Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/01/1992 Park Board Packet r, CITY OF LINO LAKES PARK BOARD MEETING - MONDAY, JUNE 1, 1992 6:30 PM AGENDA 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2Z Approval of Minutes from April 6, 1992 Meeting //3':` Open Mike /4 . ",�ld Business Comprehensive Plan Update 2 Park land/access issue (comp plan plate #N-14) Lqcal Parks and Rec Updates ,,- "a. - Trails - Birchwood Acres, Black Duck Estates, Rice Lake School - Golf Course Information - Financing 5. ew Business ✓1. ) Al Robinson - Golf Course Concept Endorsement, Al Robinson Property V2 . ) The Cottages - Roger Derrick 3 . ) Recreation in Leisure Services 6. Other New Business 7. Adjourn The balance in the dedicated park fund as of April 30, 1992 is: $257,463 . 00. PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 6, 1992 The regular meeting of the Lino Lakes Parks and Recreation Board was called to order on Monday, April 6, 1992 at 6 : 30 PM. In the absence of Chairperson George Lindy and Vice Chairperson Ken Johnson, newly appointed member Ray Johnson assumed the duties of chairman for this meeting. Newly appointed Park Board members were introduced, they are Brian Bourassa, who resides on Arrowhead Drive, Jacquelyn Farm who lives on Centerville Rd. , and Ray Johnson, newly appointed former Park Board member. Also in attendance was John Bauman, Candi Toffoli, and George Lindy who was not able to attend the beginning, or stay for the entire meeting. Absent was Ken Johnson. City Staff in attendance were Don Volk, Director of Public Works, Marty Asleson, Parks, Recreation and Forestry Coordinator, Barry Bernstein, Recreation Program Supervisor, and Carole Kohler, Parks, Recreation and Forestry Secretary. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A motion was made and unanimously passed to accept the minutes of the March 2 , 1992 Park Board meeting as written. OPEN MIKE: No one appeared under "Open Mike" . OLD BUSINESS : Park Updates - Comprehensive Plan Marty Asleson distributed copies of insertions/additions to the Comprehensive Park Plan Section 8 - (Implementation) that included a Priority Ranking Matrix regarding land acquisition. He asked the board to take their time to review it and rank the parks according to how they would like to see them phased in. He also suggested that the members take their time to review the matrix and get back to him with their priority choices and comments by the 21st of April . If they have any questions they could also call Jeff Schoenbauer at Brauer & Associates . Shelter Purchases - Don Volk informed the board that the Shores of Marshan Lake development is progressing as usual. It will be at least two or three months before homes start to be built here. We will be able to take possession of the building that we will purchase at the time of final plat approval . Marty Asleson says Jack Menkveld, the developer says we can start to take some of the trees out of there. Marty thinks that there are a lot of nice trees that can be transplanted and thinks it would be a shame to see them dozed over. He has talked to a non-profit organization called Twin City Tree Trust in the hopes of making a deal with them. .-r Birch Park - Marty informed the board that the trailer house at 1 ^ PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 6, 1992 Birch Park was recently purchased and apparently will stay at that location. Also this summer, plans are to purchase sprinkler heads for this park. The pipes were all laid in last year but we ran out of money then, so we will be able to finish up this summer. Sunrise Park - Marty Asleson reported that city crews are starting to upgrade the fences here, and also adding a 15' foot warning track. He noted that without much financial support there isn't a lot more than can be done. Rice Lake Estates Park - John Bauman asked if there is any progress to report. Marty Asleson noted that whenever you want to acquire property from MDOT the process is very slow, but he will make it a point to check with Jim Kienath at Circle Pines on this . Rice Lake Elementary Site - This park will be ready by this fall. Marty Asleson suggested that we may be able to work with the County and share the expenses involved in using the Regional Park nearby. Park Grove Development - The Park Board made a visual inspection of this site prior to the meeting. This is the old Barott property just east of the PineRidge development. Actually it is an extension or second phase of Pineridge, but a separate development. It' ll be called Park Grove. Marty Asleson explained that there have been some changes in the state wetland laws effective January 1, 1992 . The original park dedication was approved in June of 1990 . At that time the recommendation was to accept the proposal of 3 . 16 acres as park land and then later add 2 . 2 acres when the next phase goes in. The original motion stated "Rick Carlson (developer) will bring the outlot to grade according to the grading plan on the plat" . The grading as presented originally cannot be done now because of the change in wetland laws. With that change, the Army Corps of Engineers has designated this as wetland. There is a ponding area on the west side of this parcel that Marty Asleson feels would be a "real .pretty park" , even though the park board policy is not to accept wetland as park dedication. His main concern is if the Army Corps will consider this property mowable/maintainable. He is waiting for word from them at this time. The engineers have indicated that once the pond is dug the water table will fall three to four feet. A 100 year bounce of up to two feet will also occur. MOTION: John Bauman made a motion to recommend to the council to go ahead with the original recommendation from 1990, with the exception of the grading reference. The motion was seconded by Candi Toffoli . All were in favor, motion carried. .-r 2 PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 6, 1992 Birchwood Acres - This property was originally brought to the board when there was a different owner, that being Mort Huber. Since then ownership has changed and this parcel is now owned and being developed by Marcel and Keith Eibensteiner. Don Volk and Marty Asleson have looked at this property recently and noticed that there have been some noticeable changes, things look different since February of 1991 . On the original plat there was no drainage swale shown here, now there is, the developer has made a big ditch. In the original discussion there was no mention of a swale at all, the proposed plat was shown as an upland continuous park area with the adjoining site (Barott property) . Marty Asleson thinks the swale is in the wrong place. Don Volk would like to see this get straightened out soon. If staff cannot handle this effectively , we will have to ask Eibensteiner to come back to the board. The Park Board looked at this site and the Barott property next to it with a representative of Midwest Land Surveyors prior to this nights meeting, the board recommended to the surveyor that the property go back to the concept as was originally presented. The developer has agreed to do so. OTHER OLD BUSINESS: John Bauman asked if there was anything to report on a golf course. He thinks we should be hiring a company to look into this for us, and would like to see something on paper such as profits, pay-off, etc. Marty Asleson says he could get this information from the Minnesota Golf Foundation and bring it back to the board. This issue was not addressed in the comprehensive plan, although it was mentioned as an alternative for funds. NEW BUSINESS : School Underpass - Marty Asleson explained the need to put a walk- way across Birch Street to Rice Lake School . He and Don Volk suggest that an underpass is the safest way. The overall cost will be about $60 , 000 . . The School District is asking that we fund $24 , 000 . of that amount. The underpass will consist of an 81x 8 ' concrete culvert set approximately 10 feet below ground level going under Birch St. A similar underpass is installed in Circle Pines and they report no problems. The County would not be putting a lighted cross-walk in here for approximately five to seven years. We expect to be using the school property park by the end of this summer. Both Don and Marty want to work with the county to see if they can get them to relax the rules a little so that possibly a bike path or walk-way along the right-of-way could be put in. Although there is the concern of the speed of the passing traffic, and safety is the major issue. 3 ,.� PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 6, 1992 Ray Johnson asked why the general fund couldn't pay for this, he feels that the trail system is not part of the parks and should be paid for by the developer. Don volk explained that there is no money in the general fund for this project. He (Mr. Volk) asked the board for a recommendation to spend $24, 000. for the city portion of the project, as it would be our responsibility if there is a problem with children getting to and from the park. John Bauman wondered if we wouldn't be setting a precedent if we should make an underpass here. We are in a similar situation with Lino Elementary and the Forest Lake School District. There was other discussion regarding how to control traffic, snowmobiles, etc. Don Volk suggested we could put up some type of control structure or blockage if there should be a problem with traffic. MOTION: There was no further discussion. Ray Johnson called for a motion. John Bauman moved to approve no more than $24 , 000 . in park funds to help fund the Birch Street underpass project. The motion was seconded by Brian Bourassa. All were in favor. The motion carried. Forestry - Marty Asleson reported that the City had applied for and received a grant from the DNR in the amount of $3240 . This will be used in conjunction with escrowed dollars to plant Wenzel Farms and Second Street. He also noted that he has just submitted an Oak Wilt Control plan to the county in hopes of gaining use of their vibratory plow again this year. Last year we were able to treat and control 28 disease centers. This year the Arbor Day ceremony will be on May 7th at Lino Elementary School . Earth Day will be held on April 25 at Circle Pines. Ray Johnson inquired as to how the tree ordinance was working with builders. Although he is optimistic, Marty says it is not always working as well as he would like. At this time he is requiring fencing to be put up around tree save areas. He says this is important to protect future homeowners and buyers from the spread of tree diseases and slowly declining trees. Recreation - The comprehensive plan alluded to the number of teens that will be residing within the city in the future. Marty Asleson noted how difficult it is to get teens involved in activities. He explained that he sent a letter around to the area high schools asking for volunteers to get involved in planning activities for teens, but did not get a good response. There are some teen activities planned for our spring and summer 4 n PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 6, 1992 recreation programs such as golf, open parks, open gym, and open baseball . The main idea is to empower the kids to determine their recreational needs. Marty feels the idea of getting teens involved in a program is a good one, he's not giving up on it. He asked that the board contact either him or Barry Bernstein if they have any ideas or comments. Barry Bernstein displayed a copy of the upcoming Spring and Summer Program brochure that will be sent to all Lino Lakes residents. He explained some of the upcoming programs. He will be trying some teen stuff as Marty mentioned earlier. There are a total of 14 men's softball teams in two leagues, and will be at least five teams, possibly more, in the Sunday night co-rec league. Barry also explained that he will be adding a new twist to parks rentals this year. When someone rents a park and pays their $20 . 00 deposit, they will get a "Sport Grab Bag" to use. The bag will have an assortment of game playing equipment such as horseshoes, volleyball, softballs, etc. Brian Bourassa commented on what a good job the parks and recreation department did last year with the softball leagues. Developers and Builders - Ray Johnson took this time to comment on the large amounts of litter he sees left behind in certain areas during and after a home is under construction. He wondered if there isn't an ordinance or some other lever the City could use to see that these sites aren't left in such a mess. Don Volk commented that this is a point well taken, he will pass Ray' s comments along to the building department. Land Donation - Marty Asleson explained to the board that a resident offered to donate a parcel of land to the City. The property (approximately 20 acres) is at the end of 81st Street off of East Rondeau Road. Marty has looked at this parcel, he thinks it's a great piece of property, it's all upland not swamp. He doesn't know the name of the property owner or why he wants to donate it. Although it is out of the scope of the comprehensive plan, Jeff Shoenbauer thinks it would be prudent for the park board to accept the property and hold it in trust for future use, or trade it, etc. MOTION: Brian Bourassa made a motion to recommend to the council to accept the parcel of property donated at no cost, for future use or land bank. Motion was seconded by Candi Toffoli. All were in favor. Motion carried. Parkview Estates - At the request of Ray Johnson, Marty Asleson looked into the easement/walking trail issue in this development. Ray questioned whether this plat was recorded with a walking trail 5 .� PARK BOARD MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 6, 1992 going between lots 9 & 10 on block 2 . He recalls that when the developer (Eibensteiner) was before the park board in 1989 to get park board approval of his plan, the developer agreed to install a 15 foot walking trail between lots 8 and 9 over the utility easement. In researching this agreement, it was discovered that this plat was recorded without any mention of a walking trail between lots 9 & 10 or 8 & 9 on block 2 . It seems that the developer never roughed in the trail as he was supposed to do. Marty Asleson contacted the developer and the developer has agreed to put the walkway in and get the easement deeded over to the City. Ray Johnson asked if we could still get a path there without cutting the large Butternut tree down. Marty Asleson felt the same and will try to get the trail without removing the large tree. Rohavic Oaks - Marty Asleson referred the board to the explanation of this issue in their packets, showed an overhead view of this development and pointed out that the comprehensive plan identifies a need for a parcel of land and access point to the Regional Park from this development. The property in question is located right at the S curve, on the north side of White Pine Road. He (Marty) explained that Ron Cox from Anoka County is still researching to see if the county actually has first right of refusal for this piece of property. If so, then they would lease this property to the City at the cost of $1 per year. If this is determined not to be possible, then there is possibly another alternative, that would be using Old Town Road as an access point. Old Town Road is the next best option as it is a road right-of-way. Marty Asleson stressed that a trail in this area is an important link in our trail system. He will continue to pursue this issue and come back to the board with follow-up information. OTHER NEW BUSINESS: There was no other new business. ADJOURN: A motion to adjourn was made by John Bauman, seconded by Candi Toffoli . All were in favor. Meeting was adjourned at 9 : 00 pm. THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING IS MONDAY, MAY 4, 1992 AT 6: 30 PM. 6 MEMORANDUM TO: All Park Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: May 28, 1992 SUBJECT: Phasing and Implementation Section of Comprehensive Plan Please find enclosed copies of the Phasing and Implementation section of the Comprehensive Plan. As you recall, the Park Board was asked to prioritize acquisition and development needs, and then rank these needs accordingly to a phasing plan. This was done, and AMN forwarded to Brauer and Associates. Cost figures were then forwarded for each phase and a financing source was developed by Springstead, the City Finance Consultants. These figures were taken to a City Council work session for comment. We needed figures to be placed in the Comprehensive Plan. These figures were approved by the City Council, recognizing that these are the cost of implementation if all other systems are realistic ( mostly financial) . These figures are within the bonding capacity of the City, but please notice that because of the new changes in tax impact, that the property tax levies on referendum-approved debt for cities is to be based upon the city's estimated market value, not it's tax capacity. Thus, for cities without extensive commercial - industrial bases, this statue shifts the tax burden to residential properties from non residential properties. This section was the final section that we were waiting for in order to bring the document to a public hearing. THE CITY COUNCIL WISHES THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD TO CONDUCT THIS PUBLIC HEARING IF IT FEELS COMFORTABLE DOING SO. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THIS MATTER BEFORE THE PARK BOARD MEETING, PLEASE GIVE ME A CALL. SPRINGSTED 222 South Ninth Street PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS Suite 2825 Minneapolis, MN 55402-3368 (612) 333-9177 Fax: (612) 333-2363 Home Office 85 East Seventh Place 16655 West Bluemound Road Suite 100 Suite 290 Saint Paul, MN 55101-2143 Brookfield, Wl 53005-5935 (612) 223-3000 (414) 782-8222 Fax: (612) 223-3002 Fax: (414) 782-2904 6800 College Boulevard Suite 600 Overland Park, KS 66211-1533 (913) 345-8062 Fax: (913) 345-1770 1800K Street NW Suite 831 May 14, 1992 Washington, DC 20006-2200 (202) 466-3344 Fax: (202) 223-1362 Mr. Randall Schumacher, City Administrator Mr. Martin Aseleson, Park Superintendent Lino Lakes City Hall 1189 Main Street Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Dear Randy and Marty: The enclosed estimates are revisions of those sent to the City on May 1, 1992. The changes relate only to the estimated property tax impact of the project; the estimated debt service scheduled remains unchanged. The change in the tax impact is caused by a change in State law which requires the property tax levies on referendum-approved debt for cities to be based on the City's estimated market value, not its tax capacity. For cities without extensive commercial-industrial bases, this statute shifts the tax burden to residential properties from non-residential properties. We apologize for the need for this change, and are available to address any questions the City may have on these estimates. Respeciuily, David N. MacGillivray Senior Vice President \ksc \enc. ,.ty of Lino Lakes, Minnesota G.O. Park Bonds of 1995 Estimated Impact on Local Taxpayers $5,000,000 Issue Over 23 Years Estimated EMV Dollars Type of Market Tax Rate of Tax Property Value Applied Increase * Homestead Residential $80,000 0.166% $133s 100,000 0.166% $166 110,000 0.166% $183 125;000 0.166% $208 150,000 0.166% $249 $4,000,000 Issue Over 23 Years $80,000 0.133% $106 100,000 0.133% $133 1101000 0.133% $146 125,000 0.133% $166 150,000 0.133% $200 $3,000,000 Issue Over 23 Years $80,000 0.097% $78 100,000 0.097% $97 110,000 0.097% $107 1252000 0.097% $121 150,000 0.097% $146 $2,000,000 Issue Over 23 Years $801000 0.066% $53 100,000 0.066% $66 110,000 0.066% $73 1251000 0.066% $83 150,000 0.066% $99 * The Tax Rate is based on the 1991/92 Estimated Market Value (EMV) of $290,466,200. --",tepared 05/13/92 _1 SPRINGSED Incorporated S2,00u,000 G.O. PARK BONDS, SERIES 1995A Prepared May 13, 1992 CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA By SPRINGSTED Incorporate Dated: 2- 1-1995 Uature: 2- 1 First Interest: 2- 1-1996 Total Capital- Net Tax Year of Year of Principal ized Levy 105% Rate Levy Mat. Principal Rates Interest & Interest Interest Required of Total (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) 1995 1997 0 0.00% 272,344 272,344 90,000 182,344 191,461 0.066% 1996 1998 45,000 5.70% 136,172 181,172 0 181,172 190,231 0.065% 1997 1999 50,000 5.90% 133,607 183,607 0 183,607 192,787 0.066% 1998 2000 55,000 6.05% 130,657 185,657 0 185,657 194,940 0.067% 1999 2001 55,000 6.20% 127,329 182,329 0 182,329 191,445 0.066% 2000 2002 60,000 6.35% 123,919 183,919 0 183,919 193,115 0.066% 2001 2003 65,000 6.45% 120,109 185,109 0 185,109 194,364 0.067% 2002 2004 70,000 6.55% 115,916 185,916 0 185,916 195,212 0.067% 2003 2005 70,000 6.65% 111,331 181,331 0 181,331 190,398 0.066% 2004 2006 75,000 6.75% 106,676 181,676 0 181,676 190,780 0.066% 2005 2007 80,000 6.80% 101,613 181,613 0 181,613 190,694 0.066% 2006 2008 90,000 6.80% 96,173 186,173 0 186,173 195,482 0.067% 2 2009 95,000 6.85% 90,053 185,053 0 185,053 194,306 0.067% 2008 2010 100,000 6.85% 83,545 183,545 0 183,545 192,722 0.066% 2009 2011 105,000 6.90% 76,695 181,695 0 181,695 190,780 0.066% 2010 2012 115,000 6.90% 69,450 184,450 0 184,450 193,673 0.067% _ 2011 2013 120,000 7.00% 61,515 181,515 0 181,515 190,591 0.066% 2012 2014 130,000 7.05% 53,115 183,115 0 183,115 192,271 0.066% 2013 2015 140,000 7.05% 43,950 183,950 0 183,950 193,148 0.066% 2014 2016 150,000 7.10% 34,080 184,080 0 184,080 193,284 0.067% 2015 '2017 160,000 7.1096 23,430 183,430 0 183,430 192,602 0.066% 2016 2018 170,000 7.10% 12,070 182,070 0 182,070 191,174 0.066% TOTALS: 2,000,000 2,123,749 4,123,749 90,000 4,033,749 4,235,"0 fond Years: 30,640.00 Annual Interest: 2,123,749 Avg. Maturity: 15.32 Plus Discount: 28,000 Avg. Annual Rate 6.931% Net Interest: 2,151,749 T.I.C. Rate: 7.044% N.I.C. Rate: 7.023% EMV Rate 1991 Estimated Market Value: i 290,466,200 Total Levy (Average of Levy Years: 1995-2016) Column 9: $ 192,520 0.066% Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant alterations of this schedule. T The aal underwriter's discount bid may also vary. n $5,uuO,000 G.O. PARK BONDS, SERIES 1995A Prepared May 13, 1992 CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA By SPRINGSTEO Incorporate Dated: 2- 1-1995 Mature: 2- 1 First Interest: 2- 1-1996 Total Capital- Net Tax Year of Year of Principal ized Levy 105% Rate Levy Mat. Principal Rates Interest & Interest Interest Required of Total (1) (2) . (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) t 1995 1997 0 0.00% 680,988 680,988 225,000 455,988 478,787 0.165% 1996 1998 115,000 5.70% 340,494 455,494 0 455,494 478,269 0.165% 1997 1999 125,000 5.90% 333,939 458,939 0 458,939 481,886 0.166% 1998 2000 130,000 6.05% 326,564 456,564 0 456,564 479,392 0.165% 1999 2001 140,000 6.20% 318,699 458,699 0 458,699 481,634 0.166% 2000 2002 150,000 6.35% 310,019 460,019 0 460,019 483,020 0.166% 2001 2003 155,000 6.45% 300,494 455,494 0 455,494 478,269 0.165% 2002 2004 170,000 6.55% 290,496 460,496 0 460,496 483,521 0.166% 2003 2005 180,000 6.65% 279,361 459,361 0 459,361 482,329 0.166% 2004 2006 190,000 6.75% 267,391 457,391 0 457,391 480,261 0.165% 2005 2007 205,000 6.80% 254,566 459,566 0 459,566 482,544 0.166% 2006 2008 220,000 6.80% 240,626 460,626 0 460,626 483,667 0.167% /m% 2009 235,000 6.85% 225,666 460,666 0 460,666 483,699 0.167% 2uv8 2010 250,000 6.85% 209,568 459,568 0 469,568 482,546 0.166% 2009 2011 265,000 6.90% 192,443 457,443 0 457,443 480,315 0.165% 2010 2012 285,000 6.90% 174,158 459,158 0 459,158 482,116 0.166% 2011 2013 305,000 7.00% 154,493 459,493 0 459,493 482,468 0.166% 2012 2014 325,000 7.05% 133,143 458,143 0 458,143 481,050 0.166% 2013 2015 350,000 7.05% 110,230 460,230 0 460,230 483,242 0.166% 2014 2016 375,000 7.10% 85,555 460,555 0 460,555 483,583 0.166% 2015 2017 400,000 7.10% 58,930 458,930 0 458,930 481,877 0.166% 2016 2018 430,000 7.10% 30,530 460,530 0 460,530 483,567 0.166% TOTALS: 5,000,000 5,318,353 10,318,353 225,000 10,093,353 10,598,022 Bond Years: 76,720.00 Annual Interest: 5,318,353 Avg. Maturity: 15.34 Plus Discount: 70,000 Avg. Annual Rate 6.932% Net Interest: 5,388,353 T.I.C. Rate: 7.044% N.I.C. Rate: 7.023% EMV Rate 1991 Estimated Market Value: $ 290,466,200 Total Levy (Average of Levy Years: 1995-2016) Column 9: $ 481,728 0.166% Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant alterations of this schedule. The-dual underwriter's discount bid may also vary. r-. AGENDA ITEM! 0 T 3IIY MEMORANDUM TO: All Park Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: May 28, 1992 SUBJECT: Financing Parks and Recreation/Golf Courses Please find enclosed a recent article presented in the Star Tribune concerning funding facilities through tax support mechanisms. The paradigm is now one of tax support is OK if the facility or service provides for the majority of the population. Special interest facilities -(community centers, ice arenas, golf courses) General Obligation Bond issues are being defeated on a consistent basis. Basically, the ones that are being passed are the ones where Revenue Bonds and Enterprise Funds are set up. Also enclosed is a much information as we were able to acquire at this time, on golf course financing. I did speak with the Minnesota Golf Association, and they referred me to Cottage Grove as one of the recent municiple golf course construction projects that seemed to work. This project was done on a cooperative basis with a land developer. I have enclosed a brochure of the development, River Oaks. The developer donated about 70 acres for a golf course, and the City leased about 67 acres from 3M Chemolite for the rest. They are leasing the land for $17, 500 per year. The houses are being built on the river bluffs, with lots that sell for between $25000 and $100, 000. The City did set up an Enterprise Fund for this project. This was a $2 . 6 million dollar Revenue Bond over 20 years. They are going to be in the "black" after the first year. Their operation and maintenance costs are paid for through tax revenue. This City chose not to do a market analysis or feasibility study. They recognized that it was a big gamble. There are many different sources of funding and financing for public enterprise. The most recent trend is "user-pay" methods. I would suggest a committee be formed to investigate the further .•. possibilities for Lino Lakes. S�o Q 4yy 3 576 1 a� '= 6 8 fpf, 4-1 Z1 oc� tl" 2 5 7 a 51D5,crz� 4 4v 18 0 s 81 696, rxu D �2 0 10 10 ,tc� 4015 415 - �8 3a 2 3 12 10 11 12 )(' ? 13 �° Q. �513 42, u `� `` `11 gy.Q 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 t� 4 L S 5 4 5 ccn ab ' 0 17 16 11 ✓ MATCHLESS RIVER VIEWS ✓ AT ACREAGE $39,9 0 LOTS BEGINNING 14 ✓ CONVENIENT TO RIVER/ MARINA FACILITIES 30 MINUTES TO TWIN CITIES 15 ✓12 PROTECTIVE COVENANTS 20 MINUTES TO d ✓ 18 HOLE ON-SITE GOLF INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 13 / COURSE FINANCING AVAILABLE NORTH ✓ ROLLING WOODED AND LOTS AVAILABLE FOR OPEN LOTS IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION GOLF COURSE BUDGET STATUS APRIL 30, 1991 DESCRIPTION CONTRACT ACTUAL ESTIMATED BUDGET AMOUNTS ACTUAL REMAINING TO COMPLET Construction Costs ------------------ 18-Hole Course w/irrigation $1,143,500 $1,181,293 $1,171,409 ($27,909) 88,660 Clubhouse/Furnishings/Architect/Engineer* 425,000 399,779 274,500 150,500 174,047 (includes incoming rd and parking) Maintenance Building 80,000 - 54,000 73,854 6,146 33,330 Equipment 200,000 115,000 129,160 70,840 48,632 Golf Carts (20 units) 70,000 - 70,000 1,080 Pre-opening Maintenance 87,000 74,199 12,801 20,000 Septic and Water to Clubhouse 30,000 17,503 15,287 14,714 0 Benches, Pins, Score Cards, Etc. 10,000 180 9,820 6,677 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS $2,045,500 $1,767,575 $1,738,588 $306,912 $372,426 Other Costs 5()tingency $100,000 $55,876 $44,124 20,292 )Z,)ign Fees 130,000 . D,v 'o l vf-1 130,138 ($138) 0 Financing Fees 88,500 �`� 45,094 43,406 5,000 Capitalized Interest (2 yrs) 350,157 212,688 137,469 151,920 Less: Funds on Hand (54,000) (54,000) 0 Interest Earnings (60,157) (139,885) 79,728 (2,000) BOND ISSUE/TOTAL BUDGET $2,600,000 $1,767,575 $2,042,499 $557,501 $547,638 Assumptions: Construction Term May, 1990 through October, 1990 Course Open - May 30, 1991 Analyze renting golf carts vs purchasing golf carts *Clubhouse contract amount includes an estimate of $40,000 for BWBR architectal services. +r Recommendations For City of Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota $598409000 Golf Course Gross Revenue Bonds, Series 1990C Study No. 3686 SPRINGSTED Incorporated August 16, 1990 SPRINGSTED !1 PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS 500 Elm Grove Road 85 East Seventh Place 135 North Pennsylvania Street Suite 101,P.O.Box 37 Suite 100 Suite 2015 Elm Grove,WI 53122-0037 Saint Paul,MN 55101-2143 Indianapolis,IN 46204-2498 (414)782-8222 (612)223-3000 (317)684-6000 Fax:(414)782-2904 Fax:(612)223-3002 Fax:(317)684-6004 2739 Second Avenue S.E. 512 Nicollet Mall 6800 College Boulevard Cedar Rapids,IA 52403-1434' Suite 550 Suite 600 (319)363-2221 Minneapolis,MN 55402-1017 Overland Park,KS 66211 Fax:(319)363-6999 (612)333-9177 (913)345-8062 Fax:(612)333-2363 Fax:(913)345-1770 August 16, 1990 Mayor William Saed Members, City Council Mr. Robert Schaefer, City Administrator Mr. Bruce Anderson, Director of Parks & Recreation Mr.Tim Kuntz, City Attorney City of Inver Grove Heights 8150 Barbara Avenue Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 ,.� Re: Recommendations for Issuance of $5,840,000 Golf Course Gross Revenue Bonds, City of Inver Grove Heights, Series 1990C We have been working with your staff and Mr. Thomas S. Hay, Dorsey & Whitney, Bond Counsel for this issue, on the documentation for the financing of the Inver Grove Heights golf course. We respectfully request your review of these recommendations which will set the terms and conditions for this bond offering. We have attached for your information three separate appendices as follows: Appendix I- Work sheets for bond sizing, maturity schedule and computation of interest income. Appendix II-Official Notice of Sale for this bond issue. Appendix III- A proposed list of the risk factors on golf course gross revenue bonds which will appear in the official statement for this issue. Page 1 of Appendix I illustrates the necessity for issuing $5,840,000 of bonds to fund the estimated $4,572,500 construction costs of the golf course. Additional uses of funds will include$858,480 for interest during construction, $602,250 to fund a one-year's debt service reserve, $114,500-to fund underwriter's discount for purchasing the bonds, and $75,000 in legal,fiscal and administrative fees in issuing the bonds. Funds for the satisfaction of this $6,222,730 requirement will come from $5,840,000 of bond ,—� proceeds, $364,480 of interest earnings during construction, and $18,250 of other City monies which will have to be supplied to fund a portion of the one-year's debt service reserve. Federal law restricts borrowing for a reserve in the amount equal to the lesser of 10% of the issue or one year's maximum average debt service, whichever is less. Since we may only borrow$584,000 for the reserve, it will be necessary for the City to fund at the time of issuance, $18,250 of additional monies to satisfy the bond issue's requirement of one- City of Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota n August 16, 1990 year's maximum debt service reserve, which is estimated at $602,250. The $18,250 will be adjusted up or down based on actual sale results. Page 2 of Appendix I illustrates the recommended debt service repayment schedule for this issue. These bonds will be dated October 1, 1990 and will mature on December 1 of each year beginning in 1995 through 2014. You will note under column 5 we have capitalized interest which will fund the 1991 interest payments estimated at $539,835, and which will fund $318,645 of the total estimated debt service due in 1992 of $473,040. After receipt of interest income from the bond reserve, the first net debt requirement in 1992 which will be payable from gross revenues of the golf course, will be equal to $106,215. This revenue will have to be earned in 1992. After 1992, debt service for the 1993 and 1994 years of operation will represent an estimated annual $424,860 requirement. With the first principal payment of $125,000 due In 1995, the debt service will Increase to $549,860. These estimated figures nearly match exactly the estimates provided Effective Golf Course Systems Incorporated, at the time they performed the feasibility report for determining whether or not the golf course could earn sufficient revenues to pay both debt service and operating costs. We have provided that the City may retain the right to call bonds in advance of their normal maturity. On December 1, 2001, the City will be able to redeem all bonds due on December 1, 2002 and thereafter at a price of par and accrued interest. As a result, $4,715,000 of the total bond issue will be subject to early redemption should the City want to ^ refund these bonds at some point in the future when successful operating experience might make a refunding bond rateable, and thus more marketable, producing lower interest rates. We also have provided that on the day of sale the City Council may reduce the bond issue size by up to $500,000. This will serve to protect the City from issuing excess bonds if the construction bids received on September 18 are less than anticipated. Any reduction in the amount of bonds issued will reduce the annual debt service requirements which must be paid from golf course revenues, and will reduce any problem with excess proceeds which might require the City to pay an arbitrage rebate penalty after 24 months from the date of issuance. Traditionally the City has applied for a bond rating on its bond issues and currently enjoys an "A" rating from Moody's Investors Services from New York. We do not believe these bonds will qualify for a credit rating, nor do we believe they would qualify for insurance from any of the bond insurance companies. As a result, the bonds will be offered as non-rated and non- insured. This will reduce the attractiveness of this issue to investors and will require a higher than normal interest rate,when compared with the City's rated general obligation issues. Originally we had anticipated offering these bonds through a negotiated process where the City would have taken proposals from underwriters, selected an underwriter to purchase the bonds, and negotiated the terms and conditions with that underwriter. However, we determined there is no legal authority in Minnesota for negotiation of these kinds of issues and so the bonds will be offered through a public, competitive sale. We believe that the City will receive one or more bids for the purchase of these bonds unless market conditions change between now and the recommended sale date. In the event the City should not receive any bids on the bonds, the City Council could then negotiate the sale of the bonds with one or more underwriters, so long as no major terms or conditions of the bond issue would change from those terms and conditions contained in this attached Notice of Sale and the Bond Resolution. Page 2 City of Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota August 16, 1990 We are recommending bids be taken on this issue on September 24, 1990. Construction bids on the main golf course facility will be taken on September 18, and If those bids are acceptable, they will be forwarded to you in the form of a contract award on the same night you will receive bids on the bonds. With this schedule, you will not be faced with having to award construction contracts without an assurance that these bonds can be marketed. We have also attached as Appendix III the proposed bondholder's risk section which will be placed in the Official Statement for this Issue. A bondholder's risk section will be new to you since it is not included in general obligation issues for which the City's full faith and credit taxing power Is pledged for the payment of bonds. We suggest you review the risk section. Upon that review, I think you will understand why these bonds are not rateable, uninsurable, and will require a higher rate of interest. You will also receive before your meeting on August 27, 1990 a copy of the proposed bond resolution as prepared by Dorsey&Whitney,with input from your staff,the City Attorney, and Springsted. Since that resolution contains the primary requirements for the City in establishing fund structures, funding accounts, and making commitments as to future events, we recommend you review It carefully. Mr. Hay and a member of Springsted will be present at your meeting on August 27 to answer any questions you might have about that document. Following that meeting, and until approximately September 4, you will be able to make changes in the resolution. After September 4, the critical portions of that resolution which outlines the City's obligations will be printed in the Official Statement for this issue and it will not be feasible to change the sale resolution after that date. There are several critical commitments the City Is making which I have attempted to outline In summary form below, so that you may follow these requirements in the resolution, reading the full text that document. This summary is not intended to be a complete analysis of the City's obligations under the resolution. 1. Reserve Fund. The City agrees to establish a one-year maximum debt service reserve which will be funded by $584,000 of bond proceeds, and an estimated $18,250 of other City funds, which amount will have to be deposited In the Reserve Account before settlement of the issue. 2. The City is establishing an Operating Reserve Account which will be initially funded by City monies, other than bond proceeds, in the amount of$245,000. That amount represents the projected cumulative operating deficit to be experienced in the operation of the golf course between 1992 and 1995 as estimated by Effective Golf Course Systems, Incorporated. You will recall we discussed this requirement with you at the time the golf course program was being considered earlier this year. After December 1, 1995, the City is agreeing that after funding debt service requirements and current operating expenses, any income not required for these Items will be deposited in the Operating Reserve Account until the Operating Reserve Account balance is equal to 50% of the estimated cost of operating and maintaining the golf course each year. After that level is first reached, the City would be responsible each year only for funding the 50% share of any proposed annual increase in operation and maintenance costs. After meeting this requirement, and the requirement for funding the Depreciation and Replacement Account, the City may ,..� allocate any remaining monies to the Surplus Account, which may be used for any corporate purpose. We believe the establishment of this perpetual Operating Reserve Account will reduce the likelihood of operating deficits in the golf course which might have to be met by Page 3 City of Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota August 16, 1990 the use of other City monies, up to and including a property tax levy within the limitations permitted by Minnesota law. 3. Under the terms of the resolution, the City is agreeing to operate the golf course as long as bonds of this issue or any additional issues are outstanding. Section 4.06 of the resolution provides that whenever a deficiency in the Operating Account exists which cannot be restored from other golf course monies, that other available City funds will be appropriated for that purpose, the City Council will include in its next annual budget an amount sufficient to restore the deficiency, and that if necessary to pay current cost of operation and maintenance, the City will levy an ad valorem tax within the limitations prescribed by law for general purpose taxes levied by the City. This provision Is consistent with materials we presented to you when you discussed this issue earlier this year. 4. While all of the provisions of the proposed bond resolution are important, I also refer you to several specific items which I believe will be of greater interest to you. They Include the rate convenant under Section 5.02 and the earnings test for additional parity bonds as outlined in Section 6.03. Arbitrage Rebate The 1986 Tax Reform Act and the 1989 amendments modified rebating arbitrage profits to the Treasury. Generally speaking, all arbitrage profits (the yield difference between the 'PIN earnings on the investments and the yield on the bonds) must be rebated to the Treasury. There are some exemptions to this rebate requirement, one of which may be applicable to this issue. A two-year expenditure exemption test is available if at least 75%of the proceeds of an issue are used for construction and if 10% is expended within six months, 45%within 12 months, 75% within 18 months and 100% spent within two years. If it is reasonably required that a retainage be maintained to enforce the completion of a contract, up to 5% of the proceeds may be retained for an additional 12 months. Net proceeds subject to these expenditure tests include investment earnings on the original bond proceeds. The expenditure test is an absolute requirement, not reasonable expectations. At present we believe the City can meet the two-year expenditure exemption and that selection of the penalty option may be in your best interests, unless construction of the course is delayed and payment of all costs are not made by approximately mid-October, 1992. We recommend City staff review this matter closely, and if more than a 5% retainage on contractor payments may be held after mid-October, 1992, that they re-examine the penalty option. If funds in excess of the expenditure requirement outlined hereinbefore remain,the City will have to pay a 1 1/2%semiannual penalty on any excess amounts. As indicated, a member of our firm will be in attendance at your meeting on Monday, August 27, at which time you will be asked to adopt a resolution establishing the sale date for these bonds and establishing their general terms and conditions. Hopefully, any concerns you have for this issue can be resolved at that time. We look forward to meeting with you on this matter and to a successful sale of these obligations. Respectfully submitted, r. 14 SPRINGSTED Incorporate mjh Page 4 CITY OF INVER GROVE- HEIGHTS City of Inver Grove Heights Prepared 14-Aug-90 MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE Municipal-Golf ,.Course By SPRINGSTED Incorporated PROJECT FINANCING Project- Assumptions Page 1 - - - - -- - -- -- -- --------- ----- ----------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- --- - CAPITAL COSTS (1990 $) BOND SIZING (1990 $) Guaranteed Project Cost - $4,572,500 Total Capital Costs $4,572,500 Capitalized Bond Interest 858,480 Bond Reserve Funds 10.00% 584,000 Site Acquisition - - 0 Bond Discount 2.00% 114,500 Improvements 0 Bond Issuance Costs 75,000 Other Project Expenses 0 Investment Earnings (363,196) Escalation/Delay Costs 0 Other 0 Miscellaneous 0 Additional Earnings (1 ,284) --------------- ............... TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS (1990 $)- $4,572,500 BONDING NECESSARY (1990 $) $5,840,000 FINANCING ASSUMPTIONS SOURCES & USES OF FUNDS Bonds Dated 01 -Oct-90 SOURCES: Bonds Mature 01-Dec Bond Term (Years) 20 Bond Proceeds 5,840,000 Tax Exempt Interest Rate 8.10% Interest Earnings:Const 8 Cap Int 363,196 First Principal Payment: 01 -Dec-95 Non-Bond Proceeds 18,250 Interest Capitalized thru: 01 Sep-92 Additional Earnings 1 ,284 --------------- ,y-. Total Sources: $6,222,730 USES: - Earnings Rate: Construction Fund -; , , t7.7ft Construction Cost $4,572,500 Reserve Fund - 8.00% Capitalized Interest 858,480 Cap. Interest Fund 7.75% Reserve Fund 602,250 Underwriter's Discount 1149500 D Bond Issuance Costs 75,000 -o Additional Issuance Costs 0 M Additional Earnings 0 0 W ------------- - - C Total Uses: $6,222,730 X CITY OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS City of Inver Grove Heights Prepared 14-Aug-90 MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE Municipal ,Golf Course By SPRINGSTED Inc. PROJECT FINANCING Bond Payment Schedule Page 2 -- - -- - -- - - - - -- ----- -- ----------- -- - --- ----- --- ---------- --- ------- ---------------- ----------- ------------ COLLECT PAYMENT BOND BOND CAPITALIZED TOTAL DEBT RESERVE NET DEBT YEAR YEAR PRINCIPAL INTEREST INTEREST SERVICE EARNINGS PAYABLE (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) 1991 1991 $0 551 ,880 $539,835 $12,045 $12,045 $0 1992 1992 0 473,040 318,645 154,395 48,180 106,215 1993 1993 0 473,040 473,040 48,180 424,860 1994 1994 0 473:040 473,040 48,180 424,860 1995 1995 125,000 473,040 598,040 48,180 549,860 1996 1996 135,000 4621915 597,915 48,180 549,735 1997 1997 150,000 451 ,980 601 ,980 48,180 553,800 1998 1998 160,000 439,830 599,830 48,180 551 ,650 1999 1999 1709000 426,870 596,870 48,180 548,690 2000 2000 185,000 4139100 598,100 48,180 549,920 2001 2001 200,000 398,115 598,115 48,180 549,935 2002 2002 220,000 381915 601 ,915 48,180 5530735 2003 2003 235,000 364:095 599,095 48,180 550,915 2004 2004 255,000 345,060 600,060 48,180 551 ,880 2005 2005 275,000 324,405 599,405 48,180 551 ,225 2006 2006 295,000 302,130 597,130 48,180 548,950 2007 2007 320,000 278,235 598,235 48,180 5500055 2008 2008 350,000 252315 602,315 48,180 554,135 2009 2009 375,000 223:965 5989965 48,180 550,785 2010 2010 405,000 193,590 598,590 48,180 550,410 2011 2011 440,000 160,785 600,785 48,180 552,605 2012 2012 4750000 1259145 600,145 48,180 551 ,965 2013 2013 515,000 86,670 601 ,670 48,180 553,490 2014 2014 555,000 44,955 599,955 (602,250) (2,295) 2015 2015 0 0 0 0 0 2016 2016 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- - ------- ---------------------- -- -- ------------------------ ------------ ,� TOTALS: $5,840,000 $8,120,115 $858,480 $13,101 ,635 $469,755 $111427,380 cQ rn CITY OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS City of Inver Grove Heights Prepared 14-Aug-90 MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE Municipal Golf Course By SPRINGSTED Incorporated PROJECT FINANCING Cash Flow Page 3 - - -- --- - - - ------- -- - --- -- ------- ----------- ------------ - ----------------------- ---------------------------------- - BEGINNING CAPITALIZED OTHER PROJECT END OF MONTH DISTRIBUTION BOND CITY FUND OF MONTH MONTH BALANCE TO VENDOR PAYMENTS EXPENSES EARNINGS BALANCE (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Oct-90 $5,256,000 $548,000 $189,500 $0 $4,518,500 Nov-90 4,518,500 212,500 29,182 4,335,182 Dec-90 4,335,182 212,500 27,998 4,150,680 Jan-91 4,150,680 25,833 26,806 4,151 ,654 Feb-91 4,151 ,654 25,833 26,813 4,152,633 Mar-91 4,152,633 25,833 26,819 4,153,619 Apr-91 4,153,619 234,667 26,825 3,945,778 May-91 3,945,778 234,667 25,483 3,736,594 Jun-91 3,736,594 234,668 308,477 24,132 3,217,581 Jul-91 3,217,581 506,000 20,780 2,732,361 Aug-91 2,732,361 506,000 179646 2,2440008 Sep-91 2,244,008 506,000 14,493 10752,500 Oct-91 1 ,752,500 7,333 11 ,318 1 ,756,485 Nov-91 1 ,756,485 7,333 119344 1 ,760,496 Dec-91 1 ,760,496 7,334 231 ,358 11 ,370 1 ,533,174 Jan-92 1 ,533,174 67,833 9,902 1 ,475,243 Feb-92 1 ,475,243 67,833 9,528 1 ,416,938 Mar-92 1 ,416,938 67,834 9,151 1 ,358,255 Apr-92 1 ,358,255 183,333 8,772 1 ,183,694 May-92 1 ,183,694 183,333 7,645 1 ,008,006 Jun-92 1 ,008,006 183,334 212,430 6,510 618,752 Jul-92 618,752 174,833 31996 447,915 Aug-92 447,915 1740833 29893 275,975 Sep-92 275,975 174,833 1 ,782 102,924 Oct-92 102,924 0 665 103,589 Nov-92 103,589 0 669 104,258 Dec-92 104,258 0 106,215 673 (1 ,284) Jan-93 (1 ,284) 0 0 (1 ,284) Feb-93 (1 ,284) 0 0 ($1 ,284) m ---------- ------ -- ------------------------------------------ -+ TOTALS: $4,572,500 $8580480 $189,500 $363,196 CITY OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS City of Inver Grove Heights Prepared 14-Aug-90 MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE Municipal Golf Course By SPRINGSTED Incorporated PROJECT FINANCING Contractor Draw Page 4 - - - - - ---- ------- - ---------- -- -------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- GROSS NET NET DRAWDOWN DRAWDOWN PERCENT CITY CITY CUMULATIVE MONTH PAYMENT PAYMENT OF TOTAL RETAINAGE PAYMENT PERCENTAGE (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Oct-90 $548,000 $548,000 11 .98% 0.00% 11 .98% 11 .98% Nov-90 212,500 212,500 4.65% 0.00% 4.65% 16.63% Dec-90 212,500 212,500 4.65% 0.00% 4.65% 21 .28% Jan-91 25,833 25,833 0.56% 0.00% 0.56% 21 .84% Feb-91 25,833 25,833 0.56% 0.00% 0.56% 22.41% Mar-91 25,833 25,833 0.56% 0.00% 0.56% 22.97% Apr-91 234,667 234,667 5.13% 0.00% 5.13% 28.11% May-91 234,667 234,667 5.13% 0.00% 5.13% 33.24% Jun-91 234,668 234,668 5.13% 0.00% 5.13% 38.37% Jul-91 506,000 506,000 11 .07% 0.00% 11 .07% 49.44% Aug-91 506,000 506,000 11 .07% 0.00% 11 .07% 60.50% Sep-91 506,000 506,000 11 .07% 0.00% 11 .07% 71 .57% Oct-91 7,333 7,333 0.16% 0.00% 0.16% 71 .73% Nov-91 7,333 70333 0.16% 0.16% 71 .89% Dec-91 7,334 7,334 0.16% 0.16% 72.05% Jan-92 67,833 67,833 1 .48% 1 .48% 73.53% Feb-92 67,833 67,833 1 .48% 1 .48% 75.02% Mar-92 67,834 67,834 1 .48% 1 .48% 76.50% Apr-92 183,333 183,333 4.01% 4.01% 80.51% May-92 183,333 183,333 4.01% 4.01% 84.52% Jun-92 183,334 1839334 4.01% 4.01% 88.53% Jul-92 174,833 174,833 3.82% 3.82% 92.35% Aug-92 1749833 1749833 3.82% 3.82% 96.18% Sep-92 174,833 174,833 3.82% 3.82% 100.00% Oct-92 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% Nov-92 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% Dec-92 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% .� Jan-93 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% Feb-93 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% ----- -- ----------------------------------- ------------ °D TOTALS: $4,572,500 $4,572,500 100.00% 100.00% OFFICIAL TERMS OF OFFERING $5,840,000* CITY OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA GOLF COURSE GROSS REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1990C Sealed bids for the Bonds will be received by the City Administrator or his designee on Monday, September 24, 1990, until 12:00 Noon, Central Time, at the offices of SPRINGSTED Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:30 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated October 1, 1990, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on June 1 and December 1 of each year, commencing June 1, 1991. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months and will be rounded pursuant to rules of the MSRB. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of$5,000 each, or in integral multiples thereof, as requested by the purchaser, and fully registered as to principal and interest. Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the registrar and interest on each Bonds will be payable by check or draft of the registrar mailed to the registered holder thereof at the holder's address as it appears on the books of the registrar as of the close of business on the 15th day of the immediately preceding month. The Bonds will mature December 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 1995 $125,000 2002 $220,000 2009 $375,000 1996 $135,000 2003 $235,000 2010 $405,000 1997 $150,000 2004 $255,000 2011 $440,000 1998 $160,000 2005 $275,000 2012 $475,000 1999 $170,000 2006 $295,000 2013 $515,000 2000 $185,000 2007 $320,000 2014 $555,000 2001 $200,000 2008 $350,000 * The City reserves the right; after bids are opened and prior to award, to reduce the principal amount of the Bonds offered for sale. Any such reduction will be in a total amount not to exceed $500,000 and will be made in multiples of$5,000 in any of the maturities. In the event the principal amount of the Bonds is reduced, any premium offered or any discount taken by the successful bidder will be reduced by a percentage equal to the percentage by which the principal amount of the Bonds is reduced. OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on December 1, 2001, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after December 1, 2002. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City shall determine and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par and accrued interest. .-� SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be special Bonds of the City payable solely from gross revenues from golf course operations and shall not constitute a debt for which the faith and credit or taxing powers of the City will be pledged. The proceeds will be used to construct and equip a twenty- seven hole municipal golf course, driving range, club house and attendant facilities. TYPE OF BID Bids shall be for not less than$5,725,500 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds, and shall be accompanied by a certified or cashier's check in the amount of $58,400, payable to the order of the City. No bid will be considered for which said check has not been received. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted bid, said amount will be retained by the City. No bid can be withdrawn after the time set for receiving bids unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the bids is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of.the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. There is no limit on the interest rate spread if bid in ascending order; however, no rate for any maturity shall be more than 1.0% lower than any prior rate. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional bid will be accepted. AWARD The Bonds will be awarded to the bidder offering the lowest dollar interest cost to be determined by the deduction of the premium, If any, from, or the addition of any amount less than par, to the total dollar interest on the Bonds from their date to their final scheduled maturity. The City's computation of the total net dollar interest cost of each bid, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (I) waive non- substantive informalities of any bid or of matters relating to the receipt of bids and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all bids without cause, and, (III) reject any bid which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the bidder, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, it the City has requested and received a rating on the Bonds from a rating agency, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Bonds. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. CUSIP NUMBERS --� If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bonds nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. ^� SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary dosing papers, including a no-litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reasons of the purchaser's non-compliance with said terms for payment. OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly final Official Statement as required by Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement and the Official Bid Form or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (612) 223-3000. The Official Statement,when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other r� information required by law, shall constitute a 'Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, 'as that term is defined in Rule 15c2-12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting an Official Bid Form therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 200 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter executing and delivering an Official Bid Form with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its bid is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated August 27, 1990 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/Robert Schaefer Administrator/Clerk APPENDIX III ' RISK FACTORS GOLF COURSE GROSS REVENUE BONDS PROSPECTIVE PURCHASERS OF THE BONDS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT INVESTMENT IN THE BONDS MAY ENTAIL SOME DEGREE OF RISK. EACH PROSPECTIVE INVESTOR IN THE BONDS IS ENCOURAGED TO READ THIS OFFICIAL STATEMENT IN ITS ENTIRETY. PARTICULAR ATTENTION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE FACTORS DESCRIBED BELOW WHICH, AMONG OTHERS, COULD AFFECT THE PAYMENT OF DEBT SERVICE ON THE BONDS AND WHICH COULD ALSO AFFECT THE MARKET PRICE OF THE BONDS TO AN EXTENT THAT CANNOT BE DETERMINED. THIS DISCUSSION OF RISK FACTORS IS NOT, AND IS NOT INTENDED TO BE, EXHAUSTIVE. 1. Umited Obligation The obligation of the City to pay debt service on the Bonds is a limited obligation of the City. The full faith and credit and taxing power of the City is not pledged to pay debt service on the Bonds, and the City does not have the authority to levy any ad valorem property taxes in order to pay debt service on the Bonds. As further described elsewhere herein, debt service on the Bonds is payable solely from gross revenues derived by the City from the operation of the golf course described herein. While it is believed that revenues of the golf course will be sufficient to pay debt service on the Bonds when due, a number of factors described below may affect the receipt of sufficient revenues from the golf course for such purposes, which might impair ^ the ability of the.City to make timely debt service payments on the Bonds. 2. Operation and Maintenance of the Golf Course The City has pledged the gross revenues of the golf course first for the payment of debt service, and intends to pay operation and maintenance expenses from the balance of gross revenues available after payment of debt service costs. In the event such revenues are insufficient to pay all operation and maintenance expenses, the City would have to use other City moneys or general revenues for that purpose. General revenues include property tax levies which are limited by Minnesota law. In the event general revenues are insufficient to pay all City requirements for providing general City services, some service levels would have to be reduced. If golf course operating costs were reduced it could have an adverse effect on the golf course and reduce golf course revenues. 3. Competition The Inver Grove Heights municipal golf course will have to compete with other available golf course facilities both within Dakota County and the balance of the metropolitan area. There are currently eight golf courses available to the public already operating within Dakota County, with a total of 126 holes of golf. While the City has designed a championship 1 8-hole course and a 9-hole executive course which is intended to attract golfers of all ranges of abilities, these other public courses may serve to dilute the demand to play the City's courses and will serve to keep fees and charges at competitive levels. In addition to the courses available to the public in Dakota County, another privately owned 18- '� hole course which will be available for public play on a fee basis has been planned for construction within Inver Grove Heights on a site 2Y2 miles from the City's course. If constructed, this course will compete for golfers with the City's municipal course. Page 12 4. Construction of the Project it is anticipated by the City that construction of the project will commence by October 1, 1990. At the current time it is anticipated that the project will be completed by August 1, 1992. The City believes that the proceeds of the Bonds will be sufficient to complete the project, although various circumstances may result in cost overruns. In the event that the proceeds of the Bonds and certain investment income are insufficient for completion of the project,the City has agreed that it will exercise its best efforts to cause Completion Bonds to be issued in an amount not to exceed $200,000 to pay the remaining costs of completing the project. The City is not obligated, however, to cause Completion Bonds to be issued to complete the project, and no assurance can be given that the City will be able to cause the issuance of such Completion Bonds, or that the Completion Bonds will be sufficient to complete the course. Completion Bonds may be issued for the purpose of completing the project without notice to or the approval of the registered owners of the Bonds. If issued, Completion Bonds will be equally and proportionately secured under the Resolution with the Bonds previously issued. To the extent Completion Bonds may be issued under the Resolution, such issuance may result in a dilution of revenues available to pay debt service on the Bonds. 5. General Factors that May Affect Sufficiency of Revenues Payment of debt service on the Bonds and operation and maintenance costs from golf course revenues is dependent upon the continued successful operation of the course. A number of factors may affect the sufficiency of revenues including but not necessarily limited to the ability of the City to efficiently and cost-effectively operate the course, the construction of additional public golf courses in Dakota County and the metropolitan area which may compete with the City's course, 'economic recessions which may reduce discretionary income of potential golfers, and a leveling off of the number of persons who currently are playing golf or starting to play golf. While the City has pledged to continue operating the course for as long as Bonds are outstanding, significant revenue shortfalls below projected levels could cause the City to reduce operation of the course. 6. Unforeseen Problems With the Golf Course Payment of principal of and interest on the Bonds is dependent upon the continued operation of the golf course. While the City believes that the golf course has been designed and will be constructed in such a manner as to permit its continued operation without requiring unreasonable costs for maintenance or repairs and has provided under the terms of the Resolution for the creation and maintenance of funds in amounts which it believes to be sufficient to provide for the necessary repairs and maintenance of the golf course, there can be no assurance that such amounts will, in fact, be sufficient. Although the golf course will be covered by policies of insurance as otherwise described herein, casualties and other occurrences may result in damage to the golf course which may not be covered by the net proceeds of any insurance award. Any material interruption of the operation of the golf course may have an adverse effect on the ability of the City to collect fees from users of the golf course and could, in turn, have a materially adverse effect on the ability of the City to make timely payment of debt service on the Bonds. Page 13 Blue - T - Management 16009 Oak Plaza Omaha, Nebraska 68130 1-800-621-9199 402-896-2618 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CONCERNING INITIAL STAGES OF OPENING A MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE 1 . Why we are able to provide financing through d LIJ 0 .Lease/Purchase Agreement? LLJ '1986 Tax Laws changed to allow Lease Purchase financing C/) through the use of C.O.P. (Certificates of 4_ 0 Participation) . Z. r 2. How does this affect the bonding capacity of the community? It does not affect the bonding capacity, since we do not :'c'° use bonds but C.O.P. LJ 3. How does this affect the community in terms of debt? It does not go on the municipal ' s books as a debt, since it must annually appropriate funds to pick up a shortfall between the golf revenue stream and the Lease/Purchase payment. 4. What happens 4f the municipality fails to-appropriate funds for that year? The Lease/Purchase Agreement becomes null and void and we must continue to operate the golf course until our investors are paid. 5. What are the repercussions if the community fails to appropriate? It would have an effect on their credit as would any other obligation. 6. What can Blue T do to assist in preventing a Lease/Purchase contract to break? A. We can start and complete the project on time. B. We will capitalize the construction costs for 2 years, thereby allowing 6 months of play, after 1 -1 /2 years of construction time, to generate revenue before a Lease/Vurchase payment is due. '^ C. We will provide a surplus reserve equal to one annual payment which can be used in -the event of a shortfall. This can be used in the early years of maturation and will prevent the community from dipping into their operating budget. Page two 6. (continued) D. We can finish on time and on budget. E. There will be a contingency fund of $150,000 budgeted. If the municipality does alter the plans after construction begins and the fund is not used, then it could also be used as a part of the reserve. F. If the community issues less than $5 million for the ensuing year, we can capture some residual interest from fund investment. 7. Why does Blue T take a long-term ground lease (25-40 years)? In the event the municipality fails to complete their Lease/Purchase Agreement, the ground lease would protect us and prevent the community from using the land for some other purpose. 8. May a municipality quit our Lease/Purchase Agreement and 3 years later go across town and build another municipal golf course? NO! Since that would be a breach of our-no-complete clause. -- - - 9. How long will our ground lease be in effect? Until our investors are paid -- hopefully, the length of the contract. 10. How long will it take to build a golf course? Unless something happens beyond our control, we would estimate 6 to 7 months for clearing, grading, irrigation installation, green and tee construction. We•would need 2 growing seasons. Allow approximately 1 year and 4 to 6 months. 11 . Do we include all items in our cost budget? YES! However, there are exceptions if the municipality wishes to lease its maintenance equipment and its golf carts. i /• Page 3 12. If the municipality has never managed a golf course, what are their alternatives? A. You may hire a professional management. group to do this for you, however there are strict guidelines as to how the management group is compensated. Compensation cannot be based on profit. You may pay a flat rate or base it on gross sales. Management fees run from $6000 to $9000 monthly. B. We could act as a consultant for a period of time during the early stages of operation. This would be less costly, since we"would charge a $3000 monthly fee plus expenses, for a minimum of 2 years. C. They may hire a professional golf manager and put him on staff before the course opens. 13. What do we look for to create a good, low budget golf course? A. Good rolling land with few ravines (approximately 150 acres) . B. Good water supply. C. Good soil with no limestone or granite. D. Convenient location of sand and gravel, as it is expensive to make long hauls. E. Can we work around the unions if they exist? '. Is it in a flood plain? 14. Can we build on a flood plain? Yes, but it requires more dirt and better drainage, hence it is more costly. 15. Can we build on a land fill? YES, but you should allow another $1 million to the cost of construction. This may be okay if the green fee and round play demand is there. 16. How much land is required for a driving range and is it necessary? A. We need 10 to 12 acres and should have irrigation. B. We do not recommend building any golf course without a driving range. Page four 17. What are the alternatives to a regulation golf course if you don't have the necessary acreage? A. Build an executive course, which would require only 70 to 80 acres. B. Begin with a nine hole course and add on as demand warrants. 18. What about our software program? At a minimal cost, our program will provide a vehicle to: 1 . Handicap 2. Control inventory 3. Manage tournaments 4. Monitor daily revenue and expenditures 19. What kind of golf carts do you recommend? A. We recommend electric carts as they cost less to purchase and maintain. B. Gas carts may be more advisable in hilly terrain. 20. How do you begin? A. Sign a Preliminary Agreement. B. Provide a topographical map. C. Sign off on routing plans and hard costs. D. Pass resolution to begin the documentation process. E. Sign documents. L• CRY OF CHASKA.OAINNISOTA OW COU IN•RSitD IM&OEVf f;ApM NT PROMS Wood n" OrodtMt Park -am CatAQuratfon and Private(t bhoN Course Privets(Gonna and PtivaalPtrblk Coupe: and CluWMM) OAhouae): D"O"Or one 363 tlrtila-tamly ION �, give own eo t t 6 Nwnrromas do CMS daalrted • Ch1''s 8*0IN os N that Lind donated to Cny course not open for of pro"until 3rd yew CIV improved land QXM WNh caeft into Extensity planning eft Developer frAhed land between City end In residential are" Course erchtm b Ooirq**1 f{rts"Of malts Course compolbie«idt �R.( U residential-no QOM beteESO i'` r. V ' In kit" Cluena,aa•Private. LR SPRINGSSED - Q lend to loper qu Im beck FtwtauranNmeednp �.- spats not performing well CIN is bW Clubhouse for resale or leave D Prefls Fine am millionalres Minnesota Mutual Ul's Brooklyn Paris%&fly Os�p pookats lnsufsnoe carpal family lend • P No devdopmera Deep,deep pool"pool" rep� own o era �� Prior experisrtca • Deep,dsap am" TNK�Donne No Macke"Ptah fwlbUtty eoNeultant . Prior e4eriert0e Personal Ouarente" front Oonver Marketing Plan Wort"" Marketing Plan Pudk Irnpsov�frtenta No ph@Wng Phased • Two-yew phased. Privet financing of • Osyslopen negotiated City Installed utlllty meetti.lower and water wfet Clty for utility and mains and artarlds sveet knprovenarrts Into Dwqloper financed develop. laterals and We" • Aseeeemente on area bads.an paymsnls beginning at onset of pro" • ewe low M"Ites that onus land Is subdivided end Woroved,kna assessed at full market value Nigh mortgage rates - asigned for - l'i01 butt as course RUJOW t I PerWW*lres wee cortsaue ted pmwbop" number of lots SMAM �formd br Flerrte pfiose$126,OM 030,000• RW eof*m on fp IU) More pekes at ho and rider" - 0%b~-*d Yew `- . Nousinq Oft etarled 16 Ct rW*on 3rd and 0 WoufkbM lot nave better In 19M not ad~gut Of 0 absorption me of outer- muen aedvny In i M or q suburb 1087 course sloe M Oene"rhent in 7M year . Star"horn ON of ooftsaWfon f>M1000 . Course on efn an0 M mom_10"eaNfr PlodConoheMa+ of mom ph�ae,r,p,M ,ae�r, hWW te� �►Mh ertds in aerrtanee In swV yew Reeideralal dereloprr+wtl gven vM VftoeihxO and=urn dstrq voY t • AuaesnmerRa �•ob r - loth ds.,84eF ate 1:V • Property Tom house dertwta In eatq hors deep•OW 19—91 O Mr not Y*11f$ pO*W and �� cud IhW Overall,ftralffia versed CwOfta+Ise 1111"lnp from anrftntlatrent Inadequate se too fsigs a bely w for not a stroc+esalut tl M.�c ■■■Ifni ■■■■■■ ' �■■■!��'.'!■�■■■■■�t: '! ■■■■■®® GUIDELINES '■■®' ■�■■■■■ FOR e■■■ ►■ ■■■■ P LANNING ■■■�.� AND ., s. ,, ■. ► ►� ■■■■■■ . ■ ► � r�■®®t■�t ■■- DEVELOPING bLAMME, KI A PUBLIC ��'■ a■', ®•®■■■ GOLF CouRS E ■�=` ® � ■■ NATIONAL GOLFFOUNDATION �► `�"' ® ■r ����■■■■■■■■■■..■�■■sir■■■■■■■■■■r . ■r`Iim ■r-- � •■.-.:gin■■■®®® � !!!, Chapter 4: How Is a Golf Course Financed? KEY QUESTIONS: 1. What Are Your Total Projected Costs? 2. What Is Your Projected Cash Flow? 3. What Are Your Financing Options? Introduction good investment as well as a rewarding involvement. This chapter is not intended as a"textbook" At any rate, at this point you should have a on financing. It is probable that many of reasonably accurate estimate of the total amount you reading this are quite skilled in that area.In of money needed for the entire project, and are fact it is entirely possible that your thought of ready to determine the best way to fund the creating a golf course started with an idea you project. had on creative financing or land acquisition. You will be weighing whether all or part of the At this point you may have determined .that money should be from ashort-term or long-term different types of financing might be required at loan,note or bond.As noted earlier,the amount different phases;first for acquisition of the land of financing you can obtain goes hand-in-hand itself, then for course construction, then the with how much revenue you expect to generate. clubhouse and other facilities — and possibly In fact,the first question most lenders will ask is, even to cover the first few years of operation.In first much revenue do you expect to generate?" other words,it is rare that financing for astand- Citizens voting on a bond issue will want to alone public course without a real estate know that, too. development would be accomplished with a single loan or a turnkey bond issue. You may have related an acknowledged What Are Your Estimated community desire for a course to some existing Financial Needs? vacant land the city owns or has an option on. At times a planning group for a public course may Note: If you are a daily-fee developer, you make early misjudgments on what the total devel- might already own land that you know will opment costs will be—land,construction,all facili- increase in value if a golf course were to be ties and off-site needs. A good public course can be developed on it.Or,perhaps you just want to get created on a reasonable budget,but it is a serious into the golf business,and know it can be a very mistake to underestimate the total costs. Guidelines for Planning and Developing a Public Golf Course 25 HOW IS A GOLFCOURSE SUPPORTING QUESTIONS: start operation with a temporary facility for exactly that reason. Perhaps an attractive double-wide or ..� 1. What Is the Actual Land Cost? possibly the first small phase of the clubhouse, to be added to later. The function is to get golfers playing 2. How Much Will Your Planned your course. Facilities Cost? But in considering function,don't shortchange your- 3. What Will the Course Construction self or the project on quality. Do it right.It is better to Costs Be? have a smaller first-class facility than a spacious one i 4. What Will the Architect Charge? that will cost more to operate and maintain up front, and will cost more to redo in a few years. You can always expand a quality, well-planned first phase STEP 1: clubhouse. Land Cost Except for the clubhouse itself, you may want to include most of the other facilities in conjunction with At this stage you should have a practical figure of the course construction budget. It is often easier to what,if anything,land for the course will cost,includ- complete some of them during construction. For ex- ing any extra land you may have decided to acquire for ample,it costs considerably more and disrupts play to later use,sale or expansion.If that land is acquired as wait until after the course is completed to install golf part of a major annexation, the primary costs, of car paths.In certain cases you could be damaging parts course,will be legal fees.And,in rare instances,it may of the course already in play. be possible to acquire enough land by condemnation and eminent domain if the subsequent"public good" STEP 3: of a municipal golf course and other recreational area can be sufficiently proved. Construction Costs In any case,make sure in the title search that the land The cost of building a course varies widely.It is based acquired is not encumbered with such things as pre- on the contour of the land, the type of soil, the committed sewer lines,projected power lines or future vegetation,water and wetlands,section of the country, right-of-ways,and that you know of any earlier ease- the labor market and other factors.You may choose to ments. Make sure you have water rights, too. use the following rule-of-thumb 1988 average range estimates from the American Society of Golf Course STEP 2: Architects: Facilities Cost Construction of 18-holes $1,500,000 to $3,500,000 Maintenance equipment 250,000 to 450,000 Based on the type of facilities you have planned, as Maintenance building 100,000 to 250,000 discussed in chapter 3,you should have decided what Annual Maintenance budget 200,000 to 500,000 to build during the first stage and at subsequent stages. The first stage will include the maintenance facilities, These figures include the basic course construction, golf car storage,possibly golf car paths and shelters. irrigation system,shelters,bridges and cart paths and Later stages would likely include the clubhouse and grow-in costs (the maturation time for the newly other planned amenities. grassed course).Note of caution:The additional time it might take to grow-in a course because of weather or To emphasize an earlier point,in planning your club- other factors could result in subsequent costs as much house, put primary emphasis on function. This will as$200,000 or more. It could be a major figure added help you keep the cost down.Many good golf courses to your total construction costs. 26 Guidelines for Planning and Developing a Public Golf Course HOW IS A GOLF . FINANCED? The figures do NOT include the architect'sfee or What is Your Projected any design engineering charges. (These may or Cash Flow? may not be included in the architect's fee.)Nor do Inthe above charges include debt service. the Feasibility chapter you were guided through the development of a proforma on course operation.You Nor do they include costs for the various other listed all of your sources of income and detailed your facilities you may want on the course—shelters, expected expenses for the first five years. That gave drinking fountains,etc.—and such off-site costs as you an indication of how much debt service you would ? power and utility hook-ups. These are impossible be able to handle and how much early expense you will for us to estimate, but they might be substantial. have to cover before the operation starts to pay for They are entirely dependent on the location of your itself. Your projections let you know your projected site and the local utility charges. cash flow.low.Since it will probably be a negative flow for a time,you also know how long the operation will have Other costs which you must include are your to be supported out of a cash reserve—either a deep original feasibility study,any legal fees,points or Pocket or an operating loan. appraisal fees. In planning your budget and financing,be sure to cover all the bases. What Return Or) Investment Can You Expect? In individual instances the basic construction figures have been higher than shown above, and in rare This may be the key question in golf course develop- instances lower. They do suggest, however, that ex- ment. And the most complex. Obviously it depends cept for the clubhouse,a construction budget from$3 upon who is making the investment and how much it million to $5 million could be a reasonable planning is—and how much of the total development cost that range to start with,recognizing that there are instances investment represents. Generally,lending institutions in which courses have cost much more. You will find will expect that the amount management invests in the several examples of construction costs and mainte- a golf course to be of significant size that indicates the nance equipment costs in the Appendix. management will exercise due diligence in making the project a success. STEP 4: For example,if an investor put up$1,000,000 up front The Architect's Fee and obtained loans to create a golf facility worth $7,000,000, in just a few years his return on invest- The range of architectural design charges for golf ment would be quite good. On the other hand,if the course layout is perhaps wider than the range of actual daily-fee developer made a 25% investment in a construction charges. An architect's fee might be as $6,500,000 facility,his$1,625,000 investment would low as $100,000 or it might be $1,000,000. Perhaps have a significantly lower ROI. $200,000 to $500,000 plus expenses would be a reasonable budget to work with.Sometimes an archi- It is also obvious that along with the ROI from the golf tect's fee is based on a percentage of the construction course, the subsequent operating income and cash costs — say 5% to 7% plus expenses. On limited flow to handle debt service is a prime consideration. projects the charge is likely to be a flat fee.The best counsel is for you to talk to several architects.Ask for When the foregoing elements have been combined more than one bid. Engineering charges may or may based on your soundest judgment,you should have a not be included in the architect's fee,depending upon practical estimate of the amount of money you need to the complexity of the site,environmental concerns or complete your course.Financing options will be dis- other factors. Re-engineering because of environ- cussed below. mental requirements can often add unexpected dol- lars, so be aware of that working with your architect. Guidelines for Planning and Developing a Public Golf Course 27 HOW IS A GOLFCOURSE Consider Your Financing Options municipal income—logically the golf course itself. Such a bond can be useful for either Now you know how much you need to finance. And ^\ overall funding or for a significant part of you know that it's easier to have acquired the land first, the finance package. A revenue bond might and probably separately. Then you can consider a be used to finance the clubhouse once the shorter term loan for construction,including the archi- course is completed and in operation—or to tect's fees and facilities. If the land itself can be underwrite earlier cost of land acquisition so handled by grant,tradeout,cash purchase,long term- the lease operator who has contracted to lease or gift—or even a separate conventional loan, build and operate the course can get started. you will have an easier job financing or bonding for construction. Or, it might be used to refinance a project once it has been opened. Other than the specific financing plans shown below, there are often certain creative financing opportunities FOR EXAMPLE:In the Miamisburg,Ohio example available at local levels. Be sure to explore them noted earlier,the entire project,including the land thoroughly. purchase and the construction cost, was handled by a 25-year General Obligation Bond for If You Are a Municipality. $5,000,000.This resulted in a debt service charge Since municipalities have bonding power,it might be of$450,000 a year. The city anticipates converting the GOB to a Revenue Bond in three or four years in the community's best interest to cover the entire cost after the cash flow from the course has been of the project with one bond issue, including the established, the total debt is somewhat lower and clubhouse: the bond market is better,thus lowering the annual ❑ General Obligation Bond: If the course is debt service. to be part of the municipal overall long- ❑ Land Lease:Rather than leasing the facility range recreational plan or open space master to a management company for construction plan, a General Obligation Bond might be and operation,the municipality might elect the best method of funding. It may have a to lease to a company that will develop the better chance of voter approval in this larger course and then lease it back to the package than if the bond is for just a golf municipality. In this instance no debt service course alone.The necessary public meeting will appear on the municipality balance presentations in preparation for a referendum sheet, and when the lease expires, the city vote can serve as a useful springboard for will again own the land free and clear.This advance promotion of the project. In fact, is therefore,in effect,a lease purchase. once you have favorable passage of the referendum,you might well expect an early ❑ Bond Anticipation Note:In anticipation of acceptance of the course. potential bonding, a municipality might As a suggestion, when you prepare the choose a BAN, a Bond Anticipation Note.referendum "For the purpose of This would mean selling the.note on the ...," an open market.It can be rolled over each.year approximate target date should be established for an allowable five years. At the end of that will give the city the greatest flexibility that time, the loan can be covered by a in timing the bond issue. standard revenue bond or even a general ❑ Revenue Bond:Since a revenue bond usually obligation bond. On the other hand,it might does not require a public vote, it can be be possible that during those five years issued backed by the city's credit rating and enough revenue could have been generated revenues from designated sources of 28 Guidelines for Planning and Developing a Public Golf Course HOW IS A GOLF MURSE to make such bonding unnecessary, or to loans would be made at a higher loan-to-cost reduce the amount to be bonded. ratio,but in addition to the interest rate,the ❑ Conventional Loan: There are major lender would participate in the profits after debt service of the projects.There may also corporations and financial institutions and be differences in the basic interest rates resort developers that,at various times,are interested in making loans on golf courses. charged between the two types of loans,the (This is true for both municipalities and interest rate for the participating loans usually private investors.) Such loans might be for being lower. a portion of the course or for the entire The lending institution would determine the project. size of the loan it could make on the project ❑ Typical conventional loan patterns might based on the concept, your anticipated revenue,local conditions,legitimate market be grouped into three phases. First, would studies,supporting material and the financial be the construction loan for perhaps 1 to 3 and personal record of the private investor. years.This lending institution would likely `Phis will vary market by market.It may be require atake-out guarantee of that lower rate construction loan at the end of that time. useful to have your Business Plan availableif the lending institution asks about it. It is The take-out loan might be from another also important to highlight any expertise lender, or even from the same institution, that you or a member of your team has in and will probably be at a higher rate(perhaps golf course development and operations. 2%) for 5 years. The third phase of a conventional loan pattern would then be the ❑ Limited Partnership: It might be possible long-term loan for the overall going project that the community has a small group of from a bank or insurance company. It is also businessmen who are active in golf and possible that the long-term lending institution would like to become involved. In such a might ask for some equity in the project. case,a presentation to that group, centered around the proforma and the Business Plan, /f You Area Daily-Fee Developer: could help establish the required financial A developer might elect to create a public daily-fee support. course on land already owned or under option, or on ❑ Corporate Support: A major company city land acquired by lease. In any case, there are might consider providing land forgolf course several routes to acquisition of capital: construction in exchange for a course that gives employees a significant break on golf. ❑ Conventional and Participating Loans: Such land could be the basis of an outside If your project is involved with a real estate conventional construction loan, or the development, a certified appraisal of the corporation itself might make that loan to increased value of the project once a golf the course developer. course is added may be a sound basis for a ❑ Friendly Lease: There are situations in loan from an insurance company or bank. which an individual or estate might want to An insurance company would more likely protect property from development,but are prefer a long-term note. A bank loan might amenable to recreational facilities that be for a shorter term, but if the bank has a maintain open land.In such cases the property vested interest in the community, that loan might be leased to a private interest,or to a may be obtained at a more favorable rate. municipality with a minimum up-front Conventional loans would typically be made payment...or the property might be leased at a low loan to-cost-ratio. Participating with no up-front payment and delayed payments for one reason or another. Guidelines for Planning and Developing a Public Golf Course 29 HOW IS A GOLFCOURSE FOR EXAMPLE: In Myrtle Beach, S.C., a local the site specifics, the profiles of the key citizen controlled a 500-acre tract that had been in investor(s)would be part of the prospectus. his family for generations. He did not want it If this financing option were chosen,it would "sullied with homes." He thus leased half of the perhaps be wise to establish a new company property to a private developer on a 45-year lease specifically for the new facility. inerchangefora}latannualfeeplusa flatpercentage Once you have determined your financial needs and of green fees. The lease can be re-negotiated but obtained the appropriate financing, complete the cannot revert to the estate. In the first year, the paperwork and have the attorney(s)review it in every public course,HeatherGlen,hosted47,000 rounds. detail before executing the transaction. This should be your final checkpoint in the important go-no-go golf ❑ Outside Investors:If the project visualized course decision. is substantial,it might be practical to seek a broad base of investors. In this case, the Now that you have the land, the plan and the money, Business Plan and course proposal might be we will consider . . . reviewed with a local investment firm.This would lead to preparation of a formal How to Build the Golf Course in Chapter 5 prospectus to sell stock locally or regionally. In addition to the proforma projections and 30 Guidelines for Planning and Developing a Public Golf Course Signed Clerk-Treasurer 1001. 12 Street Plan. The arrangement, character, extent, width and location of all streets shall conform to the approved standard street sections, and relation to existing and planned streets, to reasonable circulation of traffic, to topographical conditions, to runoff of storm water, to public convenience and safety, and in their appropriate relation to the proposed uses of the area to be served. No full width street shall be less than sixty feet (601) wide. 1001.13 Required Land Improvements and Construction. Subdivision 1. Improvements Made. No final plat shall be approved by the council without first receiving a report signed by the city engineer and the city attorney certifying that the improvements and construction of the land, streets, and trails, together with all other necessary facilities in the plat have been completed and satisfactorily arranged in accordance with provisions of the regulations for land improvement and construction. In addition to construction on land, streets, and trails, the developer, as part of the final plat, shall install and pay for light poles, fixtures and street name signs as approved by the ,.� council for Lino Lakes and the utility company serving the location. Such installations shall be completed before the street is surfaced. (Amended by Ordinance No. 02 - 89 passed April 10, 1989) Subd. 2. Development Contract. As an alternative, in whole or in part, to completion of improvements prior to final plat approval, the owner and subdivider of the land covered by said plat may execute and submit to the city an agreement, which will be binding upon his or their heirs, personal representatives and assigns agreeing that he will cause all improvements called for in the plat, or in any supplementary agreements, to be completed within a time specified by the city. Performance of such contract shall be secured by a letter of credit in a liquidated amount equal to one and one-half times the estimated cost of the improvement. Both the development contract and the letter of credit shall be on forms provided by the city or upon forms approved by them. Subd. 3 . Restriction on Development. The owner and subdivider of the land covered by the plat shall execute and submit to the council an agreement, which will be binding upon his or their heirs, personal representatives and assigns stipulating that he will cause no private construction to be made on any lots in the plat or cause to be filed any application for building permits for such construction on said lots, until all improvements required under the city regulations for the proposed subdivision have been �.y made or arranged for in the manner provided in this section. pedicetio The developer shall dedicate to the city a reasonable portion of the proposed subdivision for public streets, roads, utility easements, water facilities, storm 171 water drainage and holding areas or ponds and other similar utilities and improvements. In addition, the developer shall dedicate to the city land for public use as parks, playgrounds, trails or other open space. The criterion to be used by the city in determining the park needs is as follows: (1) Proposed development density and use. (2) Proximity of development to existing parks. (3) Open space within the development. (4) Future park needs per the comprehensive plan. Subdivision 1. For residential development the following formula shall apply: Density in Units/Acre Percentage of Land Dedication 0 to 3 10% 3 to 5 12% 5 to 7 14% 7 to 9 16% 9 or more 18% Land site selection is to be approved by the Park Board. The City may choose to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant based on the following formula: Land Cost/Acre ($10 ,000/Min. ) x (Density Factor % x Subd. Acreage) = Park Dedicat- Number of Lots in Subdivision ion Per Unit OR (Park Dedication/Unit) x (No. of Units) = Park Dedication/Acre Number of Acres Subd. 2 . The Park Board may accept any combination of land and monies, not to exceed the dedication requirements. Subd. 3 . Minor subdivisions, as defined by ordinance, wil'1 be required to follow the Land Dedication Density Table listed in the ordinance, or $500 .00 per building site, at the decision of the Park Board. Subd. 4. For commercial or industrial development, the developer shall pay to the City $200.00 for each 1, 000 square feet .-� of proposed building for commercial or industrial use except those buildings used for warehousing, low labor intensive light manufacturing/assembly (one or less employee per 1, 000 s4tare feet of structure) and for other low labor intensive uses shall pay to 172 -ti the City $133 .00 for each 1, 000 square feet of proposed building for uses. A. All such money must be paid prior to the issuance of the building permit. B. The above shall apply to new buildings and additions to existing buildings. All cash payments so received shall be placed in a special fund by the city to be used only for acquisition, betterment or debt retirement related to parks, playgrounds, trails and open spaces. In all instances, the cash payment will be required prior to the signing of the final plat. (Section 1001. 14 Amended by Ordinance 6-85 passed May 13 , 1985; Ordinance 14-85 passed January 13, 1986; Ordinance 14-86, passed December 22, 1986; Ordinance 22-87, passed December 28, 1987; and Ordinance No. 05 - 91 passed November 12, 1991 and effective February 1, 1992 . ) 1001. 15 City Procedure. Subdivision 1. Preliminary Plat. The clerk-treasurer shall deposit any moneys received as fees herein required with preliminary plan. All moneys so received shall be used to defray the expense of engineering, legal, planning commission or any other expense incurred in connection with such proposed plat. The council shall refer one copy of the preliminary plan to the planning commission, one to the city engineer and one to the city attorney for recommendations. A report from the planning commission shall be due within thirty (30) days after receipt thereof by said commission. Reports of the city engineer and city attorney shall be due within fifteen (15) days after date of receipt of said plan. If problems are identified by or is not recommended by the engineer, attorney or planning commission or if for any reason is unacceptable, the clerk-treasurer shall be directed by the council to notify the owner or subdivider as to the time and place of a council meeting at which he will be afforded an opportunity to be heard. Subd. 2 . Final Plat. Within ninety (90) days of the approval of a preliminary plan by the council, there shall be submitted to the council an original and three (3) copies of a final plat, which may embrace all or part of the area shown on the preliminary plan. The council shall refer one copy of the plat to the planning commission for its examination and report, and shall refer one copy to the city engineer for his examination and report. The remaining copy from which copies may be made, shall be filed in ,-� the city files by the clerk-treasurer. The report of the planning commission shall be due within thirty (30) days after the plat is received by said commission; otherwise the council may take action without a commission report. The report of the city engineer shall be due within fifteen (15) days from receipt of said plat. 173 'AGENDA ITEM C MEMORANDUM TO: All Park Board Members FROM: Marty Asleson DATE: May 28, 1992 SUBJECT: Al Robinson Golf Course Endorsement Mr. Al Robinson has, for some time, intended to build a golf course on his land. Please find enclosed a map of the area where this golf course would be built. Mr. Robinson is asking for the City to endorse this concept. I have been asked to forward this information .-� to you to review in relationship to any building projects in respect to 'our Comprehensive Plan. As you can see, the area in question is outside of the scope of our plan. In other words, it would be at least 10 years before we would see any possibility of providing for recreation use in this area. Part of the trail corridor does however, travel along County Ditch 22 . Mr. Robinson informed me that his golf course would be located in the Pine Street/4th avenue area. The City Council wishes the golf course idea to be reviewed for comment by the City Boards. Please bring your comments and/or endorsement to the meeting. tu Ped strian% icyc i kage$ Ffe Sub ivision To h e 'griatil Syltem a`,, qv I • As hown n T is Ar� TDefined During o er tiv E ort etfe T e ity A d'The ev to r , y ical ' laNp � 1 1 a,A. SirLf - - ! ...... ............ .................... ................... ..... ...... . t s gi ated Trail 1 ` - r s_ b • i a 4 I AGEhDf. tT Z_1%1 MEMORANDUM TO: All Park Board Members FROM: ' Marty Asleson DATE: May 28, 1992 SUBJECT: The Cottage Homesteads of Willow Ponds Please refer to the enclosed maps showing the location of the Cottages. Representatives of the development will be at the Park Board meeting. This development consists of 8 - 12 units per acre. They will be one story with single attached garages. There will be four units per building. There will be no children allowed. This is a retirement housing theme. The residents will be in the 50's age group, and 80% will have their own transportation. There are plans to coordinate a transportation service to this area. There shall be a community center for the residents to use for recreation and a meeting/congregation place. There shall be a walk-way installed along the north side of Birch Street. This trail conforms to our proposed transportation trail set forth in the comprehensive Plan. The designated park for this area is A-2 , Sunrise Park. Staff raised the question about visiting grandchildren and if a mini-park of some sort would be needed, that this would be their responsibility to provide for this by themselves. Otherwise they are connected to Sunrise Park by trail. The raw land value is as follows: Parcel 0003 - 2 . 5 acres $78000. Parcel 0004 - 8 . 45 acres 32900. Parcel 0005 5. 5 acres 20600. TOTAL 16 . 45 acres $131500. Using our dedicated funds formula, the park dedication would be: $7994/acre x 16.45 acres x . 16 = 90 lots $233 . 78/unit or $21, 040.21 per development dm 14, � 277 !)K P fk6, * Of L£ <»y2> � � 2460 South Higb". 1 W i\rlinnespAUs,Wm').esota 55416 . 612-920.5105 27 May .1992 Mr. Party Aaleson Pai-s a.:Recreation Forestry 1189 Main, Street TO La'6 Lade$,, MPS 55014 s 9204 t Cottage Homesteads of 'Willov Ponds Lino Likes, NN ,Dear Mr. .Asleson Planes aceept this letter-ag our park dedication proposal,. As you faaw we are proposing to develop and build 06 senior titizeCi-rental .� unIta. We offer our senior$ a lifesty'Ze slternat ive that is not available t© t halt,i.n apartment or hig ;r,lsys. ''The aaftag',e.s are ail on .one level w the are na at-airs., hallways or;eIevavoraa� each apastm,ent teas direct ecc.ass to otttdoc rss:.restdenta can hAive their" oWct gar3.eti a-R4 het; gnA.l he exterior is ' prgfesatoa 41ly a intained� . We_ are able to"offer our Oen.iors affordable rents because,tlhese gra��ects .are s •f0a.ttc#al ly ,eupported by the federal government through :lei; and :ik6deratA. � incca 404iing tAk credits an4 by. the • 1,otaI commun3it.y,[hr.oug� tart mgrement fWmciag: and ot.hez support me�hanie . To, that; ands we are asking tote Park a#id >lecruaLiot e,paz ae'at tad *give the. normal gadk. dedication ragtuiremeut' for thia proje�t. ltawfoQer, as pant'' of out pian ve"da fnto€td to construct a fi.ve .foot bituminous wall€ia;;g trail elang the. front of the entire property parall.et to Xlm Street. We hA,v al�eedj� submitted the site pA.ar�, land�capitxg lai,st�, and j$,A ncing plate tt� "the city trig thsr''with our :zo<niag application and processing fee. � I ask that you.,place us oa_, your ageqda for Monday, .lt�e, .1st. I *qi3 l' be there to. answer any queatiofts tt t Y'Ou and, y*ttr colleagues p .re. A ' �hahk you. Sincerely„ Mi heel esidt ,-� Cs'tt'age 1 ,ateacl a Aneri tea:s ZttG: LL d Park 5� 92 r i Liria3 a /4 P/11 140mESTEAD ofAmerim Inc. - t$ " I 1 ' G I AWa• I IS 907 cc i \ p 6 rl I Ac c•p e ° I G R a R 0 JJ • \ � _ I z � Gfv NENr GATA I I SITE PLAN SRf AREA 15.59 ACRES € USEABLE SITE AR Ea 120E ACRES IT.AS UNITS/ACRE) ,Y 1_4SCALE.M150'-0- EXISTING ROB'-11.ACRES FUTURE R 0.25 ACRES .WR•aNa'.xa,umFp.A.•.,rre r,ImmA,••rt L TAASR RCO4S-5 R-SS -AGE ROOMS-10 BB-2 Tushie L[-2 AGES 93 • M•onlgom¢ry Innc.c'Associ LINO LAKES COTTAGES -Cid—Cl— Alpnnacls LINO LAKES,MINN. 7700 EtlN�o,ougn woV..601 MmvopO45Mmesob 55435 6178.10'8208 5 EEEDLE35.SN b'WTEPIxL- _2 esn wuE ` /.-�- \ SwWtE PINE-'_ —� /♦. � , _ a x3G PlxE - 1 4 ° 6 ° E E C/�l 10' ' E , OxeDO OE EF°ueE �i t c p m \ 3 t%11 4 4 �1 1 f _ • 4 4 ° ° 21515Tf P >' LE Swt E ° 31 ry EL.37REE7 _.___. ... ... .. cwxr•ap .c., is p°apD a4cE _ ____ - _ _ _ ________ __ _ - __ _ G SBkeCIGl45 Y°YC'._ T QMOIaNT 0.8 2YfluO�pB -- -- N Q r � feF tQACx 11RLfLceF R.0 -- c ]'aFTF wxE �n n� I 1 a N LANDSCAPE PLAN ScskE:M1SP-O" ' � nil ilia -•k' R,xGa K/P/ n - — .u�^w4�NeNmu/.q 4llwlny-Pa°fIL PrvlNv:GVE P:°hN P?/• — �,,,.,m.,,.,,m.,,.,.., 4%e"+'ht P4A`7QL E04� N/PP^NNf�•eA0 if0�APB (a�Y l..'W'�l9 PP-�Ta�J—� �• � 'ft NP FbNN hFom r h stan8 ' rw H � �\ E PLANT LIST ire:-e�3K.+r, 1+3r.cn ZT PWI4N 'g'r!-iN.C4f�,�r:i4:�(: VTK,74.Y.00'�fV.'°chCno[t.C7 dit_�i1 epuwprr e. arr. epraxrcek°exlE Ira ..SEwras TuShi¢ LF.•� _ r.X�_`l. 9fiS.IPt:��I�f"ItxN�f /YkN11(30f7`¢r/ E II" TREES ASSOoiof¢5 fAr�Pxrt>sp r�C��No OP - �.,: rl �r ro.,•• Inc. t,O,L ryxNFr',I1— �' ,'rxPveR�av��2arw •°"•"`•+'� LINO LAKES COTTAGES NChiQDlS$DGL2?CpE.C�. Not wO VP.50D ONi� I+nTo:ro1�CP Slv�rrf 14 IGn°scaDQ nlcn�;:a1 �t oly w�17 0�er cPT onw � LINO LAKES,MINN. r v NR�swzPn+vrz nlNv ' e ES M Edge of Mulch Detail Mulch Detail Sod Detail /1Tree Planting Detail- 1 Nv+naDDGt�'n°w'c SSe� No Scale C: No Scab, N Sralc 612 d:o'd:_d .,., v�w p �rav v LINO LAKES 51 �A100�0 Will r y V l►J PROJECT MANAGEMENT MEETING (PM2) DATE: Wednesday, May 6,, 1992 TIME: 9. 00A.M ATTENDANCE:: REQUESTED BY M Asleson,' D. 8oxrud (SEH) ,' W. Hawkins (ATTYj , 'P. KZuegel, Powell (TKDAj , R. Schumacher, D. Schneider; D. Volk, M,K. Wyland A. Brixius OTHERS: John Johnson and Roger Dereck 4 f I . Minutes: April 22 , 1992 J II. Agenda Approval III. PRESENTATIONS: i A. 9 : 00 A.M. Senior Housing - John Johnson and Roger Dereck were present to review proposed senior housing for a 12 acre parcel west of St. Joseph's Church off Elm Street. 8-12 units per acre are proposed. They will be one story w/ single attached garage Four units per building, approximately 90 total One sewer/water connection per unit No children 1-2 & 2+den units proposed Guaranteed senior housing for 30 years Similar units in No. St. Paul, Maplewood, Oakdale Services provided: transportation, help w/med. forms community room w/washers/dryers, 80% of residents have their own vehicles Property to be rezoned from Residential to PUD No residents under 50 years of age, one must be 55 2 x 6 construction Party wall soundproof Slab on grade Transit heat Individual furnaces/central air Owned by limited partnership •� Drainage concerns will be addressed Publish for June P & Z, Park Board & CC Staff concerns regarding adequate parking, storage r facilities, street width, trail/park area for any grandchildren RCWD review B. 10: 00 A.M. Comprehensive Plan Status - NAC, Al Brixius Al stated the plan has been approved by Met Council but not the City Council. Should be reviewed by P&Z and CC and adopted. P&Z will review at next meeting. Zoning Code - Discussion with Bill Hawkins, suggested old ordinance be revoked in full, new ordinance adopted - this will eliminate problem of publishing old and new (only a summary publication is needed) . Staff agreed this was a good idea. Will be on next CC agenda. New text for zoning map could be ready for June meeting along with ordinance. IV. Bill Hawkins - City Attorney A. Outlot A & B, Otter Lake Estates (Agreement for use of Street Right of Way for Private Drive) Bill Hawkins will draw up agreement, including a clause regarding insurance to hold city harmless. B. Bill Hawkins will set a meeting between Nelson, his attorney, Darrell, and himself. Mitigation will probably work to resolve the problem. V. Pete Rluegel - Building Official A. Prokop Septic Concern New systems has been installed, problem resolved. B. Dennis Smith Complaint - (Prokop Septic problem- resolved) C. Jim Friend, 811 Orange, Drainage Problem Check to see if there is a drainage easement, get a copy of berm plan from resident. D. Linda Avenue - Junk Vehicles/Auto Salvage Hawkins recommended an ordinance change to prohibit certain number of vehicles or limiting parking of vehicles in residential district to those residing at the site. Item for future Planning & Zoning Board. VI . Darrell Schneider - City Engineer A. Quail Ridge Platting Status - hold B. Birch Street Underpass and Trail Status - meeting scheduled for Thursday at 9 : 00. C. Pheasant Ridge 2nd Addition Status - meeting scheduled with Bill Hawkins & Darrell. VII. Don Volk - Public Works Director A. Control System - 2nd Low Bidder will be recommended to the Council. VIII. SWMP - Status - Plan of Action (next meeting) ."1 CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES DATE April 8, 1992 TIME STARTED 7::00 P M. TIME ENDED ' 9:30 P. M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ge;lbmann, I�ande:rs, Meslch, .Nordne, '> Robinson, Schaps, MEMBERS ABSENT Slatte ALSO PRESENT c City Engineer Schneider, Planning Consultant Br xius, Staff Person Wyland Mayor Reinert welcomed the new Board Members, briefly explaining their charge and wishing them luck. Board Member Robinson volunteered to chair this meeting of the Board as all other members were new. He stated that he would not be interested in the chairmanship except possibly as a co-chair and suggested that the Board meet prior to the next regular meeting to select a chair. All members agreed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Schaps moved and was supported by Landers to approve the minutes of the March 11, 1991 meeting of the Board. All voted aye. Motion carried. OPEN MIKE: No comments. ITEM 4 - P&Z 92-03 MINOR SUBDIVISION - ULMER'S RICE LAKE ADDITION - JACK MINKVELD Planning Consultant Brixius reviewed the staff report and explained that this is a request to subdivide an 11, 065 square foot parcel from a 2 . 2 acre (approximately) parcel in Ulmer's Rice Lake Addition. The property is zoned R-1 Single Family Residential and the lot conforms to the requirements of the Code. Staff would recommend approval of the request with the conditions outlined in the staff report. Robinson asked why the property owner was being required to hook up to sanitary sewer and was advised by Brixius that although staff recommends hook up, we can be flexible on this requirement. Robinson also asked why the existing house was not shown on the plan and was advised by the applicant that it was an oversight by the surveyor and would be on the plan submitted to Council. Mr. Menkvold, representing the property owners, was present and PLANNING & ZONING BOARD APRIL 8, 1992 indicated that he agreed with the staff report except the requirement of hooking up to the sanitary sewer. He explained that the existing well and septic system is functioning at this time and would request that hook up be delayed until the existing system fails. City Engineer Schneider suggested a time frame for hook up to the sanitary sewer, ie. two years. Schaps asked if there was any past practice to base this requirement on. Schneider stated that in the future the people in the Rice Lake development will be required to "agree" to "not object to" sanitary sewer/water "when" it becomes available before they will be allowed to split their property. Landers stated that this sounds like blackmail! Mr. Menkvold stated that the two year time frame is not unusual and he felt the property owners would have no objections to that requirement. Nordine asked why the lot was not split in half and Menkvold stated there would be no benefit in that as the rear of the property is low and wet. Mesich expressed concern that the property owner may not want to hook up to sewer and water even in two years. Staff advised that he has the option of not subdividing or accepting the recommendations as proposed. MOTION: Gelbman moved and was supported by Schaps to approve the request with the conditions outlined in the staff report except for the following modifications: 1. Parcel B shall be required to hook up to sanitary sewer and water service within two years or sooner if the on-site systems fail prior to that time. 6. Grading and Drainage can be adequately accommodated on site. 7 . Future subdivision of the site would not be recommended by staff. All voted aye. Motion carried to approve subdivision request. ITEM 5 - P&Z #92-04 SITE/BUILDING PLAN FOR ROCK GARDENS LAWN AND LANDSCAPING SUPPLY Planning Consultant Brixius reviewed this request which is to expand the existing business located at CSAH 32 (Ash Street) and east of State Highway 49 (Hodgson Road) by constructing a new 1, 560 square foot greenhouse and expand the site's tree storage areas. The staff would recommend approval of this request with the conditions indicated in the staff report. Board Member Robinson stated that this site has been vastly improved over the last few years and commended Mr. Soderman on the 2 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD APRIL 8, 1992 good job he has done with the improvement. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Soderman explained that this proposal will generate no new employees, no additional parking needs, or additional signage. He expressed concern about providing additional parking spaces at this time and assured the Board that if the need arose he would certainly provide more parking and that he did have the space to do so. MOTION: Schaps moved and was supported by Mesich to approve the request as submitted with the conditions outlined in the staff report except for the following modifications: 1. Parking space shall be set aside for future use. All voted aye. Motion carried to approve site/building plan. ITEM 6 - P&Z 92-05 & 06 Conditional Use Permit and Site/Building Plan for FINA Mart Planning Consultant Brixius explained that this is a request to remove the existing FINA Station on Lake Drive and 35W and replace it with the proposed structure. Staff would recommend approval with the conditions outlined in the staff report. A representative from FINA, Dan Dege was present to review the history of the proposal. He indicated that they had originally wanted to remodel the existing building and the Council said "no" they would rather see a new structure. Therefore, the proposed request. A concern was expressed by the applicant regarding the staff recommendation on signage. They did not feel it was right to consider the whole of the lighted exterior a sign and suggested that only the words FINA be considered sign. They also discussed the fact that there is an existing pylon sign that will be raised to 651 , an existing sign on Lake Drive that should be "Grandfathered" approval, and then the lighted wall sign. FINA was advised that the sign on Lake Drive would not be considered "Grandfathered" as this is a new request and all signs can be zequired to be brought into conformance with the Code. In regard to landscaping, FINA offered to provide a double row of evergreens, 10' apart, balled and burlapped. The car wash is on the plan for concept approval only and will not be constructed until such time as sewer and water is available or the car wash water can be 100% recycled. The City Engineer agreed with and recommended this action in regard to the car wash. The old underground tanks will be removed and new ones installed. Approval for the ponding area is pending from the RCWSD. Curb cuts are greater than required by MnDOT, however, due to proposed use by 3 n PLANNING & ZONING BOARD APRIL 8, 1992 large trucks and the nature of the access, a larger curb cut would be appropriate and recommended by the Engineer. MOTION: Mesich moved and was support by Schaps to approve Item 92- 05 Conditional Use Permit. All voted aye. Motion carried. MOTION: Schaps moved and was supported by Mesich to approve Item 92-06 Site and Building Plan with the conditions outlined in the staff report except for the following modifications: 4. Screening shall be provided by a double row of evergreens, 10' apart, balled and burlapped. 5. The car wash shall not be constructed until such time as sewer and water is available, or an acceptable recycle system is devised to accommodate 100% of the water from the car wash. Drainage and utility plans subject to approval of RCWSD. City Council shall review/approve proposed signage for site. Delete conditions 7 & 8. All voted aye. Motion carried. ITEM 7 - P&Z 92-07 Minor Subdivision - Bernice Blastervold Planning Consultant Brixius stated that this is a simple rearrangement of lot lines to rectify a non-conforming setback situation. Staff would recommend approval. MOTION: Mesich moved and was supported by Schaps to approve the request as submitted. All voted aye. Motion carried. ITEM 8 - P&Z 92-08 Site/Building Plan for Nature Interpretive Center Planning Consultant Brixius reviewed the proposed request which is to construct a 10, 640 sq. ft. nature interpretive center north of George Watch Lake within the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes County Park Reserve. Anoka County has received a grant from the State of Minnesota to provide for this construction. Staff would recommend ,,.� approval of the request with the conditions outlined in the staff report. 4 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD APRIL 8, 1992 Mr. Ron Cox, Park Planner and Mr. Vern Watten, Architect from Anoka County were present to review the request. They stated that the fire chief has reviewed the request and made some suggestions they have incorporated into their plan including revising the parking area to provide access to emergency vehicles. They anticipate 2 , 000 user per year and are providing parking for 47 vehicles and 5 buses. In answer to questions raised by staff, the proposed building is 270' from the high water mark, septic tank and drain field will be located on the south end of the building, and the access road will be kept gravel at this time. Al Robinson stated that he felt the City was very lucky to be getting this type of facility in the Park Reserve. MOTION: Schaps moved and was supported by Gelbman to approve the request with the conditions outlined in the staff report and the following modifications: Revised parking arrangement as suggested by Fire Chief to provide for emergency vehicle access. All voted aye. Motion carried. After discussion on the item, Robinson asked if the County would be able to provide any type of family/individual gun safety training and suggested the Park Reserve would be a good location for it. The County representatives indicated they would check on the request. ITEM 9 - P&Z 92-09 Variance for Lot Depth - Brandywood Second Addition City Engineer Schneider reviewed this request which is to allow a 2 ' and 1. 9 ' variance in lot depth for Lot 2 , Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2 , Brandywood Estates 2nd Addition. Staff would recommend approval as indicated in the staff report. MOTION: Gelbman moved and was supported by Landers to approve the request with the condition that the minimum square foot area requirement be maintained. All voted aye. Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS: Robinson recommended that the P&Z Board meet at 6 : 00 P.M. on Wednesday, May 13 , 1992 in order to elect a chairman, discuss length of terms, and any other items necessary for the new ^ board members. 5 PLANNING & ZONING BOARD APRIL 8, 1992 Planning Consultant Brixius asked if the Board would consider/review the requirements of Home Occupations in a Business District. Some items may be coming before the Board in the near future and there is the potential for problems especially in the area of Lake Drive zoned Business. ADJOURNMENT: Schaps moved and was supported Mesich to adjourn that meeting at 9: 30 P.M. All voted aye. Motion carried. MOTION: 6