . LAKE ELMO BANK A TRADITION OF SERVICE August 21, 1992 JAMES A. SCHAEFER ExECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT City of stillwater ATTN: Ms. Mary Lou Johnson 216 North 4th street stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mary Lou: As president of the Greens Townhome Association, I have been asked to request that we be placed on the city Council agenda for the September f~h, ~992 meeting. d...1..~ We propose to present a "Petition to Confirm Dedication Acceptance of City street". I have enclosed the original petition and a copy of the Quit Claim Deed. Copies of the Petition and Quit Claim Deed will be sent individually to each council. person. Thank you very much for your consideration. J. A. S,Ehaefer /<Executive Vice President .;. t/ JAS/baj Enclosure 11465 39TH STREET NORTH . LAKE ELMO. MN 55042-0457 612/777-8365 . FAX 612/773-4739 PETITION TO CONFIRM DEDICATION ACCEPTANCE OF CITY STREET .'.. TO: The city council of the city of stillwater WHEREAS, the undersigned are all of the property owners having property fronting on the street known as McKusick Road Lane("Subject street"), which street was designated as out- lots A & B, The Greens Townhomes on Oak Glen. WHEREAS, the Petitioners are informed that at the time the city of stillwater approved said plat, the City and the Developer, Oak Glen Development Company, agreed that the Subject Street would be held by the Developer as a private street; and, WHEREAS, since that time, the Petitioner's residences have been constructed on the lots abutting said Subject street and Petitioners have occupied residences and used the . Subject Street as a public street; and, WHEREAS, the Petitioners, as taxpayers and residents of the City of stillwater, believe that for their safety and convenience, the City should accept or confirm dedication of Subject Street as a public street and maintain it as such; thereby, providing to the Petitioners the same street services as other taxpayers and residents of the City of stillwater enjoy; Petitioners, accordingly, petition the city council to take the following action: 1. Accept or confirm dedication of Subject Street as a public street and maintain it as such; thereby, providing to the Petitioners the same street services as other taxpayers and residents of the city of stillwater enjoy. .! ./e ..:. ~" . ''0 2. To name same street "Fairway Lane" .~IJ _~. In support of this petition, Petitioners tender herewith, a Quit Claim Deed conveying all of their interest, if any, in the subject street to the city of stillwater for ~. street purposes. Respectively submitted by: a ~ \' 7 ~ c/ I~t t J!tz.. Name f) J 3 to f: ~ /u <-'1u:l~ UCt! c/lll .q~ . Address Lf ~J,tv 1idJ Nam 0 /3 d-S' 71l~k elJ/" Y!lS - . Address :J!f~~x~L? Name . 1,~.3 3 /"'Tg'vutt-j{ ;fee ~ ~ I. Address ~./ eu,-d;L , Name . I ()-77 fie. t U5ic_l t<JLi1 Jl Address ~~ CI. J:t-uJlCv Na e j J. (.7 c; /ttJl~~J2 f)~ ;G ~ Address .;-..J Address 01LLt.e.i13cQtM-~/ Name V \34t 1\'~k\L'6\J&{ U\JJ, Address rY ~-<;~ ;l jJ ~0r Name ~ J~SJ /JJG/c'uudL I2cfJ. . ~ Address ~0 .~~Levu ame /.s~(- ~f'~~d ~c/L"u. ~ , Address -~:t;-0i~ , ltm " I!d: I 1?).(I1J~. "I/t/~, Address -2- Address Address /{ J~ .~~I /,' ". (/ J, " . J., '---II rJ .1r-/Z.J('/.~{ :r:~~;;:c:.l~:/ ,<;1' /':-J_..;;[7;~...v' ) '- f _/ f~'/!A-t~' ;j~a,~~? . Name,.. . ' /., ,. .7/ /_~ {; 1~1r-..J:<<.zJ;..j[//~.;:;>y' /;?~l: 17 ;:'J:~>:_A_'/ /-j' ,;=!~;~ /.::., . ,/4/9 /?J /PtUL;~ f1 ~ ;V Address 'l~ ~~ N me /:;., q '?4~~-;~ ~'~_l,l!P.:;!! >i Address Address ----:-- / ...:Z.~.J-----'" Name y- ,,,.. .,. I' 1/ . I.... t ..t. (; '- .f /. "... .,' '-:'.f'-. of 'J~7 .^. . ,,! I I \ I ,t ......! I..... (... l ~ Address ? /) J - . ~!j/V~ t-~::e-4<./~"A< / I;~ame ...J ." _. t I~ 9 JJ1e /(;t~2~f1~ )? Address Name Address - " (;;:: t: (:.r.;l cqi~i i:.t _ Name -." J.${) J 7J7 C!.f0t-Jit t. PA ,t: 77, I Address Utc- ;W:-L N:t J"Ac){ ~c-k'~X i&'y:~};. Address ':"'X/"''-";{.'L..o:- g..,_--:,_,:~.,-,",/ Name (/ A-f. .-0'" . , -1 .: .. ~#..,v ,'".A. ~ :. /~ (. /-, ."..........o:.--L /c:-.. tJ ^-_ ,,:f ,,:L..._ :....,.., /C-- Address (1 ~.~ _ , ~~fi .->~_..,,/ Name > . \ . : /' :'!-" /"./' : -; (. ( --.,..... ; 1/. 0 .. /.; /'.~.! ...1...., I .-.~ l:. J . :.. l.: ....."0 l.-.-.l ......,,\... t'. -., Name - Addrr . , ./ .If 7'l1'ft..,'/K';(It, Kef 6, /fJ. Address Name . Address -3- Form No. 31.M -QUIT CLAIM DEED Corpor.tion or Partnership to Corporation or Partnership MinnelOta UnitonnConwy.ncln, Blanks (19'71) MIH.,.O.vl' Co.. M...n..pohs .. No delinquent taxes and transfer entered; Certificate of Real Estate Value ( ) filed ( ) not required Certificate of Real Estate Value No. ,19_ ~(Q)[?)W County Auditor by Deputy STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: $ Date: ,19_ (reserved for recording data) FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, Minnp~nt~ The Greens Townhome Association. Inc. ,a non-profit corporation under the laws of ,Grantor, hereby conveys and quitclaims to The City of Stillwater , Grantee, , real property in under the laws of Minnesota County, Minnesota, described as follows: a mllnic-ip"l c-orpor"rion Y""hingron Outlots A and B, The Greens Townhomes on Oak Glen . Consideration for the transfer of this property is Five Hundred and 00/100 ($500.00) Dollars or less. lif more space is .....ded. continue on back) together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto. .\if;x lh!cll Ta:,; Stamp H(!rt~ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF WASHINGTON } ~. The foregoing was acknowledged before me this by James A. Schaefer the President of The Greens Townhome Association. under the laws of Minnesota <.>l /os r- and and Inc. , on behalf of the day of 4(,'~~ A.J r Dou21as Pritchard Vice President , a non-profi t corporafion , 19..22.... , corporation "BARBARA ANN JANKOVICH NOTARY PUBUO . MINNESOTA WASHINGTON COUNTY .. My commIlIlon ....... 3-10-88 ~ ACKN Tali SlalOm.oll for lb. roll propony dtacrltiid bI thll bitt.........' mould b. ..01 10 (lIIc1ud. ....... aJId add.... of G.aol"): NOTARIAL STAMP OR SEAL (OR OTHER TITLE OR RANK) THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY (NAME AND ADDRESS): . I i I I i ! LAWSON, MARSHALL, MCDONALD & GALOWITZ, P.A. Lawyers 3880 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, Minnesota 55042 Telephone: (612) 777-6960 JSM J :. . '. Stillwater City Council Minutes September 22, 1992 Regular Meeting Teasdale and also the Board of Review process which would have reviewed his case at a much earlier date. Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Funke to table the decision on the request of Harold Teasdale for reduction of taxes at Cottages of Stillwater until a workshop, which will include Mr. Teasdale, City Staff and the Washington County Assessor's Office, is scheduled to study this issue. (All in favor). 2. Charter Commission - Discussion of Proposed Resolution on Moratorium for Regulation of City Owned Land Scott Keller, representing the Charter Commission, requested that two items be added to the resolution -- that being, the Heritage Preservation Commission be added and that no sale, lease or other transfer take place without the written approval of thee of the five Commissions. Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Farrell to adopt the appropriate resolution declaring a moratorium on the sale or transfer of City owned land, which will include the addition of the Heritage Preservation Commission to those being consulted and that no sale, lease or other transfer shall take place without the written approval of three of the five Commissions. (Resolution No. 92-196) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Continued Discussion of Kalish/Edstrom fence dispute. City Attorney Magnuson explained this issue concerns a fence that was erected that was higher than that allowed in the Variance. The neighbors are at an impasse and it is up to the City to decide whether to enforce the Ordinance. Motion by Councilmember Farrell, seconded by Councilmember Funke that the City proceed to enforce the ordinance as it pertains to the Kalish/Edstrom fence dispute and take whatever action is necessary. (All in favor). 2. Petition to Confirm Dedication Acceptance of City Street - by Greens Townhome Ass'n. City Coordinator Kriesel presented pictures of McKusick Rd. Lane No. and stated the street is more narrow that normal city streets, although there are no problems with the turn-around. Mr. Russell stated this street is not built to City standards and the City would be taking on a responsibility after the fact. Also, it is similar to a street up the way that was denied action as a public street. Council and Staff discussion followed regarding a policy that would not allow developers to build 4 Stillwater City Council Minutes September 22, 1992 Regular Meeting e. private streets. It was also suggested that perhaps these residents could get an abatement on their taxes since they do not get City services for their streets. Chuck Buehler, 1365 McKusick Rd. Ln. No., stated that when he purchased his home there was no mention of the street being private and he did not know this until NSP refused to change a streetlight because the street is private. He added that it is dangerous for the City to accept substandard private streets. Jim Schaefer, 1347 McKusick Rd. Ln. No., also stated they were not aware of the private street status until 1988. Linda Tschida, 1325 McKusick Rd. Ln. No., stated they became aware of it in 1989 when the streetlight went out. Consulting Engineer Moore stated the City standard street width is 32 ft. which is wide enough for emergency vehicles. If the City accepts the street, parking on the street may have to be eliminated. Also, it was noted that the watermain and sewer are private and should also be dedicated to the City and easements should be required. Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Funke directing the City Staff to secure easements and documentation from the property owners of the Greens Townhomes, as it pertains to declaring McKusick Rd. Ln. a normal public street, with submission of a report to Council, which will include a review of the homeowner's documents. (All in favor). . 3. Discussion of City Intersection Concerns. Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Funke directing Consulting Engineers to proceed with a signal justification report for the intersection of Greeley St. & Curve Crest Blvd., coordinating these efforts with Washington County. (All in favor). 4. Staff report on Annexation Petition for approximately 440 acres. Mr. Russell stated that the proposed area is bounded by Highway 96 on the north, Manning Ave. on the west and Boutwell Rd. on the south and has eight property owners who have requested the annexation. This request was referred to Staff to review with City policies, the Comprehensive Plan, Waste Water Plan and annexation procedures. Mr. Russell further elaborated on the the City's population growth, available land and stated that water and sewer service can be provided to the area. Also, the Minnesota Transportation Museum right-of-way extends to Duluth Junction in Grant Township and the annexation of that area would be 5 . STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL November 24, 1992 7:00 P.M. _. _ _ .4 _._______ __._U_" ._-- --- -- ~ .. 1J-L13 . REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION ROLL CALL INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS 1. Oath of Office for New police Officers: Christopher Felsch, Christopher Hoyt and Kathleen PreusS. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Special Meeting of November 5, 1992; Regular & Recessed Meetings of November 10, 1992. STAFF REPORTS UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Discussion of the Greens Townhomes request for transfer of Private Street to Public Street designation. 2. Set Date for Informational Hearing on the Southeast Area Sanitary Sewer Extension. 3. Discussion of Green Twig Way Project. 4. Notice of Appeal from Assessment of Parcels - Francis Rheinberger & Richard Rodrigue. 5. Request for Preliminary Report for Development of Parking Lot on Third & Myrtle Streets. 6. Update on Sims Property. NEW BUSINESS 1. Proclamation designating November 22-28 as National Family Week. 2. Change Order No.2 - Wilkins & No. 4th St. Storm Sewer. 3. possible Acquisition of Right-of-Way on Curve Crest Blvd. adjacent to Courage Center. 4. Highlands, Third Addition, L.I. 289 - possible approval of Plans & Specs & Advertisement for Bids. 5. Appointment of Libary Board Members. 6. Johnson Bros. Corp. - Supplemental Agreement No. 13, Downtown Construction. ~ . ~ Ii PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS (Continued) CONSENT AGENDA 1. Resolution Directing Payment of Bills (Resolution No. 92-238) 2. Appllcatlons (List to be supplied at meeting). '.e . . IO/~tj /1 ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FR: City Coordinator DA: November 3, 1992 RE: CONVERSION OF PRIVATE STREET TO PUBLIC STREET (THE GREENS TOWNHOKES) The City Council directed staff to further review the request of the Greens Townhome Association to convert the private road within the Townhome development to a public street. The association states that they were surprised to find out the roadway was private. The association further claims that the covenants were vague and did not provide a clear and direct notice that the streets and utilities were private. However, I'm not sure if this should be a factor in the Council's decision on the matter. The covenants, etc., and what they represent is an issue between the seller and buyer of the townhomes. The only issue before the Council is whether or not a public purpose is served by making a private roadway a substandard public street and if a public purpQse is served, is it practical to do so given the existing physical conditions associated with the streets and utilities. Further, would such a change in policy obligate the City to convert other private streets (e.g., Cottages of Stillwater, Bruggeman/Gardens, etc.) to public streets. From a physical standpoint, the street is a substandard street and would require the acquisition of easements or right-of-way in order to construct or have the potential to construct a standard city street. The street is presently 40 feet wide with a paved surface of 24 feet. A standard city street has a right-of- way of 60 feet with a 32 foot paved surface. However, if adequate right-of-way is obtained, then the setback (front of structure to right-of-way line) would become substandard. The normal setback is 30 feet. A setback of only a few feet would be the result of making this street a standard city street with standard right-of-way. Therefore, it does not appear to be practical to create a standard city street (i.e., 60 feet wide). Further, it does not appear to be possible to construct a standard turnaround because of the lack of available land and the location of the buildings in relation to the streets. One of the reasons for constructing a standard turnaround is to provide access and maneuverability for emergency vehicles. On the other hand, an emergency vehicle would still have to travel down the present roadway in order to get to a victim or to suppress a fire. In other words, the physical conditions may constitute an impediment but does not prevent emergency vehicle access. The only other problems related to physical conditions is snow plowing. Although the narrowness of the street may allow for quick plowing, snow storage could become a problem because of the limited area available for storage. Also, snow removal of a higher frequency (than other residential streets) might be required because of the lack of snow storage capacity. In regards to the construction standards (i. e., load limits, size of pipe, etc.), it appears that the streets and utilities were constructed to city standards and would not require unusual repair and/or replacement costs. In order to convert the roadway to a public street, it will be necessary to survey existing utilities and drainage easements, write easement descriptions and to prepare as built (utility) drawings. The cost of this work (primarily engineering and legal work) is estimated to be $3,500. Therefore, The Council should decide whether or not the roadway should be made a public street before proceeding any further. The Council may also want to determine how the cost of the aforementioned work is to be recovered. Recommendation 1. Council determine public interest served by converting private roadway and utilities to a substandard public street and utilities. 2. Council determine how a decision to accept this street would impact on other areas of the city that are served by private streets. 3. Council determine how conversion costs are to be paid. 4,. Direct staff to obtain all items necessary for conversion if decision is to convert. 121~ .. .,. '.1 .' \~... ~ \ r ,>- '-) . I~ I .~~ .~ ~ ~~ ~ ,. I \ H \1 J~~ ~~ H~ i,.f 11 I \ , ,~ , \ \, \/ ,. \," \.') r~ v " ,,""" I)' ,''- ,,' " (\' <........." '\rJ , ^ ('\ \ ,\ ,- ~' ,..\] ,) (j 0, , In "" 5 '" 3 '5 "- ""- "- .v.,.~.,~.~, ............. ..c/~.I:rN-"" H4."I' I I :1 . '1 ~ ~I .,11 ~...'" ~ 2 131-7....~: , ~I t \, \, ~ ~ t' ~.~ A......'''"" _'"-' 'Ii \I '1 ~I t n""" ~ .. ~ ~ ',h 3 /.1$"7 . .. : , I ~ A.'''' ".... .c'r.... ~ ~ ~ ,.,~..~ .'li:~ I ~ ~~ I .. ... ..\ :1 ~ 4 /31>> 'Ii ! ~ '4 <U~ ,,-- ~~__~:".... --t .. .....,..7V.1f":r.4' T ~~ ~.;.. <; .r"~"",,,, ....-..,.'t- v,-.".s- r_..-...n/........-1'~"~ ~ ~. e -. - ,.",., . ;-S-4?? ~'\"W'":,,,.... 1 ..:1 ,,"'I#~ " ~... , " <.., , 'I , , r " \J 5 ~- r ' ...' (~ .vCl'-,,;/4t:J' '~r'4-' N"~~ , I ~.. .... ,~ 3 U ~ ~ ~ I- 2 .~ ~ ~ l C ~ OUTLOT C ~, (~ ''': I~SO /~JZ". /,}90 ""....._. .t"r-r.;:; ........'1" ~~~ ~~, ",,_ ..... ;1'1'r:1.~_... ..~ , ' c. ~ - ~~----~----T. ~ ~ t - .,..........hn' ~.(;.>'..;;"...-L---< ~ ;'~P'4 \ ,r- , \/'- r\' '- /S.".'" ;. :., , I . L . , / ,t /.,. ~ / I ~ ~ .~, H I 1 ~. ~ ,. ~ ~~ /\~/ / ,Y '( ,/ '.J / I , , ~ ~~l I ~ Cv ~.~ ~.I1 ~ 0': ~~~ ~~j; .... i. ~ti!i n" ti.j,~ y ,~~ \ 'Ii ~ .:~ I; ~... , <j o -...! -) \.... '- ( , '-' "", ~ I I ,~. ~t') 6 ,0' ~.... , I / / / / I I I I I I [-- . Stillwater City Council Minutes November 24, 1992 Regular Meeting 4. Police Chief - Appointment of Officer Swanson as Investigator Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Funke to adopt the appropriate resolution appointing Officer Douglas Swanson to the Investigator's position. (Resolution No. 92-243) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Funke, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None Approval of Cellular Phones for Police Dept. Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Opheim to accept the offer of two free used cellular telephones with a cost of $100.00 each for antennas and installation. (All in favor). Free Parkin~ in Downtown during Holidays Motion by CounCllmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Opheim to approve free parking in the downtown area during the holiday season -- Nov. 27 - Jan. 4. (All in favor). . INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS 1. Oath of Office for New Police Officers: Christopher Felsch, Christopher Hoyt and Kathleen Preuss. City Clerk Johnson administered the oaths of office to the three candidates and Police Chief Beberg introduced them to the Council and audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Opheim to approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of November 5 and Regular & Recessed Meetings of November 10, 1992 as presented. (All in favor). STAFF REPORTS (Continued) 5. Consulting Engineer - Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Funke to approve Change Order No. 14, for the Downtown Improvements, authorizing the Mayor to sign. (All in favor). UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Discussion of the Greens Townhomes request for transfer of Private Street to Public Street designation. City Coordinator Kriesel explained the request presented by the Greens Townhomes to convert a private street to a public street. Discussion included whether the homeowners knew it was a private street when the units were purchased, and the accommodation of emergency vehicles and snowplowing on substandard streets. City Attorney Magnuson stated that if '. I 2 Stillwater City Council Minutes November 24, 1992 Regular Meeting . the City maintains the street for six years it would become a public street. Chuck Buehler, a resident of the Greens, stated the Council should not be accepting substandard streets when townhomes are built because of the problems which develop later. He also said it was not clear to the homeowners that this was a private street. He said that at the last meeting on this issue, they were told they would meet with Staff to discuss the issues further and were never called. The Homeowners' association would like to set up criteria for accommodating emergency vehicles and restrictions against on-street parking. Further discussion followed regarding the contents of the covenants issued to the Homeowners' Association. John Grundtner, a member of the Greens Townhomes, asked what the cost to the City would be to maintain a public street, such as filling cracks, etc. He stated they pay taxes as other citizens do and do not get the benefit of City services. He further stated it is not fair, the City should not allow developers to construct substandard streets and requested the City set a pOlicy on accepting the street. Consulting Engineer Moore stated there are two utility easements on both sides of the roadway with lots encroaching on the easements. This situation would add extra expense when making repairs to utilities. e Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Funke to deny the request of the Greens Townhomes for the City to accept the conversion of a private street to a public street. (Ayes - 4; Nays - 1, Councilmember Opheim). Council directed Staff to review other ways for contracting for services for private streets and utilities, advise Council and then meet with Greens Homeowners Association representatives. Council recessed for seven minutes and reconvened at 8:16 P.M. 2. Set Date for Informational Hearing on the Southeast Area Sanitary Sewer Extension. Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Funke to set a public informational hearing on the Southeast Area Sanitary Sewer Extension for January 19, 1993 at 7:00 P.M. (All in favor). 3. Discussion of Green TWi~ Way Project. Motion by Councilmember Fun e, seconded by Councilmember Opheim to approve the request from B & D Underground, Inc. for suspension of work for winter months, 3 el e Ie MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director ~ DA: October 13, 1995 RE: PETITION FOR FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR OLD PRISON SITE The developer of the old territorial prison will be at the meeting to present a petition for a feasibility study for public improvements. The city will be conducting a related drainage study of the watershed next year. This study will be coordinated with and start that work. It is critical that the work begin now because of development scheduling. Recommendation: Review petition and initiate feasibility study (the petition will be presented at meeting time). .. . . ... nUU"lON J.I"OII. I.OC~ IMJraOVEMENT TO: THE em COUNCIL OF S11LLWATBK, MINNESOTA: w ~ the undersigned, owners of the real property GoWD 111 the MiDDeaota TCll1itotial Prison .Sa de.saibed OD the auad1ed &hlbit -A-, bueb)" pedtioa tba& 1he 9tOPctty7 8Dd 111)' adu:L' ~ property. be UuptOY'ed by tile iDIt~l1m;on of storm ...ers~ Mter maiDllDd ... ..w., sewer maiDS and sewer SCltYices, aDd the iDstalJatio.a l1t stn:ca, cmba. pUI:Q aad any od1tJC ucallX)' IpPIII1tmaDCt8 pursuant to ~ta Statutes, Chapter 429. That yOut PetitiODers are the 0ft8is of tile Patcbaaer's Int8t8St In a comract tor tbe putddse or !be propeny, and tho)' petltioD 111at die ~ Fiml at Sbort, EUiott - HeadrlcksoD, &I me Chy'. c:onsulEiDr cngiueq, be insltUCt&ld to tcpOIt to tho CowdJ w:i1h aU ~eDJcm ~ ldvisiD.1bo Council in a preJimiDary way as to whether the proposed ~ it feasible, aDd wUdler it 8ho\11d be51 b6 ~8 as proposed or in CODPtCdo.o wttb soxne otMr fmprOVamem, aDd esdmaJed COlt of tbc i.mptovmnem a.s recommcudcd. Dated thi6 16th day f1f Oc:mber, 1995. TEJUUTOlUAL COAU11ON, INC. G d ;evS86099S 'ON/v;:;! '1S/;;:;[ ;6.9l 'Ot (NOl{) HjWVHX i I1HjSSjW WOHd .. . . 1:4 - Jill r~ "f." ... i.l.l11.' :-- , f i)~ l~I~!~JIJI ~.j~ !J~1!I.il~1 ~~ M ~!.J fl~IiI.-", '-I ~" .~ ~a fa- "'tJ ~ · Ii I ~ii bi!Uhmiii!di!iil!;~ ~ 7 ~J" r.r!t.. II~J-;Ja _II ltjl~.= t~j I ~ &~~ li.t~~1).~Ji!a!l~i~1~1)a~Jlt ~ Jt = f iJ -ilit; !i'ts- ~tlI~lila =1 ..b :I i a ;J~ !liB~!S~t:Jl!~)111~ji it t ~ f fa. 11~JrJil!f ~111J JiJ~~~:J. ~ 5; ill J~!j~4jji !~~JI!ii41:iii!1 t ~ == ~!J c.,i_lttl:j I !tl-ifa~ 1t;1 . s" f'lO :!!;.J -"I'll -I li ...,~ ~ !! ii ltl~.~ll:&~t .1]'1 ~flillt ~ ~ J ).. ..,"; -la.!lll..li1. 4,' '11.t1! i : I ~ j &! Jli;l'jUi~i~llfr !l..t: I ~ J i ~1~ ~r!:;lll' J-I:Jlj;l!ti"JJ~:" t · J ~!il &i';~l:~!!~J~lijjIJlifJll! , J t,1)1&1 j!.tij5;fJI)~4i:zIJ~ I: ~tl!lo i " ~"" :r;' ~lS ~ lit! 1Ii~ I. : ~ ~ J ijtU1l.ii ,j!la!!~Ji =t?l! t II . i: li~ i ~t!4:; r'i !U' ~aJilf al!j ! a -a } ~ .....3 III Cia · 8f~ ,.! 0 _ f~.I t ~ IIJI ."1i!.!dlli1aj~~JtllHiiit 1 ~ i l!t'as, 1al .tJ3"!.f~"-l:rtl ,! f.6 If... 1i1:zi!1!J~lf ";-!i~~illtrlt 1 . ~ I) -.S 1,2 1":., -i '" til..j.-Itf"a a - _ I ~"jill..jliIJ31i!11J;I~ 12)1- If i -. - -. ~ .. 4j ;~~I.i~jJ~J;1!:~~~JJtJ1ijll J /If ;..jJ~i~Jri'i~~:iltgjl:Ej"11Ji!1 / ~ 1ju fl.c...:....$l.a..-.;f.l-l.& Al ..... r / i~~~ta!~lji~!tll~f.~~~I.~llf!I~J~ I ~/ =tlillj-e 2 '11.-1 tit i'.l~-If I ~t'.; .~J'!j9~.1 - ,~- s~~ tat ~!~~l 1 I~ ... ,11:::i f -- 'I I.!~ ..Je.... ...! i i 11 Iz: ~1!~~Jltl=i~~lljaltjl~~l]!i~i~ I /~ !a~J~ v:rj::j!J,J lora 'l5...ail~!J 1~ If:; If I "I.. I ~i!lJjl 11-.1-.. iaJlatt!~t I!.~ ~ :(iJs~ IJi:ljl~ljil!lllli';~jil!li.. t ~ 10 ti I 1111~jtiQiJ~lt_JJI~ ~11i~i~~JI~ ~ 1 ""11JJfJI:aIAi~J.!,at.ljj :...rIII&J! / ~ - If<<~ tl- 51 !jf !rt<<Jj;~::fiaJ:a: / I jilt ~.dJa'!uftdhlJuu..nfl / . I ~.!:o_ I / I l / /.~ F.. I ij" / 1."4 f 1 J c ) W!, l'ii~ 'I111'1Ja' ~. IJ j J 'I~I~ J J.j I. I ~~ It"l~: .. ~fi:nili ~ 11JiI~f'l: i ~_.tq l !fI mfiJlf:. 11 J"" i. i n~itUe: i :~fll JI- !.. J I J iJli~I~:J: nJ!eUf IJ.JlfJ,i . ! i 1 C") ~ ..., -. ( , () ~..l-W'" I',," (' T f" ..1"'8Ff'\('('- 'f'1~i';..("'~ I ,. ~ /'~r" "l ,..r. (' I 'n l'~;f'1~'" c, '1 :lCIC v'U~:l~ Uh/V::l'':l J..~'./'::U'~ ':lC','di ,j ,l{Vi'11 Ea}fVHX ~ 11E]SS2W WO~d r '. . :. LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 95-241 A T & T A T & T Wireless Action Rental American Linen Arrow Building Center Aspen Mills B W B R Architects Berwald Roofing Business Equipment Bokerage California Contractors Supplies Campbell, Craig Capitol Communications Copy Cat Printing Croixland Excavating Cummings, Richard Cy's Uniforms Del's Outdoor Equipment Emergency Apparatus Erickson Post Fire Guard Sprinkler Service Folz, Freemam, Dupay & Assoc G & K Services General Industrial Supply George W Olsen Construction Gephart Electric Glen Johnson Construction Global Computer Supplies Goodwill Industries Gopher State One-Call Images of the Past & Present J J C Recycling Jun ker Sanitation Kriesel, Nile Lake Management Lakeland Ford Lakeview Hospital M I I Life M J Raleigh Trucking Magnuson, David Metro Waste Control Commission Miller Excavating Miller Exca v atin g Mosby Year Book Motorola Maint Agreement Nat'l Assn Chiefs of Police Nat'l Trust for Historic Preserv Northwestern Tire On Site Sanitation Pierce Manufacturing Roetgger Welding Schield Construction Equip Maint/RentallLong Distance Mobile Phone Concrete-Benson Park Towel Service Supplies-Benson Park Uniforms Phase II-Municipal Building UBC Building Microcassette Adapter Back Supports/Tape Sculpture Exhibition Microphone/Radio Repair/Maint Letterhead Dig Storm Sewer Meat Sauce-Picnic Uniforms Trim Line Truck Repair Gasoline/Diesel UBC Building DesiDesign/ Con s ultation Uniform Cleaning Tape UBC Building UBC Building UBC Building CD ROM Recycling Utility Locates Film/Slides Recycling Garbage Bags Sold Meals/Mileage Weed/ Algae Control Repair Parts Blood Tests Participant Fee Grading-Benson Park Legal Services Sewer Service Sewer Line Repair UBC Building Abuse Investigation Book Maint Agreement Subscription Renewal Membership Tires/Windshield Washer/Batteries Portable Restroom Fire Truck Repair Railing Payment #3-11 305 & 308 264.99 63.30 155.49 13.85 1,120.48 80.86 44,141.77 3,051.00 31.90 148.80 260.00 435.30 360.18 200.00 18.43 902.68 13.82 699.90 3,545.35 20,228.00 212.50 1,402.95 154.44 6,546.56 14,535.00 11,923.00 259.99 318.54 52.00 22.64 12,098.05 1,668.75 57.30 1,712.45 47.50 80.00 84.00 555.00 7,411.54 79,442.00 1,895.86 3,969.00 201.15 284.30 18.00 20.00 1,865.99 414.55 159,515.00 90.00 110,939.13 Schwantes Heating & Air Cond Shiely Company Short Elliot Hendrickson Snap On Tools Snyder Drug St Croix Animal Shelter St Croix Car Wash St Croix Office Supplies Stillwater Gazette Streicher's Swanson-Youngdale Inc T A Schifsky T A Schifsky & Sons Tautges, Redpath & Co Tower Asphalt Uniforms Unlimited Valley Auto Van Paper Company Wardell, Lelsie Warning Lites Washington Co Abstract Washington Co Central Services Washington Co Recorder Washington Co Sheriff Weldon, Morli Winnick Supply Woodchuck Tree Service Wybrite ADDENDUM TO BILLS ATEC Associates Burmaster, Russell Carlson Equipment Doeksen, Peggy Hydrocon Kimble, Jay Legislative Associates Malody, Kathryn Price, Monica UBC Building Sand-Benson Park Engineering Services Repair Kit Film/Batteries Boarding Fees Car Washes Office Supplies Publications Lenses UBC Building Asphalt UBC Building Fiscal Impact Analysis Payment #8-LI 301 Uniforms Repair Parts Paper Products DARE Supplies Barricades Assessment Payoff Copy Paper Recording Fees Mobile Data Terminal Lease Deed/Mileage Repair Part Stump Removal Computer Maint Enviromental Services Janitorial Services Pump Rental-Pump Pond on CR 5 Refund-Inspection Fee/Surcharge Payment #2-LI 309/313 Phone Calls/Meals/Lodging/Mileage Consultant Services Library Sculpture Coffe Cups/Pot TOT AL: Adopted by the City Council this 17th day of October, 1995. APPROVED FOR PAYMENT 653.00 . 296.07 10,515.20 7.83 29.98 440.38 23.97 148.75 187.73 7.99 6,269.00 292.16 37,922.00 8,276.50 18,902.53 45.80 785.90 244.42 86.98 63.78 1,998.72 66.40 88.00 2,625.00 20.40 25.24 195.96 . 334.00 1,600.00 210.00 2,393.91 15.50 78,761.53 360.84 2,895.00 770.00 5.00 -------------- -------------- 671,098.76 -------------- -------------- . '\ '" e LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 95-241 e A T & T A T & T Wireless Action Rental American Linen Arrow Building Center Aspen Mills B W B R Architects Berwald Roofing Business Equipment Bokerage California Contractors Supplies Campbell, Craig Capitol Communications Chief of Police Magazine Copy Cat Printing Croixland Excavating Cummings, Richard Cy's Uniforms Del's Outdoor Equipment Emergency Apparatus Erickson Post Fire Guard Sprinkler Service Folz, Freemam, Dupay & Assoc G & K Services General Industrial Supply George W Olsen Construction Gephart Electric Glen Johnson Construction Global Computer Supplies Goodwill Industries Gopher State One-Call Images of the Past & Present J J C Recycling Junker Sanitation Kriesel, Nile Lake Management Lakeland Ford Lakeview Hospital M I I Life M J Raleigh Trucking Magnuson, David Metro Waste Control Commission Miller Excavating Miller Excavating Mosby Year Book Motorola Maint Agreement Nat'l Trust for Historic Preserv Northwestern Tire On Site Sanitation Pierce Manufacturing Roetgger Welding Schield Construction Schwantes Heating & Air Cond Shiely Company Short Elliot Hendrickson Equip Maint/RentallLong Distance Mobile Phone Concrete-Benson Park Towel Service Supplies-Benson Park Uniforms Phase II-Municipal Building UBC Building Microcassette Adapter Back Supports/Tape Sculpture Exhibition Microphone/Radio Repair/Maint Subscription Renewal Letterhead Dig Storm Sewer Meat Sauce-Picnic Uniforms Trim Line Truck Repair Gasoline/Diesel UBC Building DesiDesign/ Cons ultation Uniform Cleaning Tape UBC Building UBC Building UBC Building CD ROM Recycling Utility Locates Film/Slides Recycling Garbage Bags Sold Meals/Mileage Weed/ Algae Control Repair Parts Blood Tests Participant Fee Grading-Benson Park Legal Services Sewer Service Sewer Line Repair UBC Building Abuse Investigation Book Maint Agreement Membership Tires/Windshield Washer/Batteries Portable Restroom Fire Truck Repair Railing Payment #3-LI 305 & 308 UBC Building Sand-Benson Park Engineering Services 264.99 63.30 155.49 13.85 1,120.48 80.86 44,141.77 3,051.00 31.90 148.80 260.00 435.30 18.00 360.18 200.00 18.43 902.68 13.82 699.90 3,545.35 20,228.00 212.50 1,402.95 154.44 6,546.56 14,535.00 11,923.00 259.99 318.54 52.00 22.64 12,098.05 1,668.75 57.30 1,712.45 47.50 80.00 84.00 555.00 7,411.54 79,442.00 1,895.86 3,969.00 201.15 284.30 20.00 1,865.99 414.55 159,515.00 90.00 110,939.13 653.00 296.07 10,515.20 Snap On Tools Snyder Drug St Croix Animal Shelter St Croix Car Wash St Croix Office Supplies Stillwater Gazette Streicher's Swanson-Youngdale Inc T A Schifsky T A Schifsky & Sons Tautges, Redpath & Co Tower Asphalt Uniforms Unlimited Valley Auto Van Paper Company Wardell, Lelsie Warning Lites Washington Co Abstract Washington Co Central Services Washington Co Recorder Washington Co Sheriff Weldon, Morli Winnick Supply Woodchuck Tree Service Wybrite Repair Kit Film/Batteries Boarding Fees Car Washes Office Supplies Publications Lenses UBC Building Asphalt UBC Building Fiscal Impact Analysis Payment #8-LI 301 Uniforms Repair Parts Paper Products DARE Supplies Barricades Assessment Payoff Copy Paper Recording Fees Mobile Data Terminal Lease Deed/Mileage Repair Part Stump Removal Computer Maint ",. 7.83 29.98 440.38 23.97 148.75 187.73 7.99 6,269.00 292.16 37,922.00 8,276.50 18,902.53 45.80 785.90 244.42 86.98 63.78 1,998.72 66.40 88.00 2,625.00 20.40 25.24 195.96 334.00 e , e e e 'l RESOLUTION NO. 95- APPROVING A MINNESOTA PREMISES PERMIT FOR GAMBLING FOR NORTH ST. PAUL LIONS CLUB AT CANELAKES BAR AND RESTAURANT, 1240 FRONTAGE ROAD WHEREAS, the North St. Paul Lions Club has submitted an application to the City of Stillwater requesting City approval of a pending Minnesota Gambling Premises application permit; and WHEREAS, representatives of the organization appeared before the City Council and demonstrated that the organization is collecting gambling monies for lawful purposes; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Stillwater approves of the gambling license requested by the North St. Paul Lions Club at the Canelakes Bar and Restaurant, 1240 Frontage Road, Stillwater, Minnesota. The Mayor and City Clerk are directed to sign the acknowledgement on the permit application, and are to attach a copy of this Resolution to the application to be submitted to the Department of Gaming. Adopted by the City Council for the City of Stillwater this 17th day of October, 1995. Jay Kimble, Mayor Attest: Modi Weldon, City Clerk .'lI .4o .., -.. Minnesota LawjiLl Gambling Premises Permit Application - Part 1 of 2 FOR BOARD USE ONt Y BASE # pp# FEE CHECK INITIALS DATE ~ LG214 (7122191) e :fl'111111'II!i111 o Renewal Organization base license number Class of premises penn it (check one) ~ A ($400) Pull-tabs, tipboards, paddlewheels, raffles, bingo o B ($250) Pull-tabs, tipboards, paddlewheels, raffles o C ($200) Bingo only o D ($150) Raffles only Premises pennit number ~ New ..~i~~ri1~~%1~ City Daytime phone number ~, Name of chief ex~e officer (~not be your gambling manager) g;/ .;/~ Bingo Occasions . If applying for a class A or C permit. MiD days and beginning & ending hours of bingo occasions: No more than seven bingo occasions may be conducted by your or~an1zat1on per week. Day Beg1nn1ng/Endlng Hours Day Beglnnlng/Endmg Hours Day Beginning lEnding Hours Tille C ko - Z'~h';- Dayti e ~./,7) #1-'-- /fS-3 to m m to to 00 Ifbingo wJl1 not be conducted. check here D to State . n:. E:r ES ~NO If no, attach the following: · a copy of the lease (form LG202) with tenns for at least one year. · a copy of a sketch of the floor plan with dimensions, showing what portion is being leased. A lease and sketch are not required for Class D applications. Zip Code ft:1/ Ie ~. Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit Application - Part 2 of 2 .. ~, .. mi1fbfiip::::~~!ilR1dff}jgdaff~rfa>':'di::~;fWil8fl..%{j~~~@il~~~ji~ill~1~~;\f~:~~~i},flfif1~i~}1l\t~~~)~[f~1~1i~~~t?:1)iii[ti~l~i!i!i~~~~~!~i~ e . . .. Bank Account Number ~ State" / p ode (;.,h"c ./~d. '/k ~/ ,4L/P~ A)- A"~)...k /- - .Gambui1iSlte Autho tion I hereby consent that local law enforcement officers, the board or agents of the board, or the commissioner of revenue or public safety, or agents of the commissioners, may enter the premises to enforce the law. Bank Records Information The board is authorized to inspect the bank records of the gambling account whenever necessary to fulfill requirements of current gambling rules and law. Oath I declare that: .1 have read this application and all information submitted to the board is true, accurate and complete; .all other required information has been fully disclosed; s~eoh~X~~iV1JOff~ 11 ~V ~ P-126<;. ..::::::::~:::::~:::;~itlllallll_lgl.t~::~:;~~:>>:......:>:,::........ . 4. A CODY of the local unit of Qovernment's resolution ap- orovina this aDDlication must be attached to this aoolication. 5. If this application is denied by the local unit of government, it should not be submitted to the Gambling Control Board. ... "tfi~lllllllllrllrlll .1 am the chief executive officer of the organization; .1 assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful opera- tion of all activities to be conducted; -I will familiarize myself with the laws of Minnesota governing lawful gambling and rules of the board and agree, if licensed, to abide by those laws and rules, including amendments to them; .any changes In application information will be submitted to the board and local unit of govemment within 10 days of the change; and -I understand that failure to provide required information or providing false or misleading information may result in the denial or revocation of the license. Date 1. The city *must sign this application if the gambling prem- ises is located within city limits. 2. The county **AND township** must sign this application if the gambling premises is located within a township. 3. The local unit government (city or county) must pass a resolution specifically approving or denying this application. Township: By signature below, the township acknowledges that the organization is applying for a premises permit within township limits. . Clt * or Count ** City or County Name Townshl ** Township Name Si nature of person receiving application . Signature of person receiving application Date Received Ii> 1 'IS- Title Date Received e Mail to: Gambling Control Board Rosewood Plaza South, 3rd Floor 1711 W. County Road B Rosevllle, MN 55113 LG214(Part 2) (Rev7I2lWI) ,'" e No. 95-40 $40.00 GENERAL CORPORATE LICENSE STATE OF MINNESOTA City of Stillwater County of Washington WHEREAS, Buelow Excavating has paid the sum of Forty and OO/lOOs Dollars to the Treasurer of said City as required by the Ordinances of said City and complied with all the requirements of said Ordinances necessary for obtaining this licenses. NOW, THEREFORE, By order of the City Council, and by virtue hereof, the said Buelow Excavating 13246 20th Street North Stillwater MN 55082 is hereby licensed and authorized to Excavator for the period of one year starting October 10, 1995 and ending October 10, 1996 subject to all the conditions and provisions of said Ordinances. Given under my hand and the corporate seal of the City of Stillwater this 10th day of October A.D. 1995. Attest: Mayor: Ie . CLAIM AGAINST CITY OF STILLWATER NAME OF CLAIMANT "ADDRESSj)etlf1 ~(ol7/)ie Simone., t. WHEN DID EVENT OCCUR? q - 26" -95 WHERE DID EVENT OCCUR?~or+h L.J+h sf i r1 .fr-oJ1f . 0+ Our hOOS<Z- WHAT HAPPENED? T~ {.. (;/,tw -}11c.\-t :LY7 ~ ou r Co.r lS S {\ ++t1 our C-<^r wi.} UJhl(...~ f=>a.,.,+ ll~e.. (,-lve.. ( Ol'11fL O.\-\-. WHY DO YOU FEEL THAT THE CITY WAS AT FAULT?:6. ELc.a(JJ.~ -rhd..-Ts L0ho ~a.((LJ3~ SjJ~ Wdfj{! T+ f'h~ (ar Wa.> 9D~ ~D blL I r1 th~)r W"'y -tor 0.7 -reason g+~1/ . _~y c;1w.Wl ha!l!t ~J us tD I'Y/Ov<z- N. if..;1,iL Car .V STATE THE NATURE OF THE DAMAGE AND THE COSTS ASSOCIATED PHONE NO. L/39-9b92 11~ S)cl~/k Con Ue..-t JL 0. f1A \A)~_ " NAME OF PERSON MAKING REPAIR; OR GIVING CARE 10-1/-15 DATE ~~r You have to formally notify the City in writing within thirty (30) days of the occurrence of an event whereby you feel you have suffered damages. I I W , /.5 P4r k.ll.J 0 vi ; n -J4, tt~ hot.> ~~ D r'1 Q.. 0 {- ~ p?o v12 i 7-- ..s-jye~1 in fr-C>'17- c-f h D rY7R... a Yl c( os , IS. OUr (A. '0 \)L _.. - -..- . :t'"' STILLWATER MOTOR COMPANY ~ Phone: 439-4333 I ~ I 5900 Stillwater Blvd. North W!!J 2 ~CK snLLWATER, MINN, 55082 ~ Jeep IDa ESTIMATE OF REPAIRS 22454 SHEET NO. w/IF- V19-1.f 0..7 OF . lAME \;' I ADORi~ )- J I PHONE rATE (J~ v Y\ _ .' ""- 0 ~ -R t Iv v/( J~ /(2-/1.. -j)- :~ I MAKE IM7:~ I UCENSE NO. I SPEEDOMETER I SERIAL NO. (VIN NO.) . ' 0 ~ 0./ .IJ-/...... r~ 'SURANCE CARRIER I TYPE OF I~URANCE I ADJUSTER r HONE I VEHIClE LOCATED AT SUBLET PAINT COST PARTS COST LABOR COST >:PAIR Aa'Ua PARTS NECESSARY AND ESTIMATE OF LABOR REQUIRED COST ESTIMATE ESTIMATE ESTIMATE ESTIMATE Y {/ ~IJ '^ .!Iir - ~I/ c.. f. /:,..o~ ~^ ('.., ~H ". ~ J .#~ ,Q/J .2 I t!::IJ ~~ cO/') ~ /l-(/Ju. .'/ ;f/- ttJ /;~~I .{ ;). of" -,;(n 0..:) ~6 An) ..r I. . , /1 \J"- ~o&I..._ .Ie ~(? cO I"' /L 0,., ,7 Y utfI..., h /'\. J .-.( ,r)/ ...0 At:. ../ _ \'- /6 60 -, / J~ L_ r 0(.. ./- p "'/'r YR ~ .... 1" ,'1 ,.. A'/.J ~ . () /..0 ?'). oC/) 0J"r, f J71 /j f ....P,... " ... / i- If.:A h. /. _.... / /Oy ~ / /) r J{;) I-f= h ,N.p-R~ ~_r j/p, I (rn AU PART NEW ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED TOTALS /DY IJ() )o~ (t) /~C) tPD INSURED PAYS $ INS. CO. PAYS $ R.O.NO. GRAND TOTAL iNS. CHECKS PAYABLE TO The above is an estimate. based on our inspection, and does not cover additional parts or labor which may be WRECKER SERVICE required after the work has been opened up. Occasionally, after work has started, worn, broken or damaged parts are discovered which are not evident on first Inspection. Quotations on parts and labor are current and subject to change. A REASONABLE STORAGE CHARGE WILL BE ADDED FOR VEHICLES LEFT AFTER ESTIMATE AND/OR REPAIR COM~D. ESTIMATE MADE BY - Authorization For Repairs. You are hereby authorized to make the above specified repairs to the vehicle TAX --- -...::' described herein. ,', WE DO NOT GUARANTEE RUST REPAIRS TOTAL OF ( Y?) O() SIGNED DATE 19 ESTIMATE 1 SHEETS (l Yz. y~.() . CLAIM AGAINST CITY. OF STILLWATER .~ ^- ~ OIU 1l-.f+-TB2- S f:,7rkllL WlLL-lAM Vfjz:-rN'fT rvl2- ("TVV - . ADDRESS CT,,0rILLW~o.t30-cfJSS I WHEN DID EVENT OCCUR? 'Oel. 2...} I Clq<; WHERE DID EVENT OCCUR? OlJ(2.. C,U'W Of; SAc.- ( V\J-l-HC H- WAS t2E.su~FA[.8 Wltl-f ~ t CI ~ ~ Me!- .-. STATE T ATURE OF THE DA ~GE AND THE COSTS ASSOCIATED ~ ON ftt-C8l~ N~~ MD\.J\H), Ws,f$; {;:.f( V/S/, ~ L/-Qj FvTtJl?E:.JlLASTIG SD~Y LF NB808D. ~J.~ NAME OF PERSON MAKING REPAIR; OR GIVING CARE l/R.. STflA-rtE. / SULL WA-TEl I t,\..4 tJ \ C-r 1Q/n (q~ATE h lfi~(9--- SIG ATURE You have to formally notify the City in writing within thirty (30) days of the occurrence of an~~~ou feel you have suffered damages. ~~; lN~~ U!L-e//Yfj}c ~ .. ! tlU)L ~W (/We G,' lJJt~ M-~. L Vl 61)Jl, II l X'", I~(l/n fP~ L LA>t- ~ ~ I & ~ UVtuU~ V~ . .-w~.tl~~~~~ vtuL-to ' ~~~~- --- . L.. "t9-ciL\tfR ~ ~ W-. . I ... / fovvt vvt ~ CL . !Antlwe ~lb . -\ .. illwater ~ ~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA TIMOTHY J. BELL CAPTAIN " .LD L. BEBERG EF OF POLICE POLICE DEPARTMENT M E MaR AND U M TO: MAYOR KIMBLE AND THE CITY COUNCIL CAPTAIN T.J. BELL, PATROL COMMANDER~ FROM: DATE: OCTOBER 13, 1995 RE: BIDS ON THE SALE OF TWO POLICE SQUAD CARS ------------------------------------------------------------------ AT 4:30 PM TODAY, WE RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 2 BIDS ON THE SALE OF THE TWO SQUAD CARS. THE CARS ARE A 1993 CHEVROLET CAPRICE 4-DOOR AND A 1991 FORD CROWN VICTORIA 4-DOOR. . THE BIDS ARE AS FOLLOWS: Welcome Motors Chicago, IL. 91 Ford $2,488.00 93 C h ev. ~.?...2..~.~;B;t'_.Q.Q. Total $8,376.00 Suburban Auto 91 Ford $3,011.00 Mi nneapol is, MN. 93 Chev. ~A..J!..!2.Q.l...'_.Q.9_ Total $7,512.00 I RECOMMEND THE CITY ACCEPT THE HIGHEST BID OF $5,888.00 ON THE 93 CHEVROLET CAPRICE FROM WELCOME MOTORS AND ACCEPT THE HIGHEST BID OF $3,011.00 ON THE 91 FORD CROWN VICTORIA FROM SUBURBAN AUTO. THIS WOULD BE A TOTAL OF $8,899.00 FOR THE TWO CARS. THE ORIGINAL COPIES OF THE BIDS ARE WITH THE CITY CLERK. THEY ARE BOTH FAX MACHINE COPIES. A95-44 . 212 North Fourth Street, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Business Phone: (612) 439-1314 · 439-1336 · FAX: 439-0456 Police Response I Assistance: 911 , , . . . . &1IJJll(Q) ~CCD 331 5 Second street North Minneapolisll Minnesota 5541 6 (612) 588-0000 FAX (612) 588-0339 October 6, 1995 " (qS' Il fU.Ph \ D f~/ Chief Donald L. Beberg Stillwater Police Department 212 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Sealed Bids For your used Police Vehicles Dear Chief Beberg: We, Suburban Auto, Inc., hereby submit the following bids for your used Police vehicles: Year Make / Model VIN Bid Amount 1991 Ford C.V. '$3,011.00 . t $ 4,501.00 1993 Chev. Caprice Thank you for notifying us of this sale. Feel free to calt me if I may be of further assistance. Again, thank you. ."IDWESrs LARGEST BUYER OF USED AND SALVAGE POUCE CARS. SUB I. m""'.""" .. ....... Michael Waldmann General Manager + + II *}~ 3315 2ND STREET NORTH MlNNEAPOLIS,MN 55412 FAX (612) 518-8339 GARY TOORNIER MICHAEL WALDMANN o 0 o 0 . . r- .- .- 0 o Ln lC\ ..::t o o '. N l~:: Weleome Mo't.ors 312 509 1183 P.01 #1 Source For Used Police Cars WElcOME MOTORS .3346 W. Irving Park Chicago, Il 60618 Phone: (312) 509-1180 Fax: (708) 679-9094 P.O. Box 59910 Chicago, Il 60659 A~~-&5~~ Dear Sir/Madam Welcome Motors submit the bids for your used Police Cars as followsr q5 C9? 9/~k / //q> / ') M/; 10 ~fI' DATE: . -- /0,.. t.t-~ 4 ..' ..:" ap ~g;;l",~ ',', ;~"'''~ _'~' -~l)-7""(sT:,~_ 00 1: cP'Lfer If awarded, Kindly contact us at 312-509-1180 Thanking you + + II * * 00 00 . . coco COal CD..j U)(\J o · o 0 . ,;..; \0'; t---'.:. ",f ~,~ For Welcome Motors .~~ (!1,~v 10/04/95 17:47 TX/RX NO.1371 P.001 . . . "I . . '~ " . . I. RESOLUTION NO. 95- ACCEPTING BID AND AUTHORIZING SALE OF POLICE VEHICLE, 1993 CHEVROLET CAPRICE TO WELCOME MOTORS WHEREAS, pursuant to a request for bids for the sale of a police vehicle, 1993 Chevrolet Caprice, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law; WHEREAS, Welcome Motors, Chicago, Illinois, appears to be the high bidder, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Stillwater, Minnesota, that the sale of the 1993 Chevrolet Caprice, VIN No. at the bid amount of $5,888.00, is hereby approved, an the appropriate City staff is authorized to sign all necessary documents. Adopted by Council this 17th day of October, 1995. Jay Kimble, Mayor Attest: Modi Weldon, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 95- ACCEPTING BID AND AUTHORIZING SALE OF POLICE VEHICLE, 1991 FORD CROWN VICTORIA TO SUBURBAN AUTO, INC. WHEREAS, pursuant to a request for bids for the sale of a police vehicle, 1991 Ford Crown Victoria, VIN 2FACP72G71v1X160238, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law; WHEREAS, Suburban Auto, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota, appears to be the high bidder, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Stillwater, Minnesota, that the sale of the 1991 Ford Crown Victoria, VIN at the bid amount of $3,011. is hereby approved, an the appropriate City staff is authorized to sign all necessary documents. Adopted by Council this 17th day of October, 1995. Jay Kimble, Mayor Attest: Modi Weldon, City Clerk ~. r'* . . el DONALD L. BEBERG ~ CHIEF OF POLICE TIMOTHY J. BELL CAPTAIN THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA POLICE DEPARTMENT M E M 0 RAN DUM FROM: D.L. BEBERG, CHIEF OF POLICE. TO: MAYOR KIMBLE AND THE CITY COUNCIL DATE: OCTOBER 13, 1995 AGENDA ITEMS RE: WE HAVE ASKED MELVIN RUSTIN TO APPEAR AT THE COUNCIL MEETING ON THE 17TH TO PRESENT HIM WITH A "CITIZEN COMMENDATION" FOR SAVING THE LIFE OF A MAN THAT WAS IN THE WATER AT LILY LAKE. HE HAS AGREED TO BE THERE. THE BIDS ARE TO BE IN TODAY FOR THE SALE OF THE 2 SQUAD CARS WE ARE SELLING (1993 CHEV AND 1991 FORD). AT THE TIME I AM DOING THIS MEMO, THERE ARE 2 BIDS. WE ARE SUPPOSED TO GET AT LEAST 1 MORE BY THE END OF TODAY (THE DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING BIDS) SO WE WILL HAVE THE FIGURES FOR YOU AT THE MEETING ON THE 17TH. I WILL NOT BE AT THE MEETING DUE TO HAVING SHOULDER SURGERY ON THE 16TH. NILE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THIS AND CAPTAIN BELL WILL BE AT THE MEETING IN MY PLACE TO TAKE CARE OF THE ABOVE 2 ITEMS. 95-65 e 212 North Fourth Street, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Business Phone: (612) 439-1314 · 439-1336 · FAX: 439-0456 Police Response I Assistance: 911 e e '\ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: City Coordinator SUBJECT: Computer upgrade (RAM) DATE: October LJ, 1995 Administration requests authorization to purchase additional hard drive memory for the computers presently being used by Admin. staff. Over the past two years the files and software programs added to the computers have created the need for additional RAM. The cost of upgrading four (4) computers is $1900. This is included in the 1995 budget and I have confirmed this with Diane. '- ~~ . . . MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: City Coordinator SUBJECT: Sewer bill adjustment DATE: October 16, 1995 The City has received a request from the resident at 706 Harriet Drive to adjust his sewer bill. The resident claims a leaky toilet caused a higher than normal water usage and sewer bill for 1995. The usage has been as follows: 1st quarter 1993- 1 st quarter 1994- 1st quarter 1995- 14,000 gallons 22,000 gallons 42,000 gallons I would recommend the bill be adjusted to the average of the previous two 1 st quarters (i.e., 1993 & 1994) or 18,000 gallons. Water Board personnel agree. 1bis item is on the consent agenda. /l1~ e e - MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director ~ DA: October 13, 1995 RE: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR OPEN SPACE SURVEY Attached is the draft questionnaire for the Open Space Survey in part funded by the city. Please review the questions to make sure they are appropriate for the subject. ...e .'j ..j ~. i: " f ~' ,~ t: ~ ,,;, {,~.. ~ ~. , ", f " t': :'.< e 1 ,. .,' ,~;~ ~'~"1 "-,:':~",I rr. -' "~ , " F~ . 1 ~ I ~,{oi,(F;.,' r~':':;'\r:-'(I~I~ " 'j ,', 'i~' ~}.{'1k:'...'~"', {;_),:."T J. . f1 :"., .. r~'! -~p,.;~. ';~ :' J~ ., ~ !.l I>; ,,:, '1 '~ ~'h". r 1'":"'1 1 ,. t,:, .' It.l"l"f,"~ f;~\~:rt'~ , ' '1 ;1 ~4~";1 , e Ii ~ 1 110". .." ,i14 r'_l-,~.:f_:..', ., ! '-i t'." . ,~.. I 'I I 612-929-6166 DECISION RESOURCES 195 Pel OCT 11 '95 16:54 t . .. e To: -1~ /hCJ Company: Fax: ~~S77'~ F from: ~~~'- y~ L J Company: Decision Resources, Ltd. Fax: (612) 929-6166 Voice: (612) 920..0337 Date: /~ -//-7.f' Subject: A Pages: 6~ includina thia cover pago. MESSAGB: x Ie .. 612-929-6166 DECISION RESOURCES 195P02 OCT 11'95 16:55 Decision Resources, Ltd. 3128 Dean Court Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 Stillwater Township and City Local Issues Study Topics Format Hello, I'm of Decision Resources, Ltd., a survey research firm located in Minneapolis. We have been retained by the City of Stillwater and Stillwater Township to speak with a random sample of residents about issues facing the area. I want to assure you that all individual responses will be held strictly confidential; only summaries of the entire sample will be report- ed. e 1. What does the term "open space" mean to you? (PROBE) For your informtaiton, the current working definition being used by the City and Township is "open space may be defined as unde- veloped lands or natural areas deserving preservation for scenic, asthetic, or wildlife conservation value." 2. How satisfied are you with the amount of existing open space in your neighborhood -- very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not too satisfied, or not at all satisfied? 3. Now, overall, how satisfied are you with the amount of existing open space in your community -- very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, not too satisfied, or not at all satisfied? 4. How would you rate your local government on its job of preserving open space in your community -- excellent, good, only fair, or poor? IF "ONLY FAIR" OR "POOR, II ASK: 5. Why do you feel that way? 6. poes the development across your (city/township) community seem to have been well-planned for the future of the community? Let1s talk for a few minutes about environmental ordinances in your community.... 7. Do you think that existing environmental ordinances in your community are too tough, about right, or not tough enough? 8. Now, how well do you think current environmental ordinances ~~e enforced in your community -- too tough, about right, or not tough enough? 9. How important is it to you that natural areas and open spaces in your community are protected and preserved -- very important, somewhat important, not very important, or not at all important? 1 e 612-929-6166 DECISION RESOURCES 1~P03 OCT 11 '95 16:55 e F~r each of the following amenities, please tell me how conveni- ent it is for your household to access each one -- very conveni- ent, somewhat convenient, somewhat inconvenient, or very incon- venient.... (ROTATE) 10. Parks? 11. Trails? 12. Natural areas? Moving on..... 13. What type of additional open space, if any, would you like to see added to your community? For each of the following, please rate the impact of its exist- ence on the quality of life in your community -- a major improve- ment, minor improvement, no improvement, minor decline, or a major decline.... (ROTATE) 14. Hiking and biking trails? 15. Wildlife areas? 16. Athletic fields? 17; Wetlands? 18. Prairie land? 19. Waterways? 20. Forested land? 21. Lakeshore? 22. If your local government were to preserve open spaces in the community, would you most prefer them to be active recreational areas, such as athletic fields and playgrounds, or passive re- creational areas, such as forests and wetlands? (WAIT FOR RE- SPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way? 23. Do you approve or disapprove of strict local setback and slope ordinances to preserve ravines? Moving on..... 24. In comparison with other city or township services provided by local government, how important is open space preservation most important, very important, somewhat important, not too important, or not at all important? Park and recreation funds can be spent on many different things, such as athletic programs, operation and maintenance of active recreational facilities such as ballfields, playgrounds, trails, and rinks, or the preservation and maintenance of passi~e recrea- tional facilities, such as forests and wetlands, as well as the acquisition of open space and natural areas for preservation or for future development. If you could allocate the park and recreation budget in your community.... e 2 612-929-6166 DECISION RESOURCES - - 195 P04 OCT 11 '95 16:55 25. What percentage of park and recreation funds would you designate for the acquistion and maintenance of passive recrea- tional areas? .. Changing topics.... The City of Stillwater/Stillwater Township is investigating ways to ensure natural areas are retained for preservation and scenic purposes. One method of preservation of open space is to have the (City/township) purchase the land. Funding for this might require a moderate tax increase. e 26. How much would you be willing to see your annual taxes increase finance open space preservation and acquistion? Would you be willing to pay $ ? (CHOOSE RANDOM STARTING POINT; MOVE UP OR DOWN DEPENDING ON ANSWER) How about $ ? (REPEAT PROCESS) 27. What method of taxation, if any. would you most prefer to see used to fund additional open space acquisition -- a local sales tax, a local property tax, or an entertainment tax on such items as restaurant meals, motels and liquor purchases? 28. Would you favor or oppose a combination of a moderate prop- erty tax increase and a local sales or entertainment tax? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way? 29. Would you favor or oppose the reallocation of currently budgeted funds from other local (city/township) programs for additional open space acquisition? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way? IF "STRONGLY FAVOR" OR "FAVOR," ASK: 30. From which local government programs would you prefer to see funds reallocated? Moving on...... 31. Would you favor or oppose your local government issuing bonds for the purpose of open space acquisition and preservation, if it meant a moderate property tax increase? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way? FOR CITY OF STlLLWATER RESIDENTS: 32. Would you favor or oppose funds being used for open space acquisition in areas outside of the City, such as in the Town- ship? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way? 3 _I 612-929-6166 DECISION RESOURCES 195 P05 OCT 11'95 16:56 PoR STILLWATER TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS: e 33. Would you favor or oppose funds being use for open space acquisition in the southern part of the township where new devel- opment is most concentrated? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way? In the next ten years, agricultural and natural areas in the south part of the township may be developed as either city or township density housing. 34. Would you favor or oppose city and/or township funding being used to purchase additional open space beyound what developers are required to donate? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strong- ly that way? Now, just a few more questions for background purposes only..... 35. What is your age, please? (READ CATEGORIES) 36. What is the last grade of school you completed? 37. What is your occupation, and if applicable, your spouse's or partner's? 38. Does you household contain any pre-schoolers or school-aged children? 39. Do you own or rent your present residence? And, now for one final question keeping in mind that your answers are held strictly confidential.... 40. Which of the following categories would contain the approx- imate value of your residential property -- under $70,000, $70,000-$100,000, $100,000-$150,000, or over $150,000? 41. Gender. (BY OBSERVATION) 42. Region of Residence. (FROM LIST) . 4 ."- e MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director v DA: October 11, 1995 RE: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF 20-UNIT TOWNHOUSE PROJECT LOCATED EAST OF BENSON BLVD ON WEST ORLEANS (CASE NO. DRlSUP/95-60) Background The Planning Commission approved the development proposal at their meeting of September 11, 1995. The project was first reviewed at their meeting of August 8, 1995 and continued to the September meeting for more information and project modifications. The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed the proposed design at the HPC meetings of September 6, 1995 and October 2, 1995. The project design concept was approved at their September meeting and design conditions of approval and details at their October meeting. Minutes for the Planning Commission meetings of August 14, 1995 and September 11, 1995 and Heritage Preservation Commission meetings of September 6, 1995 and October 2, 1995 are enclosed. The staff report for the Planning Commission meeting of September 11, 1995 and HPC meeting of October 2, 1995 is enclosed The staff report contains 12 design review conditions of approval and 13 use permit conditions of approval. All 25 conditions will have to be incorporated into fmal project design before building permits are issued. Appeal The appeal before the council states six reasons for appealing the decision. The six reasons are listed below with a response to each reason. 1. The Design Review Commission needs to satisfy the concerns of the parties directly adjacent to the proposed development with regards to the location and type of fencing. Response: The fence design and location has been reviewed and approved by the Heritage Preservation Commission at their meeting of October 2nd (see Design Review Condition No.8 and 10 and fence plan). The fence location on the city right of way will be subject to city engineer approval. 2. This development shall implement the Minnesota Multi-Housing Program. Response: Information on the Minnesota Multi-Housing Program has been provided to Councilmen Zoller, the Police Chief and City Coordinator. If the city implements the program it e would be implemented throughout the community for rental properties. .... 3. The city must implement some type of traffic control (preferably a stop light) on the comer of West Orleans and Curve Crest Blvd. e Response: The traffic generating from this project and other developments in the area was considered as part of the project review. The existing road system and traffic control devices can accommodate the traffic generated from development of the site. Enclosed is traffic engineer response to consider. . 4. No unit shall be used for exterior storage such as trash containers, bikes, camping equipment, swimming pools, etc. Response: Design Review Condition No.6 and Special Use Permit Conditions No.5 & 6 address this concern. 5. No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon the property, nor shall anything be done thereon which may be or become any annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood. Response: The general nuisance provision of the city code would apply to this project as it does to other projects. 6. These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding on all parties and all person claiming under them. Response: The 25 conditions of approval are recorded on the deed to the property and run with the land. Council Requests In addition to the appeal considerations, the zoning ordinance requires the council to make park requirement determinations. The developer is required to provide on-site park space for the development and pay a park dedication fee subject to council approval. A 6,000 square foot play area has been located on the east end of the project site. Play equipment and courts will be provided with the development. The primary users of this park area will be preschoolers up to the age 8 or 9. Benson Park is located within one block of the site and will provide park space for the older children. The park dedication fee requirement for this site, based on a density of 10.5 DU/ AC, is 10.5% of the land value or $14, 542. The applicant is requesting the city council consider reducing the park fee based on other project costs (see enclosed letter of request). It is recommended that based on on-site park improvements and landscaping and maintenance of the excess city right of way land, the park dedication ~ be reduced by 50 percent to $7,271. Other project costs described in Mr. Kornovich's letter can be considered development costs related to the use permit or design review and not related to park requirements. _I .i e The project includes locating a ponding area on excess city-owned West Orleans right of way installing a fence and landscaping the area. The developer or adjacent property owners will be responsible for maintaining the excess right of way area after it is improved. Any use or improvement to the right of way will have to be approved by the city engineer regarding existing utility locations and access. Action Before Council 1. Determination on appeal, uphold planning commission decision or deny project and approve appeal. 2. Determine park dedication in lieu fee requirement (50 percent or $7,271 recommended) 3. Approval of use of excess West Orleans right of way for landscaping and ponding subject to maintenance by adjacent property owners. Attachments: Appeal, staff reports and plans, minutes and letter from Kornovich Development Company. e C:\ WPWIN60\95PLANNI\APPEAL.KOR r .r; PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Case No. DP/SUP/95-60 .e 'Planning Commission Date: Project Location: Zoning District: Applicant's Name: Type of Application: Project Description: September 11, 1995 West Orleans east of Benson Blvd RCM, Medium Density Family Kornovich Development Company, Inc. Design Permit and Special Use Permit A special use permit and design review for the construction of20-unit townhouses. 0../ Cfl . Discussion The proposal is a 20-unit townhouse type development. The site is located in the multifamily residential district, RCM, next to and just south of the Highlands of Stillwater 200 small lot single family subdivision. To the west of the project site is Courage Center, to the south an apartment development and to the east Charter Oaks Townhomes, a rental housing development. The development sites on a 1.82 acre site. Based on density calculations, 28 residential units could be accommodated on the land. Parking for 44 vehicles is provided on site, 20 spaces in garages. Each residential unit shall be responsible for individual trash pickup so no community trash area has been designated. Landscape plan, drainage, grading and utility plans are provided. The drainage, grading plan and utility plan has been reviewed by the city engineer, water department and fire chief. Their comments will be incorporated into the final project design. The project design and landscape plan was reviewed by the design review committee at their meeting on September 6, 1995. The development meets zoning density height and setback requirements for the zone district. The RCM zoning regulations require 4,000 square feet of play area. Play areas are designated on the plan. 1brough design review the locations have been relocated to the northeast portion of the site. A better landscape plan arrangement may be accomplished through incorporating some of the excess city right of way land to the west of the project into the development (this is not needed for the project to meet zoning requirements but could result in a better development and streetscape design). A neighborhood park, Benson Park, is located within walking distance of the development. The application was reviewed by design review at their meeting of September 6, 1995 (see design review action below). Planning Commission meeting of August 14, 1995. A public hearing was held on this planning request. At that meeting, the staff report was considered, the development proposal presented and public comments heard (refer to minutes of CPC 8-14-95). Concerns from the public included concern for crime, school impact, traffic, taxes, lack of maintenance, project management, tenure, project buffering, drainage and concentration of multifamily housing. After hearing testimony, the planning commission continued the item to their meeting of October 9, 1995. Commissioners urged the developer to meet with the neighbors to better describe the project and to understand and address their concerns. e After the planning commission meeting of August 14, 1995, the applicant appealed the two month planning commission continuance. The city council considered the appeal of the commission action at their meeting of August 22, 1995 and ordered the item to be heard by the commission at the meeting of September 11. The item has been advertised for the September planning commission meeting. , ,,--.. /-'. ( .,.. . .e s'ince the planning commission hearing of August 14, 1995, the applicant, developer and management firm has held a meeting with many of the neighbors in attendance at the commission meeting. Jerry Fontaine and planning staff .were at the meeting. The applicant presented additional information regarding the project. At that meeting, buffering of the project, fence location, tree preservation, building materials and landscape maintenance were discussed. By the end of the two-hour meeting, it appeared that there was a better understanding of the project and neighborhood concerns. Design Review. The design review committee met September 6, 1995, to review the design of the project. Subjects discussed included fence location and design, on-site park location and configuration, drainage, building location, building elevations and colors and sidewalks, trash management and use of triangular shaped West Orleans right of way (city owned). The design review committee felt that the city could construct a sidewalk along Curve Crest Blvd from Greeley to West Orleans to accommodate youth pedestrian access from Charter Oaks and areas to the east to the new Benson Park. With the construction of fences around the development, children will no longer be able to cut through the site to Lily Lake School or Benson Park. After considering the above subjects, the design review committee approved the development conceptually with the following conditions: 1. The existing trees on the north side of the property shall be preserved and trimmed only with the approval of the Community Development Director. 2. Development lighting shall be normal residential lighting with no special parking lot or service area lighting. 3. All landscaping shall be installed before project occupancy. 4. All utility areas shall be completely screened from public view. 5. Any signage shall be low profile and obtain a sign permit. 6. Trash storage shall be the responsibility of each unit and not collected in community trash facility. 7. The play area shall be leveled and relocated to the east end of the property. 8. Fencing shall be constructed on three sides - south, north and east sides - of the property. The specific location and type of fence shall be reviewed by the design review committee. 9. The developer shall landscape and construct a fence on the city owned West Orleans Street right of way to buffer the project from residents to the north as approved by the city and neighboring properties. 10. The location of the north fence shall be south of the north property line and the land to the north of the fence shall be granted for maintenance and use purposes to the adjacent residents to secure the area. 11. Building elevation, materials and colors shall be finally reviewed by the design review committee before building permits are issued. e 12. All the above conditions shall be reviewed and approved by the design review committee before building permits are issued. The planning commission is charged with reviewing the project with zoning requirements. The project is consistent with the density, height, setback, parking requirements of the zone district. As conditioned by the design review . "...~ --. (" . committee above, the design review committee conceptually approves the design of the project. To address other city requirements and neighborhood concerns the following conditions are recommended. .. e . Conditions of Approval: 1. All conditions of the design review listed above. Committee shall be meet (above 1- 12). 2. The on-site park design shall be reviewed by the city park and recreation commission. A minimum of 4,000 square feet shall be provided in park use primarily for preschool children. 3. The in lieu park dedication fee shall be paid. 4. Any drainage modifications shall be approved by the city engineer. 5. Garages shall be used for parked cars only and not general storage. 6. No recreation vehicles, trailers or other nonoperative vehicles shall be located on site. 7. An irrigation system shall be provided for all landscaped areas. 8. The landscaping shall be established in a healthy condition and reviewed in three years. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy, aesthetic condition. 9. The land to the north of the northerly fence shall be available to the residence to the north for use, security and maintenance. 10. There shall be no increase in site runoff to adjacent properties. 11. Comments from the fire department and water department regarding the utility plans shall be incorporated into the [mal construction plans. 12. The fence shall be non-climbable in design. 13. The fence shall be extended 15 feet to the west and tied into the existing fence and reviewed and approved by city staff. If project is approved, the planning commission should make the following fmding based on the staff report, design review, public testimony and any conditions of approval that modify the proposed development design. Findings: Based on the residential project design, zoning requirements and conditions of design approval, the development is not injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the zoning ordinance and West Business Park Design Guidelines. Recommendation: Consideration of request and discussion. Attachments: Application and plans. CPC meeting of September 11, 1995: +5-0 approval e ., '-. .~!Ii;limlihillolllj6I11hl"P'" "'{f.'. .~., tr~;ljll1mlgl':1lDlI~'1F" "!I;',III!:11W ':llllltll~~ ill I : III ~! ;~mll!! III' W !II !I:III !IIwunUI:'llIIlllIt~mHII"'" II ""'I,!!I... I . '~lllll. .!.. , . I 1''',,'lHU!Wllfl/WII':II'''I' ' ' .....,Ii." -cq1IlluIRllill.nllllil i ~,.IiIlI~jIll~hrd:1I1 ;.1:::1;:',.1:11 Hi l:i ,:llUl!~11!-: ~.;'jI"IIl.IIIIUJII:... " '''/IIIIIIIIG41~~II/IJ~ift I!.(~" ,..~,~~~~. t:~g '1c~:" ro~, .. .... _ '" _.J. f. " '. '-d". :f=--Q n .. .... :.. . U .A. . "_0___. _ . __1 1,"1...1."'1.J , ol1'f\,.. ..'!lI, fROnT Rev ATJOtt. v,"."."" << , , e . ""... . , . " I .li!llli~lijlli!II'!lno:I~Ui. ,:,.... .~l.lb "!1I11f~.;~I!ll1~ll~IIP'd;llI~hPIII . :"'III!I!i!II::IIlI!III"IIII' '" ,.,111" " ." . ~rlll!I!I'lI!II!!PI;!I:III'I' ::1:.:'11 I!. il : :i1' '1I"IIII!I;:;i ~ lI.q~i'~"~ql,I~I"" ." !II 1I.I...lhlll!.d'I,11 (:1 I! :11,.1 · 'I '"'1"'111""'" ". .!liililll~'.lllllll!iIlI!'!,IIII~:;, '!;il'll i ':I".~"~~tj'"'I~~'r llr'llf:i:~I~I':r... . II.. .:1', lit ... ~ ~.....Jo' ~~U'"W'''UI~I:ilillil!I:;iIllllllllllllllllIIllI~'II~'''P' 1d'~lilllllIlll/IIlm:1 'BACK fitVATOl1. .~:1iI ij~ m~lliIUlQllnIllP"~11It w.C:llp!~mllblllllllilt~lll~p~iIImll!~' ;?i!!il~III'Hil~IIiIIIII!III~tillllllll .. dIWI!:!II~IJ !~i~I~~'I:l1l~ III il"I-mI'!~I!' ~11:il~!lt~li:I:III'm!~I'EI.~~oI~II",'.'" 'g . ,.1 ~. :..1.:I.I'~ -:1I,h ,'i. ~ II;. I, III I . 1'1' r1lflifj)o. "1'III1t.J:IIII~11 II"~' f't:>,'Il'l~klllV'o.'" ~;;~'"' .. ... "1/ 11~llllUJ'II~I.III." "1I111H1~0I~ '; ~...... .- -. _:~. ~.. '"/ 1..... _ .. - .. . f . . . ff .e .tmRy aev ATIOtl . e.. e ~I }l~ ~ 'j '/ I I I ! i ."'"W'I''"' ........ ~I =:~" 'f .... Ptt.PoIId F"t'-:I t4n1~ ,...&.... , \ '- -- '" 'It \ \ \____J GRADING PLAN -- J~ SCALE 1"=20'-0' l' N L,,,.~I" __'H-- _ e.r6MPf ...-"." //",'-/'//""////" .......... . "",,.....t- ....) foo_. n>U 1_) !-loft,: L,...,...4 ~ ,""'11I11 ..- _" ~-- ,..,.. 10 Ill<< III: ...... L Io'lnolo ...1' laW '""".... ~~-J .....,""'.....- .. __. \..... .<1/ . ,......... IaJ 002/002 10/13/95 09:24 FAX SEH ST. PAUL ..i...... STILLWATER e / ~SeJ 3535 VADNAIS CENTF;F/ DRIve, 200 SEH CF;NTER. ST. PAUL, MN 55110 612490-2000 800 32~2055 ARCHITEC'(URE ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORrATION October 13, 1995 RE: Stillwater, Minnesota St. Croix Villages Townhomes Traffic Study DP ISup 95-60 SEH No. A-STILL9601.00 Mr. Steve Russell Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082-4898 Dear Steve: We have reviewed the traffic impacts of the St. Croix Village Townhomes proposed for the area east of Orleans Street, north of Curve Crest Boulevard. The 20 unit townhome development should not have any noticeable impact on Orleans Street. The townhouse development will generate approximately 140 vehicle trips per day, The maximum number of trips will probably occur in the p.m. peak hour when there will be approximately 16 vehicles using Orleans Street. Of this, some will be utilizing Orleans Street to the west towards Highway 5 and others using Orleans Street to the south towards Curve Crest Boulevard. We estimate the split to be approximately even. This means that the maximum rate of traffic from the townhomes on any portion of the Stillwater street system would be approximately eight vehicles per hour in the peak period, or approximately one vehicle every seven minutes. Based on these numbers, we anticipate that the volume increase on any streets will barely be noticeable. Orleans Street was designed. to carry 4,000 vehicles per day and has the capacity to safely carry up to 7,000 to 8,000 vehicles per day. It is doubtful these volumes would ever be reached. If you have any questions regarding this brief study, please call us. Sincerely, ~~~ e Glen Van Wormer Manager, Transportation Department tIo c: Klayton Eckles, City of Stillwater SHORT EWOTT HEND~/CKSoN INC, MINNEAPOLIS. MN ST. CLOUD. MN CHIPPEWA FALLS. WI MADISON. WI I.AKE COUNTY, IN EQUAL OPPoRTUNITY EMPlOYER e September 20, 1995 We the concerned Citizens of the Highlands development in the City of Stillwater are hereby appealing the decision of the City Planning Commission for Case No. DP/SUP/95-60 on September 11, 1995. The reasons for this appeal are as follows: 1. The Design Review Commission needs to satisfy the concerns of the parties directly adjacent to the proposed development with regards to the location and type of fencing. 2. This development shall implement the Minnesota Multi Housing Program. 3. The City must implement some type of traffic control (preferably a stop light) on the corner of West Orleans St. and Curve Crest Blvd. 4. No unit shall be used for exterior storage such as trash containers, bikes, camping equipment, swimming pools, etc. 5. No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon the property, nor shall anything be done thereon which may be or become any annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood. 6. These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding on all parties and all person claiming under them. Bob & Rachael Bugbee 1427 Lydia Stillwater, MN 430-3567 Tim Mathews 1119 Gilbert Ct. Stillwater, MN 55082 439-4073 e ~'~ffl- Mike and Deb Nolan 1363 Benson Blvd. Stillwater, MN 55082 439-3352 . . ~ - -- -. . , . ,\, c: ~,- ,...~ ': , ., p < =;' 7:-~ ~ ':'~: ~ ;, , ~ ~.-.. ~ ..'~, ~ . ~:;: .,:'~" -. ~ -. ~ /' t1-1.--1.- .t1~ e 4400 121st Avenue Clear Lake, MN 55319 Phone 612-743-3116 Fax 612-743-4805 To the City Coucil of the City of Stillwater Regarding St. Croix Village Townhomes /' Based on the present approval of the above mentioned project by the Planning Commission there are a number of costs added to this project due to the opposition by the neighbors. At this time I am requesting a waiver of the park fee of 7 % of the land cost.. The cost of the land is $ 138,500.00 ( plus assessments ), or a fee of $ 9,695.00. Items added which are over and above. standard requirements: A) Privacy fence on three sides, approximatly 900' B) C) D) City property landscaping and fence $ 18,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 Additional trees on the north property line Project play area is 33 % larger then required by city ordinance. The estimated cost of equip. and concrete for basketball area is between $ 11,000 and $ 12,000.00 E) Also, keep in mind I will have to pay the cost of extending the storm water line from Curve Crest Blvd. to the site at an estimated cost of $ 20,000.00. Please review the costs I have outlined above. I believe there should be fees for the numerous costs in operating a city such as Stillwater. However, if I am going to incurr costs stated above for project park equipment as well as the other costs for community requested items, I feel the park fee added on yet is a double hit and should be waived. - Lonnie L. Kornov~ a~ . '. a.. ~ Kornovich Development Company, Inc. . ..... o o ~ l:( c: ~ >. c.., c.., ::l ~ "- :iii U ~ ~ w ..... Cl) Cl) ::) Cl) L~ ='I ='I ..... ::) ><: ~ ... Cl) "" .. ::) ..... I!) Cl) " ='I o '. o PICKET ~ FENCING I 16# x 16" DECOR. A TIVE BlK. PLASTER ID i o .l <C - -r-- ~ n I i _I _ , " _ ' d' .., - -~- - I - ,'.:' - - - - -, -1>-- - 1 , , - - - -' - I ',,4'" '. l. "'_-1.... I I ! I' A A I. 8'-0" " r. I PR'V ACY FENCE OET AIL SCAle 1/2"=1'-0" e ~STONE CAP (i I , " . ',' ~.' '. ' . " . , ',' ", ,! I I, ......-1. < .. ..... o o p.. "<l" t- "<l" N o z ~ ---.. >< E'- N Lf:l .. <.a ...... In en ---.. N o ---.. o ...... L/?c.- <g'-(7-7~ . A resident of 1403 Benson Blvd. cautioned against granting sign variances or Highway 36 will look like Roberts Street for automotive businesses. ~ . Another resident of Benson Boulevard said the pylon sign is an existing condition and the variance ought to be allowed. Mr. Russell suggested that if the variance is granted for the pylon sign, it should be a 60 square foot sign, less that the allowable 100 square feet. Ben Smith suggested that to make it equitable for the two building tenants an 8 x 8 sign would make for easy design. Mr. Roetman, seconded by Mrs. Bealka, moved approval of Case No. SUP/95- 62 as conditioned; all in favor. Mr. Hamlin, seconded by Mr. Elliott, moved to approve Case No. SUP/V/95- 63 as conditioned, allowing a pylon sign of up to 65 square feet, maximum 25 feet in height at the existing location, with the additional condition that there be no overnight parking of cars. Motion passed unanimously. Ben Smith asked that the condition of approval requiring fencing of the rear parking area be removed since no cars will be stored on the property. Mr. Zoller, seconded by Mr. Wald, moved to eliminate condition of approval No.1; all in favor. . Case No. DP/SUP/95-60 A design review and special use permit and design review plan for construction of a 20-unit townhouse project just east of Benson Boulevard on West Orleans Street in the RCM, Medium Density Family District. Kornovich Development Company Inc., applicant. Over 50 people Were present for this discussion. Mr. Lonnie Kornovich appeared regarding the request. He said he had reviewed staff comments and was open to suggestions. Peggy Ozer, 1579 Driving Park Road, said the No. 1 concern with neighboring property owners is the potential for increased crime that comes with low-income developments. There are two such developments, Charter Oaks and the Cottages, within a mile of the Highlands area. Stillwater police made 50 calls to Charter Oaks last year and 25 to the Cottages, she said. She asked that the developer consider owner/occupied townhome units or designating the units for rental to low-income elderly people. She also expressed concern about the vulnerability of the people living in the new handicapped apartment unit. And she asked that the project be buffered with landscaping. Many of the neighbors concerns deal with property managemerit, she said. e s- ,--_.... \. , \~. .'It. '\ , , e Mr. Sussi, of Meets and Bounds Property Management, the firm that would managed the proposed project, said his company manages over 2,000 units in the Twin Cities area. Criminal and credit checks are performed for prospective tenants. He pointed out the proposed development is not for low-income persons, it is for moderate income, working class people. He also said there would be no problem providing screening to the north side of the development. \ :,' ... Rick Schroeder, 1402 Lydia Circle, said he was not convinced there was enough parking. He also expressed concern about the safety of the intersection at the hill, where there already is a significant amount of traffic. Wayne Jesky, 1403 Lydia Circle, asked why the property in question had been rezoned. Rocky Picanti, 1555 Benson Blvd., said the park is important to the neighborhood. He expressed a concern that the development would bring a lot of children into the neighborhood and would impact on the current residents' property values. A resident of 1561 Driving Park Road asked why the city is clustering low-income housing and also asked why the property was rezoned multi- family housing. A number of residents asked why the property was rezoned after they had built their homes. . Cindy Olson, 1525 Driving Park Road, noted that Lily Lake school is already crowded. She too asked about the rezoning. Gary Kriesel, 1451 Lydia Circle, said developments such as the one prpposed should be built throughout the community so the Highlands area doesn't have the stigma of having all the low-income housing. He also said there should be some benchmark for communities in the provision of low- income. housing, and he asked where the city of Stillwater and other communities are in relation to that benchmark. Mr. Picanti said owner-occupied units would be preferable. He also suggested the city acted hastily in rezoning the property as the Industrial e Park is beginning to sell now. h ~ e ," Harry Ozer, 1579 Driving qPark Road, said the city is trying to build a ghetto with two low-income developments within one-half mile of each other. He said the city is not consistent in its standards -- granting a three-foot variance for construction of a porch would have far less impact on the neighborhood than will a low-income housing development. He said residents in the Highland area bought homes here to raise families and are worried about the quality of life. He reiterated concerns about safety, crime and the proximity to the Courage Center. It's not the right type of development for the area, he said. Dan De St. Aubin, 1390 Benson Blvd., cited overcrowding of schools and parks. Carolyn Hildebrandt, 1555 Driving Park Road, asked that a fence be placed along the property line if the project is approved. A resident of the new handicap-accessible apartment at 1370 Curve Crest Blvd. asked what kind of buffer would be provided at the site. And he expressed a concern about traffic and safety, saying he had almost been hit three times at the stop sign. Bruce Junker, 1451 Benson Blvd. E., spoke in opposition. Gregory Hanson, 1548 Highland Road, showed a copy of the police calls. He said the city should build improvements that will increase values -- this will lower values, he said. Ann Kriesel, 1451. Lydia Circle, asked how the developer/management company planned to follow through on resident checks, maintenance and appearance. She reiterated that concern later in the discussion. Greg Ries, 1284 Benson Blvd. W., said he lived in an area where a development, such as the one proposed, brought gangs and increased crime. Debby Knowlan, 1363 Benson Blvd., said they bought the property under the assumption the area in question was zoned commercial, not multi-family. Rental. properties aren't well maintained and residents shouldn't be punished because the city wants to rezone the property, she said. Dave Green, 1543 Driving Park Road, referred to recent problems where police had to be called and said he felt "betrayed" by the city of e Stillwater; he said he had been told the area was zoned industrial. '7 ~--_.._-- \. '... . "",- e Mr. Zoller noted the property.. has been zoned multi-family for at least a year; the rezoning was required in order to build the new handicapped apartment building. \ , \ \ \ \. Janet Mathews, 1119 Gilbert Court, asked how far along the developer is in the approval process. Sue Fitzgerald responded that the developer has the right to come to the city and ask for approval. Mr. Zoller pointed out that by state law as long as the area is zoned multi-family, the city can't discriminate against potential developers on the basis of age, income, etc. Denial would have to be based on facts that the use doesn't meet the intent of the ordinance. Mr. Hamlin asked where the city stands in providing this type of housing and whether the city has to endorse this type of project. Mr. Russell noted that the city policy is to meet Met Council's guidelines of providing for life-cycle housing. The comprehensive plan, he said, refers to the need for 300 additional housing units for low and moderate income people. Mr. Fontaine asked whether it made good sense for planning purposes to spread such housing throughout the community. Mr. Russell said most older areas of the city do have a mix of hou~ing stock, and he noted that the property is question is one of the few multi-family sites remaining in the city. Kerry Ruedy, 1573 Driving Park Road, asked whether the developer would co.nsider owner-occupied units. The answer was no. Gary Kriesel, 1451 Lydia Circle, noted the 1990 census indicated 84 percent of the Highlands area was renter occupied. He asked what would happen to the proposed housing development if federal policies change. Steve Marker, 1272 Driving Park Road, questioned the need for 300 additional low- moderate-income housing units. He asked how the area could be rezoned back to commercial/industrial. Mr. Russell responded that the residents could petition the city council for rezoning. Mary Jo Boyle, 1356 Benson Blvd., spoke in opposition. Rebecca Olson, caretaker of the handicapped-accessible apartments at 1370 Curve Crest Blvd., expressed a concern about having adequate caretakers for the project. e Terry Hildebrandt, 1555 Driving Park Road, questioned that advisability of <1 "...-..-..- .-----..- .... .,t ~ .. '. . ,. ..... .. 7 . clustering low-income housing all in one neighborhood. A resident of 1427 Lydia Circle also referred to the possibility of the federal government removing tax credits. He asked the developer to consider owner-occupied units. Regarding the need for life-cycle housing, he said senior citizens have a need, too, and would be much more welcome by neighbors. Mr. Fontaine said he thought the property owners and developers should get together to talk about concerns. He said he would consider a motion to continue the hearing. Mr. Hamlin moved to continue the matter until the October meeting to provide residents an opportunity to decide on a course of action and to allow developers to make videotapes of other projects to address concerns about management/maintenance, etc. Mr. Roetman seconded the motion. Mr. Kornovich noted he was under strict time guidelines and he would have to go back to the HRA if there is a delay; he said he would be willing to work with any recommendations from the. Planning Commission. Mr. Elliott said he would prefer to delay the issue just one month in order to move the process forward. Mr. Hamlin's motion passed by unanimous vote. Case No. V/95-54 A variance to a side yard setback (10 feet requested, 30 feet required) at 1004 S. Holcombe St. in the RB- Two Family Residential District. City of Stillwater, applicant. Mr. Russell said the house on the property will be demolished because of its poor condition, and the city wants to sell the lot . A variance is required for the setback from Anderson St. Mr. Zoller noted the building would have to be on the westerly side of the lot. Mr. Hamlin, seconded by Mr. Roetman, moved approval with the condition the building be on the westerly portion of the lot; all in favor. Comprehensive Plan updat~ Mr. Russell noted that since the April 25 public hearing, the City Council requested a fiscal impact study and engineering information regarding e assessment policy and location of utilities. In addition, he said there is a concern about runoff to Brown's Creek; the watershed district is q .;:::-... I '...- ({ -" . t. e PLANNING COMMISSION Sept. 11, 1995 Present: Chairman Jerry Fontaine Glenna Bealka, Duane Elliott, Rob Hamlin, and Terry Zoller Absent: Dorothy Foster, Kirk Roetman, Don Valsvik and Darwin Wald Others Steve Russell, Community Development Director; Sue Fitzgerald, planning Mr. Fontaine called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Mrs. Bealka moved approval of the minutes of Aug. 13, 1995. Mr. Elliott seconded the motion; all in favor. ,- .!.r;. ~;., - r:: ,;~, f'.!~~t "!#}t ,':""'l '"... .~. ';''1>< . 'Fe ' .~_~,:" "1 Case 'No~' DP/SUP/95-60. A design review and special use permit and design review plan for construction of a 20-unit townhouse project just east of Benson Boulevard on West Orleans Street in the RCM, Medium Density Family District. Kornovich Development Co., applicant. The applicant, Lonnie Kornovich, appealed the Planning Commission's August decision to continue the request for two months and the City Council directed the Commission to consider the request at the September meeting. Mr. MaQnuson, city attorney, was present for this discussion. Mr. Fontaine went through the 12 conditions of approval recommended by - the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) in its design review. Mr. Kornovich explained a number of changes to the project that were made in . response to the meeting with the HPC -- the units have been moved five feet closer to the center which shortens the blacktop area; the ponding area has been increased to make it more visually attractive; a 6,000- square-foot playground area has been provided by moving the fence to within two feet of the property line; the fence design has been changed to a horizontal weave design with concrete pilasters placed about every 90 feet; and 8-foot high pine trees will be added along the back property line, inside the fence area, as requested by neighbors. e Mr. Russell explained the ponding area is needed for drainage. By having a more shallow area, it will be easier to landscape. Also, the fence is proposed to continue on city property to help screen the lighting from J ( . . e neighbors and to secure the neighbors property from pedestrian traffic. It is being recommended that the city construct a sidewalk on Curve Crest Boulevard from Greeley to County Road 5. About 20 neighboring residents were in the audience. Most of the comments/questions centered on the fencing and having it tie into the neighbors existing fence; whether the project is subsidized housing; and the problems associated with rental housing. Debby Knowlan, 1363 Benson Blvd., asked whether the city would consider participating in the Minnesota Crime Free Housing program, a cooperative effort between cities/police departments/developers wh ich provides tenant screening etc. Mr. Zoller said the program would have to be reviewed by Mr. Magnuson but said he thought it sounded like a good program. Mr. Magnuson was asked whether he had reviewed the Liveable Communities Act. Ms. Knowlan noted the recommendation is not to group low- moderate-income housing in one area; if this project is approved, there would be three in an eight-block area. Mr. Magnuson said in his opinion there is nothing in the act that would give the city grounds to deny the request. Mr. Hamlin noted the city is not in a strong position to change the total direction of the project. The Planning Commission can help finesse the project and make changes such as in the fencing, landscaping etc. Mr. Hamlin moved approval with the 11 design review conditions, with the wording of condition No. 7 changed to eliminate the reference to the retaining wall and the wording of condition No. 8 changed from "received" - to "reviewed", plus the 12 additional recommended conditions --. changing condition No. 8 regarding landscaping to: all landscaping shall be established in a healthy condition and maintained in a healthy and aesthetic condition." Mr. Hamlin suggested additional conditions: that the fence be "non-climbable" and that the fence be extended about 15 feet to tie in with the neighbor's existing fence, with the final design reviewed by staff. Mr. Elliott seconded the motion; all in favor. Case No. SUP/95-50 Case No. SUP/95-55 Case No. SUP/95-58 These three cases were continued. e Case No. V/95-66 The applicant was not present. Mr. Elliott, seconded by Illlllil~. ffr? c f -G-'1 ~ e Mr. Tomten expressed his concern about the use of wall pack security lights over several doorways. He urged the applicant to choose the fixtures carefully; he said he would like to see the box-type fixtures rather than the standard wall pack fixtures. Mr. Tomten, seconded by Mr. Kimbrel moved approval, modifying condition of approval No. 5 to allow either a monument sign or wall signage; all in favor. Case No. DR/SUP/95-60. Design review for a 20-unit townhouse project on West Orleans Street, east of Benson Boulevard. Lonnie Kornovich, applicant. Mr. Russell noted there has been considerable opposition to the project; two public meetings have been held with the developer. The property is zoned RCM; 28 units would be allowable. The proposal meets 'parking requirements. 4,000 square feet of open space is required for the project. The applicant has indicated he would be willing to construct a fence as requested by neighbors. . . Mr. Russell suggested that one larger play area might be more appropriate, rather than the small play areas as shown on the plan. He also recommended that the city look at a sidewalk program for the entire area, considering the activity associated with Benson Park and Lily Lake. Mr. Lieberman and Mr. Michels both spoke in favor of the larger, common green space, rather than the small play areas behind each unit. _.. Regarding lighting and signage, Mr. Kornovich said the intent is to keep the project as residential looking as possible. Proposed materials include maintenance free siding, with a stucco band. Colors would be earth tones, with white for accent. He also said he would prefer that the units have individual trash receptacles, to be stored in the garage, rather than common trash enclosures. I .. Ie Mr. Russell also pointed out that the city of Stillwater owns a piece of right-of-way .behind the Courage Center which would be used to accommodate drainage for the project. Several commission members expressed their concern about the drainage and a ponding area and suggested drainage issues should be reviewed by engineers. Several nolghboring property owners were in ,attendance. Their primary " ..t' '\ " '. .. . -:---'~T,. \ ~ / concerns centered on fencing and the play areas as proposed behind each unit. Mr. Michels suggested the developer look at terracing along the east side to achieve a larger, more usable space for a common play area/open space. One of the neighbors inquired about the possibility of planting evergreens along the north side of the fence, as well as extending the fence into the city-owned right-of-way area and angling the fence over to the neighbor's. II There was some discussion as to what action the HPC should take. Mr. Michels suggested any action seemed preliminary since there are lots of details missing and lots of options available to solve problems and concerns. Members also expressed a concern that they hadn't seen elevation plans or building materials. colors, etc. Mr. Kornovich asked the HPC to consider giving concept approval so he can begin to work on the details. Mr. Johnson moved concept approval with the additional conditions that there be no common trash enclosures; that the developer investigate the possibility of a retaining wall and terracing along the east to accommodate a common play area; that fencing be provided along all three sides and extended to the property line along the north and south; that a landscaping plan for the city-owned drainage/ponding area be submitted. In the ensuing discussion, it was agreed to add the condition that elevation plans be submitted, along with colors and materials and landscaping plan. Mr. Kimbrel seconded the motion; all in favor. Mr. Michels reiterated a concern abut the amount of blacktopping in the center of the project. Mr. Tomten recommended that the developer look at coordinating the building and fencing materials. Members agreed to recommend that the city consider doing sidewalk improvements for the -- area. Case No. DR/95-16. Design review for exterior modifications at 114 N. Main St. Mark Salay, applicant. ,-, Mr. Salay and business owner Gail Roettger were present for the discussion. The building won't be purchased until next year, so modifications will be done in two phases, they said. Drawings were submitted indicating paint colors, window modifications and signage. The existing awning will be reskined, in colors to match the building paint colors. e Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mr. Michels, moved approval with no conditions; ~ ---- e e HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Oct. 2, 1995 Present Chairman Jeff Johnson Robert Kimbrel, Howard Lieberman, Brent Peterson and Roger Tomten Others: Steve Russell, Community Development Director; Susan Fitzgerald, planning Absent Katherine Francis, Jay Michels, and Todd Remington Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Approval of minutes: Mr. Johnson requested that the minutes be corrected in the discussion of the Old Post Office project to indicate that the north elevation is not as significant. He also noted for the record that the discussion of the UBC storage site at the September meeting was for information only; no action was taken.. Mr. Kimbrel, seconded by Mr. Peterson, moved approval .of the minutes of Sept. 6, 1995 as corrected; all in favor. Case No. DR/95/17.- Design review for exterior sign at 501 N. Main St. Robert Miller, applicant. Mr. Miller appeared regarding the request and provided color samples of the requested sign; the lettering will be the same as the previous signage. Mr. Kimbrel, seconded by Mr. Peterson, moved approval as conditioned; all in favor. Case No. DR/95-18. Design review for exterior awning and sign. Angelika Elliott, applicant. Ms. Elliott appeared regarding the request. She said she was aware of the conditions of approval. The awning will be the same blue as is on the drug store. Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mr. Lieberman, moved approval as conditioned; all in favor. Case No. DR/8UP/95-60. Review of previous conditions of approval HPC requested for the construction of a 20-unit townhouse development. Lonnie Kornovich, applicant. L r' _._---_::.,="".,....,~-_."- ,.,,----- e Mr. Kornovich explained the changes he had made to fulfill the HPC's concerns and conditions of approval, specifically regarding the play area, fencing, and landscaping. He also provided building elevations and color samples. Mr. Russell noted the project would be going before the City Council, as the Planning Commission's decision has been appealed. Mr. Russell said there is a lot of rubbish/branches/clippings along the tree line. He suggested requiring the developer to clean up the tree line and do some selective cutting of dead branches to bring that area back as an asset, rather than a discarded landscape. Staff will work with the developer in the tree trimming. It was also suggested that the fence be put up early in the project in order to contain the site. Mr. Kornovich said he had no problem with those conditions. Mr. Peterson, seconded by Mr. Kimbrel, moved approval of the plans as consistent with the previous conditions of approval; all in favor. Case No. DR/95-19. Review of a two-car garage plan at 220 E. Myrtle St. Mark Salay, applicant. Mr. Salay appeared regarding the request. He said the request is to construct a 23' x 26' garage, rather than 22' x 24' as indicated in the agenda packet. The additional size is due to using brick veneer, he said. The roof pitch will be the same as the existing building. The awning is intended as a design feature, as well as a functional feature. The doors will be flush wood paneled doors. Mr. Kimbrel, seconded by Mr. Lieberman, moved approval as conditioned; all in favor. Q1ber items A representative of Stillwater Yacht Club was present regarding the signage plan. The item was not on the agenda and will be discussed at the November meeting. Design ouidelines for U.S.C. storaoe site On hand for this discussion were developer Peter Gerrard and his architects and local residents Richard Kilty and Maury Stenerson. - Mark Salay, the city's consulting architect, showed some site-specific ,'.' e CITY OF STILLWATER MEMORANDUM DATE: October 13, 1995 TO: Mayor and Council k:l:~ FROM: Klayton Eckles, City Engineer SUBJECT: Concept Design for Myrtle Street/Co. Rd. 5 Alternative Connection DISCUSSION Attached is a drawing showing a concept for a possible new connection between Myrtle Street and County Road 5. The criteria used for designing this street included a 30 mph design, a safe intersection on Myrtle Street and an intersection at County Road 5 that is not in the curve. Also, the design attempts to minimize the number of homes fronting on the new street. Note that there are a number of possible adjustments that could be made, but each adjustment has advantages and disadvantages. This design has safety as a prime criteria. The cost of this alternative is quite high. There are approximately 13 lots with homes that would have to be acquired via adverse possession. The cost from these acquisitions, along with other right-of-way acquisitions, would amount to approximately 3.9 million dollars. The cost of the road way construction is estimated at approximately $800,000 and an additional $100,000 would be required for retaining wall construction, therefore the total ballpark cost for constructing is around 4.8 million dollars. Although this connection would be a great benefit to the city, the cost and consequences of making it, after all of the surrounding land has developed, would make it quite difficult to achieve. RECOMMENDATION Staff has no recommendation. This memo is simply for council's information. e -- ____ -00 .1 ------ ~ -~~ ;'''~oM'_______ . --~ -- ,'...~ - --.........- \ \ ~\ .._~_..!. .. _. .~ ._~~. -- -- e 101 ~ + t.'...~...4~. .. ,.,..;,~.III41: .U- "".6.' ......~ . I .~ "' " ~.w... --:r.'- .it -- .......... ~" ...... :~- ---- -_. .-....- : .....~'_.._.;... .- ~. . . ----"'--- '''''--~' ..;.~.....~_.. . ~._~.,..__..... -: :...."::........ iI'~- .I.i .~_ _' ~.....-'-"...-.....:..;..-_...~- ~__..:o..~_ .... .... ,.. .... ,';'II"'~6P '.I/-~ '41,-H6. ~-'-" .. II -----:.-; -....:-... ~~ -...r ~- .~ ~ .' , ',-- ~ ~ ./'--..... / ....... / / I I \ \ \ \ ou'f' '-J,,,r~- .. " .. II .....:z.=:::~.:: / / / / , I -/0" ~9S~' , - 11111' ~S J' - ,J,Zc, of 4 I I ~ . <: . . . '1 .~'" =: ~,- ZI.. IT . / / I" I: # If! /"" I i: . !.! : /tj . ( (~ "'SEH 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, 200 SEH CENTER. ST. PAUL. MN 55110 612490-2000 800 325-2055 ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORT A TlON e October 12, 1995 RE: Stillwater, Minnesota Deer Path Study SEH No. A-STILL9505.00 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mayor and City Council Members: A considerable amount of information was presented to the Council and to the general public at the October 3, 4:30 p.m. Council meeting. Summarizing the information, there is no alternate route to Deer Path that does not have some problems. There are also no effective methods of containing or reducing the traffic volumes that now exist on Deer Path. Alternates to Deer Path which were studied included Manning Avenue, Northland Boulevard, Maryknoll Drive, an extension of Bayberry Street to Olive Street, Brick Street and the Owen Street-Greeley Street combination. Various methods of controlling traffic which were studied included signing and one-way streets. It appears that the best potential solution to reduce traffic volumes on Deer Path is to close Deer Path and allow cut-through traffic to gravitate back to Brick Street. The Brick Street intersections with County Road 12 and with Olive Street are in a better location than comparable intersections for Deer Path. There are fewer homes (5 versus 22) on Brick Street than on Deer Path. The major concerns inclosing Deer Path are in the development of an acceptable cul-de-sac turnaround and the additional traffic which would be placed on Brick Street. At the Council meeting, it appeared two courses of action needed to be taken. The Bayberry Court extension needed to be studied for potential alignment and preliminary cost estimates. This is being done in a separate study. The City engineer has already done some field work regarding grades and construction concerns. e The other course of action from the Council was to study the potential closing of Deer Path. With the closing of Deer Path, virtually all of the existing Deer Path traffic will use Brick Street. This includes about one-third of the 300 trips per day from the Deer Path residents and virtually all the cut-through traffic. Some of the cut-through traffic may choose to use either Northland Boulevard or Maryknoll Drive. We also anticipate that some of the past cut-through traffic coming from the townships are already utilizing Manning A venue since the installation of the traffic signal at Manning Avenue and Highway 36. In addition, the installation of traffic signals on County Road 5 at Croixwood Boulevard, Orleans Street and Curve Crest Boulevard have decreased the time savings associated with the trip from the townships to the Highway 36 commercial area using Deer Path. SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. MINNEAPOLIS. MN Sf CLOUD, MN CHIPPEWA FALLS. WI MADISON. WI LAKE COUNTY. IN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ) Honorable Mayor and City Council October 12, 1995 Page 2 e The placement of a cul-de-sac on the north end of Deer Path requires utilization of much of the front yards of two homes. Based on aerial photographs and large scale drawings, there would be little driveway area left in front of these homes. Placing a cul-de-sac on the south end of Deer Path can utilize much of the empty lot on the west side and save the pine trees on the east side. A typical offset cul-de-sac has been marked in the field. A hammerhead type turnaround on either the north end or the south end also takes a considerable amount of property. Development of a hammerhead on the south end would require removal of some of the pine trees on the east side of the street. The hammerhead on the north end would take less of the area of the front yards near the driveways, but would take most of the yards on the north side of the lots. Closing Deer Path on the south end continues to allow fire department access direct from Myrtle Street, which is their route to the area. Ambulance service which comes from Lakeview Hospital will have a slightly longer drive. School buses would need to be rerouted from their current pattern. They may not drive into the cul-de-sac dead-end. A major problem in placing a closure at the south end of Deer Path, as opposed to the north end, is that all residents must utilize the County Road 12 intersection with Deer Path. Any trip to the south requires use of County Road 12 and Brick Street. Traffic does move faster along County Road 12 than along Olive Street. The benefit is that neighbors indicated that Olive Street is slippery in the winter whereas the grade near County Road 12 is relatively flat. Because development of a cul-de-sac on the south side does require acquisition of some private right-of-way, and there is the need to prepare plans, work on a closure, if ordered by the Council, could not be done until spring. Experiences have also shown that the inconvenience associated with a street closure is generally not totally known until residents have had an opportunity to make the longer trip over a period of time. In the past, some street closures have been reopened because of inconvenience to the local residents, who were behind the closure in the first place. It is, therefore, proposed to close Deer Path on a temporary basis on the south end using barricades and a dirt embankment. A walkway would be left for pedestrians and bicyclists. Signing for turn prohibitions and a dead-end street are essential. Without a cul-de-sac, some driveways will be used for turnaround. This will be somewhat of an inconvenience to the driveways near the south end of Deer Path. It is possible that some of the traffic will make a U-turn in the Deer Path Court and the Deer Path intersection. Others will probably end up on Deer Path Court using the cul-de-sac. U the closure is made on a temporary basis, we would propose to count traffic on several streets and measure the impact of the closure on these alternate routes in the spring. It is possible also to obtain public comments through some questionnaires. The City could then make a determination whether to reopen the street or permanently close the street with a cul-de-sac. We have reviewed this concept with Washington County, since both Orlean Street and Myrtle Street are on the County road system. They are in agreement with our conclusions and have no objections e to the closure. e e '. Honorable Mayor and City Council October 12/ 1995 Page 3 If the Council agrees with this proposal, a letter should be sent to the Deer Path, Deer Path Court and Brick Street residents advising them of the temporary closure and trial period. It should clearly be stated that this is a special case involving cut-through traffic so that other areas with a different situation do not also request trial closings of their streets. It may be beneficial to also carefully write an article for the City newsletter summarizing the study and indicating that it is a temporary closing which could become permanent. Additional information in the local newspapers may also be needed. Sincerely, Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. ~~~ Glen V an Wormer Manager, Transportation Department tIo c: Klayton Eckles, City Engineer Don Beberg, Police Chief George Ness, Fire Chief Dave Junker, Public Works Superintendent ~~ Richard E. Moore, P.E. e e ORDINANCE NO. 820 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STILLWATER CITY CODE CHAPTER 41.04 SUB. 3 BY INCREASING THE LICENSE FEE FOR CIGARETTE SALES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER DOES ORDAIN: Section I. AMENDING. Section 41.04 Sub. 3 of the Stillwater City Code is hereby amended to hereafter read as follows: "Sub. 3 LICENSE FEE. The license fee is $250 per annum. Every license will expire on December 31 of the year in which it is issued, and if issued during the year, will be computed at the rate of one-twelfth for each month, or for the fractional part of the month covered by the license. Licenses are not transferrable from one person to another." Section II. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance will be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law, and be effective for licenses issued for the calendar year 1996. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 17th day of , 1995. Octobp.r Jay Kimble, Mayor ATTEST: Modi Weldon, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. R 1 Q AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STILLWATER CITY CODE CHAPTER 30 SECTION 30.01 SUB. 8 BY INCREASING THE FEE FOR RECYCLING - THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER DOES ORDAIN: Section I. AMENDING. Stillwater City Codes ~30.01 Sub. 8, "Fees", the last paragraph thereof is changed to hereafter read as follows: "In addition to any other fees imposed pursuant to this chapter, there shall be added a recycling fee of $1.00 per month per dwelling unit. The fee shall be collected in the same manner as other fees are collected pursuant to this subdivision." Section II. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 17th day of O/"tnnpY' , 1995. Jay L. Kimble, Mayor ATTEST: Modi Weldon, City Clerk e . . I. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 27 TITLED DOGS AND OTHER ANIMALS 27.03 KENNELS Subd. 1. The term kennels shall mean any place where four (4) or more dogs over six months of age are kept, owned, boarded, bred or offered for sale. It shall be unlawful to operate a kennel in any residential zoned district. Kennels shall be allowed in any commercial zoned district. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, corpoation or other legal entity to own or operate a dog kennel without a Special Use Permit issued by the Planning Commission. Conditions of Approval: A.Each owner or keeper of a dog or dogs shall operate and maintain the premises as well as all of its pens, run-ways and all the premises upon which a dog is kept or harbored, in a clean and sanitary manner;. (a) provide adequate light and ventilation; (b) dispose of fecal materials through an approved sanitary manner; (c) keep the premises vermin free; (d) conduct its operation in such a manner that no pUblic nuisance will be created or offensive odors arise therefrom; (e) shall be open for inspection by City Authorities during working hours. e e Memorandum To: Mayor and Council From: Sue Fitzgerald Date: October 13, 1995 Subject: Regulation of Kennels Proposed ordinance amending Chapter 27 of the City Code will be available at the beginning of the October 17 council meeting. e e ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council \L-~/ FROM: Klayton Eckles, City Engineer DATE: October 13, 1995 SUBJECT: Programmatic Agreement with St. Paul District Army Corps of Engineers Discussion: Attached is an agreement prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding the levee project. The agreement states that the existing retaining wall will be repaired according to the present design memorandum dated June 1995. It also states that the Corps will develop the plans and specifications for the construction of an extended wall around Mulberry Point and the Corps will develop plans and specifications for the flood wall along the west edge of Lowell Park. After the City Council approves this agreement it must be sent to SHPO for their approval as well. Recommendation: I recommend City Council pass a resolution approving the Programmatic Agreement among the St. Paul District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office regarding the implementation of the Stillwater flood/retaining wall project. '.\ DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ST. PAUL DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS CENTRE 190 AFTH STREET EAST ST. PAUL, MN 55101-1638 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF OCT 2- Management and Evaluation Branch Engineering and Planning Division The Honorable Jay Kimble Mayor of City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Dear Mayor Kimble: please find enclosed the Programmatic Agreement (PA) for the Stillwater Flood/Retaining Wall Project at Stillwater, Minnesota (Public Law 120-580, Water Resources Development Act of 1992, Section 363) . This PA was developed by the St. Paul District in consultation with the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). This PA fulfills the St. Paul District's obligations under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 (f)) and Section 110(f) of the same Act (16 U.S.C. 470h-2 (f)) . The City of Stillwater is included as a concurring party to the enclosed PA. please sign the document on the designated line and send it on to the Minnesota SHPO [Ms. Britta L. Bloomberg, State Historic Preservation Office, 345 Kellogg Blvd. W., St. Paul, MN 55102-1906] as soon as possible. If you have any questions about this document, please call Dr. Jane Carroll at 290-5742. Enclosure Corps of Engineers Engineer 'e cf: Klayton Eckles City Engineer City of Stillwater r-. .tI PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT AMONG THE ST. PAUL DISTRICT, U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND THE MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STILLWATER FLOOD/RETAINING WALL PROJECT e WHEREAS, the St. Paul District, u.S. Army Corps of Engineers [Corps], proposes to design and construct the Stillwater Flood/Retaining Wall Project [Project], in Stillwater, Minnesota, authorized by the 1992 Water Resources Development Act, Section 363-Public Law 120-580; and WHEREAS, the Project that is the subject of this Programmatic Agreement, is described in the Design Memorandum and Environmental Assessment: Stillwater Flood/Retaining Wall Project, St. Croix River at Stillwater, Minnesota, dated March, 1995 and revised June, 1995; WHEREAS, the Project consists of the following three features: (Feature #1) repair of the existing retaining wall; (Feature #2) the construction of new-retaining walls north and south of the existing wall; (Feature #3) the construction of a floodwall along the western edge of Lowell Park; WHEREAS, the final designs for the two of the Project's three features as described above (#2 and #3) have not been completed; WHEREAS, the St. Paul District, u.S. Army Corps of Engineers, has determined that the Project may have an effect on the Stillwater Commercial Historic District, which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and on Lowell Park, a contributing historic landscape within that same historic district, and has consulted with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation [Council] and the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Officer [SHPO] pursuant to Section 800.13 of the - regulations (36 CFR Part 800) implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; (16 U.S.C. 470f), [and Section 110(f) of the same Act (16 U.S.C. 470h-2(f)]; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater is acting as the local sponsor for the Project, has participated in the consultation process and has been invited to concur in this agreement, NOW, THEREFORE, the Corps, the Council, and the SHPO agree that the Project shall be administered in accordance with the following stipulations to satisfy the Corps' Section 106 responsibility for all individual aspects of the project. e A ~ e Stipulations The St. Paul District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will ensure that the following measures are carried out: 1. Project Feature #1 (the existing retaining wall) shall be repaired in accordance with the Design Memorandum, as revised in June, 1995. Any proposed changes to the plans shall be submitted to the SHPO for review and the Corps shall take into account the SHPO's comments in revising the plans. 2. The Corps shall develop the plans and specifications for Project Feature #2 (the additional retaining walls) in close consultation with the SHPO and the Corps shall submit the final plans to the SHPO for review and concurrence. 3. The Corps shall develop the plans and specifications for Project Feature #3 (the floodwall) in close consultation with the SHPO and the Corps shall submit the final plans to the SHPO for review and concurrence. 4. The Corps, SHPO, or Council may request that this Programmatic Agreement be amended, whereupon the parties will consult in accordance with 36 CFR 800.13 to consider such amendment. 5. The Corps, SHPO, or Council may terminate this agreement by providing thirty (30) days notice to the other parties, provided that the parties will consult during the period prior to termination to seek agreement on amendments or other actions that would avoid termination. In the event of termination, the St. Paul District, .U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, will comply with 36 CFR 800.4 through 800.6 with regard to individual undertakings covered by this Programmatic Agreement. 6. Should the Corps or the SHPO object within 30 calendar days to any action or plan provided pursuant to this agreement, the Corps and the SHPO shall consult to resolve the objection. If the Corps determines that the objection cannot be resolved, the Corps shall request the further comments of the Council pursuant to 36 CFR 800.6(b). Any Council comment provided in response to such a request will be taken into account by the Corps in accordance with 36 CFR 800.6(c) (2) with reference only to the subject of the dispute; responsibility to carry out all actions under this agreement that are not the subject of the dispute will remain unchanged. e r. .~. '. Execution and implementation of this Programmatic Agreement evidences that the St. Paul District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, has satisfied its Section 106 responsibilities for all individual undertakings of the Project. e ST. CORPS OF ENGINEERS By: Date: 30 St.p~S- J .M. W nsik Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Engineer MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER By: Date: . Nina Archabal State Historic Preservation Officer ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION By: Date: Robert D. Bush Executive Director Concur: CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA By: Date: Jay Kimble Mayor of the City of Stillwater e e e ( {\ ... MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Building Official (lJJI( SUBJECT: Country Inn and Suites request DATE: October 13, 1995 Discussion: Accompanying this memo is a letter from ETC Enterprises, Inc. requesting that they be allowed to begin footing and foundation work at this time for the Stillwater Cormtry Inn and Suites project. As they point out in their letter final plan review has not yet been accomplished on the project. However, they want to begin work now in order to avoid dealing with freeze conditions. I have discussed this request with Steve Russell and Klayton Eckles.. The consensus is that the request should be denied. Steve is concerned about following proper procedures (i.e., having plans reviewed by all departments and other agencies, etc. ). Klayton is also concerned about the process and is further concerned about fmal grades. For your information it will take about 3 weeks for myself and state agencies to complete the review process. Recommendation: Denial of the request. _ ErC ENTERPRISES, INC. .. ~~?# . LINK DEVELOPMENT CO. . LINDQUIST & KEllOGG HOSPITALIN GAOUP · VISION PURCHASING GROUP · October 12, 1995 . ../ Mayor Jay Kimble and City Council City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Stillwater, Country Inn & Suites Dear Mayor and City Council Members: I am writing this letter in hopes of receiving your assistance regarding a timing problem I have in the development of the Country Inn & Suites of Stillwater, Minnesota. It has come to my attention that my architect and engineers were somewhat slow at providing your appropriate building departments with plans and specifications. While we were under the assumption this was being fulfilled in a timely manner, we aggressively proceeded with our plans to begin excavation on Monday, October 16, 1995. Our purpose is to have as big of a jump as possible in dealing with potential freezing conditions: It is imperative that we are able to substantially complete our underground plumbing and site utility work prior to these winter conditions. In speaking with Mr. Allen Zeppar and other members of City staff, who have been very responsive to our needs, it has been brought to my attention they cannot provide us with an early start Footing and Foundation Permit unless instmcted to do so by the City Council. As I am sure you are aware, Ollr project has gone through the Planning Commission and the Special Use Permit for this type of use has been issued. The Site Plan has been approved, and the building setbacks are within the guidelines oflocal codes. Therefore, I ani asking for your assistance in allowing us to receive a Footing and Foundation Permit so we can take advantage of the favorable weather. We fully ul1derstand the requirement to receive a full building permit, and we will work diligently with City staff so we will comply with and receive the remainder of the approvals in a timely manner as to not cause any further delay in our construction project. e 110 SQ. 2tJtl ST. SUITE 300. WAITE PARK. MINNESOTA 56387. (612) 240.0567. FAX (612) 240-0549 . ~ I understand there is a City Council meeting on Tuesday, October 17, at which time I would very much like your consideration in approving this request. Myself Of a representative of my e company will attend the City Council meeting in case you would like to discuss this matter further, Thank you for your consideration and anticipated cooperation in this matter. We look forward to being a part of the Stillwater community. Sincerely, RLL/tjh cc: Allen Zeppar . . . . LEGISLATIVE ASSOCIATES, INC. Washington Office: 1l013Oth Street, NW, Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20007 (202) 625-4356 Fax (202) 625-4363 Minnesota Office: P.O. Box 2131 Stillwater, MN 55082 (612) 439-7681 Fax (612) 439-7319 October 16,1995 To: Nile Kriesel, City Coordinator City of StillW~ {((;) From: Ed Cain, LAI~ ~_ . Subject: Providing Support for the "Mighty Ducks Proposal." Per the discussion that you, Mayor Kimball and I had regarding the City's submission of the Mighty Ducks proposal for funds to support the construction of the sports complex, and the need for strong political support, I would suggest the following actions: 1. Meeting with Otto Bonestroo and Steve Russell to coordinate any actions they have initiated with the Commission, or any others in support of the project application. 2. Ascertain the unique features of the Stillwater project that makes it more desirable for the Commission to support than other applications, and prepare a memo to be used for letters, etc. 3. Discuss the application with Mark Holsten and Gary Laidig; prepare draft letters to the Commission; follow up with meetings with Commission members. 4. Contact key members of the Governor's staff to determine best way to involve Carlson's office; and to take the necessary action. 5. Initiate (prepare when necessary) a dozen or so letters of support from the community, including surrounding municipalities, the Chamber, the school district: etc. 6. Determine how each of the Commission members can best be lobbied, and carry out the needed actions. 7. Do the necessary follow.up. While the competition will be great for the limited funds available in this program, the funds will be going to those cities that give the Commission the best "Bang for the Buck." We have to demonstrate that Stillwater should be their number one priority. These actions will require a minimum of 20 hours of concentrated efforts at a cost of $1,300. Please let me know as soon as possible if you want me to move forward on this matter. Since the proposal has already been submitted, it's important that these plans be implemented immediately. ~,~ ~j STILLWATER AREA SCHOOLS .uI Effective Learning Through Excellence in Education f* 1875 SOUTH GREELEY STREET STillWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 351-8303 October 13,1995 Mr. Jay Kimble, Mayor City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mayor Kimble: At its meeting of Thursday, October 12, 1995, the School Board of District 834 passed the enclosed resolution designating the Kroening property in Stillwater Township as the preferred site for its new 800 pupil elementary school. The administration has been directed to enter into negotiations for purchase of the property and communicate with the appropriate governmental and regulatory agencies its intent. . It's the understanding of our School Board that this decision is compatible with the comprehensive planning efforts of the City of Stillwater, and we look forward to working with your Council members and staff as these planning efforts move forward. The Board has requested that the City identify for us any governmental and regulatory agencies that should be contacted by the school district to help expedite this process. ~ David . Wettergren Superintendent of Schools DLW/dkh Enclosure cc: Steve Russell Nile Kriesel Dan Parlcer An Equal Opportunity Employer , . Board of Education LYMAN GEARY Chairperson ROLAND BUCHMAN Vice Chairperson KAREN ROSE Clerk SHAWN DRAPER Treasurer JOAN FRIANT Director MELVA RADTKE Director STEVE ZINNEL Director DAVID WETIERGREN Superintendent RESOLUTION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE Independent School District 834 October 12, 1995 Whereas-- The School Board of School District 834 has been studying the possibility of locating the new elementary school on one of five sites, and Whereas--after analyzing and reviewing costs, demographic and related information and, after considering responses of the Cities of Oak Park Heights and Stillwater and interests of developers and landowners; Now therefore be it resolved-that the School Board of District 834 designate the Kroening property in Stillwater Township as the preferred site and directs administration to enter into negotiations for purchase of the property and communicate with the appropriate governmental and regulatory agencies its intent. RESOLtmON 10/12/95 t 0' . . .: ., r . . i. :, METRO MEETINGS A weekly calendar ofmeetings and agenda items for the Metropolitan Council. its advisory and standing committees, and three regional commissions: Metropolitan Airports Commission. Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission. and Metropolitan Sp<Xts Facilities C.nmmi~ Mleting times and agendas are occasionally changed. Questions about meetlngl'l shoo1d be directed to the appropriate organization. Meeting information is also available on the Metro Information Line at 229-3780 and by computer modem. through the Twin Cities Computer Network at 337 -5400. DATE:~13.199S WEEK OF: October 16 - October 20, 1995 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Transportation Committee - Monday, Oct. 16,4 p.m., Chambers. The committee will oonsider: MCTO hearing report and request for approval for a fare increase; four-year Transportation Improvement Program; solicitation package for ISTEA funds; Capital Improvement Program; airportIRegional Blueprint relationship; strike update; and other business. Special Meeting-Environment Committee - Tuesday, Oct. 17,4 p.m., Chambers. The committee will consider: authorization to increase Apple Valley purchase and cost reimbmsement agreement from $550,000 to $671,350; construction contract change order greater than 5% or $50,000 for Seneca handling improvements; capital budget for Environmental Services Division; and other business. Council Members Small Group Breakfast Meeting - Wednesday, Oct. 18,8 a.m., Sheraton Midway, Bigelow's Restaurant, 1-94 at Ramline, Sl Paul. Transportation Advisory Board - Wednesday, Oct. 18,2 p.m., Chambers. The board will oonsider: proposed amendment to the 1996-98 Transportation Improvement Program regarding Nicollet Mall shuttle; city ofRoseville request for preliminmy engineering costs; regional project solicitation for STP and eohancements project; and other business. Providers Advisory Committee - Thursday, 0cl19, 10:30 a.m., Room lA. The committee will consider: strike statuslnon-MCTO Operations Report; transit capital funding request process; transit fare implementation schedule and status; and other business. Fmance Committee - Thursday, Oct. 19, 4 p.m., Room 2A. The committee will consider: authorization to close 1988C solid waste bonds debt service fund; authorization to close 1987C general obligation transit bonds debt service fund; 1995 budget reinstatement; proposed transit fare increase; authorization for payment of insurance coverage for Metropolitan Radio Board; adoption of procurement policy amendment; discussion of proposed 1996 staffing ; and other business. The next portion of the meeting will be closed to the public pursuant to MN Statutes section 471.705, subdivision la (1992) forlabornegotiation issues. The meeting may be reopened again to the public following the labor negotiations discussion. ~ TENTATIVE MEETINGS THE WEEK OF OCTOBER 23 THROUGH OCTOBER 27, 1995 ,: Tour of RedevelopmentlReinvestment Sites-St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, and Downtown Minneapolis - Monday, Oct. 23, 8 am. . Metropolitan Council and Land Management Information Center (LMIC) Geographic System (GIS) Forum - "Metro-Wide GIS: A Means to Improve Your Organization's Effectiveness and Reduce Costs" - Monday, Oct. 23, 1 - 4:30 p.m., Maplewood Community Center, 2100 White Bear Ave., Maplewood. Regional Blueprint Blue Ribbon Task Force - Monday, Oct. 23,2 p.m., Room lA. Community Development Committee - Tuesday, Oct. 24, Noon. Room lA. Environment Committee - Tuesday, Oct. 24,4 p.m., Room lA. Metropolitan Council Retreat - Wednesday, Oct. 25, 8 am - 5 p.m., World Trade Center, St Paul. Metropolitan Council and Land Management Information Center (LMIC) Geographic Information System (GIS) Forum: A Means to Improve Your Organization's Effectiveness and Reduce Costs" - Thmsday, Oct. 26,1- 4:30 p.m., Eden Prairie City Hall, 7600 Executive Dr., Eden Prairie. Metropolitan Council- Thursday, Oct. 26, 4 p.m., Chambers. Committee of the Whole - Thmsday, Oct. 26, immediately following the Council meeting, Room lA. The Metropolitan Council is located at Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fifth St, St. Paul. Meeting times and agenda are subject to change. For more information or confirmation of meetings, call 291-644 7, (TOD 291- 0904). Call the Metro Information Line at 229-3780 for ~ of Council actions and coming meetings. . METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION Special Commission Meeting - Monday, Oct. 16, 11 a.m., Room 303, West Me7.7Jlnine, Lindbergh Terminal Building, Minneapo1islSt Paul International Airport. The commission will cnntimte the discussion on the new Denver Airport. Special Planning and Environment Committee - Monday, Oct. 16, 12:30 p.m., Room 303, West Me7.7Jl11ine, Lindbergh Terminal Building, MinneapolislSt Paul Intemational Airport. The committee will consider a contract bid for FIS - parts storage and cargo transfer. Commission Meeting - Monday, Oct 16, 1 p.m., Room 303, West Me~zanine. Lindbergh Terminal Building, MinneapolislSt. Paul Intemational Airport. The commi~sion will consider: recotJ'Imendations on airport leases; October ADNE levels; final payments for ditch cleaning/obstruction removal at Anoka Co.- Blaine airport and 1993-95 Part 150 sound insulation program; contract change orders for Southwest Terminal expansion - generalIelectrica1 construction and FIS development - structural steel; contract bids received for primary electrical distribution system Phase Ill, September bid cycle for Part 150 sound insulation program, and vacumn sweeper glycol collection project bids; review of upcoming construction project bids; special Planning and Environment Committee meeting; Crystal Airport long term comprehensive plan; Part 150 Policy Advisory Committee recommendation for Part 150 Sound Insulation Block eligibility; 1996-2002 Capital Improvement Program; terminal art program; a presentation by city of Minneapolis; August budget variance; approval of pW'Cbase of public safety dispatch console; MSP 81Jtomned teller machines bid award; Frontier Airlines request to provide air service; RFP for commercial development at Airlock Airport; 51. Paul corporate fueling; update by the Budget Task Force and Finance Subcommittee; Heads Up; Regional 800 MHZ Tnmked Radio System Airport Study; and other business. . , j ,.. . . The commission will discuss: supplement to review of joint Eden PrairielMAC staff report on Flying Cloud AirPort; outdoor advertising; and 1996 insurance renewals; ~ other business. Metropolitan Airports Commission offices are located at 6040 28th Av. S., Minneapolis, MN 55450. For more information, call Lynn Sorensen at 726-8186. METROPOLITAN PARKS AND OPEN SPACE COMMISSION Commission Meeting - Tuesday, Oct. 17,4 p.m., Room lA. The commission will consider: Regional Trails Policy Plan status report and issues paper; report on Oct 9 LCMR. meeting regarding inholding acquisition and issues related to legislative oversight; 1996 tours and NRP A Congress information; and other business. The Metropolitan Parks and Open Space Commission offices are located at Mears Park Centre, 230 E. Fifth St, St. Paul, MN 55101. Meeting times and agendas occasionally may be changed. To verify meeting information, please call 291-6363. , STATE OF MINNESOTA . COUNTY OF RAMSEY In the Matter of the Adoption of the . Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund 1995 Intended Use Plan Pursuant to Minn. R. ch. 7077 .. . MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY NOTICE OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) will consider the adoption of the 1995 Intended Use Plan (IUP) for the Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund at the regular public meeting of the MPCA at 9:00 a.m., November 28, 1995, in the MPCA Board Room at 520 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, Minnesota, 55155-4194. Interested persons are invited to comment on the draft !UP prior to adoption. The Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund, more commonly known as the loan program, provides loans to municipalities for planning, design and construction of wastewater and storm water treatment projects and nonpoint source pollution programs. The 1996 IUP identifies the projects proposed to receive loans from funds available during state fiscal year 1996. As required by the Clean Water Act, each state must annually prepare and submit to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency an !UP as part of its capitalization grant application under the State Revolving Fund Program. All projects on the Project Priority List are eligible for the loan program. However, a municipality seeking a loan for construction financing must receive preliminary approval of its facilities plan before it can be placed on the IUP. Replacement on the IUP does not guarantee that a municipality will receive a loan. The Minnesota Public Facilities Authority is responsible for determining the specific projects and loan amounts that can be funded based on available funds and its ability to issue bonds. The draft IUP contains 36 projects based on the requests received as of October 1, 1995 (see table on back). A number of other municipalities have requested placement on the IUP, but have not yet received preliminary approval of their facilities plans. The 1996 IUP may be amended later to include additional projects, depending on staff workload and the availability of loan funds. Interested persons are invited to comment on the proposed IUP prior to adoption. Any persons may submit written comments at any time up to November 13, 1995, by mailing them to Mr. Peter Skwira at the address given below. In addition, all interested persons shall have the opportunity to present oral or written statements to the MPCA Citizens' Board at the November 28, 1995, meeting. Persons desiring to make oral statements to the Board are asked to advise the Commissioner of such desire as soon as possible. The Chairperson may restrict the time and manner in which oral comments are submitted, depending on the circumstances. The draft 1996 !UP has been prepared and is available for inspection and copying at the MPCA offices during normal business hours. One free copy of the IUP will also be mailed upon request by contacting: Peter Skwira Watershed Assistance Section, Water Quality Division Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-04194 Telephone: (612) 296-8617 roo (for hearing and speech impaired only): (612)282-5332 Printed on recycled paper containing at least 100jibersfrom paper recycled by consumers . . .i . October 12, 1995 STIllWATER TOWN BOARD MEETING Town Hall 7:30 P.M. PRESENT: Chairperson David Francis; Supervisors David Johnson, louise Bergeron and Jerry Hicks. Also, Treasurer Warren Erickson, Engineer Paul Pearson, Planner Mike Gair and Attorney Tom Scott. 1. AGENDA - M/S/P Hicks/Bergeron moved to adopt the agenda as amended. (3 ayes) 2. MINUTES - M/S/P Bergeron/Hicks moved to approve the 9/28/95 Stillwater Town Board Meeting ~inutes as written. (3 ayes) 3 . TREASURER - 1. Discussed the progress of the 1996 Budget. Budget for upgrading the Town Hall will be discussed the 26th. 2. Claims #604 thru #630 were approved for payment. e. ATTORNEY - 1. Rivard appeal to be filed next week. 2. Oie Deeds not received yet. 5 . PLANNER - 1. letters sent regarding excess fill and quarter sections. David Johnson arrived. 6. ENGINEER- 1. M/S/P Bergeron/Johnson moved to give final approval for the Stonehenge Subdivisi~n Plat~ (4 ayes) 2. M/S/P Johnson/Bergeron moved to approve the Engineer's recommendation for a reduction to $40,000.00 for the Stonehenge letter of Credit. (4 ayes) 3. $1,765.00 from the Park Fund will be returned to Mr. and Mrs. J. Wahl in. 4. The Engineer will talk to Mr. Vi zenor about the water issue in Curtiss Hills Subdivision. 7. JIM PETERSON RE: ESTEllE PROPERTY - Mr. Peterson talked to the Supervisors about problems with access to the Estelle Property. Dennis O'Donnell will be . asked to attend the October 26 Board Meeting for further edification. 8. PAUL BERGMANN LAND ATTACHMENT - M/S/P Johnson/Bergeron moved approval of taking 13 acres from the Senior Bergmann's Property and attaching it to Paul Bergmann's Property providing the resulting 20 acres can be consolidated into one tax parcel. (4 ayes) Stillwater Town Board Meeting - 10/12/95 " a g.e. Two 9. PUBLIC WORKS - 1. Stonebridqe Trail - The County will not double stripe. Jerry Hicks suggested an outside contractor to do the work. No final decision made. More policing needed. 2. Carlson litigation dropped. 3. Louise Bergeron checking into drug testing for equipment drivers. 4. Pine Point Gate to be put in immediately. . 10. RECYCLING - 1. Larsons 1995 Recycling Contract is up the end of December. They will be asked to attend the next meeting for discussion re: A 1996 contract. 2. Bids will be requested of other area recyclers. 11. ADJOURNMENT - M!S!P Francis/Hicks meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m. (4 ayes) Clerk Chairperson . Approved ., I Washington County Historical Society offill DlttttER and ~lIIJI""\~ fittNOfiL MEETlttG \00(\ 600(\ i\(.\ 60o~ ~~t\~~\ d \tt 600 but... reservations are a must! Please phone to reserve (or cancel, if necessary) by Friday, Oct. 27. Charles Woodward at 459~1649, Charlotte Robledo at 439-3033, Harvey Westberg at 464-3861 . . . or leave a message at 439~5956. 6:30 P.M. Thursday, ~ov. 2 Stillwater Area V.F.W. .. . '.. (west of the St. Croix Mall) . . :':. $ 8 per person '. ~ - -....... . .. . .. . .- ....... Featuring Old-Time Music... with south Washington County's own Charlie Pike and Val Strumstad, who will have your toes tapping to their tunes, And a Sit-Down Roast Pork Harvest Dinner... with relishes, pork and dressing, potato, gravy, vegetables, rolls, dessert and coffee or milk. The meal will be served "sit- down style" promptly at 6:30, so plan to be there a little earlyl A short business meeting and program will follow the dinner. Hear about progress on the new carriage house I And what's in store for Christmas at the museum I Don't miss this great fall get-togetherl The committee thank you for not smoking and for having you payment ready at the door. * WASHINGTON COUNTY HISTORIC COURTHOUSE . 10 1 W. Pine Street Stillwater, MN 55082 (612) 430-6233 MARLENE de BOEF Coordinator City Council City Hall of Stillwater 216 N. 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Oct. 10, 1995 Members of the City Council, This is to inform the City Council of the City of Stillwater, that the Stillwater Trolley has been hired to provide transportation for town visitors on November 18th and 19th, from downtown Stillwater to Trinity Church (their Yulefest) and the Historic Courthouse (Christmas at the Courthouse). The Trolley will run between lOAM and 3PM both on Saturday and Sunday. The Stillwater Trolley will pick up passengers at its usual stop on Nelson Street, continue down Main Street and stop across from Savories, then proceed to Trinity Church and the Historic Courthouse. A number of restaurants on South Main Street have contributed financially toward the rental of the "Trolley. I would like to extend an invitation to the members of the City Council to visit our Christmas benefit event on Nov. 17th, 18th and 19th. The proceeds of this year's fundraiser will allow us to restore the decorative columns surrounding the dome. S~ti /7 MJfu~1 . Project Coordinator encl. - 'I e . W ASIDNGTON COUNTY Dennl. C. Hegberv DI.ttlct 1 Mery Heu.er D.....ct 2 COUNTY BOARD AGENDA OCTOBER 17, 1995, 2:00 A.M. W"ly Abrllhell180n D1.t"ct 3/ChlIJrmlln My", Petel'lton DJ.t"ct 4 Dew Eng.tram DI.t"ct & 1. 9:00 ROLL CALL 2. CONSENT CALENDAR 3. 9:00 SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT J. FRANK CITIZEN COMMENDATION AWARDS 4. 9:10 HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT - J. HONMYHR, DIRECTOR EMPLOYEE MEDICAL INSURANCE COVERAGE 5. 9:20 H.E.L.H. DEPARTMENT - M. MCGLOTHLIN, DIRECTOR A. 1996-1999 COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES PLAN B. DESIGNATING AUTHORIZED AGENT OF THE BOARD OF HEALTH 6. 9:40 GENERAL ADMINISTRATION - J. SCHUG, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LOCATION IN DAKOTA COUNTY 7. 9: 50 DISCUSSION FROM THE AUDIENCE Y.Im'ORS MAl SHARE THEIR CONCDtNS WI11l11lE COUNIr JJa.4RD OF COMMlSSIONERS ON ANllTEM NOT ON 11IE AGEMJA. 11IE CHAIR WIlL DIRECT 11IE COUNlY ADM/NmBATOR 70 PREPARE RESPONSES 70 lOUR CONCERNS. YOU ARE ENCOU11AGED NOT TO JJE REPE'11110US OF PREVIOUS sPEA.XERS AND TO LlMlT lOUR ADDRESS TO FIVE MlNUIF:S. 8. COMKISSIONER REPORTS - COMMENTS - QUESTIONS 7lI1S PERIOD OF71ME SIWL JJE USED JJl11lE COMMISSIONERS TO REPORT TO 11IE FUlL JJQ4RD ON COMlrlllTEEAC11VITIES. MAKE COMMENTS ON MATIEXS OF 1NTERES1' AND INFORMA110N. OR MISE QUlSIlONS TO 11IE STAFF. 7lI1S ACllON IS NOT INlENDED TO RESULT IN SUJJSTAN11VE .BOARD ACllON DURING 7lI1S 11ME. ANl ACllON NECESSARl JJEc.tUSE OF DISCUSSION WIlL JJE SCHEDUUiD FOR A FUIVRE JJQ4RD MEE17NG. 9~ BOARD CORRESPONDENCE 10. 10:15 ADJOURN * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * RBMIIfDBR: HO BOAltD MBftIHG Oc.rC>BBR 31, 1995 - FIr.rB TUESDAY ~IHG HMICBS Date eo_ittee ~iae Location Oct. 17 Mental Health Advisory 4:00 p.m. Oakdale city Offices Oct. 17 Historic Courthouse 7:30 p.m. 101 W. Pine st. - Stillwater Oct. 18 Plat Commission 9:30 a.m. Washington County Government Center Oct. 18 Legal Assistance 12:00 p.m. Cane Lakes - Stillwater Oct. 18 Transportation Advisory 2:00 p.m. 230 E. 5th St.-Mears Park Centre ct. 18 Housing & Redevelopment Auth. 5:00 p.m. Washington County Government Center t. 19 Private Industry Council 8:00 a.m. Washington County Government Center ct. 19 MELSA/Metronet 12:00 p.m. MELSA Location - St. Paul Oct. 19 Park and Open Space & 7:00 p.m. Washington County Government Center County Board members "you IIHd ...-. due Iv diability ,., ~ banfer. pIN. t:#111430-6003 fTDD 439-32201 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY I AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSENT CALENDAR * OCTOBER 17, 1995 , The following items are presented for Board approval/adoption: e' DEPARTMEHT/AGEHCY ITEM ADMINISTRATION A. APPROVAL TO RENEW CONTRACT WITH SUSAN J. LADWIG FOR LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATION. B. APPROVAL OF ADDITIONAL PROJECTS FROM 1994 BUDGET SAVINGS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD GROUP IN THE AMOUNT OF $249,000. COMMUNITY SERVICES C. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION, APPLICATION FOR PREMISES PERMIT RENEWAL FROM HOCKEY FOREST LAKE ASSOCIATION TO BE USED AT VANELLIS, FOREST LAKE TOWNSHIP. D. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING OCTOBER 15-21, 1995 AS FAMILY CHILD CARE PROVIDER WEEK; AND RECOGNITION OF DELAYNE STRAND AS 1995 CHILD CARE PROVIDER OF THE YEAR. AUDITOR-TREASURER E. APPROVAL TO RENEW CONTRACTS WITH MERIDIAN SERVICES AND THOMAS ALLEN, INC. FOR CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR PERSONS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES. PUBLIC WORKS F. APPROVAL OF TRAIL GROOMING AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF WOODBURY. G. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR RECONSTRUCTING COUNTY ROAD 8A IN THE CITY OF HUGO. H. APPROVAL TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR THE LEASING OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS AT LAKE ELMO PARK RESERVE, COTTAGE GROVE RAVINE REGIONAL PARK AND PINE POINT PARK. I. APPROVAL OF ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH WEST LAKELAND TOWNSHIP. J. APPROVAL OF BLACKTOP PAVEMENT FOR PARKING AND SERVICE ROAD TO PARK MAINTENANCE BUILDING AND CHAINLINK FENCING OF STORAGE YARD AT LAKE ELMO PARK RESERVE. SHERIFF K. APPROVAL OF GRANT AGREEMENT FOR $75,000 BETWEEN THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND WASHINGTON COUNTY IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CITY OF LAKE ELMO TO HIRE ONE DEPUTY FROM MARCH 1, 1995 TO FEBRUARY 28, 1998. el '"Ccmeat CaIeodar itana are laaeraIly defined u itana of rouline buainea. DOt requiriDc diacuuiClll, and -wrovcd in CIIIe vote. Commiaaioaen may elect to pull . Coaacnt CaIcadar itaD(a) for diacuaaiClll -Vor acparate ac:1ioa. '. " ... - . --.....; - -. ",-~ '-.-...~.r-' _"<l.~' "1"':-':1""""',-.... 7;:,_'.. . e-.-..----- ate I , -- - , , \ I ----------. ......... Metropoliun Council ...... Mears P.,k Centre ...... 230 East Fifth Street SL Paul. ~IS 5510H634 612.291-&59. roo 291-0904 FIRST.CLASS MAIL U.S. POSTAGE PAID SI. Paul, MN Permit No. 7029 MOR L I IIELDON CLERIC CITY Of STILLIIATER 216 4TH ST N STILLIIATER MN 55082-4898 <1) :','OJ! REGIONAL BLUEPRINT X 11986 ME15598 Recycled paper: Contains at least SO'"l. post-consumer waste "j a WHAT IS UPDATE? Update newsletter helps you keep up-to-date on the Metropolitan Council's Regional Blueprint-related activities, especially planning under way to select a growth option for the region. The Blueprint contains regional goals and policies to achieve the kind of Twin Cities region the community wants. The Council recently expanded ~' mailing list for Update. 01De "iW readers I -... a THREE GROWTH oP1'lt>, This summer, the Council identified three general growth options for the region to the year 2020. The options suggest very different development patterns. One is a spread out pattern, largely responding to the market (We call it .Spread Development"). The second, .Concentrated Development,. restricts new growth to the area within the currently planned Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). The third concept, .Channeled Development,. locates part of the new growth near certain transportation corridors in the already developed part of the region, and extending the corridors into what is now rural area. The Council will select one option-or one containing some combination of features-and make it part of its Blueprint plan. a RECENT ACTlVmES Since publication of the last Update, the Council has been holding community meetings throughout the region to discuss development issues and hear reactions to the three options. The Council and local officials toured many sections of the region, plus a number of adjacent counties, to see the extent of development and redevelopment opportunities first hand. In addition, staff are working on two studies that will help assess the three options. One measures the impact of the metropolitan urban services boundary on land costs. A second compares public " service costs for the three ~tions. , Staff 4!so are preparing communily.,level forecasts of population ~nd households for each option. ~e studies and the forecasts are i,xpected to be completed in tire next few months. ~ a IMPRESSIONS' FROM COMMUNITY MEETlNGf AND TOURS \ Here is some of what the COllncil is finding: , . The region's economic sph\re is much larger than sev,fn counties. The seven-courity area, plus a number I>f surrounding counties, make up the region's .rear econo~c engine. For example, roughly half the workers in three coun6s just across the 51. Croix RiveL in Wisconsin commute to the l1vin Cities area. In counties di~ctJy to the north, that figure is also about 50 percent. I September 1995 highway accessibility and attractive amenities. Reasons cited by local officials include crime in the seven-county area (or the perception of it), inad des rur · . . GroWlngn expe-nsive:~;homes , ''ting''f $300,000 Mcfup'are bE1II1g"-built in developing suburbs and rural areas. Council forecasts suggest that the baby-boomers buying those homes today will be followed by a generation of only half its size, making it difficult for aging boomers to sell these homes when they so desire. . Some cities want growth, but increasing numbers of cities don't. This challenges the notion of a uniformly expanding ring of development around the region. . Redevelopment opportunities exist in the inner cities and suburbs, but pollution cleanup and road and other infrastructure improvements make the task difficult. To be effective, redevelopment needs to be linked with job training, education and public safety improvements. . Highway capacity is an issue in every part of the region. . People are moving farfler out, especially 'd~IIFII ,"lIrll i8 9..8 . ' REGIONAL BLUEPRINT , ....~--- _....~~,..~....- .', .-.....-_.~_.~-~- ...~. ..O-~~._..._ ._a" .. ,. .' . , - ! Call the COllncil's data center at 291-8140 and ask for a free copy of a broqture, Choosing an Urban Development Options for the Twin clPes Area: 1995-2020. It describes the options and contains Itrend and forecast information. I Call Dpnna Mattson of the Councif staff at 291-6493 if you woulcf like us to make a pre;entation to your group. !f1You have an online computer . you can access information and .., comment via the Twin C"lties Every five years the Council, Computer Network, or call -the revises its regional and local Metro Information Hotline, 229- .." forecasts of population, 3780. households and empl~ent. The revised forecasts..we being prepared this fall. '" '" Staff,aYe ifreparing forecasts for _ t!8unties, cities and townships based on current regional growth policies, historical trends, and community desires as . the Council has done in previous.. forecasts. Here are the some recurring questions: · What is the real cost of development and how does it get factored into decision making? Does development pay . for itself? ~ How much coordination Is occurring, or needed, between schools and other governmental units making land-use decisions that largely determine school population? · Some parts of the region are excellent areas for housing. What weight should this receive in regional level planning? What are the future implications of today's market trends? How might changing demographics affect the market? a FISCAL STUDY UNDER WAY Cost is a key criteriona in evaluating the three options. Council staff is assessing the cost implications by 1) identifying the population growth and where it will locate; 2) then translating ~e lation growth into public costs. Th next- st:ps -rhv~e -,) projecting the public revenues induced by growth; and 4) comparing development-induced costs with revenues. Costs to be identified in the study include schools, roads, water, sewer and storm drainage. a LAND COST STUDY Council staff are looking into the land cost changes occurring in Chanhassen, Inver Grove Heights and Plymouth after the land became part of the MUSA. Sites just outside the urban service area in the three cities Will be used for a comparison. The goal is to identify the change in land value based solely on its inclusion in the MUSA. A second part of the study looks at various mechanisms to capture land value windfalls for public use. a FORECASTS FOR THE THREE OPTIONS '\ '\ '\ ",. / staff also will prep;ve cpmmunity forecasts built upon the assJmptions in the Concentrated Development and Channel" Development options. ~ results \will help the region evaluate the likely impact of the growth saenarios. \ a FOR MOrE INFORMATION The public is also invited to attend Council committee meetings where the growth options will be discussed. e REGIONAL BLUEPRINT. - I"~' Auociation of ~ Metropolitan I Municipalities "I~~': ~ :" ::}." ~ :::m fj I :"~ i;m li I =:ij :;i' :.:~~ .:-:-:.. :i~ ~~~il ~~~~ i$ :1 ::~ I ,; m I I ~ ; I ~ :~ <l r PoliaAdllllilJ/lM/ilJling WhlJD WhlJllJ PriclJ Thursday,Nov.2,1995 Sheraton Minneapolis Metrodome 1330 Industrial Blvd. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 I:~ :: .... I ~I~~~>'Z t~ ~: ~. ~ ~I' "". ".. I~:il ~ ~~ ~:. ~, t~ f-i I I [l~ $25 Livable Communities Info Session .................................... 4-5:30 p.m. Social Hour ... ............ ....................... .............................. ......... 5:30-6:30 p.m. (Cash Bar) Buffet Dinner .......................................................................... 6:30-7:30 p.m. (Roast Sirloin of Beef, Lasagna, Chicken Marsala) Business Meeting ................................................................. 7:30 p.m. livabllJ Communitills Info SlJssion Metropolitan Council staff will be available to discuss/update you about the Uvable Com- munities Act. This is your chance to find out what other communities are doing and to ask any questions you may havel (4-5:30 p.m.) riJ riJ riJ There will be no speaker or panel discussion. This will allow more time to discuss 1996 AMM legislative initiatives. Copies of the policy initia- tives were mailed Oct. 4. AMM policy adoption is the keystone for our 1996 legislative program, so we encourage cities to send more than one representative to contrib- ute to the discussion. Place dinner reservations with Laurie Audette (215-4000) no later than Monday, Oct. 30. Please channel all reservations through your office of city manager/administrator. Your city will be billed. If you choose to pay in advance, checks may be made payable to AMM. City officials attending the 7:30 p.m. business meeting only do not need reservations. Map and Agenda on reverse. Guests are welcome. ..Busil)@$$..Agenda '. 1. Call to order. 2. Welcome. e i,:'/~~. :. :ii' 3. President's Report. (Joan Carnpbell) "".~/"'~, - 4. Adoption of 1996 Legislative Polley Program. 5. Discuss/Establish 1996 Legislative Priorities. 6. Other Business. 7. Announcements. 8. Adjournment. Directions w It) C") Sheraton Minneapolis Metrodome Hwy. 36 1330 Industrial Blvd. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 (612) 331-1900 University A~e. 1-94 From North: Take 35W South to Industrial Blvd. (exit #22). Turn left on Industrial Blvd. From South: Take 35W North to Industrial Blvd. (exit # 22). Turn right on Industrial Blvd. From West: Take 394 East to 1-94, go east on 94 to 35W North. Take 35W North to Industrial Blvd. (exit #22). Sheraton is on the right. From East: Take 1-94 West to Highway 280, go north on Highway 280 to Broadway Street. Take a left on Broadway Street to Industrial Blvd. Take a right on Industrial Blvd. Sheraton is on the left. e This notice was mailed to all AMM member mayors, manager/administrators and councilmembers. M I Nit. SOT A NAHRO'-S" AN,NUAL COM M U,N /.T Y D EVE L. 0 P'M E N T CONFERENCE WHEN November 30, 1995: 8:00 a.m: to 3:00 p.m.' WHERE Sheraton Minneapolis-Metrodome , 1330 Industrial Boulevard, Minneapolis WHO SHOULD ATTEND 'Community Development Staff, HRA Staff ' , ,EDA Staff State Agency Staff :ommunity Development Corporations Elected anSi Appointed Officials, ' Commissioners Municipal Finance Officials- , Morning Sessions ' , " Aftern'oon Sessions , Introduction to Tax Increment , Financing An Introduction of Tax Increment Financing In Minnesota: Covering tl1e basics of how It works, what you can and can't do and examples of recent transactions: HOw to creatively combine 'TIF powers wlttl those of HRA's and EDA's to enhance flexibility with this powerful development tool. This session Intended for the novice, or those , looking 'for, a general refresher course on TIF, -, . 'Small CIties Successes: ' Strategies and Planning This, session will highlight thiee small cities, !'11th populations under 10,000 that' are Involved ,In vary;lng stages of successful comprehensIve , redevelopment. , SCHEDULE - Barriers to Affordable Housing, " and Metropolitan Livable Communities . ,Act' , The MLCA requlres'metro cities ,to negotiate IIfe- cycle and affordable housing goals, and to adopt and Implement a - strategy. . Polley and administrative issues arise, both for cities and the Met Council. ,This panel will' discuss the requirements, Implications, problems and opportunities of affordable housing. , 8:00-8:30 REGISTRATION ~ Check in and Continental Breakfast 8:30-10:00 MORNING SESSIONS 'Introduction to Tax Increment Financing' Barriers to Affordable HousIng and the , Livable Communities Act Untrcidltlonal Methods to ' Increase HRA Revenues, 1'0:00-10:15 BREAK' 10:15.12:00 GENERAL SESSION Legislative ProspectIve qn .', Community Development 12:00-1 :3~ LUNCHEON It GUEST SPEAKERS . " ~ 1:30-3:00 AFTERN90N SESSIONS Small Cities Successes:, Strategies and Planning , ,Tax Increment Flnanchig: Trends and Policies " BusIness Retention and Expansion Untradltional Methods to Increase HRA Reven'ues This session will foCUS on untradltlonal, mission guided projects, that create positive cash flow' tor the agency. Presenters , will explore: HRA's as general partners In Low' Income Housing Tax Credit Projects, Conduit , Financing and more. '3:00-4:00 INFORMAL GATHERING I ' FOR PARTiCIPANTS General Session', . Tax Increment Flnanclng:,Trends and Policies This session will consider the future of T1F and the Implications of recenUrends In. state community development legislation, Including ,1995 special TlF legislation as, possible guidance for 1995. , Business Retention. and Expansion Most new Jobs are creafed , from expansion of existing businesses. This session will examine' h.ow ,local Jurisdictions can develop sysfematlc approach to promoflng business, retention, Job creation, and, market expansion of the local business community. ' . .' , , Legislative ,Prospective on Community Development , . This General session will teature several members of the legislature who wlll91scuss thepubDc fole'ln community development.. Among the Issues to be Included In the legislative presentations ore annexation, land use control, the future of such flminclng tools as tax Increment, ,tax subsidies, and general fund , ',appropriations. The role of the state and local governments ,In local officials and conference participants will react to the' presentations. . .. SERVING MINNESOTA'S . ' HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS 'FOR OVER-36 YEARS The Minnesota Chapter of the National Association of Hovsing and Redevelop-, ment Officials is a non-profit membership assoCiation of housing and community , 'development professionals. There are over 135 public agencies in the Chapter representing local. county,. multi-county and state-wide Jurisdictions. There are over 350 'individual members, and over 50 non-profit and for.:profit organizations in the Chapter. ' , -Minnesota NAHRO'S purpose Is to ensure the provision of decent, affordable hous- - Ing ~md livable communities for all Min- nesotans through the, association of agencies and individuals providing pUb- licly assisted housing and community de- velopment resources. ' i " . . .=. -, 'I-~ ... '-'~, = 1- - - -, _.. - ,II ~I= J_ 1= '.':: 1I1I~~1I1i ..11 ;;;; 11111== II-nJ ~=II: ~m Space is limited. To receive the .lowest registration rate" forms must be returned by November 10, 1995. . Please complete only one form for each person reg!stering. Form may be p,hotocopled. ,. NAME TITLE AGENCY ADDRESS CITY, STATE, ZIP TELEPHONE REGISTRATION FEE Please circle appropriate fee. Before November 10 After November 10 ,$ 95.00 $105.00 The registration fee includes c;ontlnental breakfast..' lunch. breaks. and materials. All other expenses are the responsibility of the registrant. ' , Please check one: _ Registration fee enclosed Please bill agency Registration questions? C?ll (612)-423-8145 Return To: . MINNESOTA NAHRO ~ 2496 145th Street. West Rosemount, MN'55068 ' The Minnesota Chapter of. National Association of . Housing and Redeyelopment Officials Community Revitalization and Development Commltte~ has assembled this seminar for professionals' Involved In .. C9rTYnunlty Qevelopment addressing tImely Issues. ;' Members are: James Heltzer, Washington County HRA. ConvnMeeVP . . Richard Grabko, Red Wing HRA . Convnlltee VP , Tom Bublitz, Brooklyn CenterEDA Wes Butler. Washington County HRA Bob Drcinen. Minneapolis CDA . Gary Relds, Sprlngsted Incorporated' Keith Ford. Minneapolis CDA . . Steve 'Grlesert. Community Partners ;, Linda Grover; SE-Mlnnesotd Development , Tom Hoch, Minneapolis PHA ' ., , , Ken Johnson, SI. Paul Port Authority Carole Kron. Dunbar Development Corp Charles lutz, Minneapolis PHA . >' Kermit Mahan, Austin HRA Marcus Marsh, St. Cloud HRA .' . lee Meier, NW MN Multi-County HRA. ' , ~ene Ranieri. Ehlers and, Assclates, INC./ pUbllcorp, INC., . Dan Sartell. Wadena HRA "',~, , lee Smith. Dakota CountyHRA . Sheila Smith. Brainerd HRA ; .:, Mark Vahlslng. Chlscigo County HRA "" Jim White. Minneapolis CDA .. Patricia Gustafson. MN NAHRO' LODGING A block of rooms has t(een reserved at the Sheraton " Minneapolis Metrodomeat the speclal.conference rate of $69.00 plus tax. single or double occupancy. , ,nie room block will beheld until November 10, 1995. To'reserve a room. call the hotetot (612) 33,1.1900 or Toll Free (800) 777-327.7and ask tor the Minnesota NAHRO conference rate: \ CANCELLATION POLICY !, Cancellations received on or before. November 10, -:. ' . '.1995 will be refunded.lnfull. Cancellations received: ,. _after November 10. 1995 will be 'charged,a. $50',. , cancellation fee. Minnesota NAHRO Incurs charges ,~ '. for meals, and event guarantees based. on". reglstratlon.lnformatlon, Therefor~, even If you do not att.erid, we must stili pay for yo~, , ", ' .." ',. , , . "";, 2:-.. "0''0 . ' ':0 ';;;~ Cf1 ."~8" ..~ $:' . (..). $: oC: , <: ...... -... '0 =<. "~O '*~' ~ Di' n,r--' ,,'~.~'. :-"a~:'" ,2:'< , '''"-{ .~ () 2:0 2: 2: ~ ,. ~.cti .:,"1 \j::U ,., 'Om' r- < ,; . (j) () . 'j" I,m. i. .s: ' r~' .~ 'N' I .0"'; , .1 .00',..r ,..! !.~... :rn . ~' .....: ,.. . , . '. .. i ,.... '. .! "'Nnn~ .....__rO _o--tm;:ICI ,.... -<;:lClr ,...,.. 1'i,- C"'O >>="'" I: ... m rn"'cn ,.... ::ID......... 0 o :Ezr- Z z: ... C '" ,.. '" ... o "' ... '" N ~ ... 0() ... .! "'.. "' ~~ ~~ , aD> .,,0- :;v '" S::' "O~-, ~~.Z . ~~Z ,.o~m c: :c Cf). ~cnO , ..-t --i s:~)> Zm , -t O1~Z gm )>. 8;-tI , ;;V o 'r. ," ..... gJ?:'01 :;,,; ?:ZO .c =iZ~~(3~ Zrn~O!!l'" o~c>~ .f;;....~' ~m JNrIAlliti ~ 7995 COM'.MUNITY DE"VELO,PMENT CONFERENCE ... ..- A CONFERENCE FO'R .COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, AND HOU.SING PROFESSIONALS, ELECTED AND APPO.INTED OFFICIALS THIS YEf.R FEA TURING: . TAX INCREMENT FINANCING . BUSINESS RETENTION AND EXPANSION . UNTRADITIONAL METHODS TO INCREASE HRA REVENUES , · STATE LEGISLATIVE PROSPECTIVE ON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT . SMALL CITY SUCCESS . AFFORDABLE HOUSING BARRIERS AND . LIVABLE COMMUNITIES.ACT. ' NOVEMBE~ 30, ] 995 8:0p A:M. TO 3:00 P.M. SHERATON MINNEAPOLIS METRODOME i330 INDUSTRIAL -BOULEVARQ . MINNEAP.OLlS , . 1-:' . -I~ . " ~ ... = '.::' - II ::=1= J_ I III:' lIIu~IIIi' II 11111== IliiJ'F!llll!,,' ~W:;; I , I 1 I I 1 I I I I) I il II I I I , I I CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA PROPOSED EXPANSION STUDY SEPTEMBER 29, 1995 I J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Transmittal Impact of Completed Development 1 2 3 4 9 Revenue Sources Not Dependent on Property Taxes Actual Market Values Versus Taxable Values State Aid Reductions Fund Type Analyses: A. General and Special Revenue Funds B. Debt Service Funds - Not Supported By Special Assessments C. Enterprise Funds D. Special Assessment Supported Debt Service Funds Oak Glen 12 16 17 18 19 23 24 28 29 Developer Agreements Construction Phases Connection Charges Summary and Recommendations Supplemental Schedules and Source Data Excerpts of Draft of Comp Plan Dated March 30, 1995: Section 3 - Land Use Section 11 - Fiscal Impact Tab 1 State Legislative Action Tab 2 Engineering Cost Estimates and Cost Recovery Calculations: Sanitary Sewer Water Tab 3 Cash Flow Projections - Oak Glen Debt Service: Accountants Report Summary of Significant Projection Assumptions $1,055,000 Bonds of 1994A: No Property Tax Cancellation Partial Property Tax Cancellation Transfer from Closed Debt Service $600,000 Bonds of 1984B Tab 4 Exhibit 1-A Exhibit 1-B Exhibit 1-C Exhibit 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I TAUTGES, REDPATH & CO., LTD. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater 216 N 4th St. Stillwater, MN 55082-4898 This report was requested by the City to assist in the development planning process. The most recent draft of the City's Comprehensive Plan contemplates expansion areas, primarily targeted for single family development, to the west of the existing City limits. This report discusses various aspects of the fiscal impacts associated with the proposed expansIOn. The analysis contained in this report is based on: A. The fiscal impact schedules and text included in the draft of the Comp Plan dated March 30, 1995. Section 3 and 11 of that draft are reproduced in Tab 1 of this report. B. Engineering construction estimates and proposed cost recovery as provided by SEH, see Tab 3. C. Financial statements and related schedules of the City from 1988 to 1994 and 1995 budget data as provided by the City's Finance Director. D. Parcel information from Washington County which has been imported to a geographic information system for parcel inquiry and report generation. E. Bond resolutions and assessment workpapers as related to the Oak Glen development as used in preparing cash flow schedules, see Tab 4. Our summary and recommendations is presented on pages 29 and 30. We are available to discuss the contents of this report with City staff and the City council. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to the City of Stillwater. ~~.... ~~L4? Tautges, Redpath & Co., Ltd. ' September 27, 1995 4810 White Bear Parkway . White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110 · 612/426-7000 · FAX/426-5004 · Member of HLB International I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 2 Impact of Completed Development The proposed development will impact the City in two financial areas as follows: 1. The completed development will generate property tax and other revenues. These amounts will be available to fund ongoing operating costs of the City such as public safety, public works, and other local government functions. Other revenue will also include utility rate charges for water and sewer operations. 2. The City will likely be required to finance improvements needed to attract the development. These improvements can generally be categorized as follows: a. Improvements such as streets, lateral water, and lateral sewer are construction costs which directly benefit and can be assessed against specific parcels. These type of costs will be referred to as front footage (or unit) assessable improvements throughout this report. b. Improvements such as water towers, trunk sewer, water mains, lift stations, certain storm sewer systems and other constructions costs which benefit an overall system as opposed to parcel specific improvements. These costs will be referred to as area system improvements throughout this report. The cost of area system improvements are often recovered through a combination of connection charges, special assessments and other revenue sources such as property taxes or enterprise fund user rates. It is important to distinguish between the anticipated impact of completed development on ongoing operations versus the short-term impact on financing system improvements. The draft of the Comprehensive Plan discussed the financial support of the first category above which deals with the funding of ongoing operating costs. The result of the method used in that report concluded that the City will have a "net gain" under all scenarios ranging from $1.2 million to $3.8 million per year for Alternative A-2 (which represents full development of the proposed areas totaling 1,457 acres). MS 273.111 Agricultural Property TaL I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 4 Actual Market Values versus Taxable Values The amount of taxes generated by development is based on statutory formulas applied to Estimated Market Values. These values will generally average 90% of the value used for building permit calculations. The draft of the Comp Plan addresses this difference and has based property tax projections on the lower value. We concur with this approach. The estimated construction values however have been provided by landowner and prospective developers of the proposed expansion areas. Variances in the density and average value of the development will impact the tax revenue estimates as presented in the Comp Plan. We recommend that the City monitor actual proposed developments as compared to the anticipated development of the Comp Plan. In a related matter, certain property, in accordance with current State Statutes, may qualify for Green Acre status. This status allows delayed in the collection of special assessments. The statute is as follows: Subd. 3. Real estate consisting of ten acres or more or a nurseI)' or greenhouse qualifying for classification as class lb, 2a. or 2b under section 273.13 subdivision 23, paragraph (d), shall be entitled to valuation and tax deferment under this section only if it is actively and exclusively devoted to agricultural use as defined in subdivision 6 and either (1) is the homestead of the owner, or ofa surviving spouse, child, or sibling of the owner or is real estate which is farmed with the real estate which contains the homestead property, or (2) has been in possession of the applicant, the applicant's spouse, parent, or sibling, or any combination thereof, for a period of at least seven years prior to application for benefits under the provisions of this section, or is real estate which is farmed with the real estate which qualifies under this clause and is within two townships or cities or combination thereof from the qualifying real estate, or (3) is the homestead of a shareholder in a family farm corporation as defined in Section 500.24, notwithstanding the fact that legal title to the real estate may be held in the name of the family farm corporation; or (4) is in the possession of a nurseI)' or greenhouse or an entity owned by a proprietor, partnership, or corporation which also owns the nurseI)' or greenhouse operations on the parcel or parcels. Subd. 6. Real property shall be considered to be in agricultural use provided that annually: (1) at least 33 1/3 percent of the total family income of the owner is derived therefrom, or the total production income including rental from the property is $300 plus $10 per tillable acre; and (2) it is devoted to the production for sale of agricultural products as defined in Section 273.13 subdivision 23, paragraph (e). I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 5 The proposed expansion area has a number of parcels which are classified under green acre deferment status as follows: PIN 19-030-20-41-0004 19-030-20-43-0001 19-030-20-42-0003 19-030-20-34-0003 19-030-20-33-0001 19-030-20-33-0002 30-030-20-34-0001 30-030-20-32-0003 30-030-20-31-0003 30-030-20-31-0002 31-030-20-42-0001 31-030-20-34-0001 31-030-20-31-0002 31-030-20-31-000 1 31-030-20-32-0001 31-030-20-24-0001 31-030-20-23-000 1 31-030-20-21-0001 19-030-20-44-0001 30-030-20-21-0003 Primary Owner ABRAMOWICZ HENRY J & SHARON ABRAMOWICZ HENRY J & SHARON ABRAMOWICZ HENRY J & SHARON ABRAMOWICZ HENRY J & SHARON RIVARD BURT H & JO ALICE RIVARD BERT H & JO ALICE NEWMAN REALTY LID PARlNERSID NEWMAN REALTY LID PARlNERSID NEWMAN REALTY LID PARlNERSID KROENING ROBERT H &PAULA J STALOCH JAMES E BERGMANN ALVINO & HELEN STALOCH JAMES E & CECILLO STALOCH JAMES E BERGMANN ALVINO & HELEN STALOCH CECIL ILO GAD lENT ROSALIE NEWMAN REALTY LID PARlNERSID BOWE WARREN P & JANICE M NEWMAN REALTY LID PARlNERSID We recommend that the City anticipate the potential impact of green acre deferments in the proposed development area. If core systems are construction and green acre deferments, continue ( or increase) the City will develop two potential funding shortages as follows: 1. The special assessments anticipated from the core system improvements could be delayed indefinitely. The bond payments of debt issued to fund the development will require an alternate funding source (usually City-wide property taxes). 2. The City may be required to extend services to the annexed rural areas without having sufficient property tax base gains if the project does not develop on a timely basis. Estimated new taxes to City Total revenue impact (taxes x 4) Total anticipated expenditures Net gain to City $2,603,693 $10,414,772 (6,584,994) $3,829,778 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 3 The above conclusion was based on an overview method of calculating the ratio of total City operating revenue compared to existing operating revenue. This ratio was then applied to estimated new property tax revenue of the proposed development. A number of sensitivity analysis were also included in the report. The worst case scenario was a net gain of$1.2 million. A summary of the "best case" calculation used in the draft of the Comprehensive Plan is as follows: The above schedule illustrates that 1) the proposed development will be sufficient to fund increased ongoing operating costs associated with the new development, and 2) that a "net gain" of revenue will be generated from the new development. If such a net gain is made available, then the City would have options for its use including a reduction in the property tax burden of the existing and expanded City parcels. The fiscal analysis portion of the draft of the Comp Plan concludes that "These results show that based on the kind of development envisioned for both the annexation area and infill properties, the City need not weigh fiscal impacts in pursuing its planning and policy objectives." The following section of this report provides further analysis of this conclusion. Revenue Sources Not Dependent on Property Taxes A variety of revenue items are not dependent on property tax levels or increased population. Extending anticipated property tax revenue by a ratio of total revenue may result in significantly overstated revenue projections. Additionally, statutory restrictions on uses of certain revenues prohibit general purpose use. Each fund type has dedicated purposes which should be considered individually (see Fund Type Analysis). I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 6 3. Agricultural property may result in the establishment of a rural service district which would reduce the amount of property taxes generated from the expansion area prior to development. Timing of development is an important concept to consider in planning for the fiscal support of the added property tax base. The draft of the Comp Plan has analyzed the impact of developed areas after all of the development has occurred. The transition periods could have a less favorable fiscal impact on ongoing operations. The City will need to increase personnel and equipment to service the expansion areas at a level comparable to the existing City. The increases may not always match the timing of increased property values. This situation may cause temporary "net losses" related to the proposed expansion (until adequate levels of development occur). Alternatively, the City could allow lower levels of services until the revenue base justifies adding personnel and equipment. Tax capacity Percent of total Existing City S 11,760,087 96.2% Expansion Area (A2) $ 470,467 3.8% I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I: II Ii To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 7 Washington County has provided market values and other parcel information for properties within the City as well as properties in the proposed expansion area. The current values of the areas are as follows: Market value Percent of total Existing City $751,081,000 96.0% Expansion Area (A2) $ 31,574,500 4.0% Tax Capacity Values Before Development 4% Expansion Area (A2) 96% Existing City I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 8 If development occurs as anticipated, the valuations will appear as follows after the proposed development: Tax capacity Proposed new development Projected tax capacity Percent of total Existing City $11,760,087 1,953,522 13,713,609 70.8% Expansion Area (A2) $470,467 5,189,210 5,659,677 29.2% Tax Capacity Values After Development 2~1o Area (A2) 71 % Existing City The above tables indicate that if development occurs as planned, the proposed expansion area will represent approximately 29% of the total tax capacity. The preceding analysis illustrates areas of the A-2 plan which includes a section referred to on the engineering maps as Middle Trunk A. Most of this area is currently developed and may not be included in the proposed expansion. The analysis of proposed assessments and connection charges as indicated in the "Construction Phases" of this report exclude the extension of services to Middle Trunk A and the related revenue. To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 9 The proposed residential development in the expansion area is projected to provide between 1200 and 1400 new residential units with tax capacity of between $4 and $4.7 million. This development when compared to the current Oak Glen development is significantly larger. The Oak: Glen development (as extracted from Washington County data), has 393 parcels with a total tax capacity of$1.1 million. Based on this analysis, the proposed expansion area is over three times the size of the Oak Glen development. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I State Aid Reductions Property taxes are now certified to the County on a net basis. HACA had been calculated on a formula which included a factor for the amount of taxes levied (Le., greater amounts levied generally resulted in greater HACA). As discussed in the Comp Plan, HACA is frozen and has no relation to the amount of taxes levied. Beginning in 1990, the HACA base was established. The HACA base was defined as the previous year's certified HACA aid. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II i I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 10 The current HACA formula for each unique taxing jurisdiction equals the HACA base multiplied by the growth adjustment factor, plus net tax: capacity adjustment plus fiscal disparity adjustment. This legislation is consistent with state-wide trends starting in 1990 which shifted state aids away from cities. A table and graph of this shift for the City of Stillwater is as follows: City of Stillwater, Minnesota Local Property Government Other State Year Taxes HACA Aid Aids 1987 $1,391,396 $386,858 $1,100,662 $83,606 1988 1,590,592 455,937 1,100,648 80,258 1989 1,785,875 463,998 1,287,810 147,360 1990 2,030,843 614,545 846,763 220,997 1991 2,151,990 628,153 690,211 199,170 1992 2,170,616 750,564 729,078 186,934 1993 2,253,289 828,456 692,056 250,044 1994 1,925,154 994,566 778,969 175,407 1995 - budget 2,061,845 1,005,068 807,755 141,665 $500,000 City of Stillwater Property Taxes vs State Aids $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 $0 1994 1995B IIIlIIIIIIIIIIlI HACA _ LGA ~ Other State Aids - Property Taxes I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 11 The 1994 increase in HACA primarily relates to allocation differences compared to prior years. Starting in 1994, all HACA is coded to the City's General Fund whereas in prior years, the HACA was spread to all funds which had a property tax levy. A restated graph on a basis consistent with prior years is as follows: $2,500,000 City of Stillwater $2,500,000 Property Taxes vs State Aids $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $500;000 $500,000 $0 1987 1993 $0 1994 1995B 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1_ HACA - LOA - Other State Aids -- Property Taxes I A continuation of the trend which started in 1990 will result in lower levels of state aid for the City of Stillwater. Such reductions have occurred more drastically in other Metro cities. While the draft of the Comp Plan addresses the further State Aid Reduction, it is difficult to predict the timing and volume of future aid reductions. The general trend to shift the funding of City services to property taxes points to advantages related to an increased property tax base. A summary of legislation impacting city finances is presented in Appendix A Tab 2, of this report. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I I I I, I I I I I ,I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 12 Fund Tvpe Analvses Operating functions are segregated into special fund types because they are not related to property tax funding levels and/or they are intended to be measured separately for other 'purposes. Extending revenue on a City-wide basis will result in global conclusions that may not be supported by a segmented analysis. We recommend that the following funds to be considered separately: A. General and Special Revenue Funds - These funds commonly account for ongoing expenditures such as general government, public works, public safety, culture and recreation. These areas represent most of the ongoing, salary intense operations of the City and are usually supported significantly by property taxes. The general and special revenue funds of the City of Stillwater have been funded by the following: General and Special Revenue Funds Property State Other Year Taxes Aid Revenue Total 1990 $2,031,353 $1,682,305 $889,628 $4,603,286 1991 2,152,150 1,517,534 1,459,703 5,129,387 1992 2,170,663 1,666,576 1,241,501 5,078,740 1993 2,253,287 1,770,556 1,362,386 5,386,229 1994 1,925,171 1,948,942 1,234,105 5,108,218 1995 Budget 2,061,845 1,954,488 1,120,152 5,136,485 $500,000 B1PropcrtyTucs . Stale Aid [] Olber Revcnuc I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 13 $2,500,000 General & Special Revenue Funds $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $- 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 - Budget The above table and graph illustrate the funding sources of ongoing operations over the past several years. Expanding the property valuation base of the City through development will most directly and favorably impact the general and special revenue funds based on the following: . Quality increases in development will likely pay its share of incremented expenditures. Efficiencies in fixed costs result in some lowering of per capita expenses, however, this savings must be measured in conjunction with increased expenditures to meet increased service demands. I I I I I I I I I I I I i I i I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 14 . Representative Minnesota cities with increasing population and a similar mix of commerciaVindividuaVresidential development may provide greater insights into revenue and expenditure bases. The level of services must also be comparable to make these comparisons valid. The City of Woodbury is the fastest growing suburb in the Metro area. The Cities of Oak dale, Cottage Grove and Forest Lake are growing Washington County Cities. Increased development of these four cities has not drastically decreased or increased per capita property taxes related to funding General and Special Revenue Fund operations from 1990 to 1994 as follows: General and Special Revenue Funds City of Woodbury Per Capita Year Population Revenue Taxes Expenditures 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 20,075 21,200 23,700 23,700 26,900 $320 336 345 382 384 $175 178 157 173 166 $286 264 281 349 348 General and Special Revenue Funds City of Oakdale Per Capita Year Population Revenue Taxes Expenditures 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 18,126 19,735 20,574 22,192 22,933 $239 216 237 232 239 $76 73 78 81 80 $194 189 200 210 217 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I II I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 15 General and Special Revenue Funds City of Cottage Grove Per Capita Year Population Revenue Taxes Expenditures 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 $301 292 308 318 287 $290 303 292 326 305 $122 122 123 126 122 22,935 23,715 24,765 25,500 28,019 General and Special Revenue Funds City of Forest Lake Per Capita Year Population Revenue Taxes Expenditures 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 $294 283 311 304 290 $127 134 132 126 123 $286 276 278 306 347 5,833 6,007 6,098 6,242 6,397 The above examples indicate that per-capita taxes remain relatively constant even during periods of increased development. The above tables may be compared to the City of Stillwater over the same period as follows: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 16 B. Debt Service Funds - Not suooort bv Soecial Assessments. These funds commonly are established to pay the debt service of projects which benefit the City as a whole (ex: City Hall expansion, Park acquisition, etc.). This type of debt service fund is typically property tax levy supported. Projects funded by such general obligation debt are approved individually and independent of population growth. An increased tax capacity base will however reduce the overall tax rate impact of debt associated with these types offuture projects. The draft of the Comp Plan concludes that "based on the kind of development envisioned for both the annexation area and infill properties, the City need not weigh fiscal impacts in pursuing its planning and policy objectives. " We agree with this conclusion as it relates to ongoing operations. The per capita property taxes for ongoing operations tends to remain constant based on comparisons of other growing cities in the previous section. This is a favorable indicator because inflation would normally increase the per capita amounts. We caution, however, with respect to the costs associated with core systems needed to support the new development (see special assessment supported debt service funds). The expansion of systems may create pressure to increase user rates particularly water and sewer rates to subsidize the core system improvements required for the development area. The funding source of these core system improvements has not been finalized. The City's consulting Engineer has typically recommended cost recovery plans for such core system improvements (see later section). I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ii I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 17 C. Enterprise Funds - Are funds established to account for operations which are funded primarily by user rates. The City of Stillwater currently does not set rates at levels sufficient to generate profits which would be available for other City purposes in the form of transfers out. This is not an uncommon practice. Increased development should not be relied upon to generate excess profits if the rate philosophy of the City continues as it has in the past. A comparison of rates with other Metro Cities is as follows: Residential Quarterly Billing Based on 22,000 Gallons of Usage Effective City Water Sewer Total Year Arden Hills $45.98 $53.95 $99.93 1995 Bloomington 34.10 19.40 53.50 1995 Coon Rapids 21.56 35.00 56.56 1995 Cottage Grove 27.60 43.12 70.72 1995 Eagan 30.00 41.20 71.20 1995 Inver Grove Heights 39.90 45.40 85.30 1995 Little Canada 37.62 47.30 84.92 1995 Mahtomedi 35.29 68.24 103.53 1995 Maplewood 37.06 41.65 78.71 1995 Minnetonka 22.00 33.00 55.00 1995 Mounds View 26.40 44.00 70.40 1995 New Brighton 16.28 42.90 59.18 1995 Oakdale 26.20 55.48 81.68 1995 Shoreview 22.82 37.51 60.33 1995 South St. Paul 14.96 59.62 74.58 1995 St. Paul 37.06 64.99 102.05 1995 Stillwater 27.50 64.20 91.70 1995 Vadnais Heights 23.76 42.00 65.76 1995 White Bear Lake 25.20 52.20 77 .40 1995 Woodbury 16.40 44.49 60.89 1995 I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 18 I I I I D. Special Assessment Supported Debt Service Funds - These debt funds are established to collect special assessments from benefiting property owners in project areas. Such assessments are planned to be available to pay the debt service of bonds issued to finance the project. Anticipated cash flows are scheduled at the time of issuance of the bonds. Differences can, and usually do, occur based on future events such as a) delinquent special assessments, b) prepayment of assessment which are invested at interest rates other than the special assessment rate, c) other anticipated collection of revenue occurs at a different pace than expected. I I When such differences occur, the City may experience favorable or unfavorable variances which impact the City as a whole. An evaluation chart of the status of debt service funds is as follows: I I I Condition A Condition B Fund balance plus deferred revenue is less than bonds payable. Questions I Cautions 1. Are sufficent future assets scheduled (such as property taxes) to meet bonded debt payments? 2. Are cash assets sufficient to generate investment earnings? 3. Are transfers or other funding sources available? 4. Are there future assets to pledge such as assessments, MSA allot- ments etc.? I I I 1. Is the city experiencing favorable collection rates for special assess- ments? 2. Are anticipated investment interest rates earned on prepayments ade- quate to replace assessment interest? 3. Is the timing of receipts sufficient to meet bonded debt payments as they become due? 4. Are significant portions of assess- ments not scheduled for collection (green acres, tax forfeit,etc.)? 5. Is arbitrage or negative arbitrage an issue? II I I I I The debt service fund is clearly adequately funded. Plan for eventual use of surplus. The debt service fund is clearly not adequately funded. Plan for alter- native funding (taxes, transfers other sources . Variables and possible outcomes are too diverse. Prepare projections to analyze possible scenarios and 0 tions. Conclusion 1 Conclusion 2 Conclusion 3 Other important findings: New development pays for itself in terms of infrastructure (new streets, sewer, water lines). The only cost to the City relates to contributing to the upgrade of existing deficient streets and providing a new park and trails. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 19 The draft of the Comp Plan refers to infrastructure related to new development as follows: We recommend the above conclusion be revisited and that the City proceed cautiously in ordering core system improvements. Some development does not pay for its entire infrastructure costs on a timely basis and in some cases not fully. When this condition exists, the City's general tax base may be relied upon to pay for the development in the form of increased property taxes to, both new and existing property owners. If the area system improvements required in the development area will be paid by developers in cash and in advance of proceeding with the construction, then the City eliminates the risk associated with financing the development. If, on the other hand, area system improvements will be ordered with some uncertainty regarding the amount and timeliness of revenue collection, then the City should consider the risks associated with ordering area-wide improvements. The City has had a significant development project fail to meet the anticipated timing for collection of special assessment and other related revenues. Oak Glen The Oak Glen development was financed by the Improvement Bonds of 1984. That bond issue was structured based on developer commitments and anticipated assessment revenue. The anticipated cash flow schedule was not met based on: 1. Slower pace of development then anticipated. 2. Delinquent and tax forfeit assessments. 3. Failed developer guarantees. 4. Prepayments of assessments which could not be reinvested at rates comparable to the special assessment rates. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 20 Although the City successfully resolved the temporary funding shortfalls associated with the Oak Glen development, the City devoted significant administrative efforts including the following: a. Identifying the revenue shortfall. b. Pursuing all available collection alternatives. c. Special state legislature to allow for reassessment of project costs. d. Issuing a 1994 financing bond issue designed to lower interest costs and establish general property tax support of the restructured debt. These scheduled property tax levies total $1.4 million. The City's efforts to overcome the difficulties associated with the Oak Glen project are commendable. The City has a financing plan in place to assure timely payment of scheduled debt and to minimize the general property tax burden on the City. Exhibits lA to lC present anticipated cash flows of the $1,055,000 Improvement bond of 1994 A 1994 as follows: Schedule I-A - A cash surplus is anticipated if all schedule property taxes are levied starting with collection year 1997. Schedule IB - The scheduled property taxes may be partially canceled (approximately 50%) and the fund would continue to have sufficient cash to meet debt obligations. Exhibit lC - The $600,000 Bonds of 1984-B are projected to have a surplus available of $350,000 at December 31, 1995. (see Exhibit 2) This amount may be used at the discretion of the City Council. Two options include the following: a) transfer the remaining balance to the 1994A Bonds to further reduce required property taxes as presented in Exhibit 1 C b) use the remaining balance to pay for core system improvements of the proposed expansion area. Oak: Glen 9.3% I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 21 The Oak Glen scheduled property tax levies are spread to all properties within the City. This type of property tax requirement occurs when development does not "pay for itself' through special assessments, connection charges and other revenue sources on a timely basis. The amount of property taxes actually required is uncertain at this time and the City has canceled the 1995 and 1996 levies. Any property taxes required after 1996 (for a project which began in 1981) will, however, be spread on an expanded property tax base. The net impact of property taxes needed to pay for the debt associated with those improvements will be spread on the following valuation: Oak Glen Rest of City Total Market Values Amount Percent $65,072,100 8.7% 678,885,400 90.4% 751,081,000 100.0% Oak Glen Rest of City Total Tax Capacity Values Amount Percent $1,092,107 9.3% 10,667,980 90.7% 11,760,087 100.0% Tax Capacity Values Rest of City 90.7% I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 22 The amount of proposed property tax levies average $137,000 (before partial cancellations). This levy represents approximately 5% of the total 1994 collectible property tax levy. Because Oak Glen represents 9.3% of the total tax capacity value of the City, the added property tax levies required to pay for the Oak Glen improvements do not increase the property tax burden of other City parcels. The City's ability to delay required property tax levies until development is substantially complete should not be relied upon for all such developments. If property taxes are required prior to sufficient increases in tax capacity values, then the remaining City property owners may bear the cost of improvements (which do not directly benefit them) through increased property taxes. It is an acceptable policy to use property taxes to fund core system improvements. Many cities use this funding source because they have determined that the added development benefits the entire City or that the timely availability of adequate revenue from the development area is uncertain. When there is uncertainty as to the timing of revenue sources, bond resolutions often include scheduled property tax levies to assure timely availability of resources to make debt service payments. These scheduled levies may be canceled in whole or in part annually as revenue is collected. The connection charge revenue source is commonly measured and included in the financing plan for the bonds as scheduled property tax levies. If connections are made and the resulting revenue used for debt service, then the scheduled property taxes may be canceled. If the City's intent is to have development "pay for itself', then that goal may not be achieved if development does not occur on a schedule consistent with scheduled debt service payments. 1) The cost of enforcement may not be justified. Oak Glen had developer guarantees which ultimately did little to enforce collection. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 23 Developer A2reements The City may reduce the risk associated with expanding core systems by negotiating guarantees from developers. This approach has the advantage of increasing the collection options available if charges for construction are not received as agreed. Developer guarantees are not always effective because: 2) Guarantees increase the project costs in the form of up-front legal fees and more importantly, the bonds may not meet the public purpose requirement for tax exempt rates. This increases the interest cost of the project. Alternatives to developer guarantees include: · A thorough study of the value of the improved property. If the improved property value significantly exceeds the cost of City improvements, the City improves the likelihood of full collection. Do not allocate assessments to unbuildable or undesirable parcels if the assessments will exceed the tax forfeit net proceeds. · Phased development reduces the financial exposure of the City if development does not occur as planned. Often the reasons for delayed development are outside of the direct control of the developer and the City (such as increases in interest rates which discourages new home buying). . Shift the greater construction project responsibility to developers. I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 24 Construction Phases The City has core system improvement estimates as provided by SEH. These cost summaries are presented in Tab 3. The improvement areas require a progression of improvements to accommodate the physical proximity of the proposed improvement areas. For example Middle Trunk B could not be completed until Middle Trunk A is completed because "A:' extends mains to the "B" starting point. This only becomes an important consideration if areas which do not currently abut existing systems are considered preferred development areas because "prerequisite" systems must first be constructed. Based on discussion with SEH, the following phases should be considered for core system improvements: Storm Sanitary Sewa-* Sewer Easements Watermain Sub-total $4,800/acrc Total Phase 1 South Trunk A $ 587,970 $ - $ 128,740 $ 716,710 $ 748,320 $ 1,465.030 Phase 1 South Trunk B 780,000 57,750 276,260 1,114,010 1,510,560 2,624,570 Middle Trunk A 330,000 98,200 428,200 428,200 Total- Phase 2 1,110,000 155.950 276,260 1,542,210 1.510,560 3,052,770 Phase 3 Middle Trunk B 300,000 90,800 360,000 750,800 442,224 1,193,024 Phase 4 Middle Trunk A .* 200,000 200,000 200,000 Phaae 5 North Trunk 430,000 50.000 305,000 785,000 404.064 1,189.064 C.R. 15 Loop 435,000 435,000 435,000 Sourcc &. Storage 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 Total- Phase 5 430,000 50,000 2,240,000 2,720,000 404,064 3,124,064 Totals $ 2,427,970 $ 296,750 $ 3,205,000 $ 5,929,720 $ 3,105,168 $ 9,034,888 Costa per developed acre $ 3,753 $ 459 $ 4,954 $ 9,166 $ 4.800 $ 13,966 Costs per developed acre - excluding Source &. Storage $ 3,753 $ 459 $ 2,636 $ 6,848 $ 4.800 $ 10,975 · Engineer catimatcs Storm Water improvements between $4,100 and $5,500 per acre. .. Mav not be required ifC.R 15 Loop is comDleted. 1. Area-wide assessments to residential and commerciaVindustrial benefited properties. 2. Sewer Oversizing Charges (SOC) at the same rate that is currently charged within the Oak Glen Development ($527.32 per connection, increased annually by inflation). 3. Source and Storage costs from the operations of the Water Enterprise Fund. The Board of Water has suggested in a memo dated September 7, 1995 that the Water Availability Charge (WAC) would be increased to approximately $400 for connection within the expansion area. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I II To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 2S Cost recovery charges have been proposed by SEH through a combination of the following: I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 26 If the City elects to phase the core system projects, the following phases may be considered: I I I Pbasc 1 Pbasc 2 Pbasc 3 Pbasc 4 Pbasc S Totals Total estimated construction Colts $ 1,46S,030 3,OS2, 770 1,193.024 200,000 $3,124.064 $9,034,888 Less: Water Source & Storage (l.SOO,OOO) (I,SOO.ooo) Commercial charges to 70 acres: Sanitary Sewer $ 6.079 (39S,142) (30,396) (42S,S37) Watcrmain $ 2,636 ' (171,314) (13,178) (184,492) Storm Water $ 4,800 (312,000) (24,000) (336,000) Net cost to residential wits S86.S7S 2,98S,197 1.193,024 200.000 1.624,064 6,S88,8S9 Planned residential Units 60 610 300 300 1,270 Corc system costs per wit 9,Tl6 4,894 3/J17 S,414 S,188 Improved residential acres 91 310 92 84 STl Corc systan costs per devcloped acrc 6,4S3 9,639 12,949 19,293 11,421 Residential units per developed aac 0.66 1.97 3.26 3.S6 2.20 Prclim inary proposed cost recovery: Commercial $ 878,4S6 $ 67,S74 $ $ $ $946,029 Residential assessment. 937,903 3,19S,47S 9S0,S9S 0 868,S67 S,9S2,S40 Sewer Oversize Chargc.. 31,639 321,66S IS8,196 0 IS8,196 669,696 Total $1,847,998 $3,S84,714 $1,108,791 $ $1,026.763 $7,S68,26S Estimated COIIStruction over (under) proposed cost recovery $382,968 $S31.944 ($84,233 ) ($200,000) ($S97,30 1) $33.377 Cummulativc surplus (deficit) 382.968 914,912 830,679 630.679 33.377 33,3Tl I I I I I I I I · Residential preliminary proposed assessment: Per Per Residential Acrc Un it (2.2 per aac) 2,882 1,309 2,636 1,197 4,800 2,180 $ 10,318 $ 4,687 Sewer Water il I I Storm Total .. Sewer Oversize Chargc (SaC) of $S27.32 per wit I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 27 The above phases will allow the City to maintain positive revenue streams (in excess of construction costs) if revenue is charged and collected on a timely basis. The primary advantage of phasing is to reduce the City's risk of incurring significant core system construction costs without timely collection of matching revenue from development. I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I The Storm Water improvement costs were estimated on an overview basis by SEH. The estimated range is $4,100 to $5,500. The preceding schedules reflect the mid-point of $4,800. The cost could vary significantly because of environmental issues. We recommend that the City pursue improved information regarding the storm water costs and other costs associated with potential environmental issues prior to ordering improvements. Storm water improvements may be partially funded with a utility billing rate charged to all City residents or to residents in the expansion areas of the City. The storm water utility charge may be segregated to a separate fund for ongoing costs and improvements to the City's systems. The City established a Storm Water Enterprise Fund in 1994. The rates have not been established, however, the rate system is anticipated to charge residential properties a flat quarterly charge and commerciaVindustrial projection based on acreage and impervious surface. The City may consider establishing a dual rate structure for the expansion area to recover a greater share from the area which will require new core storm water systems. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 28 Connection Char2es The City currently charges fees for construction of new facilities within the City. These fees are collected upon issuance of the building pennit. A comparison of fees charges by the City of Stillwater is as follows: Water Sewer Connection Connection Total City Fee Fee Fees Bayport $450 $400 $850 Cottage Grove 585 195 780 Forest Lake (a) (a) 800 Lake Elmo 265 N/A 265 Mahtomedi 880 300 1,180 Oak Park Heights (b) (b) 1,485 to 2,700 Oakdale 500 400 900 Stillwater - Oak Glen 250 (c) 627 (d) 877 Stillwater - Other 250 100 350 Woodbury 515 250-485 (e) 765 to 1,000 (a) - Forest Lake has a street opening fee of $750, plus a $25 connection fee for sewer and water (b) - Oak Park Heights has a combined connection fee ranging from $1,485 to $ 2,700 on newer developments. (c) - Stillwater water connectionalso requires water meter purchase of $225 (d) - Stillwater sewer connection includes S.O.C. charge of $527.32 in Oak Glen (e) - Woodbury's sewer connection fees vary by district The above comparison table suggests that the City is currently very competitive with other Washington County cities with respect to connection charges. The City may wish to review connection charge policies and rates to determine if changes are needed 1) to establish a reserve for future expansion or replacement of core system improvements, and 2) to cover the cost of the current proposed expansion with a rate structure unique to the proposed expansion area. Additionally, the City may consider a storm water connection charge which would be collectible upon permit issuance similar to the current water and sewer connection charges. The City of Cottage Grove currently charges a per square foot storm water connection fee to various areas of the City. Page 1. Be clear on the distinction between funding ongoing operating costs 1-3 associated with new development and the cost associated with core system improvements necessary to attract new development. 2. Monitor proposed developments to determine if they meet the 4 valuation and density expectations as planned in the draft of the Comp Plan. If they vary, measure the probable fiscal impact of the differences. 3. Anticipate the potential adverse impact of green acre deferments on 4-6 anticipated revenue assumptions. 4. Anticipate the transition periods prior to achieving full development. 6 During transition periods, the increase in ongoing operating costs may exceed revenue from new development. 5. An increased tax base will likely allow the City to control tax rate 9-15 increments as the state shifts a greater share of City funding away from state aids. 6. Based on comparative analysis with other Cities, quality development 14-15 will pay its share of incremental increases in ongoing operating costs. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 29 Charging unique connection charges to various areas of the City requires adequate underlying systems to assure that the correct charges are assessed at the time that the building permit is issued. If the City expands the use of unique charges for specific districts, we recommend that the system of flagging properties subject to unique conne~tion charges be reviewed. Summarv and Recommendations We recommend the City consider the following prior to proceeding with development of the proposed expansion areas: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater Page 30 7. The City incurs risk in financing the cost of core system improvements. If timely collection of dedicated revenue fails, the City may be required to raise general property tax: levies (or provide other funding sources) to meet debt service requirements. 8. To control the risk associated with financing core system improvements, consider phasing the proposed development. Consider the financial obligation of the related debt service and the potential general property tax: burden if connections are delayed in determining the size and timing of the various phases. 9. Storm water improvements may have environmental complications and increased costs inside the proposed expansion area. Consider resolving these issues prior to proceeding with the proposed development. 10. Consider changes to connection charge rates for both the existing City and the proposed expansion area and review underlying systems to flag unique charges for specific districts within the City. 11. Consider establishing a storm water connection charge in conjunction with the utility charge to fund all or a portion of the operating and improvement costs of storm water systems. 18-22 24-27 27 28-29 28 C" ~~ City of Stillwater Comprehensive Plan I I I I ,I I I I I I I I I I I I' 'I' I I " I I March 30. 1995 80's saw the development of the Oak Glen neighborhood smaller in terms of number of housing units, 450, but larger in terms of land area. So far the 90's has seen the subdivision of the last large vacant site located in the City of Stillwater, the Benson Farm, and the development of a 200-lot subdivision for first time homeowners. Major residential developments since the 70's have provided for small lots (Highlands), medium sized lots (Croixwood) and large lots (Oak Glen) for single family housing. Multifamily and attached single family housing, along CR 5, has been constructed in the Cottages Planned Unit Development, 240 multifamily units (60 assisted), in the Brick Pond planning area, 74 attached duplex single family units and Oak Glen 60 townhouse units. Land Use Introduction Stillwater's land use patterns is well established and is unlikely to change significantly. This chapter examines past city growth and development and provides direction for future growth for the next 25 years to 2020 by defining land use categories and mapping changes in land uses in the existing city and in the Urban Rural Transition Planning Area (URTPA). The key goals for this chapter are: 1. Maintain Stillwater as a separate and distinct community distinct from the surrounding area. 2. Create new interesting quality designed neighborhoods that related to their natural settings and surroundings, developed areas, protect natural resources, provide central parks and open spaces and are interconnected by trails to neighborhood and community destinations. 3. A greenbelt shall be established around the ultimate Stillwater planning area to separate suburban and urban development from semi- rural and rural Washington County areas" Past Growth Growth and how growth is regulated and phased is a central issue for this comprehensive plan. Over the past 20 years, Stillwater has grown at a moderate rate, 20 percent. The 70's saw the e'de've!o'pn'lei{t bf "the' Croixwood'" neighborhood containing 800 single family housing units. The , ....... ~ . . ~ .' -. '":';" .. . '. 3-F City of Stillwater population growth from residential development since 1970 has been steady but less than the population growth rate experienced in Washington County or the immediate greater Stillwater area. For the 1970 to 1990 period Stillwater grew from a population of 10,196 to 13,882 or 36 percent. The Greater Stillwater Planning Area (Oak Park Heights, Bayport, Lake Elmo, Bayport, Stillwater, Grant and West Lakeland Townships) during that same period grew from 12,073 to 21,108"or 75 percent and Washington County matched the greater Stillwater growth rate growing from 83,003 to 145,896 or 76 percent for the 20-year period. Past growth rates for Stillwater, the Greater Stillwater Planning Area and Washington County are shown on Table 1 and Chart 1.' Existing Land Use .,", '.,' . . The City of Stillwater planning area contains ( c City of Stillwater Population Gro~h . 1970 - 1993 '6000 . .ocoo --- --- --- _--:;.100--- --- ---- -- '2"..00 -- --- I _- -- ,??oo - - I 1 1000 I ! : 1000 .ocoo 2000 o \170 lNO '1'lO Vo.- 25000 Stillwater Planning Impact Area Population Growth 1970. 1993 20000 -----.. ------ ---- -- -- -- -- -- ~".".",.. -- - : -- -- I 1??oo ; I .~ ~. o . "70 'NO .uo '"3 Vo.- 1 County Population Growth 1970.1993 200000 -=----- -- -- -- -- -- -- . -- l __- : 10??oo --~~ " . ;'11' . :. .... "-:;:'-'-' ....,:..... .... -- --- --- ,soooo -------_.. ,':'" ..... .......,... ....._ '0" .. ,', . .,.... '-. ";. ~'.' .. , soooo .~____.___n__ -..-___._______._.._ .\ . .... ;:. . . ....... ..' .. :~.~., -. _:. ':.." : -.' '-: '.. :" . - .:. '.~ " -.......... .' .. .....,.. ~ . Q - <- -.. .------- -- -.-. ------. ------ -- - --.---.-- --------_. -. '- '"3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I .. .........1. I .,...,., ..' - - - .. .. - .. ...} - - .. .. - .. - - - Table ;:: ',--. . .' 1970 - 1993 Population Growth . , City of Stillwater, Greater Stillwater Planni g Ivea and v i/ashin~on Cou nty -- 1970-1980 1980-1990 1970-1990 1993 Population 1970 Number Percent 1980 Number Population 1990 Number Population Number Population _ P~pula~~ Increase Increase Population Increase Increase Population Increase Increase Increase Increase 1 -.--.-.- , '- . City of Stillwater 10,196 2,094 20.1% 12,290 1,592 12.9% 13,882 3,868 36.1% 15,001 8.1% .'--:::::-:-: 1,238 1.353 110% 2.591 895 35% 3,486 3.701 ' Oak Park Heights I I -::'----.- 2,987 55 l! .8%) 2,932 268 9.1% 3,200 3,195 Bayport ' ~:- 3,542 1.754 50% 5,296 607 11.5% 5,903 6,057 I Lake Elmo , : Baytown ., 723 128 17.7% 851 88 10.3% 939 1,045 ] - Stillwater Township 1.014 585 57.7% 1,599 467 29.2% 2,066 2,339 i '. 1.797 1.286 71.6% 3.083 695 22.5% 3,778 3,951 . GrantTownsbip West Lakelan(J Township 772 546 70.1% 1.318 418 31.7% 1,736 2,206 -_...... _..- -~-- ..,.... ----.-...... ---_._-- -...-.. --- --...-- ---.. "'.-- .--.--- -.- -----. , . Stillwater"Planning Impact Area ... ..-- -. -.-....---- ------ -'-i2,073--- =_ s~59'f-._~:~ '4-6.4%- 17,676 2ITos' --- f.....---::--- ....- -.- 1---_.' - '. ~EX<~.UDINC:;CrfYo'FsfTCLWATER)- 3,438 19.5% "9~6~ 75% 22,494 6.5% \;;.. . ~ . , .' '., Washington c.ounty 83,003 30.568 36.8% 113,571 32,325 28.5% 145,896 62,893 75.8% 163.500 12% I .,~. I '. Source:197a, 1980, 1990 Census J .. :~ ,. .,-: ( 5.544 acres, 3,649 acres in the C1ty of Stillwater and 1.895 acres outside Stillwater in the URTPA. The URTPA is generally the lands west of the current city boundary to CR 15, Manning Avenue. The existing land use Map A shows existing land use for the city and URTPA planning areas. Table 2 on the following page shows existing land use figures for the existing city and for the URTPA outside the city. Table 3 shows City of Stillwater land use by percentage as compared with a typical city Stillwater's size. Table 3 Existing Land Use Percent Typical ~ Stillwater 6 1 Industrial Public (parks, churches, schools, Ci.Vicbuildings) Community gOn'msrcial Residential' '" .. Vacant " .... ....., Streets &HighWays Total' . 14 .3 32 26 12. 100 28 6 39 8 1B. 100 As can be seen from the table, Stillwater does not have a typical land use distribution. Stillwater has much less industrial and vacant land then the typical city, twice as much public and community commercial lands, more residential then typical and about the same street and road right of way by percentage. These land use proportions are reflected in the character of the community. Stillwater has more than its share of public lands. This reflects Stillwater's role as the central city for the surrounding greater Stillwater area. The Washington County Government Center, area churches, schools, and city and school district offices are located in Stillwater. City '. neighborhood 'ari.d cOl'ilmuhity-patks ate 'also in this category. ( I I Stillwater has twice as much commercial land proportionately to the typical city. Stillwater I has a strong tourist industry and is the retail center for the surrounding area. The streets and highways category is similar' and the vacant land I amount is 8 percent of total land in Stillwater as -Compared to 25 percent for a typical city. I acres of City ofl 1995.. Table 41 Vacant Acreage by Zoning c;lassification ~. '."., .~:._~/~. Percent 33% 12% I I I I I I I I, II I II -I As of January 1995, there were 223 vacant developable land within the Stillwater as shown in Table 4. Zoning Classification .~ RA Single Family . 741 RB Duplex,Residential .' ......28 ~~i~ultifafIlilr.M~lt;fftiifri3 RCH Multifamily High>..:"....:;:' . Density. .<:.' . " "';>,>';0 CBD' CentraLBusiness~Distiict"O:' . . :. : ':. . '. ...... ~.~.' .': " ,:'-~' . ~ . BP-C BusinessPark ".~-;:;-."~.,, .........;.... Commerciat .... '. <':.'.:'.:'::-50 BP-I Business,Parl<Ind\istrial "~:602 BP-O Business parkOffice ' . 73 PA Public Administration Office 1 223 1% 0% 0%:' 23% 27% 3% ~ 100% This amount of land could accommodate 370 residential units at existing zoning densities as shown below. (Table 5). DUI Table 5 Acreage AC I2U ~ 74 2.88 210 57 28 4.99 140 38 Residential Zoning RA Single Family RB Duplex Residential RCM Multifamily Medium. Density 3. 5.63 '20 '.2 110 acres in this zoning district is anticipated for a neighborhood park. 1The City of Stillwater owns 8 acres of.la~ld in this zone. distdct for a new armory. _' . "'3The 'City'of Stiihvater owns '7' ~cres of land j'n'B}li zonihg district fo(--a co~murllty tacllity. " . ...- ~--~~-~-~~----~~~-- Table 2 STUDY AREA EXISTING LAND USE -----.. . . I~ Parks/ Residential Commercial Public Open Space Streets Vacant Total City of Stillwater 1493 40% 232 6% 767 21% 668 18% 668 18% 223 8% 3649 100% Outside City 686 36% 7 1% 69 4% 326 17% 76 4% 731 38% 1895 100% ~ , Total Stq.dy Area :::' 2179' ;';""39'Yc 239''1;!:,.'4'Yc'; a35,;i:":';-'6~;:; ~,()'Q5~1~~Q%~~ 744'<';i!;~13'CYc'; 454:)~':!"i?t8%; 5 5,~4~ '100% '.~ < ," i;.Ji',;}~ . . 0"., l;:~ ~. ,", O,! · ..t:;1::<'\, oj :' .'; ~~:>jIS.:~.,..~;, . 0,. '.. . ... ~~ .... t', " ..... ..'... ,~. ~. .. '''' ..~::'~;.l~~:;~:.,~:.i.:..: ......: ,,';"'~'.f("~~'" :'.\"'1>-.;1..:_ ...... .~.,J....~..........~..._..'"' ......,. ': ...~;:.: '. :.,...:i..I":'. ...~~.N .- .'" .~. .. ',.',.j .~, ", . ',..,. . -. . "-. .... I') " , ;' Source: ~ity of Stillwater GIS parcel information adjusted for 1995 growth. ( Avenue, on the south by Highway 212/36." "This would be sufficient lanq to accommodate a potential future population of between 20,000 and 25,000 persons which is the desire maximum population consistent with city growth and development policy." "Annexation should be staged in accordance with logical extension of sanitary sewer service; this would call for annexation of land to the nonhwest (nonh of County State Aid Road No. 12) between 1979 and 1985 with land to the southwest (vicinity of Long Lake) to be annexed between 1985 and 1990. Growth should be staged in accordance with housing demand, logical and gradual extension of sanitary sewer and other city services and in accordance with the long-range capital improvement program and budget. A major concern should be to allow growth only at the rate compatible with the city's ability to properly finance the required public improvements and services." Development Potential There are 998 acres of vacant land in the City of Stillwater and the URTPA acres combined. Of that amount, 188 acres is designated commercial and 810 designated residential. Figure 8 shows the vacant commercial and residential acreage for the existing city and URTPA. In Stiliwater:,Vacant:,Land/";H,:<::'Figure 8 ~!~'.~;~r~~i~~WI;1if';~'~~\i,. . n "'d" "';;'1' ,J'~'\(''''r'''( ..-"'.,,. "105"'" '-' .l\..eSl . ent;Ii:U . '';/;^!;/;'Yl.~::I')/.l;;.; ;' -' ,': . ;:~ .: .. Commeroal:'" ',f.:; .!....~:;.:~::,;;i. .,~ 118 "{:" "'/t ;;.'-:., ~ URTPA Residential Commercial , To"t<il ' 705 ..1Jl '9'98 ." .. ." ..... I ( The potential for residential construction for the I existing city and URTPA is shown below at a 75 and 100 percent build out rate. (Figure 9) Figure 9 I I I I I A total of 764 housing units could be constructed in the existing city and 1,180 in the I URTPA. Residentia(VacantLand~,:~ . '~::.New Housing Units , ,;,". ,.~.::'::;;}:'}":- ~ '}';;::\~;:;:;g:,.',: :":URTP.A";' s~i~~i~Ti";l~~!~~'KNI:3~5~;!~~ SmaIl Lot..., '. ...,$,1", 605 ' M~~~1~1,~;'tl!~gi~;i,'ri90;i'X[... 1(.otal, . -:'''.' ..",,,,<; ...,;,.,.'..76A~f~t>.:+,,, 1180, ."'.:, . '''., . . '~,;. . :.:,~'~: ::. .~J"_" .... ':~,:~.. :.>:,'}./t.!y\~~.Ei~'!f!::~:<,. ", '.:',~ :'t!::.: . I Figure 10 shows the population resulting from I housing unit growth assuming an average of 2.65 persons per dwelling unit. (Metropolitan I Council) Experience has shown that build out (every vacant acre of land fully built upon to the maximum allowed based on zoning) is unlikely. I ! It is more likely 75 percent of the land will be utilized. At a 75 percent build out, 1,45811 housing units would be constructed housing a . population of 3,863 or a total Stillwater population of just under 19,300. A 100 percent I i build out would result in as, 151 population increase and a Stillwater population of 20,600. I , ~~gur~.1.,I,.~o~p:u~~s ,..~h~,?,ui.l.~., o,~~. ..y~.i~g 'pas.~n residential growth rates and met council II forecasts. Based on the available land, historical . .' -. " .' .... -' .. ~. . ". .~ '11 3-4 I I I I I 1\ I I I I I I I I I I I ,I i I ;1 I (' " ';:-.1 05 ," )::c;';37cr:TOO%' To put this amount of vacant land and residential development capacity into perspective with recent residential development trends grovvth for the past 5,10 and metropolitan council hou'sing unit forecast growth rates are shown. Depending on growth rate Stillwater has 3.7 to 2.4 years of growth capacity remaining in the city boundary depending on actual rate of housing construction. It is unlikely that all vacant residential development sites will be developed so the number. of years of development remaining is likely to be less then those described above. Urban Rural Transition Planning Area Growth The URTPA is comprised of 1895 acres of land. Existing land use for the URTPA is shown by land use category below: ". ...:..... Planning for city expansion in, the URTPA began :. ~. ". C in the 1980 City of Stillwater Comprehensive Plan. In the plan, TH 36 (south), CR 15, Manning Avenue (west), and TH 96, Dellwood Road (north) were described as the future growth area boundaries for the City of Stillwater. Policies in the current Stillwater City and Stillwater Township Comprehensive Plans recognize the future development of the planning area. Public facility improvements (roads, sewer and water) have been sized and constructed participating the future development of the area. Stillwater Township Comprehensive Plan Polices state: The Stillwater Township Comprehensive Plan recognizes the URTPA as the city growth area as indicated in the following policies. "Concentrate urban residential, commercial and industrial land uses adjacent to the 'city where urban services can easily be provided." "Require that urban areas be initially developed to include all services (sanitary sewer, public water, paved streets, etc.) with phased developments to coincide with the extension of urban services." "Establish lot sizes and other development standards for transitional areas adjacent to the city in such a manner to easily permit resubdivision when urban services are extended." City of Stillwater URTPA Policies The 1980 Stillwater Comprehensive Plan set the ground work for future planning, staged growth into the URTPA. Policies state: "The city should consider an annexation plan that would gradually and in stages extend the . cityli.Illits,911tw~rdJo ev~~ttlally,~,n.cp,mpass aD area bounded on the north by Highway No. 96, on the west by County Road # 15 or Manning 3-3 MAPA ....--.---.-- "1 CITY OF STILLWATER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE EXISTING LAND USE MAP Total Pet. of ~ A.ruil lligJ 0 One Family 1,960.4 35.4% ffil Two Families 78.2 1.4% '~i' mJ 3 Or 4 Families 41.2 0.7% ill Larger Multi-Family 39.8 0.7% 1m Group Quarlers 3.3 0.1% .. Commercial 211.8 3.8% 0 , c fiB Industrial 27.1 0.5% . . <( Cll ~ Agricultural 407.1 7.3% c 'c c 0 rnI 759.1 13.7% ~ Parks & Open Space II Public & Tax Exempt 344.5 6.2% mJ Vacant Parcels 602.8 10.9% .... lakes & Streams 324.6 5.9% Street Right-Of-Way 744.8 13.4% Study Area Tolal 5,544.7 100.0% I:-=='. SCOI~~_l--J J o 1000 2(100' 3000 4000 ~ :" '". .._....._0... ...._...~___.. CllY OF STillWATER COMMUNllY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. I I I I ___'._ __._.......,_1 Insight Mapping & Dcnio9rO/lhic~., Inc. 1/23/1994 , , )-.. ----------~---~-~~- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I II and forecast growth rates, la~s within the URTPA <?'Pansion area will be filled in resulting in a total city population of 19,500 to 21,500. Sfu~t~:~i"~ t::~II;ft:0~ffi;,~;:~~:;~~~;:~{fr 1985.94 ;:;;,;;:'<.~.. r&id~ti~i"co~" 19oci~94r~$.;" ' . ~.......' ......... i~ldcilti.iil:co f995.!200.0;(~ ' ..~......:-.:~..}:..-". ~.~::t (t.1e~p>~ciJ) .~.. Based on the available vacant residential land contained in the proposed land use plan and previous growth rates, the ultimate Stillwater population of 19,300 to 20,600 could be achieved as early as 2005 and as late as 2010+ depending on actual construction rates. Maps B and C shows the areas of growth for the 1995-2010 period. Mter 2010, most vacant residential lands will) be developed and the ultimate city boundary defined. After that date, redevelopment and reconstruction will be the primary type of new development. Map D shows the ultimate city planning area boundary beyond 2010. Objective Polices and Programs Since the 1980 comprehensive plan adoption, Stillwater has set as a key goal to maintain Stillwater as a separate and distinct community. A complementary goal is to establish a greenbelt around the ultimate Stillwater planning area to separate suburban and urban development from semi-rural and mral areas. Maps B, C and D shows the 1995 to 2010 growth area (B and C) and the 2020 ultimate planning area boundary (D) and greenbelts that separate the urban area from the semi-rural area. The City of Stillwater will continue to work with Stillwater Township and Washington County to 'inaint~lin corhpact urban' centered development in Stillwater and to protect urban growth areas for future develo'ent and limit urban sprawl in rural areas. Stillwater's land use objectives are grouped under three headings: community size. shape. separation and buffering. land use and infrastructure. Community Size, Shape, Separation and buffering Objectives a. Determine the desired growth rate and phase urban services to accommodate planned for growth to 2010 and 2020. b. Establish an open space environmental framework to separate urban from semi-rural areas, retain the loosely developed open space character of the URTPA edges and preserve natural resources. c. , Promote the order1~ planned and harmonious development of Stillwater and its surroundings. d. Decide the ultimate city limits size to 2020 and set an intermediate 2010 city boundary: PolifY I. Maintain the open space separation between Stillwater and surrounding semi-mral township areas with zoning regulation, open space dedication, development design review and land purchase as appropriate. Polig 2. Establish a permanent greenbelt around the ci0' planning area. Polig 3. Screen views from Dellwood Road, Manning Avenue, Myrtle Street, McKusick Road, Boutwell Avenue and TH 36 of developed area using aisting vegetation and land fonns, new landscaping, wetlands and greenways. Polig 4. Discourage urban sprawl at the edge of and outside the planning area. Polio/ 5. Use. wetlands, JVoodlands, windbreaks and sloped areas to form'a lititiiral fraineWork for new aeve10pment.' ".." ..' 3-5 . .. -.......-----...----- ... ._--" -.....--.-...-.. .......-, -..-......... .... ... .. ......., i ~.(llml lWIN lAKE :. ~ .. . 'JLI =-=-.~~]:-_! -u~:, ; 'I I , ; l. \ -- i I I ! ~ .p .... L.. ~ .p D - MAP B CITY OF ~'ll ater ~-~~~ COMPREHENSIVE PLAll Proposed Land Use Mal Phase 1 . 2010 . Allernl1tivl:1 A . (E-:.! {'IIOI'OSI:I) "ANI) USH rCily): . I Sina;lt~ F..u\lIy l..tl1)t I..tt l:J SlnSk: P."tllly Smill1 1.1.11 l ) AllJch.J SI.ele r.",lIy ~ Muhl.r.",Uy U NOl;hborhuod Comm.",l.il o CommUlllly Comm."'l.11 B DwlnwSl I....rk Cl)n,mll!rt.:i.1 ED 8w.ln~" I',.n om!.:ll iii AdIllI.l>lt.u..lOrrl<o I H....."'h l. 0....<101'",..1 Pork Iv.lnt:"1 p..rk Indusl",,1 . IUllway 1~ILo.J. . SOCOl\d.ry 5<1...1 el....o.luy Sd",..1 , Cem...ry MuIN Nclahborhuo.l r.r\; Communlly htk ~CoU CDu.... .. \"I.der _ 1I1&",...,.\\\y TOTA L: ...,,, ('II' 1'/.~h' )f.. 16' , III' IJI'I' 1.111' I. IS' H2' II.~' 12~' nr.' 271' O,W CJ:'\~' 122' 1)1' 1,1" 11.21' ':.0;' 1116' 6"a I,:,) 1':H2 If I) "'..J(l....i: IIILDI ~'In 11 7".1ft to'l'.., I,l~ 12 ,:u.", u,r '. 20\ ....~., '1:1.1 101.9 21.~ u.~ U,l,5 u~~ )'1.\1 ~AI 1l~61 ll~.~1 2s.'.~1 167,~ 71Hi )~'),' nOPOS!D LAND use (AM.....UO. AN'): U SI.SIe r...lly 1."'0 LoI ~ A1u"".J SI.slo f.m1ly Rlltucll " Otvtlopm..1 P"k . Witolcr . ~IShll"'\""y, , .' , TOTAL: Ac:tU~S: ...... t.J( ARE ~.,)o; )0, IS a,12 III 17,16 ,1.1.-1) IIId HI 16:-' a 7,\ 191Z6 IW HED US! ISlUh..,.r To,...hlp): Scm' It",,,) . IWlwlY II Coli CDu... I~h""'tt J Itlshl-ol.W.y TOTAL: ,ICRES: 'l. 0/ ,~RI 1.\1>-1,\1 .1, I~ 16.\6 O~ 7Uo7 ua Ilun o,)J 11""'" l.37 16iA 1J1I111 P "'rk " IIld. Lut J: TnU Sua:t., An,. I I r.n:... O...IJ. Study ^"" ,., P,un' U\,,,nd,,"'t:_ N t'NF"b...d l.mJ U..... tl')\lnd. ::'/ Eu.lIns ('Jly Llrnll,~ ,1'1 ^^n~llul\ ^Io:~ Limb. StNlr,\~ J ..J, ... , ".. "V' U..I... UI't"" .,.,It. I"... '....". !ItW ItlItG" ,'4" II.., '11." .. . ~., ., .:, . i III llC U nJr.1lI1' CUr 01 SllIIw.l.r . L"IlUlrnWllly 1l...lo~u'.1I1 Il.p.n,nr l'hon. (612) H~.6121 ~W"Il.""'''1'LUl",4..,r.. .iL..i.a..:....~.....'^-.I~...lIu.._f>-j~ \..t:L::.":..-1lLIIIIo - - -... - .. - - - - - - - .. - - - - - - - .. - .. IU\l' I" CITY OF illwater . -T-.~.;;~.;;.;;...).. , J1I'J,v JAk'!: ~I ~ i! , I ~' COMPREHENSIVE PLAII Proposed Land Use Map Phal;e 1 . 2010 . Allcrnutive l3 . (F.3) 'X. 1.1)'~I"I.~: 16 w>. 1117'\.. l'~'''' UILl.... U\',_ ~~.:>-- 1.2. Cll'u",_ IN')., 11.~~'J., 11:\-"'" I.U,," '-'1'>' I.W,., n.ll...... <l.S'\, 2"''1. 6,W:" l,5l", IYl2'\.. 11/1'<. ACKI,S, IOL\ "\J ~'.Itl.17 1n 11'\ 6'il.f', U' 1131 Wl."'~ H..,I ,.='~ ~ 11 IUl,~ 21.'/; 12.~t.I lH\ l.15 J~,II AM U':I.cd H\6 ~ t 15;,;2 167.:cI 7Hd5 J64?~ )'1~OI'OSIHJ LAND USr. (Cuy): I I SinGI~ PoIllllly Lars~ (..II H SiJ\gle F.ulllli' SlniA11 J.ul C ^IU('h~J Slncle F.n\ll)' IIJ Mulll.r.nllly I I N.lghI>.IlM.,d Cnrnrn.n:1.l1 [J Comn\uNI)' Con\m~n:iJl II Uuslneu ll.uk Cornn\crdlt Bl 111...1""')6 I',uk OHlc~ 111\JJ1"inbtr.ati...t/Orlic~ I. "I Nck'i/I"=h '" 1".Yt'lorm~nl I""Jf\'; L:IDwincu r",rk t"du~tnoll (J It.lh.,y f )W,'llonJ, 6i S..~ond.ry Sehoul 0.. l!1ca'ltnl.uy Sehoul Ctnwh:ry lIohriN Gl N.lghoorht>oJ P.rI: [J Cnrnrnunll)' Pork D Coli Cou... n W.'" I 'I R1&hl'o',W.y TOTAL: '" :- n ~ o ..... ".. "I ^1t~A utJJ':;'" U~')., lb,U.... \91" t1.:'t\').. 8<7'" II d.\ '" O,2J '" l.H'" 0,)4" )),\ ~- l,\l', trtJ'l.t Al'PE~, tb, 2&3.',2 3Y1.~ fi)ll~ '1' 87,Ih 8;'2 2l l'(o 1 ,l~ 1}.1.b:! lA..,,1 ll12~ II PRUPOSED LAND USE f^nn~t1"n ^I'\:"j~ I I s.ml Rur.1 r.lsInSI. F.rnily !AtS. 1-'" P SinS" P.mUy s"",U 1.01 LJ AIluh.d s.n61o: f.mlly [l NelGhhorhuod Commercl.ll ~ RellC'arcll I.t O......c:topmcnl r,uk . ~ll""ay \....otIUndll , N.lghborhuod I'ul: ~ CoO\01\mi'y r.rk . I....,t< , ,R1&hl..f.W.y ", , TOTAL: I i I ~ .p ... .L <!' .p .~ ~.. I.f . .' .. n."'t~ lS'2tl'\' 110'1. 5,1"" YJ.V1"", ^CJ(I:~; 11.""., 7. ",'/ 1~.'.IJ ~;.2.1) .;)6 M~t'c:nIU~~rJ\ShI1W.lh!'t Tuwn!llllp): IJ lUU."y g Coli Cuu"",, i IW,at~r I 'I Rlghl.ul.W.y 1'OTAL: N Propv~d un..! UtA.' O...undJn~'~ /.,: El,.blLfl~ ('.Ilf LIII::I..; ;V ^nnNlh:..n At.:J I.IrruU S!.nUN P P.rk " RJJ. lot T TrAil sI.I6U'6 ^"" U P>.to.lo OUl!I~. Study AI" ,',I P'4J'ttl Uound.uir. l: ..:1"- U.Lt; 41111"~ !Iouh; I- - 1.1iWI' ~', ....~'?" 11:"~ ....~r .'''':'1' --'t" lit H 1 J "hl~ _---~"'J.(If,.~"'l.I.ft'L.L"I'I1'Cl'-nLU ..1_,.:'.' ..! ...':..... , , / ... '\...., ; ---- l,;ll Y Ur illwater COMPREHENSIVE PLAtI Proposed Land Use Map Phase 2 - (A-2) rIlO"OSF.\) '....ND US" (o'y): Rs,ns.. ,...11y t..uo.. In . slna" "../Iy 5,,,,11 ...., Aluchtd Sln~lt r.ml1y t! Muhl.P,mdy W Nt"l\borl\ood eoa\mt<<,-ll ~'J ConununJly Corn....m.1 . Dwlnu. rule Comm.rd.d IB Owl...., /'uk om<< D AdmIniotnll.tlOf/lCt ~ R....rdI " O<Ytlormtnl Pork ,.. Pwlnn. l'atk IndUllrtal ,. JIoIlWlY L ''''II.neb II S<<ond.ry Sd"",' ~. I!It'tMnl.ary School c...."'try , M.rIN tg Ntlahbo,hood ""'" [] Cornrnun"y P>rk ' III CoU Cou,.. 1.I1Y...r I. .Il1lakl,of..I\~y,., , , TOTA!.: ACJIES: Iill.l.'\l ~~h,7 i'h.i'1\ ,....~. lA,' -42." HlI.'i2 2uI 4~$7 ',24 10l.~ 21.9~ IV,,. U.II'i 41'Slj", 3.,11 ft^,. 11'61 "'/1..&1 2.<;',~2 i"7.~~ 71.,,~ JM~," ~ ,J l"m' :; .,,~.. 16,16'), HI1'), In.'lIo 01'1'\0 I.I~." 3Jl2~. O,",'~ 1.2. '" ,--"'6 'lo '~ .'" ll.:-~~ 1.22'" 1 ~l'l. IIY,,,,, 024~, 4.1J5~ 11-4').. fl.l:I""'. 4!\"\. 1"."2'\, If"'" P Pa'" " ltJdt Lot T TroD S"~In~ AtOl LJ ""...11 Oulllld. Study"'" N 1'>tI:t1 Bouncloll.. N P'oro~d ,,,,nd U~ U.,undotrtt. ;VuMl"~ City Llnllt-' N ^nno.A1iun. ^rN ltn\il~ SUNms ,- - - - I .\ ~~~;~S:~nlLANO US! (Ann.....~on A",.): r: Sinal. F....lly Lo". Lot : Slnslo I'ornlly Srn.1I Lot I~ AllIchtd SlnSIo PamUy NelShborhood Cn",,".~1 Jl.>...rdI " Otvtlop"'tnl P"k IloIlWlY , Wor'''ndt Ell N.tchborl.cvd "',.. ~,. ColNlluNly /'ark Willtr R1Shl"",.W.Y. ...,. . toTAl.: ACRES: ....~ ^P.F.A 1b),71 ~Hl 'I. 2~/,6Z 17,13'10. ,lM". 22.2'1. H1~2 .l$1':\. ,I\:tt 11.1'" ~716 5(\1'L II...", 1'M 'X. .10'<1 '.L1'). my, U/l7'lio 35,... 2 JIll 'L H),72 &.I&'J. 4',~ U1'!1. 17.l2111 11f'''' M~~IU:;,,\SIIII...'tt '!lJwn.hlp): . c..U Cou... l-j""ltt .' IIJSht,o!:!Yty _.' ,. --..- . toTAL: ACRF.S: '!I. I.r AII!A Mot., o1ll;'~. 17hZ ,~'" ~,73 ,. 2,~. .I'L '~',7 1/1''1. _.._.......___.__..... ("1'T1'f:~"",,,,,,.,,!".I..:...~'I"""I'.'I', I',,' - - - - ... - - .- - - .. - - - i~\ ...;-r" 0.1.: UU1"S Se,l.: ,- .. 1,'-011' o J(IO" lDt'lO' l\OO' Jim' 2\M' ~.:.::..:...- ;i;:' .. l;r'~. ,;, ~lllt Clly 01 sun......, . Cumu,unlly DC'Ytlopm.'" lI.pHlm.nl !'hone (6U) 43"'121 - - I c I Policy 6. Coordillate the plmmil/gfor phased developlllmt of the URTPA with Stillwater Towl/sltip. I Policy 7. Use the lal/d use illtel/sities of the lal/d use plan as a bases for phasil/g new development. Policy 8. TI,e ciry shall strol/gry support measures to preserve opm I space and maintain the areas ullique lIatural and historic character. I I I I Policy 9. Support iJifill multifami!J residential development in locations accessible to public transportation and communiry servias mtd facilities consistent with the character of the area. Policy 10. Continue to activery participate ilt the developmmt and update of the compreheltsive plall for Washington CoUltry and Stillwater Towltship. Policy 11. Establish developmmt staggeringfor the URTPA and coordiltate with annexations and MUS A extensiolts. I Policy 12. Maintain areas outside the ciry within the URTPA for future possible urban development for the 2010 . 2020 I plaltning period. I Program (1) Establish annexation mzd municipal urban service area boundaries for planning periods consistent with the comprehmsive plan. I I I I I I I I Program (2) Encourage use oj the new development concepts, where appropriate, such as mixed use development and cluster housing to provide life cycle housing opportunities, minimize the need for and use oj the automobile, protect natural resources and maintain opm space. Program (3) Coordinate development in the surroultding township area in the URTPA to maintain the opportuniry for future annexation and development at urban densities with urban services. Program (4) Develop an overall planting plan for the greeltbelt buffer. Program (5) Monitor yearry growth and growth impacts to see that J"hat occurs is as anticipated or detennine d,anges are needed ill land use plan policy to achieve plan goals. Program (6) Explore the "transfer of developmmt rights" concept ....ith Stillwater Township to help preserve rural character 01/ the edge of the ciry alld in areas outside the Ci91 of Stillwater. Program (7) Prepare specific area plm,s. use the plallned ullit dtl/elopmmt proCc"ss alld developmellt design guidelines to recogllize il (' alld preserve existing lIatural resources alld providt for future developlllmt. Land Use Objectives a. Designate lands appropriately located for a range of residential uses, neighborhood, commercial, light industrial, parks and open space. b. Designate natural resource and environmental constraint areas for preservation of the resource and protection of public health. c. Nonresidential land use shall be buffered from all adjacent residential uses, connected by trails to residential areas and appear subdued in a landscaped setting as viewed from the public roads. d. Identify and preserve historic resources and unique land forms in growth areas to maintain elements of the areas past and to provide an identity for new development. e. Provide for a range of new housing opportunities from large lot single family residential uses to for multifamily housing sites. Program (1) Implement the land use plan through zoning lands consistellt with the land use plan designations. Program (2) Revise the subdivision ordinance and use subdivision review requirements to implement park and open space, public facilities and special design guidelines of the comprehensive plall. Program (3) Support the open space committee in identifying mticalopm space resources and the development of tt mechanism to obtain selected open space lands. Program (4) Require plaltned unit developments or specific area plans to coordinate parks and trail de,'elopment, traffic ~stems. buffirillg alld design guidelines. Program (5) Require a detailed CIIJ1irolllllelltal assess/IICllt flS fl 3-6 part of the lIew development design and revi~v process. Program (6) Coordillate specific areas planning alld plalllled unit developments with Stillwater 1Ownslzip. Program (7) Use inllovative approaches such as development agreemarts, orderlY annexations agreements and joint pltlll1ling to implement land use polio/ ' Infrastructure Objectives a. Coordinate the provision of roads, water, sewer and drainage systems, community park and trails with existing facilities and new development phasing. b. Require that new development pay for their share of infrastructure improvements. c. Maintain high-quality pubic facilities to accommodate existing city needs and for new development areas. d. Phase public improvement expansion to minimize city financial risk but accommodate development demands. Program (1) Develop a capital improvements program that anticipated growth according to the comprehensive plan. Program (2) Review ci9' assessment poli0' to ensure that new developmart P'9' or proJ1ide public facilities required to service the development. Program (3) Explore methods of reducing the financial impact on annexed township residents who do not need or want ciry utiliry services. Land Use Map The proposed land use map shows land use for the year 20 I 0 and the ultimate city planning area beyond. The land uses adopted in the plan echo existing patterns. This is because for the most part land use and roadways already exist. In 1988, a specific area plan for downtown was prepared and in 1989 the West Business Park Plan was adopteI Both plans provide specific land use direction for those areas. Only a few notable land use changes have been proposed to exiting city land use. Those changes are described under the section titled Existing City Land Use Changes. Land use for the URTPA is shown on the proposed land use map and described in the URTPA Land Use section. I I I I I I I I .1 I I I I I I I I I I Definition of Land Use Categories Listed below are land use categories and boundaries that appear on the land use map, along with their definitions. For residential uses, the designations shown are maximum densities. For commercial and research and development office park industrial areas the use describes the activities intended for the district. Semi-Rural Residential: An average of up to one dwelling unit per 10 acres. Very low iI':tensity residential development that does not need city services and occurs in the township areas within the URTPA. (This density is consistent with the metropolitan council and Washington County policies for urban transit land areas.) Single Family Large Lot: Up to two dwelling units per acre. This designation applies to areas in the URTPA away from the existing city boundaries where natural resources or environmental constraints dictate a lower density. This density is less than Oak Glen densi ty. Single Family Small Lot: Up to four dwelling units per acre. This is Stillwater's older typical residential density similar to residential areas developed before 1950. Single Family Attached: Up to 6 dwelling units per acre. This is the density found in recent townhouse developments in Oak Glen 3-7 I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I 'I ( and along County Road 5. Multifamily Residential: Up to 15 dwelling units per acre. This designation is intended primarily for multifamily projects for three or more dwelling units on the same site. These sites are located on transit lines and in mixed use areas where city services are available. Neighborhood Commercial: Commercial uses that cater to the immediate residential area surrounding the use. They are usually located at intersections of collector or arterial roads. The uses are a convenience to the adjacent areas and not for community-wide use. The areas are small 5 acres or less with wide setback buffer areas in developing areas to screen the use and minimize the usual impact on adjacent residential areas. Community Commercial: Large shopping areas and the citis central business district (downtown) that provide a range of goods and services not available in neighborhood shopping areas. Community Commercial areas shown on the land use map are downtown and the West Stillwater Business Park. Business Park: Land use contained in the West Business Park Plan including office, commercial and industrial. Research and Development Park: Light industrial and office use house in a compact business park campus setting with an overall development concept. Commercial uses other than office are allowed only to the extent that they offer goods to employees of the office parle Wetlands, Lakes and Tributaries: Water bodies that meet the definition of wetland contained in the Minnesota Wetlands Preservation Act. Parks: Parks are designated neighborhood, community, elemC~tary school sites, marinas and golf courses. Neighborhood and community parks are own.ed. by the city; schools by the school district and marinas and golf courses are private or semi-privately owned. Special Area Plans: Areas where special specific area plans are required to be prepared to address specific development guidelines contained in the comprehensive plan. Guidelines cover the areas of site design, road system, buffering, parks, trails, open space preservation and natural resource protection. (See special area plan map, Section 12.0) City Boundary: A parcel specific boundary located to mark the outer edge of where urban development requiring urban sewer and water service may occur for the 2010 and 2020 time period. Floodway: Channel of river or other water course and the adjacent land area that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more then one foot as defined by the Corp of Engineers (overlay district). Bluffland/Shoreland: The riverway boundary contained in the official copy of the Lower St. Croix Natural and Scenic Riverway Master Plan. Existing City Land Use Changes Proposed land uses in the city are similar to existing land use with some exception for infill residential development opportunities. The proposed land use plan for the existing city show new multifamily sites in the downtown over the city parking lots at Olive and Second Streets and Mulberry and Second. These sites could accommodate 100 - 150 multifamily apartment type housing units. Both sites are particularl) appropriate for senior housing. Multifamily site~ 3-8 ( are also designated along the north edge of the West Stillwater Business Park just south of Benson neighborhood park. Both sites are served by transit and within walking distance of community services and facilities. Other site may be appropriate i,n the downtown. Sites for attached single family housing are shown along CR 5 and just west of Oak Glen on the south side of McKusick. Road. Other changes on the proposed land use map for the existing city basically recognize exiting land use conditions and adjust proposed land use to those conditions. Areas changed include the Lakeside Drive area from duplex residential to single family residential, Greeley Street area from small lot residential to large lot single family, Greeley at West Orleans from single family to multifamily residential. The proposed land use plan designates existing commercial areas located in residential area neighborhood commercial because of the size of the commercial area, services provided, nature of development and location of the use. The Churchill/Fourth Street and Owens/Wilkins Street areas are designated neighborhood commercial. The riverfront area running from the Lakeside Drive residential area on the north to Sunnyside Marina on the south is designated open space as is city-owned I<Olliner Park located in Wisconsin. This designation allows marinas and open space and park uses. URTPA Land Use Proposed URTPA land uses are shown on Maps B, C and D. Map B shows Phase I, Alternative A, 2010 (E-2) land use. Only lands along TH 36 are annexed under this alternative. The alternative could stand on its own for the 1995 - 2010 period or be combined with Map C. Phase I, Alternative B, 2010 (F-3) alternative shows the development of ~our-Iarge, vacant sites located between Dellwood Road, TH 96, and 62nd Street North. Township areas that are currently loosely developed in a semi-rural, 10+ acre per dwelling unit pattern would remain in the township. Two areas are designated commercial in this alternative. A 65-acre research and development office park is located just north of TH 36 east of 15 and a fiv~-acre neighborhood commercial use designated at the corner of Manning Avenue and County Road 12. Alternative B, Map C is the proposed land use plan for the 1995 - 2020 period. Map D shown the ultimate 2020 city boundary. I I I I I I I I '1 I I 1 I I II II I I, I I The following planning concepts from the Stillwater city and Stillwater township joint task force guidepost report provide direction for URTPA land uses. The concepts are used to designate land use and provide direction for specific plan area planning. Greenways/Open Space Definition Greenway buffers shall be established along Manning Ave, Dellwood Road, Myrtle Street, McK.usick. Road and Boutwell Drive. The greenways shall be 100 - 200 feet in width depending on the location and site conditions. The purpose of. the greenway is primarily to preserve the natural semi-rural character of the transition area by screening new development from major public roads. The greenway shall appear informal and natural using native indigenous plant material adapted to existing topographic conditions. Enhancement of existing topographic or vegetative conditions is encouraged to the extent the enhancement appears natural. Wetland mitigation sites may be used as part of the greenway. Pathways may be located along side or in the greenway but not appear as a primary design element of the greenway. The 'green way will provide a landscape separation between newly developing 3-9 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I i I II II II ,I ( residential areas and high volume traffic corridors. Trailways, Parks and Open Space Areas Trailways, neighborhood and community park and open space areas will be provided throughout the URTPA. The extensive Brown's Creek Wetland systems shall provide the framework for park and open space resources preservation in the north portion of the URTPA area. Long Lake and existing woodlands and windbreaks shall be used in the southern portion of the site for trail locations and buffering. An overall system of trails connecting new neighborhoods from Dellwood Road to 62nd Streets shall be planned along wetlands, new natural drainage ways and wooded areas. Within neighborhoods pathways shall conveniently connect residents to neighborhood park and open space areas separated from auto traffic. Any active community park, convenience commercial use or school site shall be clearly connected to surrounding residential areas by walkways and bike path, utilize and preserve natural areas for trail locations. Development Pattern and Density The overall character of the URTPA shall be single family with selected locations of compact clustered attached housing. The existing semi- rural character of the areas north of McKusick Road (Random Creek) and south of Boutwell (Spring Creek) shall remain with some in fill at rural densities. Newly developed areas shall be large lot ( 1 to 2 dwelling units per acres DU/Acre), small lot (2 to 4 DU/Acre) or higher density attached housing at 4 - 6 DU/Acre. Large. lot single family areas are located in areas of sensitive sites. Because of topography (' wetlands, lakes or timberland conditions the amount of site disruption is limited. These areas tend to be located on steeply sloped or wooded shorelands or adjacent to sensitive wetlands or open space areas. A cluster development concept could work in this area to minimize the impact on the land. Small. lot single family areas tend to be in areas that are less environmentally sensitive. These sites can be interior to the large lot area or setback form open space areas. These sites are the flatter corn or hay fields of the URTPA. The development density of the small lot area is typical of the existing city. Attached or compact housing areas are located in pockets separated visually and physically from single family areas. These locations have good direct access to major roads and are more closely tied to existing urbanized areas. Sites for compact housing area located on County Road 5, Myrtle Street south and west of Long Lake, possibly McKusick Road (east and west of mitigation site) and pockets south of Dellwood Blvd. Convenience Commercial Locations. The purpose of this use is to provide services and products for the surrounding residential areas to reduce auto use. The sites should be buffered, but clearly connected by pathways to adjacent residential areas, be of a residential scale and style compatible with the adjacent residential areas. Office park or research and development areas. These locations provide a job base for the surrounding residential areas and tax base for the community. These sites should have convenient access to major roads, be visually and physically separated from residential areas, be attractively designed and landscaped to fit into the site conditions. ( The proposed land use map shows the area immediately west of County Road 5 as attached/town house single family and large lot single family consistent with existing large lot development pattern along Nightengale Avenue and 62nd Street North. Lands directly north of TH36 are designated research and development business park. The intent is to establish a high design quality labor intensive business park providing basic employment for the greater Stillwater market area. Located north of 62nd Street is a combination of single large lot and single family smaller lot development. Areas of environmental sensitivity are designated large lot (boarding Long Lake) and areas closer to roadways or on less descriptive land are designated small lot single family (just south of County Road 12 and north of 62nd Street). The proposed land use plan recognized the existing semi-rural development pattern and character of the lands north of County Road 12 and south of Boutwell and maintains those areas in their current land use with the exception of a 15 acres parcel just west of the township park lands. That site is designated single family attached/town house. North of Boutwell, an area bounded by tributaries of Brown's Creek is designated small lot single family. The development would be buffered and partially hidden from public view. A site separated from the single family area and Brown's Creek is designated single family attached/town house. Access to this site is provided off of McKusick Road. A northern area with access from Neal Avenue is designated a mix of residential uses; single family large lot, small lot and attached/town house. The area includes neighborhood parks with special setbacks and trails along Brown's Creek. I All residential de~dopment areas would include neighborhood parks, access trails or sidewalks I and special setback:, special wetland setbacks . and buffer areas' adjacent wetlands and maj'or I roads. The land use plan along with comprehensive I plan policy provide direction for future growth, development and preservation.. Other sections of the plan including natural I resources, parks, housing and transportation detail and provide more specific direction for I land use map designations and policies. 3-11 I I I I I I I I II II I I I " ( ( City of Stillwater Comprehensive Plan I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I !. I I Marc" 30, 1995 population that will be generated by each land- use alternative determines the demand for City services and, hence, for budget e:>"'Penditures. These two data sets are therefore critical to determining the fiscal impacts of growth and annexation. Fiscal Impact This analysis calculates fiscal impacts associated with the proposed land- use alternatives A-2, F-3, and E-2 described in the land use section of this report. The alternatives treat the existing city similarly but proposed different intensities and areas of development in the URTPA area. The fiscal information used in this analysis was derived from two sources: first, a study of the City's budgets and audits, including both 'revenues and expenditures, from 1988 to 1993; and current State property-tax regulations and local aid disbursements. Many of the underlying policy assumptions -- for example, that the City will not dramatically expand services but will instead focus on maintaining and improving the quality of existing services and responding to changing demand -- were developed and confirmed by the City Council as part of the planning process. Other assumptions used in completing this analysis were made conservatively -- that is, to underestimate revenues and overestimate expenditures. For example, state aid to local governments is assumed to decline to about half its present level. As a result, the primary analysis indicates the "worst-case" fiscal outcome for each of the land-use alternatives. This analysis is followed by a series of sensitivity analyses that test each of the major assumptions. Basic Population and Household Data The number of residential properties (or the number of households) that will occupy a given area determines how much tax revenue that area will produce. Similarly, the size of the Table 1 shows anticipated growth in the number of housing units (i.e., households). These figures were derived from actual plans submitted by owners of the largest parcels of land in the potential annexation areas. The column labeled nWithin CityU refers to anticipated increases' in population and households within the current City boundaries, regardless of what occurs in the URTPA. (Refer to land use section maps for ., visual representation of land use alternatives A-2, E-2 and F-3.) Table I. Anticipated Increases in Number of Single-Family Residential Units (Households) Laud Use A/tenlati"" E.2 .-E:L 266 50 10 385 o 605 40 190 o 0 A Semi-Rural (0.1-0.2 DUlac) B Large.lot (2.0 DUlac) C Small.lot (4.0 DUlac) o Attached (5.5 DUlac) E Multifamily (12.0 DUlac) A.2 25 455 655 290 o Within Citv o 70 136 308 250 F Total Increase' 1,42S 316 1,230 (G)164 H Increase in Township' 25 266 SO I Existing Township, To Be Annexed 203 30 30 J Net Incrcase in Township' 118 (236) 20 K Increase in City' 2,361 844 1,914 'B+C+D+E 'Same as A 'H.I 'F+G+I.H Table 2 shows the corresponding population growth, based on the household sizes (persons per household) found in the City of Stillwater today. ^ Semi.rural o Large.lol C Small.lot D An.ched Table 2. Anticipated Increases in Population Assumes lIousel.old Site ~ 2.65 persons l.mul/1.<" AllenuJliI'e E-2 F-3 105 \32 21 1,020 o 1.603 106 504 Within City o 186 360 816 ..6::l... 66 1,206 1,136 769 11- 1 ( o AlUCh<'d 769 106 50~ 816 E Multif3l1lily 0 0 0 0 f TOI.u Incre~ 3.777 838 3.259 (G)~.02S 1 E.",islinS To\\nship.IO be Annc~ed 538 80 80 K Increase in (ity' 6,274 2.238 5.232 'f.:\+G+[ Anticipated Tax, Revenues Single-Family Residential Tax Capacity and Revenues In the State of Minnesota, property-ta..x calculations are based on tax capacity, which in turn is loosely related to market value. Table 3 shows the tax capacities of five representative properties, one in each land-use category Average values are based on estimates of construction value submitted to the City by landowners and developers for specific parcels that may be affected by annexation. Estimated market value (EMV) equals about 90% of actual market value (AMV). Single1amiry residential (homestead) tax capacity equals 1% of first $72,000 of estimated market value plus 2% of remaining value. The tax capacity of multi1amiry residential (in buildings of 4 or more units) is 3.4% of the total EMV: Table 3. Tax Capacities of Representative Residential Properties AMV EMV Capacitv Calculation Tax Capacity s"mi.rura[ 330,000 large.[ot (0.5.ac lot) 330,000 Small.lot (0.25'ac lot) 170,000 Attached (O.13.ac lot) 130,000 Multi.family 80,000 297.000 297,000 153,000 117 .000 72,000 720+(.02 x 225,000) 5,220 720+(.02 x 225,000) 5220 720+(.02 x 81.000) 2,340 720+(.02 x 45,000) 1,620 .034 x 72,000 2,448 Table 4 shows the anticipated increase in the area's total tax capacity under each alternative, where Total tax capacity = property tax capacity x number of properties This table assumes that 100% of the single- family properties will be homesteaded. Table 4. Residential Tax Capacity I,alld Uu AIUmal;,,,, (' A.:! f..2 F.J "'ilhi" Coil,' Scmi.rural Sc.largc.lot 52,3,5.100 52.200 2,009.,00 365.4JO Small.lot 1,532,,00 0 1.415.ioo 318,240 Altachcd- 469.Goo ji4.8oo 30i.5oo 498.960 Apanments 0 0 0 612.000 Total 4,377,600 117.000 3.i33.2oo [.,94.600 Annc.'Ccd from Twp 475.020' 70,200' ,0.200' Totallncrea~ it, City S6,647.220 $1,981.800 S5.598.ooo I I I I I I I I .1 I I I I I I I I II I I , Exisling uniu to be ann~\;cd assumcd to have average valuc of S 1 iO,ooo. Because it is unrealistic to assume that 100% of all single-family properties will be homesteaded, Table 4a shows how tax capacity increases when 5% of the large- and small-lot single-family and 25% of the attached single- family properties are non-homesteaded. Table 4a. Total Residential Tax Capacity vtCllt ofhomateaail/g: 9596 oflargr./lIla small.lot, 7596 of attad,d. ApartmClItS Ill/dlal/gea. Lal/a US( Altal/ative .!:cl. U U Within Ciw Scn\i.ruraVlarge-lot 2,493,855 52.200 2,110.185 383,670 Small.lot 1.609,335 0 1.486,485 334,[52 Attached 587.250 81.000 384,750 623.700 Apanmcnu 0 0 0 612,000 Total 4.690,440 : 133.200 3.981.420 1.953.522 Annexed fronl l\vp 498.770 73.710 73.710 Total Increase in Ci9' 7.142.732 2.160.432 6.008.652 Table 5 shows the distrihution of new tax revenues to the City and TO\-vnship under each alternative. The City tax rate is 29.626% of tax capacity. The Tmvnship tax rate is 18.084% of tax capacity: Table 5. Distribution of New Residential Taxes to Township and City I..III/a Use Allcnllft;,.c .!:cl. E.2 Within Cit\' F.3 Dlllv . Taxes to Township Increased Ci!y Tares ($75,323) 99.867 8.463 2.116.1060 640.050' 1.780,123' 578,750 Oincludcs "Within atf increment Table 6 shows the tax impacts of annexation on each type of property. The first three columns show the gross tax liability of each property. In fact, however, state aid to local governments now pays about 40% of this liability. Therefore, the true t~LX impact on each property is somewhat less. For this study, we 11-2 I ha\'e assumed that state aid will ~JVer only 20% of the local tax liability. I I Total t3..xes in City = 127.465% of gross tax capacity Total taxes in Township = 114.676% of gross tax ca paci ty Gross increase = Increase in ta.'Xes assuming no local aid payment Net increase = Increase in taxes absent local aid pa)ment from state; assumes that this aid will pay 20% of property tax load (1993: 40.3%; however, some forms of local aid have been frozen and may decline). I I I Table 6. Tax Impact of Annexation on Representative Single. Family Properties Tax Bill Tax Bill A.\I\' in To,,"ship in Citv Gross Increase Net Increase I S330,ooo $170.000 5130.000 5.916 2.683 1.858 6.654 2.983 2,065 738 300 207 590 240 166 I Commercial/Industrial Tax Capacity and Revenues I I Commercial and industrial development have a tax capacities equal to 3.0% of the first $100,000 of EMV and 4.6% of the balance. As before, we assumed that EMV equals 90% of AMY. I I I. The industrial property value used for these calculations is $400,000 per acre (improved, with buildings, or about $9.20 per square foot total). Four different parcels sizes are assumed to be representative: 10,5,2.5 and 1 acres. For neighborhood commercial property, the value used is $350,000 per acre (improved, with buildings) and a property size of 1.5 acres is assumed. These are very conservative value estimates, in light of recent construction. I II I II I Table 7 shows the tax capacities of commercial properties. Table 7. Commerci:>' :>nd lndustri:>'lndividu:>l ProperlY Tax Cap:>cities !lliY ~V C~P~dlV Calculation C....ciw CommerciI' I.; >C 525.000 H2,500 3.000 + (.0-16 x 372.5(0) 20.\35 IndwtrioJ 10,0 Ie -1.000.000 3.600.000 3.000 + (.0-16. 3.500.000) 16-1.000 IndwtrioJ ;,0 Ie 2.000.000 1.800,000 3,000 + (,0-16 x \,700.(00) 81.200 Indwlrill 2.> ~c 1.000.000 900.000 3.000 + (,0-16. 800.Wll 39.800 Indwlri.1 1.0 Ie -100.000 360.000 3.000 + (,0-16 . 260.000) 1-1.960 ,I I ( For the purposes of conducting this analysis, a mix of property sizes was assumed for each alternative. These mixes are shown in Table 8. Their ta.." capacities and property-tax contributions appear in Table 9. Table 8. Commercial and Industrial Mixes Ldllt! Us. Altm'dtivt E.2 D. o 3 I I 2 2 12 12 15 15 Within Ciw 36 I Commercial 1.5 ac Industrial 10 ac Industrial 5 ac Industrial 2.5 ac Industrial I ac A-2 3 I 2 2 10 9 12 15 Tot:>1 properties Total acreage, conul1/ind'l 33 4.5/65 30 0165 33 4.5/65 29' 27i22/5" o Assumes only 50% buildou1/improvement due to inefficiencies in reuse. Table 9. Total CommerciaVIndustrial Tax Capacity and Revenues Laud u.ft Altmlativ. M ~ F.3 Within Citv Oull' Commercial 1.5.ac 60,450 0 60,405 352.430 Industrial lO.ac 164,000 164,000 164.000 0 Industrial 5.ac 162.400 162,400 164,000 81.200 Industrial 2,S.ac 477,600 477.600 477.600 199.000 Industrial I.ac 224.400 224.400 224.400 74,600 Toul Tax capacity 1.088,805 1.028,400 1.088,805 717.430 Total taxes to City 322.569 304,674 322.569 212.546 Summary: Anticipated Tax Revenues Table 10 summarizes the results of the City's tax revenue analysis. Table 10. Anticipated Tax Revenues to the City of Stillwaler 6:1. E.2 D. Within Cit\. Oulv Residential 2.116,106 CommerdaVindustrial 535,115 640,050 1.780.123 578.750 517.220 535,115 212.546 Totaltaxesto City 2,651.221' 1.157,270' 2.315.238' 791,296 oincludes 'Within City" incremenl Adjustments to Anticipated Property Tax Revenues Properties in the developing area now pay the City fees for fire protection. Once annexed, they \-vill no longer pay these fees (a net revenue loss), because the cost of this service will be part of their t(L'{ bills. Therefore, fire- 11-3 (., protection fees now being charged to properties proposed for annexation must be subtracted from the anticipated tax-revenue increase from those properties. Table 11 shows the impact of these fees on anticipated revenue increases due to ' annexation. ' Table II. Adjustment in Tax Revenues Due to Changes in Fire.l'rclleC1ion Fees &l &l F.3 \\ithin a,v On/v Toul u..estoGt\. 2.651.221 1.157,270 2.315.238 791,296 au"S.;n fin,..e;';,. .ont....t .47.528 .1,206' .24.~ 0 .'ole< Total T.u: Rn-cnuc co City 2.603.6910 1.156.0640 2.290.3340 791.296 'includes "\\iuun aIr incr.ment Anticipated Increase in Expenditures Three important sets of assumptions were made for the sake of this analysis. The first has to do with the relationship between per-capita expenditures and the City's budget; the second with the relationship between cost of service and land use; and the third with the level of state aid to local governments. These are described below. As before, assumptions err on the conservative side -- that is, to overestimate expenditures and underestimate revenues. According to the audit of the 1991 City budget, Stillwater spent approximately $1,025 per capita annually. This figure includes all expenditures associated with servicing capital debt. Inflating this to $1,050 to account for the three-year differential, and multiplying by the approximate 1994 population of 15,000, yields estimated annual ci0' expenditures oj $15,750,000. Annual expeuditures per household equal $2,782. Within the existing City boundary, this level of expenditure accounts for all service costs -- that is, the costs of providing ( services to all residences and all non- residential properties, Services provided to commercial and industrial properties are limited primarily to water and sewer service, solid waste collection, street maintenance, and police and fire calls. Businesses that use City parks usually do so on a fee-for-use basis. Other services, such as inspections and licenses, are usually paid for through fees. Therefore, taken alone, each non-residential acre costs less to service than a comparable acre in residential use. I I I I I I I I ..1 I I I I I I II II II I' I In assessing fiscal impacts in the developing area, either of two methodologies may be used. The first would be simply to assume throughout the analysis that: ( 1) a household in the developing area will consume the same amount of services that a household within the existing City limits does. Plincipal weakness: Households in the developing area will consume more park capital (because they need a new park and trails) and more street capital (because some streets must be brought up to City standards) for the first fifteen years, until the associated capital debt is paid off. This can be adjusted for by calculating actual street and park costs within the developing area and adding an expenditure increment from each household's cost. (2) in total, commercial and industrial properties in the developing area will consume the same amount of services relative to residences as commercial and industrial properties within the City limits do relative to residences within the City limits. Principal weakness: The same 70 acres of commercial and industrial propeny is present whether the residential area to be annexed is 50 acres or 1,000 acres. This can be adjusted for only by applying slightly different methodologies to each of the alternatives, based on its idiosyncrasies. JVlethodologies Used to Estimate Etpenditures 11-4 I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I i I I I I. ,I I Rc:lnted to A1lnexation ( (1). Alternative A-2 and infill within the 'existing City limits represent essentially the same ratio of residential-to-non-residential property as the City as it exists toda)~ An empirjcal assessment of land use in both areas suggests this is a valid point of departure. Capital costs for new park and trail improvements and street upgrades were estimated based on the land use plan and anne..xation assumptions. Given a capital cost of $1,300,000 for a new park and trails in the annexation area, additional park eA-penditures (capital only; maintenance is already accounted for) will equal about $86,800 per year for 15 years, or $62 per new household. Street eA-penditures (capital only) will equal $55,000 per year, or about $40 per new household. Per- household budget expenditure = $2,782 + $102 = $2,884. (2) In Alternative F-3, the ratio of residential-to-non-residential area is lmver by about 14%. As a result, the per- household figure assumed above would be too low by about 14%. Park expenditures will remain constant but will be spread over a smaller number of households, creating an increment of $71 per new household. Street expenditures per household are assumed to be half what they are in Alternative A-2, since fewer miles of existing street will be annexed. For this alternative, a per-household budget expenditure therefore = ($2,782 x 1.14) +$71 + $20 = $3,262. (3) In Alternative E-2, the ratio of residential-to-non-residential area declines to nearly zero. Increased capital costs are negligible. For this alternative, the actual per-household budget expenditure of $2,782 is used for the 80 anticipated households. These households would "pay" for services to about 5 acres of non-residential uses. For the other 60 acres, a surrogate { .~lsure is needed. It's been noted that a non-residential property costs less to service than a residential propeny of th.e same size. For this analysis, it's assumed that each non-residential acre is equivalent to 2/3 of each residential acre. Since each residential acre contains an average of three households, we have therefore assumed that each acre of non-residential property consumes as much in services as two households. Per acre budget expenditure = $5,564. The expenditures required to service the properties in Alternative E-2 is shown in Table 12. Table 12. Estimated Expenditures. Altemath'e E-2 Acreaye Cost of Se,,;ce Residential COllul\croal Industrial 10 ac Industrial 5 ac Industrial 2.5 ac Industrial I ac Totals 0.0 10.0 10.0 25.0. 15.0 139.100 o 55.6-10 55,6-10 139.100 83,460 472.940 . reduced by 5 acres to adjust for ponion carried by new residential propcnies. Table 13 shows the aggregate anticipated increase in the City's spending budget in each alternative, based on the household growth found in Section 1 of this report. The total shown for Alternative E-2 includes an allowance for service demand from non- residential properties. Table 13. Anticipated Increase in City Expenditures Laud.U.w: Altcnlati..c A.2. E.2. F.3. Within City Ol/Iy $6,584,994. 2.820.948. 6,439.188. 2.125.448 Oincludes 'Within City" increment Actual property-tax collections (exclusive of state aid payments) equal 25% of the total revenue budget. Since 1988, on average, the City's net tax levy has equaled 15% to 17% of tOtal revenues. However, this has occurred in a fiscal environment that includes more than $1.5 million in state aid. Given that HACA 11-5 ( (homestead credit) payments have been frozen and that LGA (Local Government Aid) has declined significantly since 1988, it is assumed here that property taxes will have to bear a larger share of the budget load in the future. CostA3enefit Analysis' of Land-Use Alternatives The impact of annexation and new' development comes down to a comparison of revenues and expenditures. From a fiscal standpoint, an ideal land use alternative would be one that maximizes revenues and minimizes expenditures. However, this might undermine other long-term planning policies and priorities, such as balancing the mix of housing within the community, maintaining a certain community character or providing jobs. The results of this study are shown in Table 14. T:able 14. Fisc:al CostIBenefit An:alysis Ln"tl.Us~ A.lu",ativ~ A.2" E.2. F.3" City O,,!Y Toul taXes to Citv S 2,603,693 1.156,064 2.290,334 791.296 Toul revenue impact (taxes x 4) 10,414.772 4.627,616 9.161,336 3.165.184 Toul anticipated c:xpcnditurcs 6,.584.994 2.820,948 6.439.188 2.125.448 Net lain (loss) to Ci9' S 3.829,778 1.806.668 2.722.148 1.039.136 "includes ,Vimin City" increment Sensitivity Ana[vsis One way to measure the validity of these results is by testing its assumptions. In the tables that follow, each of the assumptions used in determining net gain (loss) to the City is altered, one at a time, to see what effect the change would have on the results. Table 14a changes the tax rate from 29.626% to 23.701 % (20% decrease). Table 14b changes expenditures per household from 52,782 to $3,338 (20% increase). Table 14c changes the ratio of property tax to total budget from 1:4 to 1:3 on the assumption ( that a dramatic drop in state aid to local government will occur within the next decade. Table 14d reduces the value of new residential properties by 15%. I I I I I I I I ..1 I I I I I Ii I I I I I These tests indicate that: . City taxes could drop by 20% and the City would still benefit fiscally from both annexation and new development (in both the e~sting city and developing areas). Ta..-xes would have to decrease radically for this result to be negative. . City expenditures per household could increase by 20% or more without affecting the positive fiscal outcome of the annexation and new development. . A change in the level of state aid would have the greatest impact on the City's budget. However, even this change would have to be quite dramatic before the net benefit to the City would be lost. . A 15% decrease in the value of new , residential development would cause a 30% drop in the net benefit to the City; however, it would not create a negative impact. . Infill development within existing City boundaries is a net fiscal benefit, even if no annexation takes place. Similarly, any of the annexation alternatives produces a net benefit even if no infill development occurs. Table 14a. Fiscal CoslIBendit Analysis.. City Tax R:lte ~ 23.701% (.20%) Ltrmf.Ust Alle-nultilY' ""thin ^.2* &1: & Ow Onl\' Total UX<S to Otl' 2,082,954 92~.85 1 1.832.267 633.037 Total budget imp.ct (rc~nuc.) 8.331,816 3,699.404 7.329.069 2.532.H. Toul anticipa.ed o<pcnditurcs 6.584.994 2,820.9~8 6,439.188 2.125.~~8 Net lai" (I",,) to Ci!y 1.746.822 878.456 889.88 1 406.699 -includes -Within Otf' increment Table 14b. Fisca. Cosl/Ilcncfit Analy.;s Expendi.ures per Household - $3.338 (+ 20%) I.lInJ.Uu AI(~"'dt;tY '^.2' '\~;tltill E.2' F.3' Cil~. OH~;' 1.1 5t,.06~ 2.290.33~ 791.296 4.627.616 9.161,336 3.16;.IS~ Total UX~'I to City 2.603.693 Toul revenue impact (tMU x~) 10.~ H.772 11-6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. II I I ,I I. Tou.l.mkir>ledol",ndi,,,re. 1.901.'193 3.385.138 (' '2;.0:6 2.550.232 ""t< l"i" (/.,,/ r. Ci~,. 2.512.779 1.242.479 1.434.310 614.952 -induJcs '\\ithio Cit~... increment T.ble 1 ~c. Fiscal CostlBene/it Analysis .. Budget = 3 If T"" Re\'enues . [""tl.USi'I\ltrn'''';IY \\';tM" .H:. .u: H.: CiIV 0,,/1' Toul u...\:cs to Gty 2.603.693 1.1 56.064 2.290.33~ 791.296 Toul budsc.t imp.aa (revenues) /.811.019 3.468.192 6.871.002 2.373.888 Tow .atltidp.atcd c.'l'Cnditurcs 6.584.994 2.820.948 6,439.155 2.125,448 "".n llfift (lIIU} tll City 1,226.095 647.244 431.814 248,440 -includes ~\ithin City" increment T.ble 14<\, Fi.ul COSllBeneflt Analysis - Residen,;al Values Reduced 15% l..3nd.Csc .-'1t:'mlli\Oc \\"ithin Cit\'()"/I' td: u: f:l: TouI u>;e, to City 2.245.345 1.061.022 1.991.343 712.HI Tow budget imp.ct (revenue.) 8.981.350 4.268.088 7.965.372 2.549.764 Tow anticipated apcnditurc. 6.584,994 2,820.948 6.439.155 2.125.448 Nt< ,,,i,, (/0") to Ci!y 2.396.386 1.447.140 1.526.18-1 72-1,316 -includes \'''llhin Cit:" increment Findings These results show that, based on the kind of development envisioned for both the annexation area and infill properties, the City need not weigh fiscal impacts in pursuing its planning and policy objectives. At a time when the State of Minnesota is pruning aid payments to local governments and taxpayers are feeling pinched, this is a strong signal that the community will remain in good fiscal health in both the long and short terms.. Other important findings: New development pays for itself, in terms of provision of infrastructure (new streets, sewers, water lines). The only cost to the city relates to contributing to the upgrade of existing deficient streets and providing a new park and trails. Operating and maintenance costs for all public improvements are paid by the increase \n taxes and other revenues. The planned (~. ; multi-family units located in the existing city will not be a drain on the City's fiscal position (This housing will generate about $725,000 in additional revenues and require about $695,500 in expenditures. ) Commercial and industrial properties are a substantial net benefit to the City This is most clearly demonstrated by the contrast between Alternatives E-2 and F-3. The anticipated increase in taxes due to the annexation in Alternative F-3 could be used, all or in part, to reduce property taxes for current residential properties. It bears repeating that fiscal impacts .are 01l!y O1le consideration in determining the Ciry's future planning policy. Many other goals, objectives, policies and priorities must be taken into account before the future direction of the city is chartered. Fiscal Key Goals Place emphasis upon "quality" and not quantity of future development. Stage new and development to not out-distance the community's ability to pay for the increased need for pubic facilities and services. Objectives Weigh fiscal impacts of new development with other city objectives to determine the appropriate rate, type and staging of development. Consider fiscal impact of new development on city taxpayers when reviewing future development plans. 11-7 Work with Stillwater townships ahu Stillwater township residents financially impacted by .annexation to reduce the effect of annexation but accommodate city growth. Police~ and Programs Polit)' 1: ' Use dry assessment polit)' to allocated ((Jsts of public improvements. PoIit)' 2: Consider methods of assessing cristing township residences "n"exed to the dry at a reduced rate for trunk line extension but to lUt:ount for future service ((Jnllmion cosls. Program (1) Revie,., tire fiscal impact of specific developme/lt plan to make sure the pro;<<ted tax reve/lues pay tire service cost of new development. Program (2) Reduce the impact of anllexation on the Stillwater to"'lIship tax base by pJutSing the tax gaill on annexed township lands. Program (3) Establish dry fie structures that favor Stillwater dt residents over residents of unin((Jrporated surrounding areas or find methods of no/lresident users of dty services to pay for those services, i.e., parks. library (' I I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I II I I I. ll-8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I I APPENDIX A CITY OF STILL WATER. MINNESOTA YEAR & STATU1E REFERENCE STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTION 1994 #48 Property taxation by square footage: The Department of Revenue is required to conduct a study on the feasibility of basing property taxation on a square footage rather than the current system of basing property taxation on the estimated market value of property. 1994 #47 Firefighter protective equipment: Effective July 1, 1994, personal MS 297A.25 protective equipment for firefighter will be exempt from sales tax. 1994 #46 Gifts to local officials: Local officials may not accept a gift from an MS 471.895 interested person and an interested person may not give a gift to a local official. A local official includes an elected or appointed official. 1994 #45 Repeal of the local government trust fund: The trust fund will sunset on MS 477A.03 July 1, 1996. All programs funded by the LGTF will be transferred back to the general fund. In place of the trust fund, an inflationary increase for LGA was established beginning with 1996 aid distribution. The inflationary increase is based on the implicit price deflator for state and local government procedures. This index cannot be less than 2.5% or greater than 5.0% per year. The minimum aid distribution for each city for 1995 and future years is the sum of 1993 LGA, equalization aid, and disparity reduction aid. 1993 #44 Mortgage backed securities: As of August 1, 1993, cities are not allowed MS 475.66 to purchase "high risk" mortgage backed securities. A definition of "high risk" is included in MS 475.66 1993 #43 Budget information: Cities must provide summary budget information to MS 6.745 the Office of the State Auditor by December 31 of the year preceding each budget year. 1993 #42 Special assessments: Cities are now required to pay to the county auditor MS 429.061 the administrative expenses incurred by the county auditor for administering the Subd. 5 collection of special assessments. PREPAREDBYTAUTGES, REDPATII& Co., LID. PAGE 10F9 APPENDIX A CITY OF STILLWATER. MINNESOTA YEAR & STATUTE REFERENCE STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTION 1993 #41 Purchase of investments: Cities must provide securities broker-dealers a MS 475.667 written notification of investment restrictions and include a provision that all future Subd.6 transactions are to be made in accordance with State Statutes governing investment of public funds. Additionally, the broker-dealer must acknowledge receipt of the notification and agree to handle the city's transactions in accordance with State Statutes. 1993 #40 Payment of claims prior to council approval: A city council may delegate MS 412.271 its authority to pay certain claims to a city administrative official provided adequate Subd. 8 internal accounting and administrative controls are in place. A list of all claims paid under this procedure must be presented to the council for informational purposes only at the next council meeting. City council delegation must be made by resolution. 1993 #39 Aid eliminations: Equalization aid and disparity reduction aid is eliminated. MS 477A03 However, the 1994 LGA base includes these amounts. 1993 #38 LGA formula change: Beginning in calendar year 1994 and thereafter, a MS 477 A03 City's LGA is determined using the following formula: (City aid base x (100 - base reduction %)) + City aid increase = LGA 1992 #37 Authorized the Commissioner of Health to assess an annual fee of$5.21 for MS 144.3831 every service connection to a public water supply that is owned or operated by a Subd. 1 City or Town. 1992 #36 Sales tax: on purchases by political subdivisions of the State is imposed. MS 297A25 School districts, hospitals, nursing homes and ambulance services owned and Subd. 11 operated by political subdivisions. The tax: is effective for sales made after May 31, 1992 pursuant to Article 8 Section 39. 1992 MS #35 Expenses incurred by Counties and Cities in the administration of the 207 AlO presidential primary shall be reimbursed by the Secretary of State. Subd. 1 PREPAREDBYTAUfGES, REDPATII& Co., LID. PAGE20F9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I: I I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I II APPENDIX A CITY OF STILL WATER. MINNESOTA YEAR & STATU1E REFERENCE STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTION 1992 #34 Increased the total amount of equalization Aid to $20,011,000 for aids MS 477A.03 payable in 1993 and thereafter. Subd. 1 1992 #33 Adjusted LGA formula. For aids payable in 1993 and thereafter, City will MS 477A.013 receive an amount equal to 103% ofLGA it received in 1992 before any non- Subd.3 permanent reductions made under 477A.0132. 1992 #32 Authorize the Commissioner of Revenue to make adjustments in aid amounts MS 16A.711 in the second fiscal year of each biennium if anticipated total revenues is less than Subd. 5 anticipated total obligations of the local government trust fund. 1991 #31 Authorized contingent addition to the levy limit by the amount oflost aid of MS 275.51 local governments located in a County where the local sales and use tax was not Subd. 7 enacted. 1991 MS #30 Further reductions in local government aid for aids payable in 1992. 477A.0132 Estimated reduction percent is 4.034% of 1992 revenue base. Revenue replaced Subd. 1 and 2 by property tax levy authority. 1991 #29 Approved LGA cut for December, 1991 aid payment. Cut is estimated to be MS 1.6% of 1992 revenue base. Aid cut not replaced with levy authority. 477A.0132 Subd. 1 and 2 1991 #28 Adjusted the HACA base as the 1991 certified HACA less any 1991 MS 273.1398 permanent HACA reductions. Subd. 1 1991 #27 If any County does not approve the local option sales tax of 1/2% there HF 1698 would be no payments made to the local government trust fund to the County or to Section 5 City, Town or Special Taxing Jurisdictions located in the County. (See #30 for increased levy authority). PREPAREDBYTAUTGES, REDPATII& Co., LID. PAGE 3 oF9 APPENDIX A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I CITY OF STILL WATER. MINNESOTA YEAR & STATlTfE REFERENCE STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTION 1991 HF 1698 Art. 2 Section 6 1991 HF 1698 Art. 2 Section 3 #26 Authorized the establishment of a local option sales tax of 1/2% on all retail sales in the County. If the County does not authorize the additional 112% sales tax, Cities and Towns within the County which have a majority of the population may override the County action by sending copies of approving resolutions to the County Auditor by August 1, 1991. #25 The local government trust fund is authorized to make the following payments to Counties, Cities, Towns and Special Taxing Districts: 1) HACA 2) Disparity Reduction Aid 3) Local Government Aid and Equalization Aid 4) Increased HACA Guarantees 5) Supplemental Homestead Property Tax Relief 6) Disparity Reduction Credit 7) 25% of the State Aid for County Human Services 8) Attach Machinery Aid, a fee for the Commissioner of Revenue to administer the local option tax ($852,000 for 1992 and $660,000 for fiscal year 1993). 9) Other fees to the Commissioner of Finance and to the Advisory Commission on inter-governmental relations. If revenue is insufficient to pay each of the above amounts, the Commissioner of Revenue is authorized to reduce the payments of the first four items (HACA and LGA). PREPAREDBYTAUfGES, REDPATII& Co., LID. PAGE40F9 I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I ,I il APPENDIX A CITY OF STILLWAlER. MINNESOTA YEAR & I STATUlE REFERENCE ... 1991 HF 1698 Art. 2 Section 2 1991 HF 1698 Art. 2 Section 1 1991 MS 273.13 Subd. 32 1991 MS 473F.02 Subd. 8 1991 MS 273.13 Subd.22 STAlE LEGISLATIVE ACTION #24 Created the local government trust fund to be used exclusively to pay local governments for inter-governmental aid and to repay advances made by the State's general fund as may have been required to make all required payments as provided by law. Ifrevenues of the trust fund are insufficient to pay commitments, all commitments to local governments will be proportionately reduced unless other provisions have been made. If the estimated receipts of the trust fund exceed estimated payments by $1 million or more the appropriation from the trust fund to each inter-governmental aid program would be increased proportionately unless there are specific provisions which prohibit such increase. #23 Establish the advisory commission on inter-governmental relations with an initial membership of twenty through July 1, 1992. After July 1, 1992 the commission is reduced to fourteen members. The commissioners are to be representative of the various geographic and governmental jurisdictions of the State. #22 Approve further adjustments to the commercial industrial tax rate for valuations in excess of $100,000. Adjusted rates effective through 1995 are as follows: 1990 1991 1m 1993 1994 1995 ~~~~~~ Fin! $100,000 of market value 3.30% 3.20% 3.10% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% Market value over Targeted to $100,000 5.06% 4.9S% 4.75% 4.70% 4.60% eventually be 4% #21 Prohibits municipalities from conscientiously excluding most commercial - industrial development within their community for reasons other than preserving agricultural use through restrictive comprehensive zoning and planning policies. #20 For aid payable in 1992, HACA will increase for certain cities as a result of the adjusted property class rates (see #19 and #22) and the net tax capacity adjustment (see #12). The net tax capacity adjustment is calculated as follows: (previous year total net tax capacity - current year total net tax capacity) x current local tax rate. PREPAREDBYTAUTGES, REDPATII& Co., LTD. PAGE50F9 APPENDIX A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II CITY OF STILLWATER. MINNESOTA YEAR & STATUTE REFERENCE 1991 MS 273.13 Subd.22 1991 MS 270.12 Subd.2 1991 MS 477A.0132 Subd. 1 & 2 1991 HF 47 1990 Ch.604 Art. 3 Section 47 STATE LEGISLATIVE ACTION #19 Approved adjustments to residential homestead property (class la). Adjusted rates are as follows: Payable Payable Payable 1991 1992 1993 Rate Rate Rate First Tier of Market Value Up to $68,000 1.00% Up to $72,000 1.00% 1.00% Second Tier of Market Value $68,001 to $110,000 2.00% $72,001 to $115,000 2.00% over $72,000 2.00% Third Tier of Market Value over $110,000 3.00% over $115,000 2.50% #18 Establish methodology used in preparing assessment /sales ratio studies requiring them to be consistent with the most recent Standard on Assessment/Sales Ratio Studies published by the Assessment Standards Committee of the International Association of Assessment Officers. #17 1991 LGA initially frozen at 1990 levels, then in subsequent actions, aid was cut. The 1991 reduction equals 2.052% of the City's Revenue Base. This aid cut will first reduce LGA. If the City's LGA is insufficient, then the cut will affect Equalization Aid, HACA and Disparity Reduction Aid, in that order. Aid cut not replaced by levy authority. #16 State Aid road allotments were reduced to Cities. #15 Levy limits for Cities repealed starting with collectible 1993 levy. 1990 #14 Approved potential LGA and HACA cuts related to tax increment districts MS 273.1399 formed after April 30, 1990. Subd. 5 PREPAREOBYTAUTGES, REoPArn& Co., LID. PAGE60F9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX A CITY OF STILL W AlER. MINNESOTA YEAR & STATUTE REFERENCE STAlE LEGISLATIVE ACTION 1990 MS 477A013 Subd. 7 1990 MS 273.1398 Subd.2 #13 Further reductions in LGA to cities. The Legislature reduced LGA by 1.53% of the revenue base. This permanent cut occurred after City budgets were adopted and the operating year was one third elapsed. The Legislation did not provide a replacement revenue source. #12 The prior year (1990) HACA cut related to LGA is extended to also reduce 1991 HACA Established a "Homestead and Agricultural Credit Base". HACA base is defined as the previous year's certified HACA aid. For aid payable in 1991, HACA is determined as shown in #7. For aid payable in 1992, HACA is determined as follows: (HACA base x growth adjustment factor) + net tax capacity adjustment + fiscal disparity adjustment. 1990 #11 Commercial property tax rates lowered. (See #22). MS 273.13 Subd. 24 & 1990 1991 1992 1993 32 Rate Rate Rate Rate First S100,Ooo of market value 3.30% 3.20% 3.10% 3.00% Market value over Targeted to Sloo,ooo 5.06% 4.95% eventually be 4% 1990 #10 Equalization Aid limited to 12% increase over 1990 Equalization Aid. Also MS 477 A013 Equalization Aid subject to reduction ifLGA is not sufficient to absorb cuts based Subd.5,6,7 on revenue base. Equalization Aid capped Statewide at $19,485,684. 1989 MS 477A013 Subd. 5 1989 SPl Ch 1, Art. 5 Section 51 #9 Tax Base Equalization Aid, is a program that targets aid to low tax base cities starting in 1990. Tax Base Equalization Aid is to be administered similar to HACA whereby the county auditor is to deduct the aid from the amount of taxes certified by the city. Payments of Tax Base Equalization Aid are to be made on July 20 and December 15, 1990 from the Department of Revenue. #8 1989 levy limits for Cities repealed starting with collectible 1992 levy. In 1990 the effective date was extended to collectible 1993 levies. (See #15). PREPAREDBYTAUfGES, REDPArn& Co., LID. PAGE 7 OF 9 APPENDIX A CITY OF STILLWAlER. MINNEsoTA YEAR & STATUlE REFERENCE STAlE LEGISLATIVE ACTION 1989 #7 Transition Aid re-termed to Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid MS 273.1398 (HACA). The formula for distribution was modified from the 1988 Transition Aid Subd.2 formula for Unique Taxing Jurisdictions (UTJ) as follows: Payable 1989 gross taxes of UTJ less [Payable 1989 local tax rate X payable 1990 net tax capacity X.9767) As with the original Transition Aid the above HACA to be distributed to local governments based on the percent of local government levy to total UTJ levies. HACA was subject to additional reductions if the level of local government aid was insufficient to absorb the education aid shift and other cuts. The education shift and the subsequent cuts were first taken from LGA, then from Equalization Aid, then from HACA and finally from Disparity Reduction Aid. 1989 #6 LGA initially increased for 1990 by approximately $30 million from the 1989 MS 273.1398 level. Funding transfer to school districts subsequently approved. The aid transfer Subd.2 to school districts is a method of increasing the State financial support for education while decreasing financial support for cities. The aid transfer for a city is an amount equal to 3.4% of its adjusted net tax capacity. Cities received increased property tax levy authority to replace the aid transfer. 1989 #5 LGA formula revised to reduce household guarantee factor from 1.08 in 1989 MS 477A.013 to 1.04 in 1990 to reduce the expenditure/unlimited ratio factor by 50%. A 15% Subd.3 ceiling increase over prior year LGA factor was also added. 1988 #4 Taxes spread to property owners based on tax capacity valuations. Taxes MS 273.13 levied divided by tax capacity valuations equal tax capacity rates. This is a change from the prior system in which taxes were spread to property owners based on assessed valuations. Taxes levied divided by assessed valuations equaled mill rates. PREPAREDBYTAUTGES, REDPATII& Co., LID. PAGE80F9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ii I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I !I I APPENDIX A CITY OF STILLWAlER. MINNESOTA YEAR & STATUlE REFERENCE STAlE LEGISLATIVE ACTION 1988 #3 Cities to receive Transition Aid in lieu of homestead credits. Transition aid MS 273.1398 to be calculated on each unique taxing jurisdiction (UTJ) and then allocated to the Subd.2 local units of government within the UTI based on the proportion of local governments gross tax levy to total taxes within the UTI as follows for 1990: Gross taxesofUTJless {46%X2.17%X 1989 tax capacity rate X 1988 aggregate assessment sales ratio} X UTJ net tax capacity X 103 The above UTI amount to be allocated to local governments based on percent of local governments levy to total UTI levies. Transition Aid to be frozen at 1990 levels. Considering growth and inflation, this freeze is a reduction of State funding. Transition Aid was the replacement of the Homestead Credit Program. This Transition Aid was subsequently re-termed as Homestead Credit and Agricultural Aid (HACA) - see #7. 1988 #2 Targeted Cities (primarily non-metro cities) to receive disparity reduction MS 273.1398 aid. The 1989 disparity reduction aid to be based on 1988 gross taxes and gross Subd.3 tax capacity rates. Disparity reduction aid will be frozen at 1989 levels. Metropolitan suburban cities to receive one-half of one percent of this aid ($300,000 of $54.3 million). 1988 #1 Local government aid (LGA) formula modified to reflect a per household aid MS 477A.013 factor compared to prior year tax capacity and tax base increase. Subd.3 Expenditure/unlimited ratio factor established as component ofLGA formula. Lower of three-part formula to calculate initial LGA increase. PREPARED BY TAUTGES, REDPATII & CO., LTD. PAGE90F9 ---~---------~----- STILLWATER, MINNESOTA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SANITARY SEWER PROPOSED ASSESSMENT SEH ALE: STlLL9514.00 8/9/95 AREA DEVELOPED COST/ AC. RESID. UNITS SOC RESID. TOTAL COST EASEMENT TOTAL AREA IN BY 2010 (AC.) BY 2010 $527.32 AC. BASIS + AREA CONSTRUCTlONCOSTl1\ COST TRUNK SEWER lAC') I NO/COM. RESID. IND/COM. RESID. PER UNIT SOC/UNIT SOUTH $375,000.00 0 178.6 65 90.9 $6079.10 $2882.37 60 $31,639.20 $688,788.13 TRUNK +$212970.00 A $587,970.00 SOUTH $780,000.00 $57,750.00 383.25 5 309.7 $6079.10 $2882.37 610 $321,665.20 $1,244,730.69 TRUNK B MIDDLE $300,000.00 $90,800.00 281.48 0 0 $6079.10 $2882.37 0 0 - $390,800.00 TRUNK A MIDDLE $330,000.00 $98,200.00 203.13 0 92.13 $6079.10 $2882.37 300 $158,196.00 $423,748.75 TRUNK B 'NORTH $430,000.00 $50,000.00 194.9 0 84.18 $6079.10 $2882.37 300 $158,196.00 $400,833.91 TRUNK 'TOTALS $2,427,970.00 $296,750.00 1,241.39 70 576.91 1270 $669,696.40 $2,367,301.48 (1) INCLUDES 10% CONTINGENCY AND 25% ADMINISTRATION, ENGINEERING, LEGALAND BOND COST STILLWATER, MINNESOTA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WATERMAIN PROPOSED ASSESSMENT SEH NO. STILL9514.00 8/1 0/95 AREA DEVELOPED BY TOTAL COST TOTAL AREA 2010 PER ACRE AREA(1 ) TOTAL COST COSTIAC IN SEWER DIST. IND. I COMM. RESIDENTIAL . SOUTH TRUNK A $128,740.00 $2,635.60 178.6 65 90.9 $410,890.04 , SOUTH TRUNK B $276,260.00 $2,635.60 383.25 5 309.7 $829,423.32 MIDDLE TRUNK B $360,000.00 $2,635.60 203.13 0 92.13 $242,817.82 MIDDLE TRUNK A $200,000.00 $2,635.60 281 .48 0 0 0 C. R.15 LOOP $435,000.00 $2,635.60 -------- ( INCLUDED) ( INCLUDED) -------... SOURCE & STORAGE $1,500,000.00 0 -------- (WATER BOARD) (WATER BOARD) ------.... NORTH TRUNK $305,000.00 $2,635.60 194.9 0 84.18 $221,864.81 TOTALS $3,205,000.00 1,241.39 70 576.91 $1 ,704,995.99 (1) PRIORITY FOR WATERMAIN CONSTRUCTION BY TRUNK SewER DISTRICT _' _ _ _ _ _ .. _ iii _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ _ - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I h ~-~ -- --Y"\ I\~, '0 ~ II~~ .~,~ -L '~;':\ i'! ---. -:;~\ a -.-l \,\ I-;'~am: ~ ~ ~ ,-__11!J1 DL. r- /jtnll~ \ i- 1-;.. ~~<l0&~> /1 ~~ i C =I:1\lIlDg(\ ~I 1 t1 (Y 3 \~8 \ I ' I ' <Qc.lllD\ ~// h'l' i I I \ \ , 0 ---\ ' ~.../.. I rrr,..~ "'""'/" -.L.U I ') / 4- <.0 . I r,':--_I lJ ! OJ v !;::n.") Ii) N-t.l~ - _..1 t:n:~ \ ~ -./ ' }'--( ;: ~'! ~ i7Jli~ \ r~ lfr,Xli v1 ~~:;-' J.J.D'P ~ ~~;,5~'. ~ f. tt!1/~ u -w.' ~< '_lJ ri. I VT,r r-i ~~ NO SCALE LEGEND 12" . SANITARY SEWER AND MANHOLE EXISTING PLATS ---".----- PROPOSED PLATS ----- TRUNK SEWER BOUNDARIES o -:: . EXISTING SANITARY SEWER AND UFT STATION DRAFT COpy ~ -- CS.A.H. 15 C,S.A.H. 15 , -<(fW(B~, "'::~"fr'UT:7'''t A~'~ '~~:~~.." '.~....-:-- ~~' ,.,' ,.'~..'1U:~J~',..' '. t\".~ :--'tf.,~:. ~ '-. .1' '. . . ,. . . k . ' lJ,! N5'-"A" f?:~' . , J.. . 7- HE-9, ' J tn ' '~' kJ h // /1...::rv:.Y .;,....:...~.Y::.. ..:...1.'..1. .~~ ' ~e:: ~,.,.,~\~., .',n~' u' //. M~ . ~~..'.j:t:; :.: .:..~~~ . . l::J~ ',~. " '\.~. . II-~' I Q T -T-I-I'/"J:,UL . J:',{ :. ~.\. :. ... : .~it- r ^-. . l ./ ':J(f) .'. h'l'>..Y~~ . "n.. (j /~'fffflJJjr"~ - -u..'. ~..1. f!!!!fii, ~= r.JV . . ~~ ~Sk~iYf~V-: \J D i-u;,,;,>lt t~"~~">~"~. ~..,;i1tF/~ ~~. ~~<~c:'S' j ~ . 'L":-.;. . ~. \ I V l;:tr.q+-...:. TI..;-,.' \.)-(~. . . ~~II" .~q}lT ~ .~~. ~ , ( .' - '. ,1, '. . . I .,. ,... ->L . ~ \ . .' '",).,:L ., . T 6 ~. ~ ~: :: :... . . . !J ~ 4';/~::;;. . ~ : '(t. T . 1"'" 1-. 1 ~'. : :' ... . /;;. . . .IT . .. ~s ~ . '!-r.Il,;T. i~'" f' F'.A' t$~.t~.:~ ~~~'~~I:":' Ek,'.'iVA:\: :.,..::...:::..~H. .~U~'~~. '"] ~' .., 'f--'-/.F.:y . I ?Y:ir.~~~' ~~: .':;,,: J::. '. .~.":--,- ~".k\~~' )"1. ~~~I ~ K~~' ~~~:-:t7s'I'I"'Y..~~~~:~:~,. .........~W:/.... ). ',~~. ~ , . lIP I/-J ~.J:.J" TITI.. .:J'~ r:- ~.' .' -:,\:'J,; , il'ij \ .., /......---. I . .J.-...: -/. ~ . .' . . '.' .'. '. ' /).tJ,':~'/ t . ,,--:L~ .~. .' \ ~ '-"'- .t ----- ~ . / ~ '. . .' ". '. '., ". '. Y.1""."/,/,,,/,' J- . ~ '-II!.;\~f,>( 'r t-_. I~ -:-.. ~ l ~ ~ "). "'~ ........: ..,....~l.ITHI.I. 'L - J~{f7$~,~~\1 b;r-~m ' I' ~ ~ r ~ '\. . /\ .~~C\ ., y.r '\ I S ~ . . ~li \ ~~. . . L .::,- . . . 0 ~y'-"''''' \J j ---. ~~ _ \ I , .,.'!2~. 0::::: . 0 ~~ " /\ I). ,/ 'L{f ~%~~"'~~~~~~~~j~~ ~ <( ~. ~ ~'~~:~~-\",;.~~\~\J . {. 0 1\ ~ TT~,-(:'~~::JJT r1. y:: g ~,~\\ [, 1 I, ~::t, --i W . }~\ y~~ //'"', ~~' ,___ t' ..u \ '. ~~ I ~,. Z ~ ~ ~ \ %)~ 1;'\'~ ~~~;;; c5 ~ ~ . . ~ ~ ~& (~;+:: ~;:>(~' 'l'o I 11 I ,\ : ~r\,~\-\t~7~~~~ti~ :=) ~ ' !vi ~, J' 2 . N-\7'\X1l! ~_ ~,<~\171~,-"/' .:-t"_ LJ ,- -i ' / ''''--~fs~'' Ofl14'~R-t~CtJtc>o.,c7I'tJQ .,- 1i1... y' !'Tl'D\~ ,I ~ . ~\ I .lPt..1 .,...... --.... ~\--:~" \ y 1-- /. \ , ..l..__.L_.uQ_____ r-:---- -L .J . I . I ' -< d~~ ~:.rQ . - J[~:.:r~T J t:t--~-?\'-~~~~-(' ;.>:;;.- ....: I- ....: /~i\ ~~J~' or.::1; --)/ .....,..) "/~.." (f) :J (f) . /,,:~. "\t~];~ -::7]' / I I I ,,,)\~ I ~- -- -"'-1 ~- g 0 iE ....,>;~ - .... }f:Yl-- - ''ft~- -- N (j) o I (\'\H D... _ -. O_~-:;:- -.............Ji. -_ CD CXl J VH ~,.~ ' / , I 10] (TT' ... r l J \ ,,/ I I 'I ... 1 I I I I I , I I \ " ,/,",/, ,1,/,/, ./.1, . ~I::' ~" :,~~~ ~ ,.' . l5:f\7R/ j .... .. G :!ZFt. . ~ '.' . . . . .r 'VCJ W . . ,/\'6 ";' , /.t' ' .' :II ~~'~< . ,\'lO\". ..:...- . ~V "'<.\ 1 .~ . -- ." ~ ' . ./.,' . t: ~~ . -----r ~p ~ . . \.., n....r-' ' f-:-' .. -..:- ,,""T :"\ ~ f-:-" . /'" --:- EEEEf1l - ----:TI! NE L A\~. . NEAL AVE. . I ....oIIy _tHy """ 11I10 ,.., _ _"" by .... or _ my dhct ~..... ...d 11Io1 I am 0 ....y ~_ Pro_d Englnew ....- tII. IcnnI of ... ._ of "_0. COMPREHENSIVE SEWER PLAN UPDA TE SEH CITY OF STILLWATER Date: 4/4/95 R~ No. ~ _AlCHE"~ <.0 r') I ~ (/) BASE PLAN F1lE NO. S1U.IS08 OAt[ 4/4/95 2 <( \(,,~ 0, ~~\ \S ~'. \":-'0 (;:::\ '.\' v \~'" ',., ,\~, ". \,.~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II II ~~ NO SCALE LEGEND 12" WATERMAlN EXISTING PLATS ---------PROPOSED PLATS -1- EXISTING WA TERMAIN ~. . B ~. AiY.^/\;~>.... //. . /fl.~f ~~~f'~'*~'" :;:~. E:: .'. .'.~)j . ~..~~~. .':rrT\' V //. H/-,'\'\ . -:- ,J;.l:./~'~7j' '~"~p'.~'- ''/ ~ .. . '~.' :~~ " .'\.. . .T 7/' I Ld. .1. 'I-J.+f.f.\" .,. .7-. .'f:'.: 1'-'[;.lJ ~ : 'f.J!JE )..{..~ ~J7 . . I ./. . . -'\>ff..>:--~ C\.' 71., ....~ .x~.^ . n II I :~'.L:. ..~J ~:,,\...~,~.i;.'7:i:.'J...~I:;...r . r~ V H 2. ~ .10....1 Y '. rv--- I .7/' . ~. . ~ .'<)...~ rx.~ -<;;J~' . t:1l:t1J . . -.\- v . /~'. J1 ~rk.-- .. ...~.-~ . '1//' 0. I ':;UI:J:/'Fr!"]/fl!:. :.~ -' I#~//il!}~.~~,~~... c.~' .. J l.. ~ '"7-' .tj . fA. '. V ~.qi;:1.~ ~<('':1.I. ,'.~0~ f:. :./:"'(:'El. '. '. -:-:~ . "1.">.' I . , ::: 1.I.m ')1J1 I h -:- ... . ~~I .,.f:i/;:P~:' : : Iff. . . h'~. '~A.~'>:rs;J ~G ~I~'~ I.... ~/j?iffi ~ : '. .. ..' .~.:., ~~' . '7 ~NEA ~V 12' EALAVE. ~'l'-JI.lTfT"'~~:y S~~t.z29~~~t':~'$: i ~':"~'B"~~>"'~'''~'''~'~'' 'IJ''''J~.'~~''I . ~~ '^- :.[:1 +/'.1'L 0...1-;-.~.~,.. ..~-{\,V' /1./' ') r~ -:::::" ~ ~. - F!7!i' -:-;::;t1lJ..J..':'f... /.I.I..\.t.( .~~S.. ~;/ ~""'~0~\Y') . ' oJ' ft.........i '------------/-- I~~ ~~. ~ [~\11"L . \.T~~f. ~~ ~ ..;;!!s ~~~il:~lf . NI'I. ~ D 1 . ~\ 1~ .1. j~~~'!l/~. "1 .\.\ . \' 1../. \\~""'--.t ~~~ /. /' p;;...... ..':. ........ ........~.I.,.,.'.H,.. ~ . ~ \ ~aml g . b :~1 ~).:~I--'" L,.o-- ::::- '\............. ") '""'"\. '. ~ ....... .: . ". . ~ .\.\.'.1.'.'.'. ~ ~ ~ \ %mn/am -J/f}J; ,> / ~-1 - ~ .... . l} . . . .... ~ ~ .... . . blJll~ \ ~-~h ': i7}f t~~~~ !:tf ~ . I' ~ 1M' "'"/ . ~ ~~ ~~v . ~~l~i~) Z/ ~J . It' I j~d~l~::~ ~ J. ./~~ ~ I ~ . C) ~ '<Sli(f'- . ;~_Lrl' ~lII1!\~/ / liM~V r- rj' \..'.G'\I~' ,7"Tf.. 'I . .J. ;'. ~ '. . ~ l\, ) V-I? ---- \ I r;::, .d I I J,. ........... ~.G.~ :t:~ ,I ~~~').. / i, -ir ".l, \ I >--,>->- ./' '-..I )..,':---1 I / 7'->.. L , ,J...;... ,\ I \\--::}-r... , (. 0 I' .{, ^~~ )'"T"',. ~ ~ _J?A~ ~rtiJ;j ~ :~\ f~ ~ ;~~~1 ~~~ ~. /. ~~~', >. ! " I . ,I L--~ (-- ITr;<~\'~ X<</.,.\ t~: "1.~ ~ ~TURE s}DJJ CE """'<./ ~- ~ l~~..ull -j.J.I'1 -t a ~ a: l1F~~~ ~~:1)r!' -' . Y f-- - C'~,~lfrA :f~:< ,~~tt ,,/JJ III \ : \ :>r~j - Ef).' ,~~~ ~a~Uj~~ ; '7)//0 ' I' ~ % ~ s. t::,[~> ~~' ~ H) 't1f.j") - ,.:x;'if] .,. '(~) ,/ ~~ j? t:) '\-~-:J Qe. ~'::~B ~ ~:'" 8 . t~'--\~ ;.l:f:.~'- ~ . '4 " b<.~"\\?"~-0( ~-....... ~-<......~D<<~f~ :f:- L~ ': ~ l' /t::::1 ~ Q~~~~~_~~!~~f1 ~::/I./ l).Jl . /J1 y /!!! \ 11/ \ '1 .. l'/\~CjL~~ \. I;" _T"~\--:;:-:~1 'CI:x:;.~ ~..... ?J'?-'7' . '(jJ.i-Y / '.( 'J/ . '[- I J. I . I . 1 ~)~~ ::'4*1;\ I ~::t:: -:-X:--Q~'>> :;; ( R~. ~ . ~=~l{-t+L>.~)~':)..rtl/ " I I IC:\~J.;-:,:- I;~-+.p~,- ~ '- I :t ( f'--?;~ r-- [~~l-- I\.,{'..q:~- -- ~ ' ~ \ \--IDI.....l- ~. o~~ Il_J....J,-.JL '- l/T. "--I r 0 \~ IrrTTT- . .. "f'" I .-7'rTT ~ " \ . \ I I <XI r-L..., \'l . 1 I' ' \ 1 1 I III 1 I I I I I ,;1 ~ .' \\.-, .,. I C.s.A.H. 15 12' C.S.A.H. 15 \2' I _"'y -my _ _ ..... _ ...-<<1 by.... (JI" _ m1 ....., __ ..... ...., I am G ....1 ~- ""_ EntIM<< ..... \Ile _ of 1M ."'Ie of 11_ CITY OF STILLWATER COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLAN UPDA TE SSEH' Date: 3/20/95 R No. ~ -~,.~ '-D ('Y) :t t- (,I) Fll.E NO. S1U8S08 DAlE 3/2O/" I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TAUTGES, REDPATH & CO., LTD. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 We have compiled the accompanying projections of cash flow including future interest revenue and the summary of significant projection assumptions of the $1,055,000 Improvement Bonds of 1994- $600,000 Improvement Bonds of 1984-B Debt Se/Vice Funds of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota for the years ending December 31, 1995 through 2005 in accordance with standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The accompanying financial projections are estimates of possible future financial results based on one or more sets of assumptions made by the City. These assumptions may not necessarily reflect management's judgment of the most likely set of conditions and courses of action that may transpire in the future. Projections are based on assumptions about circumstances and events that have not yet taken place and are subject to variations and there is no assurance that the projected results will be obtained. A compilation of financial projections is limited to presenting in the form of projected financial schedules assumptions and estimates that are the representation of management. We have not examined the accompanying projections of cash flow and, accordingly, do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance on them. Furthermore, we express no opinion on the projections or how closely they will correspond with the actual results. We have no responsibility to update this report for events and circumstances occurring after the date of this report. ~,/~~ t'i7 / . TAUTGES, REDPATH & CO., LTD. Certified Public Accountants September 29, 1995 4810 White Bear Parkway . White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110 · 612/426-7000 · FAX/426-5004 · Member of HLB International I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I ,I I I I CITY OF STillWATER, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL PROJECTION ASSUMPTIONS The financial projections are based on various levels of investment interest rates and special assessment and tax collection rates. To the best of the City's knowledge and belief, the individual debt funds are expected to achieve the various financial positions if such interest and collection rates occur. Accordingly, the projections reflect the City's judgment as of September 29, 1995, the date of this projection. The presentation is designed to provide the City information: 1) which may allow the City to reduce debt related tax levies with a high degree of reliance that such reduction will not affect the ability of the individual funds to meet debt payments; 2) for establishing a plan for providing supplemental financing in those funds which have a projected deficit; and, 3) regarding projected surpluses. In order to compile the following exhibits, various assumptions of future events must be determined. A summary of such significant management assumptions used in the compilation of the exhibits is as follows: Beainnina Cash Assets The January 1, 1995 beginning cash assets consist of cash, investments and other balance sheet accounts which represent current cash conversion type amounts such as accrued interest receivable. Future year's beginning cash assets are the cumulative result of all projected financial activity in each of the following categories. Debt Payment of Principal and Interest Future debt service payments have been compiled from original bond sale resolutions. The call options have not been considered as such call options are generally not favorable to the City and the exercise of future call options is not predictable. January 1 debt payments are assumed to be made in the month preceding due date which has been the payment practice of the City. Investment Interest Interest is calculated on positive cash asset balances based on average annual balances. The various sets of exhibits have been prepared on the basis of interest earnings compounded monthly at 5. Tax levies Tax levies are included as scheduled in the original bond sale. The assumed collection rate is 98%. The County collects property taxes and remits such collections primarily in July and December of each year. Certain homestead credits are received in the second half of the year. For purposes of projection, it has been assumed that the City receives one-half of the property tax levy in July and December. " 'I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL PROJECTION ASSUMPTIONS (CONTINUED) Tax Levies (continued) The City Council has the authority to cancel or increase debt service tax levies as deemed appropriate. Certain exhibits suffixed with "B" or "C" were prepared based on partial property tax cancellations. Additionally, one exhibit (17A) was prepared based on a supplemental property tax levy. The City has not approved any such cancellations or supplemental levies. Soecial Assessments Upon completion of construction, the City adopts assessment rolls to charge benefited property owners. These assessments are extended over a period for collection with interest added on the unpaid portion. It is the option of property owners to prepay their assessment upon adoption of the roll (full amount) or at any future time (remaining amount). The projections assume no prepayments of existing rolls. The effect of future prepayments is to reduce assessment receipts by an amount equal to future assessment interest and to increase cash assets at the time of the payment which should allow for greater future investment earnings. The collection of assessments is the responsibility of the County. The County remits assessment collections primarily in July and December of each ye1Jr. The projections assume one-half of the assessment collections will be received in July and the remaining half in December. The projections assume collection rates as detailed in the Table of Contents. Other Receiots Other receipts represent the following: · Transfers of residual debt service funds in the- $600,000 Improvement Bonds of 1984-B Debt Service Funds. (Exhibit 1-C) ----------------~-- City of Stillwater, Minnesota Fund 517 Exhibit I-A Projection of Cashflow $1,055,000 Bonds of 1994-A Total Cash Balance Property Special Other Investment Projected Debt Other Cash Balance Year January 1 Taxes Assessments Receipts Interest Receipts Payments Disbursements December 31 1995 $430,754 $0 $18,699 $0 $20,384 $39,083 $41,617 $0 $428,220 1996 428,220 0 17,599 0 16,148 33,747 130,201 0 331,766 1997 331,766 134,560 16,499 0 13,090 164,149 127,275 0 368,640 1998 368,640 136,186 15,399 0 14,816 166,401 129,057 0 405,984 1999 405,984 137,472 14,299 0 16,574 168,345 130,472 0 443,857 2000 443,857 133,258 13,199 0 18,300 164,757 131,551 0 477,063 2001 477,063 134,082 12,099 0 20,095 166,276 127,402 0 515,937 2002 515,937 134,586 0 0 21,808 156,394 128,047 0 544,284 2003 544,284 134,702 0 0 23,152 157,854 128,349 0 573,789 2004 573,789 134,414 0 0 24,561 158,975 128,265 0 604,499 2005 604,499 0 0 0 24,367 24,367 127,813 0 501,053 Total $1,079,260 $107,793 $0 $213,295 $1,400,348 $1,330,049 $0 Assu tions Special assessment collection rate... .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . 95% Property tax collection rate.......................... 98% Investment interest rate. . . . . .. ..... .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . 5.00% Ne ative interest char ed to funds?................ no Unaudited - see accountants' compilation report and summary of significant projection assumptions. Fund 517 Cash Balance Property Special Year January 1 Taxes Assessments 1995 $430,754 $0 $18,699 1996 428,220 0 17,599 1997 331,766 85,560 16,499 1998 319,028 87,186 15,399 1999 304,279 88,472 14,299 2000 287,454 84,258 13,199 2001 263,228 85,082 12,099 2002 241,798 85,586 0 2003 206,825 85,702 0 2004 169,844 85,414 0 2005 130,744 0 0 Total $687,260 $107,793 Assumptions Special assessment collection rate... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95% Property tax collection rate................ . .. .... 98% Investment interest rate........ .................... 5.00% N e~ative interest charged to funds'?............ no City of Stillwater, Minnesota Exhibit I-B Projection of Cashflow $1,055,000 Bonds of 1994-A Total Other Investment Projected Debt Other Cash Balance Receipts Interest Receipts Payments Disbursements December 31 $0 $20,384 $39,083 $41,617 $0 $428,220 0 16,148 33,747 130,201 0 331,766 0 12,478 114,537 127,275 0 319,028 0 11,723 114,308 129,057 0 304,279 0 10,876 113,647 130,472 0 287,454 0 9,868 107,325 131,551 0 263,228 0 8,791 105,972 127,402 0 241,798 0 7,488 93,074 128,047 0 206,825 0 5,666 91,368 128,349 0 169,844 0 3,751 89,165 128,265 0 130,744 0 679 679 127,813 0 3,610 $0 $107,852 $902,905 $1,330,049 $0 Assumes property tax levy cancellations of $50,000 annually beginning in 1997. Unaudited - see accountants' compilation report and summary of significant projection assumptions. ----------~-------- ------------------- Cash Balance Property Special Year January 1 Taxes Assessments 1995 $430,754 $0 $18,699 1996 428,220 0 17,599 1997 699,266 29,210 16,499 1998 647,848 30,836 15,399 1999 592,486 32,122 14,299 2000 533,017 27,908 13,199 2001 464,015 28,732 12,099 2002 395,570 29,236 0 2003 311,232 29,352 0 2004 222,417 29,064 0 2005 128,892 0 0 Total $236,460 $107,793 Assumptions Special assessment collection rate................ 95% Property tax collection rate.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 98% Investment interest rate............................ 5.00% Negative interest charl~ed to funds?............ no City of Stillwater, Minnesota Exhibit l-C Projection of Cashflow $1,055,000 Bonds of 1994-A Total Other Investment Projected Debt Other Cash Balance Receipts Interest Receipts Payments Disbursements December 31 $0 $20,384 $39,083 $41,617 $0 $428,220 350,000 33,648 401,247 130,201 0 699,266 0 30,148 75,857 127,275 0 647,848 0 27,460 73,695 129,057 0 592,486 0 24,582 71,003 130,472 0 533,017 0 21,442 62,549 131,551 0 464,015 0 18,126 58,957 127,402 0 395,570 0 14,473 43,709 128,047 0 311,232 0 10,182 39,534 128,349 0 222,417 0 5,676 34,740 128,265 0 128,892 0 587 587 127,813 0 1,666 $350,000 $206,708 $900,961 $1,330,049 $0 Fund 517 Assumes transfer from Fund 514 of $350,000 in 1996. Assumes property tax levy cancellations of $107,500 annually beginning in 1997. Unaudited - see accountants' compilation report and summary of significant projection assumptions. City of Stillwater, Minnesota Fund 514 Exhibit 2 Projection of Cashflow $600,000 Bonds of 1984-B Total Cash Balance Property Special Other Investment Projected Debt Other Cash Balance Year January 1 Taxes Assessments Receipts Interest Receipts Payments Disbursements December 31 1995 $383,646 $0 $7,049 $0 $16,635 $23,684 $57,502 $0 $349,828 1996 349,828 0 1,542 0 17,511 19,053 0 0 368,881 1997 368,881 0 1,414 0 18,462 19,876 0 0 388,757 1998 388,757 0 0 0 19,438 19,438 0 0 408,195 1999 408,195 0 0 0 20,410 20,410 0 0 428,605 2000 428,605 0 0 0 21,430 21,430 0 0 450,035 2001 450,035 0 0 0 22,502 22,502 0 0 472,537 2002 472,537 0 0 0 23,627 23,627 0 0 496,164 2003 496,164 0 0 0 24,808 24,808 0 0 520,972 2004 520,972 0 0 0 26,049 26,049 0 0 547,021 2005 547,021 0 0 0 27,351 27,351 0 0 574,372 Total $0 $10,005 $0 $238,223 $248,228 $57,502 $0 As tions Special assessment collection rate... . . . . . . . . . . . .. 95% Property tax collection rate........................ 98% Investment interest rate.... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. 5.00% Ne ative interest char ed to funds?............. no Unaudited - see accountants' compilation report and summary of significant projection assumptions. -------------------