Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-10-1990 Council MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 • ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor James Grabek, Councilmembers Diann Goetten, Allan Nettles, Barbara Peterson and Edward Callahan. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, City Engineer Cook, City Attorney Barrett, and City Recorder Scheffler. CONSENT AGENDA* Bernhardson requested the addition of a report from the LMCD Representative following Agenda Item #2. He also asked that item #18, Lake Use and Management be discussed at that time. Goetten requested that items #2 and #25 be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Callahan asked for the removal of item #4 for the purpose of discussion. It was moved by Mayor Grabek; seconded by Callahan, to approve the Consent Agenda, with the addition of a report from JoEllen Hurr and with the exception of items #2, #4, and #25, which were removed and discussed in the order appearing on the Agenda. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0, Motion passed. is APPROVAL OF MINUTES* Goetten referred to the item pertaining to the disposal of City property, (see page #20 of the August 27, 1990 minutes). She asked Bernhardson if the City will in fact destroy 14 bicycles as stated. Bernhardson explained that the bicycles have been stored in the Public Works shed and are severely rusted. He stated that it is not known how the bicycles will be disposed, but that he would inform Council of the method that is recommended. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting held August 27, 1.990. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0, Motion passed. LMCD REPORT -LAKE USE MANAGEMENT LMCD Representative JoEllen Hurr was present. She stated that it was her understanding that Council would delay a vote on this matter until their September 24th Meeting. Callahan indicated that is correct. Mayor Grabek asked Councilmembers Callahan and Nettles to make a brief presentation of their views regarding this issue. 40 - 1 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED Callahan stated that he and Nettles had met with JoEllen • Hurr, Gene Strommen and Bob Rascop to discuss the report. He said, "I think it is fair to say that the new report is better than the old one, particularly in regard to clarity. A number of the items noted in our letter have been addressed with better organization and clarity. The report now clarifies the views of the individual LMCD Board members. I think they should be congratulated for their response to the input from the various cities. However, Allan and I still do not think that the report should be adopted. It is very difficult to explain all of the reasons why. I would say that this plan is an LMCD .plan only in the sense that they gathered the people to make the plan. It is a plan that has been made and developed because of a request from a Metropolitan Council task force. It is not at all certain what the plan does, other than being an expression of the views of the various members. I don't know what the impact, authority or meaning of the plan is other than to say that this is a good report to have. I believe it is very difficult for individual cities to adopt the plan because of the uncertainty of what they are adopting in relation to authority from other governmental bodies. Moreover, it is focused upon, and starts with the premise that this is a plan that the whole system of government related to the lake, think would be an overall, broad plan. In my opinion, the LMCD adopting the plan compromises a number of views that would not have been compromised had the LMCD started • with their own plan. The plan seems to fall back on the authority of the Metropolitan Council. When I say that it misses the LMCD's point of view, as an agency, I think it necessarily fails to involve a focus on the pollution and aesthetic aspects of the lake at the expense of some other things. For example, I believe that the plan ought to state what the reasonable limit on the lake is. I myself think it should be what has been suggested by other State agencies, which is 10 acres per boat. The plan should set clear ideas to mind as to how they will proceed if that in fact is the standard. The plan still strongly focuses on the recreational activities of the lake as a goal of the LMCD. It sets forth the expectation that there will be a number of parks around the lake. However, it does not focus on what the LMCD's response is to how those recreational activities will impact the lake. I am opposed to the giving of the any kind of authority, review and comment authority, to the LMCD over the shoreland management. I believe Mr. Nettles opposes this also. I would be willing to cooperate only so far as to provide a copy of shoreland actions taken by the City to the LMCD once they have occurred. The terms review and comment are very vague and I don't know where it will lead. I am also not in favor of the tax increase, because I do not support the items for which the funds would be used. I do no believe that there should be additional, non -city members added to the LMCD Board. Finally, because this - 2 - 0 ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED • plan is designed to have the LMCD as the managing entity, I believe that in the long run the LMCD will be supplanted by other agencies that are more bureaucratically staffed to take care of it. Therefore, the benefits that the City can gain from the LMCD will be lost. I believe that the LMCD is becoming a mouthpiece of the DNR because it is beginning to take money from the DNR to perform the functions and activities of the DNR. I believe that the City Council should vote against this plan." Nettles said, "I agree in large measure with the things that Ed has said. I would like to thank JoEllen Hurr, Gene Strommen and Bob Rascop for taking time to meet with us. It helped me to better understand the position of the LMCD. As I thought more about the plan, I compared it to the internal tension that was built into our Constitution, checks and balances. There are many agencies that are involved with Lake Minnetonka. The Legislature has repeatedly given bits of power to each one. You can make the argument that this was done to keep some of that tension in check to prevent any one agency from becoming too powerful. I feel that, even though the motivations of the plan may be positive and sound, we are concentrating too much on what the DNR and Metropolitan Council want to do. The LMCD takes on the position of being a hand maiden to those two organizations. As I understand it, the LMCD was started because of the need for a coordinator for the cities to regulate environmental efforts. I • am worried about setting a force in motion without knowing where it will go. I'm afraid of what may happen once the Legislature gets involved with this plan. I think it is important for everyone to know that really the way the DNR and Metropolitan Council are treating Lake Minnetonka is different from the manner in which lakes are normally treated.. The issue of acres /boat for example is one where I believe Lake Minnetonka is looked upon in a different way. It seems to me that the number of boats per acre has been determined arbitrarily. The number has no bearing or footing in relation to what is safe and environmentally sound. It is just based on the fact that there is a large population here. I share Ed's feeling that one of the primary things we ought to look at is what should be the standard. Do we wait until the last boat is put in on top of the one that preceded it, or is there some other way to do this? That is of great concern to me. If a conclusion cannot be reached, then I would like to see an environmental impact statement, in the truest sense, each time this issue is considered. Some users are going to be forced off of the lake if usage continues to grow. As I understand this report, better though it is, we don't get down to saying there isn't going to be anymore access until 929 boats are added to the lake, if I understand that right. I can't imagine 229 more boats on the lake in peak hours before we get to 7 acres per boat. 40 - 3 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED I'll explain my reason for objecting to land use controls by • the LMCD. Orono is the most restrictive of any of the lake communities. The pressure can only come one way, which would be for Orono to become more lax. I agree with the plan's statement that the pressure for re- development is probably the biggest concern. I think that is an appropriate concern for the agency. However, I would suggest, that perhaps we look to the LMCD to establish standards that are held in common, but leave the enforcement of those in the communities that surround the lake and actually have the lakeshore management." Hurr replied, "Those standards were still left for the cities to enforce. The LMCD is not becoming the enforcement agency on shoreland standards. The DNR came to the LMCD and asked us to work on the shoreland management regulations that every city has to adopt. The DNR asked us to establish a unified plan that would be accepted by all communities. I think if we had uniform standards it would better protect the lake as a whole. The intent was never for the LMCD to become a shoreland enforcement agency." Nettles stated that Orono would still come under pressure of the other communities that wished to have less restrictive standards. With regard to the overall plan, he said, "I think the LMCD is on the right track, but I'm not ready to approve this plan. I believe this is one of the most important issues before • the City of Orono. I think the City should develop our own committee for lake use and other issues. It may be appropriate for marina issues, etc., to be given back to the cities because if affects their land use decisions." Mayor Grabek asked Hurr for her opinion on the comments she heard this evening. Hurr said, "The LMCD was mandated to prepare this plan. If we didn't do it, the Metropolitan Council was going to do it for US. The reason I am not as worried as Councilmember Callahan about another agency taking over the plan is because the other agencies were involved in the plan. I think the LMCD has been realistic about our role as it relates to other agencies. We really are part of these other agencies and because of that we will never be able to do everything by ourselves. Compromise is necessary. As far as shoreland management, I wish all of the communities were as strict as Orono. I'm concerned that if there are no regulations, there will be development around the lake that you and I would not favor. I agree that there is the threat of future developers pressuring Orono to relax its standards. The boat /acre issue is tough because there are so many kinds of boats." Nettles asked Hurr whether the LMCD has considered looking - 4 - is ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 • LMCD REPORT CONTINUED at the issue of varieties of boats, power restrictions for boats, etc. Hurr replied, "We have talked about the idea of limiting horse power. We do limit size, to some degree, to 65'. If we were to lessen that it would eliminate the ability for charter boats to use the lake. If we were to specify that charter boats can be larger, then everyone will have a charter boat." Mayor Grabek said, "It seems to me that the language in the plan is very vague and may be interpreted different ways. For example, it could be interpreted the way the DNR wanted it many years ago. That there be parks and docks, etc. They may use the plan as the opportunity to take over those areas." Hurr replied, "The LMCD had nothing to say about the park on Halsteads Bay. That was a land use issue. On one hand the cities don't want the LMCD involved with land use issues and yet they are requesting us to help keep out Hennepin Parks. Either you deal with land use or you don't. The LMCD has no right to keep out parks. We have in our plan that if so many boats are on the lake, and we do boat counts every year, then we trigger more water patrol. Then the County has to come up with a good amount of money to provide more water patrol or we won't allow 'x' number of boats on the lake. I agree, and I believe Bob Rascop • did too, about the environmental assessment is something we should add to every category we have in the plan. That is a good point that Allen suggested." Mayor Grabek stated that it appeared as though JoEllen was trying to sell the plan. Hurr replied, "I am trying to answer some of the questions. I am comfortable with the plan and am sure that it will pass anyway. That doesn't mean that Orono should vote in favor of it. Out of the 14 communities, I'm sure there will be 8 that will vote in favor. I'm not asking you to jump on the band wagon. If you don't believe in the plan, then you should vote accordingly." Mayor Grabek said, "I believe that there are a lot of generalities in this plan and that caution should be exercised. I think if we wait until the vote on the September 24th, we may miss an opportunity to convince one or two more communities of our position. If Council can reach a consensus this evening, I think we should prepare a draft to send to each of the other communities stating that we are voting no and the reasons why. We could invite representatives from those cities to meet with us to discuss the plan before they vote in favor. That could be the official position of the City and JoEllen can take that to the meetings." - 5 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED • Callahan agreed that there is no point waiting until September 24th to express Council's opinion. Mayor Grabek asked Hurr what will happen if the plan is not accepted. Hurr replied, "Then it is put on a shelf." Callahan said, "We really don't know because no body knows what accepting or not accepting means." Hurr added, "I think if the plan is not accepted and voted on, then the Metropolitan Council Executive Committee will call it a critical review area and they will step in. I think if that happens the cities will loose the clout that they have in interpreting this plan and making it happen. I believe that the Metropolitan Council will look at the fact that all agencies sat in on the preparation of this plan in conjunction with the lake cities. If the cities are still not willing to accept the plan, the Metropolitan Council will step in." Mayor Grabek said, "Just because these agencies were involved with the preparation of the plan, does not mean that the cities have to agree with it." Goetten said, "I think that drafting a letter is a good • idea. We should include in the letter the portions of the plan that we approve. It is obvious that the LMCD made a good faith effort to revise some of the items that concerned us. I also feel that Orono has been a leader in these areas and the environment. We are more strict than any other community. I think that unless there are further changes in the plan we couldn't possibly support it because of who we are as a community. I don't think that should be a direct cause of the Metropolitan Council taking over. They could do that anyway." Hurr said, "I think they would be likely to do that if they can point to the fact that the cities have not accepted the plan." Nettles said, "I don't think that any of us are absolutely rejecting this plan. As Diann said, there are good points in the plan. I think the LMCD is on the right track. On the other hand, if that is the way it is going to be presented by these other agencies, they are putting us in a take it or leave it position. I think there are some things in the plan that are very vague. Why can't they accept the fact that we have some good faith questions about aspects of the plan ?" Hurr replied, "The Metropolitan Council is going to say that two years have been spent drafting the plan. They started • - 6 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 LMCD REPORT • looking at communities I'm playing will look cities the satisfied." CONTINUED Lake Minnetonka back in have not responded to the devil's advocate here, but at this. They'll feel that opportunity to be involved 1973 and the lake area concerns they expressed. I believe that's how they they have now given the and they are still not Goetten and Mayor Grabek stated that the City of Orono has been responding to this issue for some time. Mayor Grabek said, "We have responded to issues such as parking in a manner we believe is best for our community. I think the Metropolitan Council is looking for smooth, political way, over a long period of time, to get what they want.. If they are going to get what they want anyway, no matter what we do, then I think we ought to be on record stating that we do not approve. I would like to propose that we impose on Ed and Allan one more time to draft a position paper that the Council approves and send it to the other communities. The letter can request that they come to our September 24th Council Meeting. We can hold a special meeting if need be." Hurr stated that many other cities hold their council meetings on the same Monday nights. • Mayor Grabek suggested that staff identify the cities that are in question of Orono's position and concentrate on them. Hurr stated that she could provide a list of those communities that have voted to support the plan. Mayor Grabek said, "Each of us could attend the council meetings for those cities not yet decided and present our position." Goetten stated that she would still like those cities that are already in opposition to the plan to get a copy of the letter. Callahan said, "Just one additional point. The City of Orono is not against additional parks or access on the lake. What we oppose is the fact that the plan does not address what impact those additional factors will have on the lake and what should be done accordingly. Also, if this plan ends up before the Legislature, it is impossible to guess what will they will do with it. It doesn't seem that it would be the way to proceed to get your way." Hurr agreed. Mayor Grabek confirmed with Hurr that the position paper is • - 7 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED the way that she will vote and what she will present to the LP4CD. • Hurr replied, "That is correct." Callahan asked whether the LMCD budget had been voted on, and if so, how JoEllen had voted. Hurr replied, "The budget was voted on and I abstained." PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS: Planning Commission Representative Moos was present but had no comments at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #1334 REBERS CONSTRUCTION - SUGARWOODS PLAT RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONS OF PRD APPROVAL Bernhardson explained what it is that the applicant is asking Council to reconsider and why (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 9, 1990). He stated that the Planning Commission had recommended that each driveway that did not meet the standard 20' width allowed, be reviewed individually rather than giving a blanket approval. Bernhardson said, "The proponent was hoping that it would not be necessary to bring each situation before the • City. The City Engineer has provided us with sketches of possible driveway configurations that the City might approve. The proposal is that staff would determine if there is a hardship for an extraordinary driveway in the 50' setback area. If a true hardship is demonstrated the applicant could choose one of the options provided by the City Engineer. If the applicant does not wish to use any of the options, then it would be necessary to appear before the Planning Commission." Callahan asked whether the plan being presented this evening had been presented to the Planning Commission for their review. P4abusth replied, "It went to the Planning Commission. They have given their opinion which is that they prefer to review each case. They are opposed to deviating from what had been approved in the PRD resolution." Callahan asked, "So the consensus of the Planning Commission was arrived at after hearing of staff's suggestions ?" Mabusth replied, "No, this specific resolution has not gone to the full Planning Commission. Maureen Bellows reviewed the resolution and had some comments when she appeared as the Planning Representative at the August 13th Council Meeting. The information was also sent to Charlie Kelley for his comment, - 8 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE #1334- REBERS CONTINUED which he made to both staff and Maureen, the Planning Commission Representative. The enclosed resolution reflects the Planning Commission recommendation for an approved procedure of review for such requests. The illustrations were added by staff in an attempt to provide an abbreviated review." Callahan said, "It seems to me that we are going around in circles if staff changes the plan after the Planning Commission has given their consensus." Mabusth clarified, "Staff did not come up with a different plan, we are merely proposing a simple amendment to try to appease both the Planning Commission and the applicant." Callahan said, "We do not know that this plan will appease the Planning Commission." Mabusth replied, "It wasn't an attempt to appease the Planning Commission. It was an attempt to present a moderate position to the Council. This has not been presented back to the Planning Commission for their comments. They were very specific about their position and you may wish to ask Sara to comment further." Moos said, "I think the Planning Commission felt that we • preferred to review the cases individually, because giving a blanket approval defeats the reason why we set so many specific standards when this was presented as a PRD." Mayor Grabek asked Moos for her opinion regarding the plan proposed,this evening. Moos stated that she had not had the opportunity to completely read the information packet prepared for tonight's meeting. Goetten asked why only Bellows and Kelley had been given this most recent information. Mabusth replied, "We quickly wanted to be sure that the Planning Commission Representative, Maureen Bellows, who was to attend the Council Meeting, had an opportunity to consult with Charlie Kelley. It is appropriate that the Planning Commission Representative be informed of any significant changes to be presented by staff. It was appropriate for Maureen and Charles to review this. If it is Council's wish to have the Planning Commission review this. it can be reconsidered at their next meeting. However, the Planning Commission was very adamant about their position regarding any deviation from what was originally approved. I believe Maureen stated that at the August 13th • Council Meeting." 9 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE #1334- REBERS CONTINUED Goetten said, "The Planning Commission has not had an • opportunity to comment on this. That doesn't mean that some might feel it was appropriate, it may be that most of them wouldn't. I believe that is the role of the Planning Commission. They spent a great deal of time reviewing the pros and cons of this application. I think it is only fair that they see this before Council votes on it." Mabusth stated that it would be appropriate to have the applicant's representative give their opinion of this matter. Mr. Robert Kost, a representative for Rebers Construction, said, "We would like this issue decided this evening. However, we would respect Council's opinion to have this matter referred back to Planning Commission." Callahan asked whether the applicant has reviewed this proposal prior to this evening. Mr. Kost replied, "We did receive this proposal a couple of weeks ago. However, we have spoken directly with staff about our opinion. After reading the resolution, we have no major problems with this. There are elements of prior solutions that we had worked with staff to achieve, but were rejected by the Planning Commission. Just the same., it is lacking other elements that Planning Commission felt were not in keeping with the spirit of . the original resolution. There is some give and take in the resolution. As we understand it we would still need to work with staff through the building permit process and discuss the pros and cons of the building site and unique characteristics that would allow us to provide the turn - around in the front yard setback area. If we didn't agree with the staff's findings, it would be necessary to appear before the Planning Commission. Given the history of the subdivision and unique characteristics, I believe that we will be back before the City anyway. There are some sites on corners that are heavily wooded and have a large amount of frontage that, for safety reasons, people will probably want a loop driveway. Given the nature of the price bracket and the size of the homes and. some of the properties, some people may want cul -de -sac driveways. It may be more appropriate, given the placement of trees and unique characteristics, to have such driveways in the front yard setback area rather than the building pad. It seems that the three options proposed by the City will work." Mayor Grabek said, "If I understand this correctly, you are asking for the ability to install a driveway that meets the needs of the house and considers the trees and other characteristics of the lot, as well as the restrictions. You are asking for this flexibility to eliminate the need to come before the City every time one of these cases arise." - 10 - is ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE #1334 - REBERS • Mr. Kost replied, ability for the driver backing out. Because of the heavily wooded chara, CONTINUED "That is correct. Additionally, the to head out to the street, rather than the curvilinear nature of our street and Ater of the site." Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Kost if it is the timing factor that presents the problem. Mr. Kost replied, "It is timing, but also the fact that we wish to prevent the construction of driveways from becoming a major public policy decision." Mayor Grabek asked why the Planning Commission had made a recommendation stating that each case be reviewed individually. Moos replied, "It was not so much the issue of a driveway, it was giving blanket approval for removal of trees with no specific plan showing the hardship to do so." Kost added; "I believe the Planning Commission did not want to encourage excessive tree removal and felt it was appropriate to look at each case to see that only what is necessary is approved." Goetten reminded everyone that was approved as a PRD rather • than a standard subdivision. She said, "The PRD allowed more homes to be constructed than the number of homes that would have been allowed with a standard subdivision. Because of that, controls and restrictions were established. I believe that the Planning Commission spent a great deal of time on this. In my opinion, it is appropriate for them to review this proposal." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to refer this matter to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. #1476 DAVID PRASS 1063 LINDEN LANE RESOLUTION #2865 Councilmember Callahan had requested that this item be removed from the Consent Agenda. He said, "Mr. Prass is proposing a cover for his swimming pool. The City wanted to have pool permanantly covered. The resolution refers to the pool cover as temporary. How did the City come to agree on a temporary cover ?" Peterson asked how the City would monitor the monthly inspections. Mabusth stated that Mr. Prass has proposed a specific schedule that he would follow with regard to constructing a - 11 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE #1476 -PRASS CONTINUED principal structure. She said, "Because we have specified that a • principal structure must be completed by December 1, 1992, Council approve a temporary cover for the pool. At our last meeting, Council had been asked to reconsider the need for a permanent pool cover by the applicant because of the expense involved." Council asked to have the City Engineer review the cover that the Prasses are intending to.use. Cook said, "First of all, with regard to the monthly reporting, the City could do it or rely on the property owner to do it. I talked with staff and they felt it would be appropriate to leave the responsibility with the property owner. The major reason to review it monthly is to assure that the fence is in place, that the cover has not been damaged or vandalized, and that the pool is pumped out. The cover that is proposed is porous and will allow water to go through. Any water that falls on the pool area will go into the pool and stay there. The cover is heavy duty, but is not a barrier that can withstand vandalism. Allowing Mr. Prass to report monthly on the condition of the pool would also leave him responsible and liable for its condition." Mayor Grabek asked the City Attorney if the City has any liability for the condition of the pool. Barrett replied, "There is always an opportunity to be sued • in these circumstances. However, the City's first obligation is to determine whether or not this is a hazardous structure. I believe you have done that. Secondly, whether or not the measures which the owner is supposed to take are reasonable to prevent the hazard. The City is insured for a risk such as this and has sovereign immunity. I can't say positively that a jury will agree that putting this cover on the pool and having Mr. Prass report monthly was sufficient if someone gets injured." Mayor Grabek stated that he preferred to follow staff's recommendation. He suggested that staff may wish to periodically check on the property. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Goetten for the purpose of discussion, to adopt Resolution #2865, allowing the swimming pool to temporarily remain at 1065 Linden Lane without a principal structure. Staff is to periodically inspect the condition of the pool site. The applicants are put on notice that should the City deem the condition of the pool to be unsafe at any point, alternate action must be taken. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. - 12 - 0 ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 • 11493 CHUCK DOWNEY 2665 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCE Mr. Downey was present. Bernhardson provided a brief summary of Jeanne Mabusth 's memo dated September 6, 1990. Bernhardson noted that the Planning Commission has recommended approval of this application with a 3 to 2 vote. He said. "The two descending votes were based on opinion that the applicant should not pay a double fee for the after - the -fact portion of the application." Mabusth added that the Planning Commission also reviewed Mr. Downey's Conditional Use Permit application. She said, "They recommended that the Variance application be separated from the Conditional Use Permit application. This stemmed from Mr. Downey's request to be able to proceed with the front entry project to his house. It will be necessary for Mr. Downey to come back with a revised plan for the land alterations in the lakeshore yard. That application was tabled. The Planning Commission did act on the application for the hardcover Variances." Mr. Downey noted that the resolution states that the front entry will be 11' x 6' which is incorrect. It will be a 19' x 6' addition. • Mabusth agreed that the resolution was incorrect and should read 19' x 61. Goetten stated that she would prefer to see hardcover, other than landscaping plastic, removed as a means of reducing hardcover. She suggested portions of walkway could be removed to bring hardcover to 45% as originally approved. Callahan asked how much hardcover will be added by the land alteration project. Mabusth replied, "It is difficult to determine at this point. The specific areas where erosion exists are located in the 75 -250' setback area, and if retaining walls are to be installed, additional hardcover must be approved in that area." Goetten said, "I believe this is why we asked to look at this property from a comprehensive view point." Callahan concurred with Goetten that the applications should not be separated. Mr. Downey said, "We are talking about hardcover in two separate areas. I don't believe that the Planning Commission is • going to approve anything that is excessive. The Planning - 13 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE #1493- DOWNEY CONTINUED Commission understood that I have been trying to do this addition • since January. I have tried to work with the City in any way possible. I am taking 480 s.f. of driveway away, which is more than just landscaping plastic. The retaining wall work cannot be done until spring. The erosion problem stems from a project done on the neighboring property which the City of Orono approved." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to accept the Planning Commission's recommendation which includes the payment of a double fee. Motion, Ayes -2, Callahan, Goetten, and Peterson, Nay. Motion failed. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to table the Hardcover Variance for a front entry addition until such time that the Conditional Use Permit application is presented for action. Motion, Ayes -4, Mayor Grabek, Nay. Motion passed. #1550 GERALD NELSON 1629 BOHNS POINT ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2866* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan, to adopt Resolution #2866, granting a Hardcover Variance to construct a closet addition at 1629 Bohns Point Road. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. #1561 CHRISTINE BECK • 3820 CHERRY AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2867 Mrs. Beck and her son were present. Bernhardson reviewed the information pertaining to this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated July 12, 1990), and noted that the Planning Commission had recommended approval. r1abusth, using a sketch plan, showed the location of the deck addition and the 4" encroachment into the lakeshore setback area. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan, to adopt Resolution #2867, granting a lakeshore setback Variance and hardcover Variance to construct a deck at 3820 Cherry Avenue. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. #1572 GUENTHER AND GERTRUD NOELTING 1060 TONKAWA ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT /VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2868 Mr. and Mrs. Noelting were present with their Architect, Mr. Neil Weber. - 14 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 • ZONING FILE #1572 - NOELTING CONTINUED Bernhardson provided a brief summary of the information contained in Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 16, 1990. Bernhardson noted that the Planning Commission had recommended approval with the condition that the dock be no more than 3' above the ordinary highwater mark. Goetten stated that this application shows why it is .iecessary to have surveys submitted with permit applications. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2868, granting a Conditional Use Permit and Variances to construct a dock at 1060 Tonkawa Road. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. #1573 CAROL KELLY /JAMES MASSEY 3020/3030 CASCO POINT ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #2869 Ms. Kelly was present, as was her Surveyor, Mr. Bob Smith. Bernhardson reviewed Ms. Kelly's application, stating that the Planning Commission had recommended approval. Callahan asked whether the City's code is to be interpreted • that there be 100' of lot width at the lakeshore. Mabusth replied, No, there is to be 100 width at the 75 ' setback line, based on the standards of the code and the policy of the City. Callahan said, "I would recommend that the code be amended to reflect that the 100' width is to be maintained at the lakeshore." Peterson and Goetten concurred. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2869, granting preliminary approval of a plat at 3020/3030 Casco Point Road. Motion, Ayes -3, Peterson, Callahan, Nay. Motion passed. Callahan asked that the code be amended and a public hearing be scheduled for the October Planning Commission meeting. #1575 JUDSON DAYTON 1111 TAMARACK DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Bernhardson stated that Mr. Dayton has asked to withdraw this application. He said, "Though this is to be considered a pre- school, it does fall under the State Statute for a daycare. Under that statute, Mr. Dayton is allowed to have 14 students. • Daycare is a permitted use in the Zoning District. Mr. Dayton 15 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE #1575- DAYTON CONTINUED has reduced the number of students he intends to enroll from 18 • to 14. This would mean that no further consideration is necessary and Mr. Dayton is withdrawing." Callahan asked the City Attorney to define the term daycare as it relates to the State Statutes. Barrett stated that he would provide Mr. Callahan with that information at a later time. Peterson noted that Mr. Dayton was originally proposing to have up to 28 students enrolled. She asked how the City will be assured that he does not exceed 14 as he now proposes. Mabusth replied, "State licensing will be a form of regulation. The City can send a letter to Mr. Dayton putting him on notice of what must occur if he goes beyond 14 students." Peterson asked if the residents who attended the Planning Commission Meeting will be notified of the reasons why this application was withdrawn and the fact that Mr. Dayton will be able to operate the pre- school. Mabusth replied, Mr. Dayton did mention that aspect of his proposal during the Planning Commission Meeting. Also, I have talked to some of the residents subsequent to that meeting. • Peterson asked that staff notify the neighbors of the status of this application. No formal action was taken. #1577 NORMAN TORRISON 2250 LONGVIEW CIRCLE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2870 A representative was present on behalf of Mr. Torrison. Bernhardson briefly explained the information relating to Mr. Torrison's application (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated August 24, 1990). He stated that the Planning Commission had voted 3 to 2 to approve this application. The two members that voted no did so based on no hardship and the need for additional screening. Gaffron noted that the Planning Commission also recommended that the tennis court not encroach the 10' utility easement. Mayor Grabek stated that Mr. Torrison had called him and explained that he would be unable to attend this meeting due to job - related conflicts. - 16 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE #1577 - TORRISON CONTINUED • Goetten stated that she too believes there should be additional screening for the benefit of the neighbors. Nettles concurred.. He questioned whether it was necessary for Council to be specific as to the height of the screening. Mr. Torrison's representative said, "I'm sure Mr. Torrison will be happy to comply with Council's requests. There are trees to the south where the significant slope occurs. There is a neighbor directly to the east. We have agreed to move the tennis court as far west as possible. The neighbor to the northwest is at least 250' from the tennis court. Mr. Torrison has planted an apple tree orchard to the direct west. Goetten suggested that the trees be 6' high. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2870, granting a side setback Variance to construct a tennis court at 2250 Longview Circle, provided that 6' trees are provided to screen the neighbor to the east. Motion, Ayes -4, Peterson, Nay. Motion passed. #1578 AL AND LIBBIE HOPWOOD 1205 LAKEVIEW AVENUE AFTER -THE -FACT VARIANCE • RESOLUTION #2871 Ms. Hopwood was present. Bernhardson provided a brief summary of the information presented in Michael Gaffron's August 24, 1990, memo. He noted that the Planning Commission recommended approval. Gaffron displayed a front view of the deck. Bernhardson said. "The Hopwoods immediately ceased all work until they obtained the proper permits. Staff felt it may be appropriate to have the applicants pay only a double fee for the building permit and not the zoning application. It may be an issue Council desires to consider." Peterson noted that the tuck -under garage was converted to a bedroom. She said, "The driveway still exists that served the tuck -under garage. Does the City have any requirements stating that it must be removed ?" Gaffron replied, "There is nothing in our code requiring the driveway to be removed as it has existed for a long period of time." Peterson asked how the City inspects after - the -fact structures constructed without the benefit of a building permit. • - 17 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE $1578- HOPWOOD CONTINUED Gaffron replied, "The City Building Inspector would have to • probe to locate the footings.' It may be necessary to ask the property owners to uncover portions of the footings. Following a thorough inspection, the Building Inspector may require that portions of the structure be revised or replaced. It is difficult to review footings after - the - fact." Peterson stated that in her opinion, the applicants should be required to pay a double fee for zoning and building permits. Goetten asked staff to clarify applications are normally handled. Mabusth said, "Normally we ask for the Gaffron added, "I don't believe that was an after - the -fact application until the submitted and paid their zoning application how after - the -fact double zoning fee." anyone realized this Hopwoods had already and fees." Mabusth said, "In this case, Michael found the owners to be very responsive to the stop work order." Mayor Grabek asked how much the double fee is in this case. Gaffron replied, "The zoning fee is $175.00, plus the additional cost for the building permit which may be another • $50.00 to $100.00." Nettles indicated that he preferred not to fine the Hopwoods because they did cease work on the project right away. Goetten stated that she concurred with Nettles. Nettles asked how fees are addressed in the resolution presented this evening. Bernhardson replied, "The resolution makes no reference to the fee at all, it will have to be amended to reflect Council's decision." It was moved by Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2871, as amended, granting approval of after - the -fact front and side street setback variances to construct a deck /walkway, with no double fee for the building permit, nor the zoning application. There was no second. Motion failed. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Callahan, to adopt Resolution #2871, as presented, granting approval of after - the -fact front and side street setback variances to construct a deck /walkway at 1205 Lakeview Avenue. Motion, Ayes -3, Peterson, Nettles, Nay. Motion passed. - 18 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 #1580 PATRICIA PLANT • 2245 WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2872 Mrs. Plant was present. Bernhardson summarized the information presented regarding this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 15, 1990).. He informed Council that the Planning Commission had unanimously recommended approval. It was moved by Goetten. seconded by Mayor Grabek, to adopt Resolution #2872, granting a front street setback variance required for a 1/2 bath and closet addition at 2245 Watertown Road. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. #1581 ROBERT KOEHNEN 537 HANLON AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2872 The applicants were not present. Bernhardson reviewed the information pertaining to this application (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated August 24, 1990), noting that the Planning Commission had recommended approval. • Goetten said, "The applicants are not present, but have been before us previously. They have done a very nice job improving their property. It is unfortunate that the house is located where it is on the lot." It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2872, granting a front setback variance to construct an attached deck and gazebo. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. SPECIAL DRIVEWAY PERMIT 265 BROWN ROAD SOUTH Bernhardson provided a summary of Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated September 6, 1990. He noted that Mabusth had asked the City Engineer to review the existing access within Lot 2. Cook said, "I see no problem as long as the driveway is raised up slightly." It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to conceptually approve the plan for separated accesses for 255/265 Brown Road South. Staff is directed to prepare a resolution to be presented for Council's review at their September 24, 1990 meeting. Motion. Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. • - 19 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 #1516 WHITNEY MACMILLAN 1560 FOX STREET • PRIVATE ROAD EASEMENT Mr. Jack Taylor, Attorney, and Mr. Herb Baldwin, Landscape Architect, were present as representatives for the MacMillans. 3ernhardson stated the road configuration in this recently approved subdivision was unique. He said, "Only the upper part of the road is included in the subdivision, the lower portion is not. Originally, the applicants requested that the City not be allowed to convert Outlot C into a public street unless all other private streets in Orono were converted likewise. Staff and the applicants have reached a compromise between their request and the City's normal road standards. We are proposing that the City give the applicant's additional notice prior to the conversion occurring and that a 4 /5ths vote be required from Council to approve the conversion. This proposal would not preclude the City from making the conversion, but would allow the applicant an opportunity to propose alternatives." Goetten questioned whether this proposal may set a precedent ror future developments. Bernhardson replied, "We consider this case to be unique in that only part of the road would be subject to the. City's control. We don't see that occurring with most standard subdivisions. We can't say absolutely that the City will not be • approached by future developers wishing to have this exception. Also, should the City feel it necessary to provide this compromise again in the future, it will not preclude the City from making the conversion." Goetten asked why then the City would go to such lengths when it can achieve the same thing without the easement. Barrett replied, "This agreement gives the applicant additional time to react to the City's notice to convert the road and to consider alternatives. The requirement of a 4 /5ths vote was added for the benefit of the applicant.." Goetten questioned why the issue of public /private roads was being addressed only with this individual circumstance. She believed the issue should be addressed comprehensively throughout the City. Callahan did not feel it was necessary to give the applicants the provision of a special majority. He believed that the usual 3 /5ths vote should suffice. Mayor Grabek concurred. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to - 20 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ZONING FILE #1516- MACMILLAN CONTINUED • approve the proposed easement with the exception that only a 3 /5ths vote be required. Nettles asked Barrett whether this agreement will change the legal powers of the City in any way. Barrett replied, "In my opinion, it will not." Motion, Ayes -3, Goetten, Nettles, Nay. Motion passed. MAYOR /COUNCIL REPORT: None. ENGINEER'S REPORT: CHANGE ORDER 12, WELL #3 Bernhardson reported that a flow rate for well #3 has been established in the range of 1,200 to 1,600 gallons /minute. He said, "However, there has been a problem with loose sand under the bedrock accumulating at those rates. Continuous pumping at those rates of 500 gallons per minute would provide a continued flow free of sand, but starting and stopping the pump would cause about a minute of sand to accumulate. This would not be desirable over a long period of time. This is the appropriate time to try to eliminate the sand entirely. We are recommending approval of change order #2 to accomplish that. Mr. Dick Foster of Bonestroo is present this evening to answer any questions." Goetten questioned whether the additional costs will be passed on to the users of well #3. She said, "Well #3 has been • brought before us several times now and is becoming increasingly more expensive." Bernhardson agreed with Goetten, but stated that this is the first change order that has been presented to Council for well #3. He said, "We will assess all of the costs of this to the benefiting property owners, either through assessment or connection charges. We could also add user revenue to assist with the costs." Callahan asked if well #3 will serve the location proposed for the new facilities. Bernhardson replied in the affirmative. Mr. Foster said. "It is unusual for these circumstances to occur. This area is right on the edge of the bedrock formation. A lot of lakeshore wells are drilled in the Jordan and limestone formations. As you approach the Orono School those formations are gone and it is necessary to drill deeper for water. We were fortunate in this case to find Jordan formations. The well does have a very good yield. The problem is that there isn't enough cavity. We need to enlarge and stabilize the cavity. The change order reflects our estimated cost to do that. The estimate is on the high side. In our opinion, it is better to invest the • additional money now to make the well efficiently functional. - 21 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 CHANGE ORDER WELL $3 CONTINUED Otherwise it may be necessary to go back and make repairs ten • years from now." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to approve Change Order #2 increasing the contract amount for well #3 to $101,630.00 as proposed by the City Engineer. Motion, Ayes - 5, Nays -0 Motion passed. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: FLEXIBLE BENEFITS Bernhardson presented information for Council to review pertaining to the selection of a vendor to design a flexible benefits program. He said, "We are recommending Safe Benefits, which is affiliated with an insurance company, but is independent of them and is strictly a third -party administrator. We would bring the plan back for Council approval once it has been designed." Goetten said, "I think it is great that we are going to provide this for our employees. I've looked forward to this for some time." It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to approve the concept of a flexible benefits program and to direct staff to work with Safe Benefits to develop a flexible benefits program • which will be submitted to Council for approval. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY Bernhardson presented information to Council regarding Highway 12. He said, "There are two items for Council's consideration. The first item is that staff is proposing a list of draft issues for submission at the next Policy Committee meeting. The other item is that the City consider utilization of outside expertise to assist the City during the process. Because of the experts that are involved with MNDot, staff felt it may be appropriate for the City to enlist the services of a consultant that would also be an advocate of the City's position. Staff is recommending that we hire John Shardlow to develop a work program at a cost not to exceed $5,000.00." Goetten asked when this position would take effect. Bernhardson replied, "Staff would work with Mr. Shardlow during the next two weeks and have something to present at the September 24th Council Meeting." Mayor Grabek believed this was a good way to approach the Highway 12 Corridor Study. - 22 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY CONTINUED • It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to accept staff's recommendation to enlist the services of Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban regarding a work program for expertise on the Highway 12 Corridor and a transportation subcontractor as needed, in an amount not to exceed $5,000.00. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. LAKE USE AND MANAGEMENT Bernhardson had requested that this item be discussed at the time of the LMCD report. ON SITE SEPTIC MANAGER POSITION Bernhardson stated that staff has included in the budget the request for an additional position for an on -site septic manager. He said, "It has become increasingly more difficult for staff to keep up with the program. Staff is presenting information relating to the septic program. My position at this point is that this should be considered as a full time position during the 1991 budget discussions. This evening I am asking Council to consider whether they object to considering this position in the 1991 budget. If there is an acceptable level of interest for further consideration staff is asking that the current temporary position be extended through to the end of the year. We do have a good employee and would like him to continue on a temporary basis until the end of the year." • Goetten said, "I think this additional position would be helpful, especially with the work to be done for Stubbs Bay sewer (if the project proceeds). My only concern is where this person would have a desk. In talking with staff I learned that the Council Chambers is presently being used by the temporary person performing this function." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Goetten, to accept staff's recommendation to continue the program through the end of the year and will table the balance of the discussion until the budget discussions later this year. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. 1991 BUDGET /WORK SESSION It was the consensus of Council to set November 8th at 6:00 p.m. as the tentative time and date for the work session to review the 1991 budget. ASSESSING SERVICE Bernhardson said, "Staff is recommending that we again hire Mr. Rolf Erickson as the City Assessor. I realize that the cost of the contract is substantially higher than what we are currently paying. I believe that the quality of Mr. Erickson's service warrants the increased cost." 40 - 23 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 ASSESSING SERVICES CONTINUED Goetten asked what reasons Mr. Erickson gave to support his • request for $66,000.00. Bernhardson stated that Mr. Erickson was losing money on Orono. He said, "Mr. Erickson indicated that if he came back to ,work here that he could not afford to lose money. Orono is one of the most difficult communities to assess because of the extensive variety of housing and property. I don't believe that anyone else could provide us with the well- defined assessments. He has also been very responsive to the citizens during the Board of Review." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan, to authorize the establishment of a contract in the amount of $66,000 with Rolf Erickson for the next assessing year ending August 31, 1991. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -O. Motion passed. LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION BUDGET RESOLUTION #2874 Peterson stated that the LMCCC budget had already been approved. Bernhardson stated that it was understanding that the cities had 30 days to respond to the budget proposal from the date it was received. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to adopt • Resolution #2874, directing approval of the Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission budget for 1991. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. FALL CLEAN -UP DATE* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan, to designate October 20, 1990 as Orono Fall Clean -up Day. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. JOHN SASS RESOLUTION #2875* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan, to adopt Resolution #2875 recognizing John Sass's years of service to the community and to present the resolution to John Sass at the regular Orono Council Meeting on September 24, 1990. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. FENCE INSTALLATION - NAVARRE PLAYGROUND Councilmember Goetten requested that this item be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. She asked whether the Park Commission had reviewed this recommendation. Bernhardson stated that he would have to report back to Council with that information. - 24 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 • NAVARRE PLAYGROUND FENCE CONTINUED It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to table this item .until it is determined whether or not the Park Commission has reviewed this proposal. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. • EMPLOYMENT -GOLF COURSE* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan, to confirm the employment of Aaron Burdich as a temporary groundskeeper helper at the Orono Golf Course effective August 28, 1990 at $5.00 per hour. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding: Dakota Rail, Goal Setting, July Receipts and Disbursements and Wire Transfers. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0, Motion passed. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: None. LICENSES* None. BILLS* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0, Motion passed. ADJOURNMENT 9:34 P.M. It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Nettles, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 9:34 p.m. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0, Motion passed. .� Ja es R. Grabe ATT T: 0 othy t. Hallin, City Clerk �4•�