Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-22-1990 Council Minutes• f � MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 • ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor James Grabek, Councilmembers Diann Goetten, Alan Nettles, Barbara Peterson, and Edward Callahan. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Public Works Director Gerhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, Police Chief Kilbo, City Engineer Cook, City Attorney Barrett, and City Recorder Scheffler. PUBLIC DISCUSSION FACILITIES COMMITTEE - SITE RECOMMENDATION Bernhardson explained to those in attendance that an 18 member Citizens Committee had been selected in April 'to assist with the City facility project. He said, "The Committee undertook the task of reviewing all of the elements involved with a new facility, such as space, sites, etc. After reviewing eight or nine sites, the Citizen's Committee reduced the selection to the current site and a site on Highway 12. It has been determined that the present site has drawbacks such as its location in relation to residential properties, and the fact that all City departments could not be housed within one building. They are recommending that this site, if it is no longer used, be converted to additional park area. The site on Highway 12 was • selected as the best site. In August the City obtained an option on a parcel located near the Orono Middle School. At Council's September 24th Meeting, the site issue was discussed and Staff was directed to schedule this public meeting. Council has the site comparison information and the schematics have been done. The next step is the design /planning process. In order to proceed with that step, it is necessary to have a site selected. The design process will cost approximately $60,000. Council and the Facilities Committee have reviewed various funding options. It is estimated that, should the City build a facility on the Highway 12 site, property taxes would increase one to two percent for the next fifteen years. The purpose of this meeting this evening is to determine whether Council wishes to exercise the Highway 12 option, and if so, when. Council may wish to select another site. The City has funding set aside for this project and currently holds a AA -1 financial rating, which is an excellent rating, especially for a City of this size. If a site is selected this evening, Council and the Facilities Committee would work with the Consultant to determine a design. Issues relating to financing would be addressed next, and then preparation of construction documents would likely occur. The City would probably schedule another public meeting to provide information regarding the status of the project prior to taking bids." Mayor G.rabek announced that the public would now have an • - 1 - +1 � . ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED opportunity to express their concerns, suggestions and guestions. • Mr. Jerry Sveeggen, 1525 Bay Ridge, asked for clarification regarding the action proposed for this evening. Mayor Grabek explained that following an analysis to determine whether a new facility is actually needed, the City undertook a spa--e study. He said, "The space study helped us determine what we needed within a facility to properly conduct business. Following that process, Council and Staff reviewed building types and sites. Staff toured five or six different city halls to view various construction materials and methods. We then reviewed various building designs provided by the Architect and are now at a point of selecting a site. The Facilities Committee has recommended the site on Highway 12 which would be adequate for not only the City Administration, but the Police Department and Public Works as well. Council needs to make a final decision on the site and begin design work with the Architect. Tonight Council is considering the direction to give Staff with regard to a site." It was asked whether the Post Office would also be relocated. Mayor Grabek replied, "There has been some discussion regarding how this present site will be utilized if the Highway • 12 site is chosen. That may or may not affect the Post Office. However, all other aspects of the City will be combined. The City has asked the City of Long Lake if they wished to participate in a joint facility. However, they declined our offer. The present facility does not meet building code standards and the City employees are working under terrible conditions. I believe that a new facility is important if we are to retain the good staff we have and encourage future employment." Ms. Ann Cosgrove, Foxridge Road, asked how much consideration is being given to the plans to upgrade Highway 12. Mayor Grabek stated that the upgrade of Highway 12 is considered in any plans for construction in that area. He said, "The property is located far enough back, that should the upgrade take place along the existing corridor, it should -have little impact on a new facility." Ms. Cosgrove said, "The proposed location shown by the Highway Department last week is the present corridor with an interchange going down Old Crystal Bay Road. Wouldn't that affect the property for the new facility ?" Bernhardson stated that the new facility would not be - 2 - 0 ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 • CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED located any further south than the Middle School. Ms. Cosgrove said, "The proposal I saw showed the interchange going through the School parking lot." Mr. Carl Parten, 1025 Tonkawa Road, asked when this project was first considered by the Council and if this was the first public information meeting. Mayor Grabek responded that this project has been considered by the City previous to the time he was first elected Mayor. He said, "Since the time I have been Mayor, we have been considering the condition of the present facility and the need for a new one. We have studied the issues and have provided public information via newspaper articles and the Mayor's letter. We have also selected the Citizen's Committee. I don't believe this issue should be a surprise to the public." Mr. Parten indicated that due to his vision impairment, he could not read the newspaper. He stated that he had no notice of this issue until he received a letter today and believed the matter is being hurried along. Mayor Grabek apologized for the problem of getting information to individual citizens. He said, "I believe the • process has been straight forward and has been a matter of public record for some time." Mr. Parten asked whether the Highway 12 site is most preferred by the Council. Mayor Grabek replied, "There is not Council consensus for the Highway 12 site. There is a recommendation from the Architect and the Facilities Committee." Mr. Mike Ellis, 1020 Old Crystal Bay Road, asked if the decision to consolidate all of the City departments into one building was final. Mayor Grabek responded that there cannot be a final decision in that regard until the site is selected. Mr. Ellis stated that it makes more sense to combine all of the departments on one site. He asked what percentage of the costs could be paid from the proceeds of the sale of City property. Mayor Grabek stated that a portion of the sale of the old sewer plant property would be applied to the new facility costs. • Bernhardson stated that the sewer plant property would sell 3 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED for $150,000 to $200,000. • Mayor Grabek stated that it has not been determined what will be done with the present facility site. Mr. Bob Paige, 3493 Crystal Place, asked the size of the present facility parcel, including the Post Office, and its estimated value. Bernhardson replied, "The parcel is approximately 2.5 acres and would sell for $34,000 or $35,000 if the buildings are cleared." Mr. Paige asked whose decision it will be to sell this parcel or convert it to a park. Mayor Grabek responded that it will be the Council's decision with the assistance of the Park Commission. Mr. Wilbur Andersen, 3555 Frederick Street, asked who had made the motion at a previous Council meeting to purchase the property. Mayor Grabek stated that he may have made the motion, but did not recall for certain. Mr. Andersen stated that he has not seen any articles in the • paper regarding this issue. Mayor Grabek replied, "It is City policy to make these meetings known to the public. The press attends and reports on our meetings." Mr. Andersen stated that in his opinion, there will be traffic problems if the City Facility is located on Highway 12. He said, "There are busses in and out of the school at various times of the day. If you couple that with the Public Works trucks and the Police vehicles, there could be some safety hazards for the school children." Mr. Curt Quady, 1223 South Brown Road, suggested that the various aspects of this project be worked out and that the public be asked to vote on the project. He said, "If the people vote in favor of the project, fine. If not, then the project does not proceed. Council is acting as though the project is definitely going to happen without taking the public's opinion into account. I don't believe that the public is in favor of Council approving this project without public input." Mayor Grabek assured Mr. Quady that the Council would not push for a project that was not needed or approved of by the - 4 - 0 ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED • majority of citizens. He said, "We are approaching this project in a manner that is commonly used by municipalities. This meeting has been scheduled to provide the opportunity for public input now that Council and Staff has determined the need for a new facility. We have only begun the process." Mr. Quady asked whether Council will allow the public to vote on this issue. Bernhardson stated that a public vote on this is an option available to Council. Mayor Grabek added, "The size and location of the facility make little difference, as such projects can only be funded through tax revenues. The issue then is whether there is a new facility or whether we continue to ask our employees to work under the poor quality conditions now existing." Walter Pemberton, 1720 Shadywood Road, asked whether Council has the authority to raise taxes for fifteen years. He also asked for the opportunity to poll the Council regarding their position on raising taxes. Mayor Grabek stated that the Council does have the authority to raise taxes. • Callahan stated that he believes a new facility is necessary and that there ought to be input from the citizens regarding that project. He said, "Yes, I would fund a new facility by raising taxes if it is necessary to do that. I agree with Mr. Quady that the City should determine a location and a design so that the public can be accurately informed of what the City intends to do and how much it will cost." Mr. John Farnham asked for the Councilmembers' comments regarding whether or not there should be a referendum on this matter. Callahan said, "I am willing to commit the taxpayers to paying for the facility over a 10 or 15 year time period. I am inclined toward a referendum, but am not totally committed to it. If there is no referendum, I believe there should be sufficient public meetings so that the City is aware of what the public wishes to do." Peterson said, "I do not think that anyone can disagree that a new facility is needed. I do feel that a referendum should be held. I would not have a problem with asking the taxpayers to fund the new facility if the referendum indicated they were in favor of doing so. In the initial discussions of this topic, I understood that information would be sent to the general public • 5 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED as the stages progressed." • Bernhardson commented, "It was my understanding that a Committee would be appointed and that a package of information, including location, cost, etc., would be prepared and presented to the public. The package of information would answer as many questions as possible." Peterson said, "If that is the case, then why are we trying to push for this option to spend nearly $300,000 without having public input." Bernhardson replied, "Council directed Staff in August to proceed with obtaining the option. Council agrees that a facility is needed, therefore, location becomes the next issue. The potential location has been narrowed to two sites. Those sites have been compared and it makes little difference in the cost if the facility is located on one site or the other. The next step in the process is the design stage, which will cost approximately $60,000. Staff did not feel it made sense to spend $60,000 to design two facilities on two different sites when only one site will be used. There really is little information that could have been provided to the public prior to this point." Peterson explained that she and Councilmember Callahan had initially voted no for the motion to pursue the option. She • said, "It was a two to two vote. Another motion was made and it was my understanding that we would pursue the option, but that we would have six months to prepare information and receive input from the public. I voted in favor of that motion. It is now two months later and nothing has been done, with the exception of obtaining an agreement on this particular property. I do not know what will happen this evening, whether Council will vote to spend $300,000 to purchase the property, I will not." Goetten stated that she too strongly agrees that a new Facility is needed. She said, "I have been concerned about the escalating cost of the project which started just under two million dollars and is now over three million. Should taxes be raised to fund a new facility? If it will cost over three million dollars, I guess that will be necessary. I am still waiting for information pertaining to the Highway 12 site and the option. I agree that more public meetings are necessary and that the process has bean lacking in the area of providing information. I will not vote to exercise an option this evening. I believe there should be a referendum." Nettles said, "I have -been a Councilmember for two years. This project pre -dates me. I became aware of the project in 1986, just after moving to Orono. It does seem that there is consensus among the people of the Community that a facility is - 6 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED • needed. The question is where we go from there. I believe that this meeting is a first step of many that will involve the public in this issue. I am happy to see such a large turn -out as we have had little input up to this point. We decided to obtain an option on the Highway 12 property to avoid the possibility of the purchase price increasing. That had previously occurred on another parcel on Highway 12. When the owner learned that the City was negotiating for the property, the price immediately escalated. The decision to obtain the option also resulted from a recommendation from the Citizens Committee who spent a great deal of time reviewing sites and possible building structures. I agree with Mr. Ellis that all departments should be located on the same site. I had originally believed that the Public Works facility should be separate. I have since learned that the requirement of sprinkler systems in each building would add a significant cost to the project. I have not seen any attempt on the part of the Council or City to keep this information from the public. I do not know what we need to do to better inform the public. The Council Agenda is always posted. Another reason that we chose to obtain the option is so we could proceed with the process to a ?oint where we would have some concrete information to provide to the public. I would commit taxpayer dollars to this project, but there are other aspects to that. The City has saved a considerable sum of money for this project. Also, the financial rating we have allows us to borrow money at a • lesser rate of interest. The City could opt to use the entire amount saved for a new facility. However, we could lose our bond rating and would have no funds to fall back on. In the alternative, we could use a portion of the savings, in conjunction with a tax increase, which would allow us to keep our financial rating and corresponding benefits. I believe that the issue of a referendum depends on how the project is funded and how the public feels as the project and public meetings continue." • Mayor Grabek stated that he would commit the tax dollars of the Community, which included his own, for this project. He said, "I believe we would all benefit from a new facility in the long run. I am not sure that a I can make a decision regarding the referendum at this time." Gabriel Jabbour, 985 Tonkawa Road, stated that he had received information pertaining to this issue just prior to this meeting. He asked whether this meeting would be taking place if the Council had voted to exercise the option on the Highway 12 property. He also asked whether the proposed two percent increase in property taxes would be to fund the difference between the cost of the facility and the 2.2 million saved by the City. Mayor Grabek replied, "It was not my intention to proceed - 7 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED with the facility project without acknowledgment of our is expenditure for the land or the facility. There would have been a public hearing prior to that. I believe that the City should push for this land and commit to a new facility. I wish to correct earlier comments made regarding the cost of this project. The 1.7 million first discussed pertained to land. The cost has not escalated from 1.7 million to an excess of three million." Bernhardson stated that the City had experienced financial difficulties back in the 19701s. Since that time it has tried to prevent that from occurring again. He said, "The City has been very frugal with tax dollars. In response to Mr. Jabbour's question, at the two percent level, the City would have 2.2 million. plus other funds, that could be used for the facility. If the two percent level is used, the City would have a cash reserve, after the facility costs, so that it could maintain a strong fiscal balance for the future, and keep taxes lower than they otherwise would be. Tiae City of Orono has the lowest City tax rate of any city in Hennepin County with a population. over 1,000. I believe this Council has done a good job in trying to manage City funds. If we lost our bond rating, it may cost the taxpayers more in the long run." Mr. Dave Peterson stated that construction costs are generally based on so much per square foot. He asked why it is necessary to design the entire building in order to provide the • public with a cost estimate. Mayor Grabek responded that it is important to have a design plan in order to assure that the structure will in fact be sufficient in size and functionality for some time. He stated that it may be necessary to remodel or add on, at additional costs, if an adequate structure is not designed from the start. Goetten stated that up until a few months ago, the Mayor has been dragging his feet on this issue. Mr. Quady concurred with Goetten and asked why nothing has happened over the last four years regarding this issue. He said, "The City has been dragging its feet up to this point. If there is so much concern about the working conditions, why hasn't something been done prior to this? The City has made no attempt to improve the conditions of the existing facility." Air. Norman Paurus, 2500 Casc:i Point Road, stated that he has lived in 0-.:ono for 21 years and served on the City Council in the 19701s. He said, "This issue was as much a problem then, as it is now. The issue is not whether or not we need a City facility. The question is where and when. I believe that the process of determining that has fallen apart. In my opinion, the public has not been adequately informed. Secondly, I believe that great - 8 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED • consideration should be given to housing all departments on one location. As to the timing, I think it would be sheer disaster to consider this issue without knowing the route of Highway 12 if that is to be the chosen site. I do not think it is necessary to delay this project that long however, because there are alternate sites." Ms. Candace Rowlette, 3775 Bayside Road, stated that a new facility is needed as soon as possible and that the project cannot be delayed pending decisions regarding Highway 12. She said, "The City has one chance to do this and it should be done right. If the project is delayed, it will only cost more. I believe it was appropriate that a decision was made to pursue the option at the August meeting. Otherwise, it would have become impossible for the City to purchase any property at a decent price." Callahan added, "The purpose of the option was allow us time to more carefully consider they Highway 12 location as well as other options." Mr. Harry Sweatt, Bohn's Point Lane, stated that the people attending this meeting were responding to a surprise. He asked if the City had distributed a yellow flyer to Orono citizens. • Mr. Farnham indicated that he was responsible for the yellow flyers. Mr. Sweatt asked how many square feet the City will require in the new facility. Mr. Jack Boarman, Architect /Consultant for the City, stated that the total office space for police and City hall is approximately 8,000 to 9,000 s.f. He said, "The total building, including the garages and detention facilities, public meeting spaces, etc., is approximately 18,000 s.f." Ms. Pam Peters, Togo Road, asked to have the financial information repeated concerning the cost of the land on Highway 12 and the resale value for the current site. Mayor Grabek replied, "Thy land on Highway 12 is approximately $20,000 /acre for 14 acres. It would be necessary to separate the Public Works facility on another location if we chose to rebuild on this present site. This may result in a higher cost for the facility if it is constructed in this location. It is the consensus of Council and Staff that it would be easier to function if all departments were located in one facility." Ms. Marsha Rokke- a member of the Citizen's Committee, 0 - 9 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED stated that the need for an extra wall for this site adds a • significant cost to building. She said, "The;-e a,-.-e other considerations such as the cost of the sprinkler systems that make this site more expensive than it would seem. The Highway 12 site already has municipal water." Mayor Grabek added, "The cost of reselling this parcel would be aLDproximately $30,000 provided that the buildings are demolished." Peterson added, "It would cost the City approximately $30,000 to demolish the buildings existing on this site. The property on Highway 12 will cost $292,000." Ms. Nancy Brantingham, 3185 County Road 6, stated that in her opinion, public notification regarding this issue has been insufficient. Mr. Farnham stated that he would like to have a referendum on this issue. He asked whether it would be possible for the City to summarize the report from the Citizen's Committee for distribution to the community. Gabriel Jabbour commented that there had been little direction given to the Citizen's Facility Committee and what direction was provided came from City Staff. • Mayor Grabek stated that it was the intention of Council to have no interaction with the Citizen's Committee initially. He said, "We did not want the Council to have any influence on the Committee. The information they receive should come from the consultant and City Staff. When Council arzd the Citizen's Committee met together in a workshop session, it was clear that the Highway 12 site was preferred by everyone." Mr. Jabbour s=ated that he did not object to the recommendation for the facility location on Highway 12. He said, "What I object to is the process and the lack of input to and from the citizens." Mr. Art Torangeau said, "I think what people are trying to say is that this is being rammed down their throats. Everyone is concerned when it has to do with their pocketbook." Mayor Grabek replied, "If it is necessary, Council can consider mass mailings to keep the citizens informed. However, that may be a costly venture." Mr. Farnham commented, "Due to the magnitude in the cost of this project and the effect on the citizens, I think there should be mass mailings." - 10 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED is Mayor Grabek said, "Vie have no objections to providing the citizens with information. However, before we can do that, we must have some information to provide. It will do no good to provide generalities or figures that have no realism. There has always been an intent to provide the public with information and to receive input back in that regard. There is only so much the City can do. It is also up to the citizens in the community to attend meetings and read articles in the paper, or contact the Councilperson from their area." Ms. Marilyn Pemberton, Shadywood Road, asked why it would not be possible for the smaller cities to combine their facilities. Goetten stated that in order to combine facilities, it is necessary to have a working relationship with the other communities. She stated that is not the case. Mr. Bill Stubbs, 18:5 Old Crystal Bay Road, stated that he is also a member of the Citizen's Committee. He said, "It was my feeling that we could pick up the option for $5,000. When considering the entire cost of this project, it seems that this land is reasonably priced. I think everyone agrees that a facility is needed. I believe that the facility should be visible and accessible. There is a service road planned right • across from Old Crystal Bay Road to Willow. I also believe it is important to have all of the City functions on one site. I do not want to see this option run out. In all of the sites that we reviewed, there were none for sale that compared to the Highway 12 property. It seems to me that we are progressing in the right direction if we can communicate more to the people. We should not let this property get away from us." Mayor Grabek stated that it would now be appropriate to take comments only from the Council and Staff at this point. He said, "The next step in the process is to identify the site and to direct the Architect to provide plans based on that site selection. The option is available to us for another five or six months. It would not pay for us to exercise that option unless there is a threat of losing the property. I would like Council to engage in discussion regarding whether or not the Highway 12 site is appropriate. If it is the consensus that the Highway 12 site i.s most sensible and economical, then, without exercising the option, perhaps we could have the Architect draw plans taking that site into consideration." Peterson stated that there are only four months left on this option, but there is an opportunity to extend that for six more months. She said, "That should provide ample time for more information to be gathered, prepared and presented to the public." • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED Nettles stated that it is necessary to provide the public • with the information from the Citizen's Committee pertaining to their review process and recommendation. He said, "I also think it may be interesting to have the public tell us what kind of tax increase they would agree to." Goetten stated that she is not ready to make any decision on this issue at this point in the process. She informed everyone that the Citizen's Committee had met only four times. She said, "While the Citizen's Committee has provided a considerable amount of good information, there is more to be done before the option is exercised." Callahan said, "I favor this present site more than the Highway 12 site. The cost differential is a major factor. Also, I have not been totally convinced that it is necessary to have all of the City operations located on one site. If it can be determined that the Highway 12 site is more economically feasible, I would give that consideration. I do agree that the basic cost of the building will be approximately the same, regardless of whether it is constructed o_z Highway 12 or here. However, there are other aspects of the project, such as landscaping, etc., that must also be included and from a cost standpoint, are unknown at this time. If it is possible to construct a building that has lesser square feet than shown by the schematic drawings, this site may be appropriate. However, I • understand that it would still be necessary to construct a Public Works facility elsewhere. It would also be necessary to provide an additional source of water to provide a sprinkler system for the building. All of this has been discussed previously at public meetings. I want the opportunity to review whether or not the City needs to have a facility with all of the features shown in the schematic drawings. -I do not believe that Council should spend $60,000 for design work until that has been determined. I am not prepared to vote on a site selection. Even if it could be determined that the Highway 12 site is the most feasible site, I would not vote to exercise the option because I believe that should be done just prior to beginning construction. The term 'referendum' could refer to a form of bond referendum, or a method of gathering public opinion. If it is the public intention this evening to have a referendum to provide public opinion, I would favor that. It may not be necessary to have a bond referendum, however. That would depend on the method of financing that is chosen.. There is little doubt that the building could be entirely paid for by the City. However, the money used for the building would greatly affect the operating budget for the City and may have a tax impact on the City. This information would have to be explained to the public at a later time." - 12 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED Mayor Grabek said, "It is prudent for the Council to question and identify what the City needs in terms of a facility. That has been done on a preliminary basis. A needs study was done to help us determine what our needs may be in the future. At some point in time, Council will have to make a decision as to where the appropriate site will be. There is no reason why that could not be determined this evening. We should target our direction as where the facility should be. I think it would be dragging our feet to delay that decision any further. We have been talking about sites for over a year. It was moved by Grabek, seconded by Nettles for purposes of discussion, to identify the more preferred site, that being the option land. of 14 acres off of Old Crystal Bay Road, as the targeted site for the new facility. This would enable the City to identify the land and the type of structure that could be constructed on that site. The process of reviewing alternate funding sources could then begin, which would enable us to provide more information to the public. This motion does not include exercising the option at this time. Nettles stated that the reason he agrees with the Mayor's motion is because he believes Council is taking the next necessary step, which the public has indicated that they want Council to do. He said, "It will then be possible to provide the public with some concrete information. It was my understanding that there was a 900 • consensus among the Citizen's Committee in favor of the Highway 12 site. I am being guided heavily by that recommendation. I started out in this process believing that this site or the sewer plant site would be more appropriate. If the Council does not target in on a particular site, it is not clear to me how we would provide any additional, realistic information to the public. Peterson stated that it was her understanding that there had been a 70% consensus of the Citizen's Committee in favor of this site. Marsha Rokke stated that 70% represented the minimum required for a consensus, but that more than 70% agreed with the recommendation for the Highway 12 site. Callahan stated that the Committee Report included a recommendation for four sites. He said, "It turned out that three of the four sites were not available. Thus by process of elimination, this Highway 12 site was chosen. I am not convinced that the Citizen's Committee chose that site based on other factors. I also believe that the Highway 12 project could have a negative impact on this site." Bernhardson stated that there had been an earlier report, in June; from the Citizen's Committee, which indicated that the Highway 12 area was most preferable among the other sites being considered. Goetten indicated that it may be appropriate to delay a decision until the results of the upcoming election are known. Peterson stated that she did not believe the election was a factor in this process. She said, " I would not vote for the option because there are too many unanswered questions. The majority of Orono citizens reside south of Fox Street. I prefer 10 - 13 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED the present site and have not been convinced that the Highway 12 site is most suitable. I would like to have more information and make a decision when it is nearly time for the option to expire." Nettles said, "I do not understand, Barb, how we can provide the :_ nformation that the public is requesting without targeting in on a particular site. I do agree that the elections have nothing to do with this. Everyone pretty much agrees that we need a new facility." Motion, Ayes -2, Peterson, Goetten, and Callahan, Nay. Motion failed. Callahan said, "I would like the opportunity to review the drawings provided by the Architect to determine whether or not we need to have all of the features and spaces shown." It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to table this matter until November 26, 1990, to provide time to see comparisons and information regarding building spaces and requirements and financing options. Mayor Grabek stated that such information has already been reviewed, but he suggested that Staff provide a compilation of the information pertaining to space needs, financing alternatives and building types that could be constructed on each site. He said, "I would like to be able to make some forward motion at the November 26, 1990 Council meeting. We should be able to select a site, but not necessarily exercise the option. If that is agreeable, I will not oppose the one month delay. Callahan stated that he could not commit to • what he may do a month from now. Goetten stated that she would like more time for this issue to be discussed and more information to be provided. Mayor Grabek asked whether Council would like to a hold work session prior to the November 26, 1990. It was the consensus of Council that a workshop should be held. Motion, Ayes -4, Mayor Grabek, Nay. Motion passed. NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUATION Mabusth stated that the purpose of this continuation was to allow additional opportunity for public opinions to be expressed. Ms. Pam Peters, Togo Road, stated that she had missed the previous meeting and asked for a brief summary of the two options available to solve the drainage problem. Ms. Beth E.isher, 3556 Livingston Avenue, stated that a letter had been submitted to the City today that included the signature of 16 property owners that would be financially affected by this proposal. She said, "The 16 people are not in favor of the storm sewer project. We do not feel that our property values will be increased by the amount of the assessment. We think there are other options that have not been explored. We believe it is possible for the Cuffs to construct a garage on that lot without assessing the neighborhood for a sewer project. The Cuffs have made changes to lot and perhaps if those - 14 - 0 ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUED is revisions were reversed, there would be no problem." Mr. Harvey Reder, 3598 Livingston Avenue, asked whether the City was putting pressure on the Cuffs to solve the drainage problem in order to obtain a permit for a garage. Mayor Grabek stated that was not the case. He asked Bernhardson to briefly review the events of the last meeting. Bernhardson explained that the time of the September 24, 1990 Public Hearing had been incorrectly stated. He said, "As a result, we scheduled this matter for the October 8, 1990 Council meeting. At the October 8th meeting it was agreed that the City should notify the property owners and provide an additional opportunity for public input. If the Council, following that felt it was appropriate to have specifications prepared, there would be another project Public Hearing once the plans and specs were completed. If, based on the input from the Public Hearing, Council wished to proceed with the project, bids would be taken and another Public Hearing would be scheduled regarding the special assessment. If the special assessment is ordered, the City would then consider the appeals. Council would consider the number of appeals in determining whether or not to proceed with the project. There has been some question about whether or not all of the persons who signed the 35% petition were within the confines of the project area. It is our determination that they were. There was only person in question and that person has moved." Gerhardson displayed a copy of the plat showing the various lots that would be involved in the project. The plat map also indicated which of the property owners had signed each of the various petitions that have been submitted. Bernhardson commented that there are four property owners who have signed both petitions'. Ms. Shirley Spalding stated that those four persons wished to have their names removed from Karen Cuff's. She said, "They wish to only have their names on the petition opposing the project. They did not fully understand the proposal when they signed Karen Cuff's petition." Mr. Anthony Gleekel, Attorney for the Cuffs, stated that there is no other option available to satisfactorily resolve this problem. He said, "If there was a less expensive method of solving this problem, the Cuffs would prefer to proceed in that manner. The Cuffs would be assessed for this project as well. This is not just simply being proposed to allow Cuffs to construct a garage. There are properties other than the Cuffs that are experiencing water problems as well. Council had is - 15 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUED previously informed Karen Cuff that if she obtained a 35% • petition, that they would order the project. Ms. Cuff has submitted a 35% petition. I do not believe that Council should revise their position from that in their motion on September 24, 1990." Ms. Karen Cuff, stated that she had discussed the project with each of the neighbors at the time she was circulating her petition. She said, "I gave each resident a copy of the proposed assessmen °.:s and time period, and a complete copy of the feasibility study. I feel that I did accurately explain the project. The excavation that was done on the lot was to be a temporary solution to the drainage problem. We experienced drainage problems before we did anything to the property." Mr. Robert Paige, Crystal Place, asked if the cost of the project has been estimated. Bernhardson stated that until the specs are drawn and bids are taken, it will be difficult to determine the cost. He said, "Staff estimates that the project may cost approximately $32,000." Mr. Paige asked how many properties would share in that cost. Cook replied, "There are approximately 42 lots. There are is fewer people than there are lots. It will cost approximately $700 /lot." Mr. Hers -3l Forester, 3599 Crystal Place, said, "This was a tax forfeit lot and was used for drainage before the Cuff's purchased it. Wouldn't it be less expensive for the City to purchase the property and let the water run. I am downhill from the Csffs and I have no water problem. I have seen only two houses on that street that have a water problem. Yet they expect the rest of the neighbors to pay for their problem." Bernhardson commented that the property was purchased from Hennepin County, not the City of Orono. Mr. Jim Smith, 3580 Livingston Avenue, said, "The problem is that the water isn't running, it is creating a very large pool. During the first week of August, shortly after a heavy rain, a child was nearly hit by a car. The child lives in one of the houses that have signed both petitions. This child was laying on his skate board in this pool of water. I watched the car approach and barely stop in time to avoid hitting him. Children are automatically drawn to water puddles. This is a pool. There must be something done to stop water from pooling in this location." - 16 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUED • Mr. Reder suggested that Cuffs should regrade the lot to the way it existed the day they purchased it. Mr. Michael Bohlen, 3525 Livingston Avenue, questioned why the City could not pay for the cost of this project out of the general fund. Mayor Grabek replied, "It is the policy of the City that we assess projects such as this to the area residents that most benefit from the project." Bernhardson added, "Storm sewer projects are difficult to assess because the people downhill receive the most benefit. However, it is the people uphill that contribute to the problem." Mr. Pete_ Niesen, 3533 Livingston Avenue, stated that in his opinion this should be a City project. He said, "The City knew that water pooled in that area when they put in the blacktop. Something should have been done at that time. The road is damaged from this problem and it is necessary for the City to fill the potholes periodically. It would seem to me that the City would correct the problem to avoid the need to repair the road." Ms. Peters asked if the water from the proposed storm sewer • would be discharged on the north side of the.railroad tracks. Cook replied, "That is correct." Ms. Peters asked, "So water will drain onto the properties on the south side of Togo Road is that correct ?" Cook replied, "Yes, that is correct." Ms. Peters said, "Those lots currently have water problems." Cook acknowledged that there are some drainage problems in that area. Ms. Peters stated that there are some significant drainage problems in that area. Mr. Dave Carlson, 3645 Togo Road, said, "I gat all of the drainage frofi Northern Drive. If a storm sewer is added to the property, it will have a real problem. Currently, every time it rains, I get one to two feet of water in my backyard, and it is ruining my basement. I have called the City several times to complain about this problem. Nothing has been done. I believe that I maintain the culverts better than the City. The proposed storm sewer will only aggravate the situation." • - 17 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUED • Ms. Evelyn Lang, 3585 Crystal Place, asked if the drainage will go under or stop prior to the railroad tracks. She said, "There is a swale between the street and railroad track. Will there be an additional culvert under the railroad tracks ?" Cook replied, "There will be no additional culvert. The water will drain under the tracks through the culvert that now exists." Ms. Peters asked what the City intends to do about the properties on Togo Road that will be adversely affected by the storm sewer project if it proceeds. Cook replied, "It is true that water will drain at a faster rate to Togo Road. Staff will need to review the present situation in that area before proceeding with the project." Mr. Paige asked if there was any possibility that the City would participate in the funding of this project and who made that decision. Mayor Grabek stated that at this point the City does not intend to participate in funding, and that such a decision is made by Council. Mr. Forester asked whether it is Council's decision as to • whether or not the project will proceed. Mayor Grabek replied, "That is correct, based on the information pertaining to the costs and feasibility of the project and the input from the public." Mr. Forester said, "The City has received a petition with 16 names opposed to the project. That is 50% of the neighborhood that is opposed to this." Ms. Peters added, "The neighborhood below does not want the project either." Mr. Bohlen asked if the City could estimate the costs of the easements. Cook stated that it is impossible to estimate easement costs. Mayor Grabek stated that he would take no more public input at this point. Peterson asked what ramifications the withdrawal of the four names from the 35% petition will have on the validity of the petition. - 18 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUED • Barrett replied, "The statute states that if a petition is below 350, it requires a 4 /5ths vote. There is no other reference. In my preliminary opinion, at this point, since the 35% petition has not been officially voted on, it is possible for persons to withdraw their names. If the petition drops below 350 as a result, it will take four Councilmembers voting affirmatively to approve the project. I would like to research that further." Callahan asked at what point in the process the 4 /5ths vote would apply. Barrett replied, "Once the specs have been prepared and bids taken so that a final cost is known, it will be necessary to hold a Public Hearing to order the project. It will be necessary to order the project with a 4 /5ths vote if there is less than 350 on the petition." Goetten stated that she is now concerned about aggravating an existing drainage problem for the residents on Togo Road. She questioned how . this new information will affect this process. Nettles concurred with Goetten. He said, "It appears to me =hat the problem may be more extensive than we first believed. I would like to direct the City Engineer to review th,, Togo Road • area to determine the extent of the drainage problem." It was moved bye Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to table this item and direct City Staff to review and report on the drainage in the Togo Road area and whether this storm sewer project will have any effect. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion, Ayes -5; Nays -0. Motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to adopt the minutes of the Regular Council meeting held October 8, 1990. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. LMCD REPORT LMCD Representative JoEllen Hurr was present. Bernhardson referred Council to the additional information that had been placed before them just prior to this meeting. He stated that he had attended the LMCD meeting on October 16th and had thought that the Board may be willing to explore the proposal from the City of Wayzata. He said, "However, in reviewing Mr. • 19 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED Arndorfer's comments, I am not sure." • J(,)Ellen stated that she would not be. able to attend the meeting on October 24th. . Mayor Grabek asked JoEllen what the City needs to do in light of her absence. JoEllen replied, "A representative from the City could attend the meeting, but cannot vote. They can speak on the City's behalf." Callahan stated that he would like to have the City Administrator attend the meeting. Mayor Grabek asked JoEllen for her opinion on what action may be taken at that meeting. JoEllen replied, "I believe that the Plan will be passed. The thirty -day delay was not long enough to accomplish anything given the magnitude of issues. I don't believe there will be another delay." Mayor Grabek asked if there were any additional cities that have chosen to oppose the Plan along with Orono. JoEllen replied, "As far as I know, Orono, Spring Park, and • Wayzata are the only cities voting no." Nettles stated that having input regarding the Shoreland Management Regulations done at the Comprehensive Plan level was a positive step toward developing a working relationship. He asked what happens once they Plan is approved by the LMCD Board. JoEllen replied, "The Plan is submitted to the Metropolitan Council and I do not believe they will oppose it." Goetten asked how long the Metropolitan Council may take to review the Plan. JoEllen replied, "They are allowed 90 days to review the Plan. However, they may not take that long." Callahan said, "This is a real mess. First of all, the LMCD has assured everyone that this is only a plan. So voting no or yes, makes no difference to anyone except for moral suasion. Secondly, it was apparent to me from the meeting of October 10, that this, particularly the Shoreland Management, is a DNR operation and the LMCD is there to carry out whatever the DNR wants done. The DNR is confused by it all because they expected that they would have unanimous consent of the cities. If they do 20 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED • not have that, they do not have an interlocking method of working the scheme. They now have a scheme which they rely on for their Shoreland Management which they think may change the rules, but Orono, Spring Park, Deephaven, Minnetonka, Wayzata, and Tonka Bay are not going to agree with the whole thing. The DNR is not sure what to do because they are not sure they have the authority to enforce it until this Plan that is only a plan is approved." JoEllen said, "The DNR does have the ability to legally enforce Shoreland Regulations." Callahan replied, "That may be the case, but they were relying on the LMCD to be the instrument to carry this out. They have now found out that the LMCD is not going to be an effective method. It may be that the Plan is no longer important to the DNR." JoEllen said, "I think they still care. From the down side, it may have been easier for the DNR to have the LMCD be the middle person in this. I think in the long run it would have easier for many of the cities to have the LMCD be the middle person rather than each city having to negotiate on its own." Callahan said, "The DNR is really concerned that they have $45,000 which must be given away. This scheme through the LMCD • was a method to give it away to the cities. If that scheme falls through, they won't know what to do with the $45,000 and that presents a bureaucratic problem." JoEllen said, 11$5,000 will go directly to O-=ono." PUBLIC COMMENTS Ms. Lorraine Moss, Crystal Bay Road, stated that someone is in the process of constructing tall, cement posts in the wetland. She said, "Rumor has it that this person intends to construct a pool in the wetland area. I have lived in my house 45 years and have enjoyed all of the wild life that comes and goes in the wetland area. That area is a nature conservatory." Mabusth explained, "This, issue is scheduled to come before the City shortly. We have sent a letter to the owner of the property. It is my understanding that he will be applying for a Conditional Use Permit. Mrs. Moss is referring to pillars that the owner intended to use as part of a fencing project. We have ordered him to cease work immediately." Mayor Grabek advised Mrs. Moss that the City would keep her apprised of the progress involving this matter. Mr. Robert Gehrman, 4300 Sixth Avenue North, stated that it has come to his attention that the City of Orono was sued by the is - 21 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 PUBLIC COMMENTS CONTINUED Mayor in regard to work done to his home. He asked Mayor Grabek • if that is correct. Mayor G-1abek replied, "That is correct." Mr. Gehrman asked Mayor Grabek why he sued the City. Mayor Grabek responded that this was not an appropriate place or time to discuss his personal lawsuit. He offered to discuss the matter individually with Mr. Gehrman. Mr. Gehrman asked if it is City policy to notify the Council of all lawsuits pending before the City. Barrett stated that in this particular case, the lawsuit was referred to the City's insurance carrier, and was dismissed. Bernhardson reviewed the City's standard procedure regarding lawsuits. Mr. Gehrman asked whether there is any cost to the taxpayers for such lawsuits. Nettles confirmed Bernhardson's statements relating to the standard procedure for municipal lawsuits. He added that the only cost in cases such as the Mayor's is the insurance premiums • that are normally paid. Mr. Gabriel Jabbour stated that he had attended a recent meeting at the League of Minnesota Voters. He said that he had received a phone call after the meeting regarding his position on annexation. He said, "I was informed that the City of Orono is coming across much more aggressive than need be. I was told that the position taken by the Mayor of Long Lake did not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Long Lake Councilmembers. I also told that the Mayor of Long Lake did not fully communicate with the Councilmembers. The present Council feels that the issue of the number of houses to be constructed is not an issue. They indicated that they would be willing to develop only 13 houses. I believe that it would be beneficial to meet with the Long Lake Councilmembers to see if we can amicably resolve this issue." Callahan stated that the number of houses to be constructed was never the sole issue involved in this matter. Callahan said, "I am aware that the Long Lake Council changed their position. However, once they have the property, there is nothing to stop them from constructing 40 houses or more." Mr. Jabbour urged Council to make an attempt to rekindle a friendly working relationship with Long Lake. - 22 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 PUBLIC COMMENTS CONTINUED • Mr. James MacKinnon, Attorney, stated that his lawfirm had initially represented an individual involved in the lawsuit referred to by Mr. Gehrman. He said, "The matter with respect to the City arose because there was information that led us to conclude that the City undertook a special duty. That can arise when a city does not do what it normally does to design something for somebody's house, but goes over and above. By taking on this special duty, the city then has a certain obligation. If they do not do it properly then can they can be subject to suit. We sued the City of Orono. After that, I did some investigation, which included speaking to Jeanne Mabusth and Mike Gaffron. I found out through them that the City did not undertake any special duty. They treated the Mayor exactly like they, treat every citizen ir1 Orono. Based on Mike and Jeanne's expressions to me, and based on the fact that my clients did not wish to spend a large amount on the lawsuit, we decided not to fight the Summary Judgment. The matter was dropped because I determined that what we had originally thought was a bonafide suit ended up not to be. With respect to the actions and cost to the City, it was the conclusion of our lawfirm that nothing irresponsible had been done." ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #1334 REBERS CONSTRUCTION - SUGARWOODS PLAT • RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONS OF PRD APPROVAL Mr. Sid Rebers, Mr. Stephen Pflaum; Attorney, and Mr. Robert Kost, Planning Consultant, were present. Bernhardson explained the present conditions of the PRD for driveways, and M::. Reber's request to have those conditions reconsidered. He stated that there will be a number of lots that will be unable to meet the existing PRD requirements. Bernhardson said, "Thy: Developer is making this request so that he will have more flexibility in designing these individual driveways without havi:Zg to go through a Variance process for each. Seve;:al templates have been designed by Staff and BRW for use in such cases. If the owner of the property did not wish to use the templates, a review by the Planning Commission and Council would be necessary. The Planning Commission reviewed the templates, but felt it was their responsibility to review each of these cases individually. Th Planning Commission was concerned about tree preservation." Mr. P::laum said, "There were two key issues in the Sugarwoods Development. Minimal hardcover and maximum tree protection. From discussion I have had with Chairman Kelley, it appears that hardcover is not an issue here. However, tree preservation continues to be a concern. During the planning and review process, consideration was not given to the ramifications that may result from the requirement for a maximum driveway width • - 23 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1334 - REBERS RECONSIDERATION CONTINUED of 20 feet. The interior lots of the subdivision have such a configuration that it is impossible to provide a turn - around no matter where the house is placed on the lot. There can be no loop or circular driveways, but a turn- around area is acceptable. The turn - arounds will eliminate the need to back out unto the street, which in some cases may prove to be very dangerous. Most of the lots in this subdivision are heavily wooded, thus reducing sight capabilities. The templates present three options for providing a turn - around." Mr. Kost used a sketch of the development plan and an actual house footprint to support Mr. Pflaum's comments. Mr. Pflaum said, "We have an economic problem if we are to proceed with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. This subdivision is catering primarily to corporate transfer executives that have little time =o go through a designing process. They wish to be provided with a design and cost estimate as quickly as possible. They need to know that they can build the house design of their choice on the lot they have chosen without delay. Mr. Rebers is competi ;ig with other subdivisions of this nature that exist in Minnetonka, Eden Prairie and other suburbs. We are asking to be allowed to use the templates in order to avoid the time delay of a review process to determine whether a particular lot is buildable. If a home buyer wishes to have a driveway design not represented by a • template, Planning Commission review would be required. Goetten asked how many lots would need this special driveway consideration. Mr. Kost replied, "Approximately 12 or 13 of the 25 lots would need this special consideration." Goetten asked Mr. Pflaum if he understands why the Planning Commission has taken such a strong stand on this issue. Mr. Pflaum replied, "Mr. Kelley told m-a that this subdivision had special benefits included with it. It is the only subdivision in Orono that is less than two acres and has sewer and water. Mr. Kelley's point of view is that we negotiated the package and if we did not give consideration to the driveways, that is our problem. He does not wish to see any change in the original conditions. M_ -. Kelley told me that I could quote him. He said that he and the Planning Commission had walked the site and saw the houses that were under construction. He was fully satisfied that a maximum effort is being made, more than they had intended, in regard to tree and site preservation. Mr. Kelley does not object to what we are proposing, except that he wishes to view each of these on a case by case basis." - 24 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE 11334 - REBERS RECONSIDERATION CONTINUED • Goetten stated that Planning Commissioner Cohen had expressed to her this evening that he felt very strongly that each of these situations should be reviewed individually. 0 Planning Commissioner Rowlette said, "The vote was six to one in favor of reviewing each of these individually. The Planning Commission believed we would not be serving our purpose if we gave a blanket approval." Mayor Grabek stated that if the Planning Commission approved the template designs, that Staff should be able to handle the process without involving the Planning Commission. He said, "I believe that the Planning Commission has more than enough to do already. I am not trying to take any authority away from the Planning Commission." Goetten stated that she supports the Planning Commission's recommendation. She said, "It may be that this issue was not considered fully by Mr. Rebers. However, the Planning Commission work-ad very, very hard to address all of the aspects of this unique, sensitive parcel. My option would b•a to allow the Planning Commission to review these case by case and leave the decision there. I , eould like to see the Planning Commission make some decisions on their own. I think they took ownership of this subdivision and I would like to support them." Callahan stated that originally ;ze had concurred with Goetten Is position. He said. "However, as I now understand it, there are 12 lots that may have difficulty meeting safety codes for a driveway. There is no question then, that a turn - around must be provided from a safety point of view. If the Planning Commission is going to be forced to make a change anyway, why is there a need to revi•aw each change individually. More than likely, the turn - around will be designed as the templates show." Rowlette said, "There are alternatives. This is not cut and dried. If we give blanket approval, each of the 12 lots will design the house to the maximum limit of that approval." Mr. Kost stated that would not be the case. He said, "Even if the property owner agrees to use a template design, it will be necessary to work with City Staff to assure that the driveway is sited giving consideration to the trees and land characteristics. If at any point in the process, Staff is uncomfortable with the request, the matter would go before th_: Planning Commission." Callahan asked whether it would be possible for the Planning Commission to work with Mr. Rebers to pre - determine an acceptable location for the driveways on each of the 12 or 13 lots. Rowlette replied, "I do not believe thz., Planning Commission - 25 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1334 - REBERS RECONSIDERATION CONTINUED would object to reviewing all 12 lots at one time if Mr. Rebers • wishes to proceed that way." Mayor Grabek said, "It seems to me that is basically what has been proposed." Mr. Pflaum noted that the template designs are a compromise between Mr. Rebe::s and Staff to provide a safe access to the street. Rowlette said, "The question is whether the Staff or Planning Commission should take the time to solve this issue, The Planning Commission wishes to take the time." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan for the purposes of discussion, to accept the templates as a method of allowing Staff to restrict what may be done on these lots. If there are any exceptions other than those designs represented by the templates, the matter must go through the planning process. Callahan asked if this proposal varied at all from Staff's original proposal. Mabusth replied that the proposal before Council this evening is reflected in the resolution first prepared. Motion, Ayes -2, Peterson, Nettles and Goetten, Nay. Motion failed. #1497 TOBERMAN MANAGEMENT 1960 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO TABLE* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to table review and action by the Council on Application #1497; Toberman Management, for property located at 1960 Shoreline Drive. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. #1592 SMITH BAY MARINA & YACHT CLUB, INC. 1955 SHORELINE DRIVE RENEWAL VARIANCES RESOLUTION #2891 Mr. Vern Larson, an Associate, of Toberman Management, was present. Bernhardson provided a brief review of the information pertaining to this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated October 11, 1990). He stated that this application included the same conditions and requirements set forth in Resolutions #2190 and #2648, with the exception of the club house which is proposed to be one story rather than two. Bernhardson noted that the Planning Commission had unanimously recommended approval. Peterson asked if there was a limit on the number of times an application could be renewed. - 26 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1592 -SMITH BAY MARINA CONTINUED • Mabusth replied, "The City ordinances do not set any limitations for renewals. She asked Mr. Larson if he could estimate when a building permit may be issued for this proposal. Mr. Larsen stated that he d_d not know when a building permit application would be submitted. Callahan stated that it was his understanding that the property was in the process of being sold. He questioned whether it was appropriate to proceed with this application at this time. Mabusth replied, "The property was in the process of being sold to th.is same party when Council reviewed this application last year." Callahan said, "on :he other hand, if the property is not sold, should :ve consider this application when it is possible that these improvements will never take place ?" Mr. Larson stated that the reason the improvements had not been done prior to this was because of the economic hardship caused by the low lake levels. He said, "tie completed the dredging, the replacement of the old docks and the construction of the seawall. Then the lake level decreased and it was not econamically feasible to proceed with the other improvements." • Callahan said, "I can understand why you chose not to go ahead. I am questioning whether it makes sense to grant Variances relating to a building in a commercial site plan, when we have no idea when the building may be constructed." Goetten asked whether Council could request that a specific time period be provided indicating when construction would begin. Mr. Larson stated that he was not prepared to provide such information. He added, "If ghat information is normally required as part of the renewal Variance process, we could probably provide an estimate." Goetten asked, "Can you give the City a reasonable expectation that the building will be constructed ?" Mr. Larson replied, "Probably just as reasonable as any of the other times we have been before the Council." Mr. Art Torangeau asked if the building will have indoor plumbing facilities. Mr. Larson replied. "Yes it will." Mr. Torangeau asked whether there would be an entrance and • 27 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1592 -SMITH BAY MARINA CONTINUED exit to the property. He said, "There are two access locations. • If both are used for entering and exiting, it will make traffic a mess. Tne traffic on County Road 15 has really increased over the last few years. I think that is something that should be considered." Planning Commissioner Rowlette said. "The Planning Commission did consider the issue of traffic. We believed that there would not be as much traffic generated with this use as with the previous use. It was our feeling that there would be sporadic traffic coming and going." Peterson asked whether the City had received the report from the State inspectors regarding the proposed sale of gas on this property. Mabusth replied, "Staff has not received any updated reports in that respect because there has been no activity on the property. If the sale of gas is proposed, we will have to ask for those reports." It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2891, granting Variances and approving the Commercial Site Plan for Smith's Bay Marina and Yacht Club., Inc. Motion, Ayes -4. Nays -0. Nettles abstained. Motion passed. 1555 LANDSTAR, INC. • 2501 OLD BEACH ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Mr. James MacKinnon, Attorney for Landstar, Inc., was present. Bernhardson referred to the resolution presented for Council approval. He said., "The City Engineer has estimated the cost of curb and gutter to be $10.00 /foot and the expanded roadbed at $20.00 /foot. This would be independent of the City's bituminous overlay. The curb and gutter would be only be constructed on the west side of Old Beacali Road. We have been informed by the City of Minnetonka Beach that they will not include curb and gutter along their portion of the road." JoEllen Hurr, City Planner, City of Minnetonka Beach, said, "The City of Minnetonka Beach is not in favor of any upgrade of Old Beach Road." Goetten asked if the need for curb and gutter had anything to do with drainage. Cook replied, "Drainage is part of the reason. It provides adequate drainage and helps increase the life of the road." - 28 - • ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE 11555- LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED • Mr. Jim Krey, 2560 Old Beach Road, said, "It was my understanding that drainage is not a concern for the lots in this subdivision. T-,ie City Engineer is now saying that curb and gutter is needed to help drainage. I would like to knew why the curb and gutter is needed." Cook replied, "It is a City requirement that curb and gutter be provided in urban sections of road in new developments. We had originally stated that Old Beach Road would be brought up to City standards. The 32 foot width with curb and gutter is what the City requires." Mabusth stated that the drainage referred to by the City Engineer pertains to the roadway. She said, "The City Engineer is not referring to drainage within the lots of the subdivision." Mr. MacKinnon said, "I would ask the Council keep in mind that my client is proposing to develop this parcel at approximately 50% of its maximum density. We are developing nine lots, but could have 17. The owner of the property believed that he could recove_ a comfortable amount of his investment by developing only nine lots. He only considered sewer and water and the contribution toward a 1z" overlay in his cost estimates. At a late date, that is now being changed. The City is now asking for curb and gutter. If that is the case, we will submit • a new plan with more lots so we can recover more money to pay the cost of the road improvements." Mr. Dave Schneider, Old Beach Road, asked what the City of } Orono would like to see: Old Beac'l Road become. He said, "If the road is upgraded, it will become a super short -cut. There is a newly expanded and upgraded intersection in Navarre. Why upgrade Old Beach Road ?" Mayor Grabek stated that the upgrade is not intended for the purpose of turning Old Bea&i Road into a faster shortcut. He stated that the upgrade is required from a safety point of view. Cook commented, "The widening of Old Beach Road will primarily be done to accommodate the curb and gutter. The traveled portion of the road will not increase significantly. I do not believe that the quality of the road will cause people to drive at a higher rate of speed." Mr. Schneider asked whether it would be appropriate to consider placing a cul -de -sac at the end of Old Beach Road. Cook replied, "That could be addressed as a separate issue. However, that would create a very long cul -de -sac, which is not looked on favorably from a safety standpoint." • - 29 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1555- LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED • Goetten asked whether the road issue could be separated from the subdivision. She said, "I cannot see a cul -de -sac being placed at the end of the road. However, I am also against curb and gutter for this particular road." Bernhardson stated that Council could opt to approve the subdivision without curb and gutter and require the developer to share in the cost of the overlay. Goetten asked what the overlay will cost. Staff did not know at this point what the cost of overlay will be. Cook said, "Council could indicate that the developer would have to share in whatever that cost is determined to be." Goetten stated that she would prefer -o know that =nformation prior to approval and that the developer should also know. It was moved by Goetten to approve the preliminary subdivision as recommended by Staff and Planning Commission, without consideration for the road. The motion failed due to a lack of a second. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles for the purpose of discussion, to approve the preliminary subdivision in • accordance with the resolution presented this evening, which includes curb and gutter. Callahan asked whether the cost of any of the road upgrade will be assessed to the persons living on the east side of Old Beach Road. Mabusth stated that the property owners on the east side of Old Beach Road would not be included. Nettles asked whether curb and gutter is a requirement. Mabusth stated that curb and gutter is required in an urban area. She said, "Only Council can change that requirement. Staff had to include that requirement. Nettles stated that the people want to leave the road as is and that the present road is in keeping with the character of the area. He stated that he preferred to have lesser density. Mabusth noted that if curb and gutter is not included in the subdivision, the resolution would need to be amended accordingly. Bernhardson suggested giving conceptual approval so that the cost of the overlay could be provided. Motion, Mayor. Grabek -Aye, Nays -4. Motion failed. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson, to conceptually approve the preliminary subdivision with a leg" overlay. Staff is directed to include in the resolution language pertaining to cu;--b and gutter being excluded from the requirements of this subdivision. Goetten asked whether Ne=ttles' motion included a requirement to be provided with cost figures. Nettles replied, "The motion is to give conceptual approval of this subdivision and direct Staff to provide the Variance • - 30 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 • ZONING FILE #1555- LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED language pertaining to the curb and gutter and bring that back for Council to consider at the next meeting." Gerhardson stated that he would like to maintain the City's standard to be a consistent 24 feet in width. He stated that the road presently varies in w:�dth. Nettles amended his motion to include Gerhardson's request. Petersen seconded. Motion, Ayes -4, Nays -0, Callahan abstained. Motion passed. #1593 PHILIP KALEY 1395 BROWN ROAD SOUTH VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2893 Mr. Kaley was present. Bernhardson summarized the pertinent information relating to this Variance application. He noted that the, Planning Commission had unanimously recommended approval. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2893, granting street setback Variances to construct a 10' addition to the residence located at 1395 Brown Road South. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. #1594 DUANE LUKE 2465 NORTH SHORE • VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2894 Mr. Luke was DRIVE present for this review. Bernhardson reviewed the nature of this application, noting that the Planning Commission had recommended approval provided that an equivalent amount of hardcover be removed. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2894, granting a side setback and hardcover Variance to construct an addition to the residence at 2465 North Shore Drive. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. #1596 DARYLE L. UPHOFF 2699 KELLY AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2895 Mr. Uphoff was present. Bernhardson made a brief statement explaining Mr. Uphoff's application. He stated that the Planning Commission had recommended approval provided that hardcover not exceed 35.70. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #:2895, granting hardcover a:.id a.rerage lakeshore • setback Variances to construct an addition to the existing - 31 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE $1596 - UPHOFF CONTINUED • residence and repair timber walls and a stairway at 2699 Kelly Avenue. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. #1597 RALPH D. BURGESS, JR. 2610 WEST LAFAYETTE ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2896 Mr. Mike Peters, Contractor, was present on Mr. Burgess's behalf. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2896, granting lakeshore setback, average lakeshore setback and hardcover Variances for replacement of a deck in kind. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. #1598 IRWIN JACOBS 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT /VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2897 Mr. Jim Jensen; Jensen Homes, was present on behalf of Tor. Jacobs. 3ernhardson reviewed the information presented in Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated October 12, 1990. He added that the Planning Commission had recommended approval of this application. Goetten said, "The Accessory Structure Ordinance does not • --ake into consideration an estate of this size. It applies mainly to the one, two and five acre parcels. There are .30 acres of land in this case.. I see no problem approving this application." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2897, granting a Conditional Use Permit and an oversized accessory structure Variance, to construct a guest house at 1700 Shoreline. Drive. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: None. MAYOR %COUNCIL REPORT: None. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: LAFAYETTE RIDGE Bernhardson s sated that his memo presented information regarding other urban streets that could also be converted, if requests were received to do so (see Mark Bernhardson's memo dated October 17, 1990). JoEllen Hurr did not believe that there would be any major . - 32 - 1* ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 LAFAYETTE RIDGE CONTINUED impact to the City if it converted the other urban roads that do not meet City standards. Goetten stated that her concerns with upgrading were primarily involved with the rural area roads. She said, "I believe we could approve the conversion of Lafayette Ridge without setting a precedent we could not manage." It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to approve the Lafayette Ridge conversion per Staff recommendations. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to accept t;ze information presented by City Administrator Bernhardson. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. 1991 BUDGET MEETING* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to accept the information presented scheduling November 8, 1990 at 6:00 p.m. as the time and date for the 1991 Budget Meeting. 14otion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. 1991 MEETING SCHEDULE* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to • accept the 1991 Meeting Schedule as presented. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. WEST HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES - RESIGNATION* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to accept with regret the resignation of Gary Printup from the West Hennepin Human Services Board and direct Staff to thank him for his willingness to serve. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0. Motion passed. STEP RAISE - JAY DEMBOUSKI* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to approve a step increase for Jay Dembouski to $11.738 per hour, effective October 6. 1990. Motion, Aves -5, Nays -0. ' Motion passed. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding: Cable TV, City Assessor, Stubbs Bay Sewer and W,.- -ll #3. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0, Motion passed. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: None. LICENSES* None. • - 33 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 BILLS* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded Peterson, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0, Motion passed. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 11:48 p.m. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0, Motion passed. ' L James R. GraZhan, Mayor AT T: Edward J. Cal Jr., Acting Mayor /. othy allin, City Clerk • - 34 - •