Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-10-2019 Council PacketAgenda Council Meeting Monday, June 10, 2019, 7:00 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us The public is invited to address the council regarding any item on the regular agenda. If your topic is not on the agenda, you may speak during the Public Comments section. Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance Approval of Agenda Consent Agenda 1. City Council Meeting Minutes of May 28, 2019 2. City Council Work Session Minutes of May 28, 2019 3. Claims/Bills 4. Approval of 2019 Garbage Hauler Licenses 5. Approval of Rental Licenses 6. Appointment of 2019 Seasonal Employees 7. LAI 8-000057 —City of Orono Text Amendment: Plumbing in Accessory Buildings —Ordinance Public Comments — (Limit 5 Minutes per Person) This is an opportunity for the public to address matters not on the agenda. The council will not engage in discussion or take action on items presented at this time. However, the council may refer issues to staff for follow up or consideration at a future meeting. Speakers should state their name and home address at the podium before speaking. Public Safety Report 8. Swearing in of Junior Cadets Finance Director Report 9. 2018 Transfers — Pavement Management Public Works/ City Engineer Report 10. City of Orono Text Amendment: Water Meter - Ordinance Planning Department Report (Planning Commission Representative — Bob Erickson) 11. LAI 9-000017 — Stephen and Jennifer Paidosh, 4300 North Shore Drive, ROW Vacation 12. LAI 9-000018 — Christopher W. Bollis and Rachel A. Bollis, 350 Stubbs Bay Road, Preliminary Plat — Resolution 13. LAI 9-000027 — Mike Johnsrud, 135 Luce Line Ridge, Variance Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us — follow links for Stay Connected & Email Notification Agenda Council Meeting Monday, June 10, 2019, 7:00 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us 14. 19-000028 - Steve Eggert, o/b/o Lake West Development, LLC, unaddressed PID 2011723420039, Variance from Subdivision requirements 15. LAI 9-000044 - City of Orono Adoption of 2020-2040 Community Management Plan - Resolution Mayor/Council Report City Administrator Report City Attorney Report Closed Meeting 16. The meeting will be closed as permitted by §13D.05, Subd. 3(a), to evaluate the performance of the City Administrator, Dustin Rief Adjournment Upcoming Events 2019 06-24-19 City Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 06-24-19 City Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 07-01-19 Park Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. 07-04-19 Official Holiday, City Offices Closed 07-05-19 Official Holiday, City Offices Closed 07-08-19 City Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 07-15-19 Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Aaron Printup) 07-22-19 City Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 07-22-19 City Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 08-12-19 City Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 08-19-19 Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Victoria Seals) 08-26-19 City Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 08-26-19 City Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us — follow links for Stay Connected & Email Notification MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28, 2019 7:00 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Dennis Walsh, City Council Members Richard Crosby, III, Aaron Printup, and Victoria Seals. Representing Staff were City Administrator Dustin Rief, Finance Director Ron Olson, Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, Public Works Director/City Engineer Adam Edwards, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Walsh called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT AGENDA 1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 13, 2019 2. CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES OF MAY 13, 2019 3. CLAIMSBILLS 4. APPROVAL OF RENTAL LICENSES 5. APPOINTMENT OF SEASONAL EMPLOYEES 6. 2019 CONTRACT STREET MAINTENANCE 7. 2020 STREET MAINTENANCE PLANNING AND ENGINEERING 8. LOMA LINDA LAKE ACCESS DOCK REPLACEMENT 9. APPROVAL TO ACCEPT DONATION OF ELECTRONIC ASSIST BICYCLE 10. APPROVAL TO DISPOSE OF FORFEITED VEHICLES 12. JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH PLYMOUTH FOR FERNDALE ROAD NORTH, MILL AND OVERLAY PROJECT Crosby moved, Seals seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as revised, with the addition of Item No. 12. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PUBLIC COMMENTS None PRESENTATION 11. HENNEPIN COUNTY PRESENTATION — JAN CALLISON MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28, 2019 7:00 o'clock p.m. Commissioner Jan Callison provided the City Council with an overview of the 2019 Hennepin County assessment report. The first sheet of the report is a summary sheet showing that Hennepin County has experienced its sixth straight year with an increase in home values. Since 2013, there has been almost a 50 percent increase in the median value of a single-family residential unit. The next several sheets of the report provide an overview of what is happening with the County as it relates to the community and property taxes. The final sheet relates to Orono specifically and shows that 55 new homes were built in 2018 in Orono. Hennepin County is proposing to change their tobacco ordinance to raise the age to purchase tobacco from 18 to 21, which only applies to five western cities and does not apply to Orono. The new age already applies iin Mound, Rogers, Greenfield, St. Bonifacious, and possibly Rockford. The proposal will be discussed in June and will also restrict who can sell tobacco and where flavored tobaccos can be used. Walsh asked why only a few cities have the higher age limit. Callison noted those cities regulate themselves and that Orono also has its own tobacco ordinance. The other provision of the ordinance would control the sale of individually wrapped cigars but does not apply to Orono. Crosby asked what the County's stance is on the legalization of marijuana. Callison stated Hennepin County has not taken a position on that. The issue with the single cigars is because they are inexpensive and they are easier for younger children to buy. Hennepin County has seen some positive results for child protection. Those numbers have dropped below what they were in 2016 and 2017, which means there are fewer children being placed out of the home. The 2019 legislation session was not significant for Hennepin County. While Hennepin County will see some additional county program aid, but by the time you factor in the fact that state is not going to pay any portion of PERA, it will probably be a wash. In addition, Hennepin County did not receive any additional money for roads and bridges. Currently Hennepin County is not able to spend as much as they would like to repair roads and bridges. Approximately $85 million is collected in Minnesota for road tax, but a good portion of that is sent outstate each year. Crosby asked if that comes from auto tabs. Callison indicated it comes from a variety of sources, such as tabs, sales tax on cars, and registration fees. Hennepin County does not receive anything from leased motor vehicle sales tax currently and that did not change with the 2019 legislative session, which was a disappointment. At the present time Ramsey and Hennepin County are excluded from receiving any leased motor vehicle sales tax revenues. As it relates to road improvements in Orono, Highway 112 will be completed this year. Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road intersection improvements are scheduled for this year, and while it will be a major inconvenience for a number of motorists, it hopefully will result in an improved intersection. As it relates to Tanager Bridge, Hennepin County Transportation Department is currently anticipating a fall or winter MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28, 2019 7:00 o'clock p.m. 2019 contract award. Their plan is to try to keep the existing bridge open for traffic if it is possible, with the project expected to be completed in the summer of 2020. Callison thanked the City of Orono for enforcing road restrictions this spring. Walsh thanked Commissioner Callison for following up on the police overtime issue. Orono also appreciates the people from Hennepin County Transportation Department holding an open house in Navarre regarding the road project. The City Council took no formal action on this item. 12. DONATION GARDEN LICENSE EXTENSION Rief noted at the May 13 City Council meeting, Staff was advised that the Council was interested in extending the lease agreement for the donation garden by five years to December 31, 2027, and to extend the number of days' notice within the term from 90 days to 180 days. Staff recommends approval of the Amendment to the Lease Agreement. Walsh noted at the last City Council meeting they discussed having the Parks Commission get more involved in the donation garden. The next Parks Commission is July 1. Walsh suggested Ms. Delaney and her group come up with a list of items they are interested in doing at the garden and present it at the next Parks Commission meeting. Jane Delaney, 1350 Wooddale Avenue, stated everyone is really excited about the donation garden and that it would be nice if they could start some community gardens. Delaney indicated she has a number of items that she is interested in doing there but that she will wait and save her ideas for the Park Commission. Delaney thanked the City Council for their decision not to sell the property. Crosby moved, Printup seconded, to approve the Amendment to the Lease Agreement and to extend the number of days' notice from 90 days to 180 days. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Crosby stated he would like to acknowledge all the fallen soldiers and the great sacrifices they and their families did for America. Walsh noted in June graduation parties will be starting up and that he would encourage everyone to be safe. Walsh reported a number of people have thanked him for the City working on the roads and that it is the Council's intent to continue to improve Orono's roads. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT Rief noted the City has received a significant amount of rain over the past month or so and that the Public Works Department has been keeping busy because of it. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, May 28, 2019 7:00 o'clock p.m. Walsh commended the Public Works Department for dealing with the two water main breaks promptly. Crosby suggested posting the lake levels every couple of days on the City's website. Walsh recommended a link to the Watershed District be included on the website since that would include the water levels. Rief noted Lake Minnetonka was over the high-water mark a couple of weeks ago, then dropped back down, but the lake level is back up again following the recent rain. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT None ADJOURNMENT Printup moved, Seals seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 7:22 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor Orono City Council Work Session Tuesday, April 28, 2019 Council Chambers 5:00 p.m. PRESENT: Mayor Dennis Walsh, Council Members Richard F. Crosby II, Aaron Printup and Victoria Seals. Representing staff were City Administrator Dustin Rief, Finance Director Ron Olson, Police Chief Coffey Farniok, and City Clerk Anna Carlson. Guests: Long Lake Fire Department Chief James Van Eyll, John Hall, and Shane Gardener Meeting Start Time: 5:04 p.m. 1. Heritage Preservation City Administrator Dustin Rief stated Council Member Victoria Seals had a resident reach out to her in regards to heritage preservation districts for Orono. Rief requested guidance and input from the Council about heritage preservation for Orono. Mayor Dennis Walsh stated that it may be better to look into this later in the year after the budget is established. Walsh recommended readdressing it later in the year after Council Members had a chance to review the information received in regards to heritage preservation. Rief mentioned staff will look into how many houses we have that are over one hundred years old. 2. Budget Priorities Finance Director Ron Olson presented a high overview of the significant factors that make up the budget. Staff has until June 7th to get their budget into the City Administrator for review. He briefly ran through revenue and expenditure estimates for 2020. Olson also noted the City's tax levy can increase by 4.78% without increasing the City's tax rate due to the City's increased Taxable Market Value. Walsh mentioned if the Council can be comfortable with raising the levy to help fund the roads budget to get that specific budget to where it should be. He noted if the City wants to increase the pavement fund, it could be raised roughly by 3%. Council needs to figure out what they are comfortable with. He added that he would like to see what we have done for the permits over the last few years so Council can compare and use it to figure out estimates. Walsh recommended the Council to consider incrementally increase the levy now so we don't have to make such a huge jump to get where we want to be. Seals agreed that by making the increase of 3% since the City has the option to lower it if needed. 3. HR Performance Review Update Orono City Council Work Session Tuesday, April 28, 2019 Council Chambers 5:00 p.m. Rief gave a brief update to the Council in regards to the draft HR Performance Review Competency Matrix. Seals mentioned that there is a lot of information provided. Seals asked if the matrix has been set up in the HRWize software, and if not how do we get it there. She added that the Council is looking for action on the performance review process now if possible. Walsh recommended the Council add a Work Session to work on this and get it up and rolling. Discussion followed in regards to the different ways of beginning the process. 4. Fire Discussion Rief gave an overview of the information presented. Discussion followed regarding ownership between Long Lake and Orono, structure of the department, and partnerships. All parties will continue to meet regularly to work together, review and discuss possible changes that could be made to the contract in the future. Meeting End 6:50 p.m. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 3 Item Description: Claims/Bills Date: June 10, 2019 Presenter: Maggie Ung Agenda Consent Agenda Accountant Section: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to approve payment of claims made on the City for services and/or products provided to the City. 2. Background. The attached claims for payment have been received by the City. Staff has reviewed the claims and is recommending approval of the listing for payment. The claims will be paid by checks 111922 to 112010, totaling $467,202.43. 3. Noteworthy Payments. Vendor Amount Description of Payment #111954 GMH Asphalt $254,406.75 Payment for the 2019 Street Improvements and contracted street patching. #111988 Randy's Environmental Services $8,952.61 Payment for the 2019 City Spring Clean-up ($8,015). #111993 SHI $9,748.66 Payment for the purchase of 2 police Toughbooks. Various Cities $31,172.20 Pass-through payment for 2" a quarter Towards Zero Death grant. 4. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of a motion authorizing payment to the claims list as presented. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the claims list as presented. Exhibits A. Check Register Prepared By: JtP-U Reviewed By: J9116 Approved By: `Z�-)a) City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Payee Issue Date Number Number JOHN DEERE GOVERNMENTS 06/03/2019 111873 116588624 405-48500-580 Front Loader Attachment Total 111873: MN DEPT OF HEALTH 06/06/2019 111883 3821-2019 601-49400-441 Water Supply System Operator Class C License B. Water MN DEPT OF HEALTH 06/06/2019 111883 4686-2019 601-49400-441 Water Supply System Operator Class C License G. Water MN DEPT OF HEALTH 06/06/2019 111883 802997 101-45210-441 Golf Course Hospitality Fee -2019 Golf Course Total 111883: UNITED FARMERS COOPERATI 05/29/2019 111911 21-53529 101-43000-489 LP Cylinder Public Works Department UNITED FARMERS COOPERATI 05/29/2019 111911 53811 101-43000-224 Grass Seed - Sod Repair Public Works Department Total 111911: UNITED FARMERS COOPERATI 05/29/2019 111922 53811 101-43000-224 Grass Seed - Sod Repair Public Works Department Total 111922: Englund, Jeanne 05/31/2019 111923 053019 101-22205 Escrow Refund 08-3356 2455 Shadywood Rd Total 111923: LENSING, JULIE 05/31/2019 111924 053019 101-22205 Escrow refund LA19-000011 3349 Crystal Bay Rd LENSING, JULIE 05/31/2019 111924 053019 101-39615 Escrow refund LA19-000011 3349 Crystal Bay Rd Total 111924: Rudolph, Stephen 05/31/2019 111925 052819 101-22205 Escrow Refund 2016-00348/2016-01020 2480 Casc Total 111925: MN DEPT OF HEALTH 06/06/2019 111926 3821-2019 601-49400-441 Water Supply System Operator Class C License B. Water MN DEPT OF HEALTH 06/06/2019 111926 4686-2019 601-49400-441 Water Supply System Operator Class C License G. Water Total 111926: MN DEPT OF HEALTH 06/06/2019 111927 802997 101-45210-441 Golf Course Hospitality Fee -2019 Golf Course Page: 1 Jun 06. 2019 11:06AM Invoice Amount 23.00- 23.00- 40.00- 31.98- 72.99- 104.97- 72.99 72.99 700.00 21.00- 2,500.00 23.00 23.00 46.00 40.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 2 Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Payee Check Issue Date Check Number Invoice Number Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount Total 111927: 40.00 A 1 RENTAL 06/10/2019 111930 140656 101-45210-404 Tiller Rental, X-mas Tree, Electrical Restoration Golf Course 276.48 Total 111930: 276.48 ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIO 06/10/2019 111931 385933486 710-49970-413 PW Copier Lease 5/20/19-6/20/19 116.76 Total 111931: 116.76 ALLSTREAM 06/10/2019 111932 16150040 101-42110-321 Phone service Police Department 302.27 ALLSTREAM 06/10/2019 111932 16150040 101-41900-321 Phone Service Central Services 423.18 ALLSTREAM 06/10/2019 111932 16150040 601-49400-321 Phone Service Water 70.53 ALLSTREAM 06/10/2019 111932 16150040 602-49450-321 Phone Service Sewer 211.60 Total 111932: 1,007.58 APPRIZE TECHNOLOGY SOLUT 06/10/2019 111933 18064 101-41900-319 Administrative Fee 06/19 Central Services 507.00 Total 111933: 507.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232718 435-48971-304 2018 Street Improvements 2,773.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232719 101-43280-304 LA19-000022 Willow Bay Sanctuary Special Services 768.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232720 101-43280-304 LA19-000025 Eisinger Flats Special Services 726.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232739 101-43280-304 2265 North Shore Drive Special Services 413.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232740 101-43280-304 Southways Development 18-3999 Special Services 1,062.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232742 101-43280-304 LA18-000036 2745 Kelley Parkway Special Services 684.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232743 101-43280-304 16-3858 Crystal Bay Estates Special Services 59.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232744 651-16500 2019 Drainage Improvements 3,820.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232745 101-43170-305 GIS/Mapping Engineering 1,320.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232745 602-49450-305 GIS/Mapping Sewer 1,705.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232745 601-49400-305 GIS/Mapping Water 605.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232745 651-49910-305 GIS/Mapping Storm Water 275.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232746 651-49910-304 2019 Misc Drainage Storm Water 256.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232747 101-43170-304 Misc Engineering Engineering 86.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232748 651-49910-304 2019 Pond & Drainage Area Study Storm Water 384.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232750 651-16500 2019 Drainage Improvements 4,695.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232750 435-48972-304 2019 Street Improvements 4,695.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232751 435-48971-304 Bederwood Park Improvement 4,661.50 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 3 Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Payee Check Issue Date Check Number Invoice Number Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232752 101-43170-304 Big Island Master Plan Engineering 96.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232753 601-16500 CR 15 & 19 Reconstruct 1,608.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232753 602-16500 CR 15 & 19 Reconstruct Law/Legal Services 1,608.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232754 402-48055-304 OCB Feasibility Study OCB Road Reconstruction 6,618.50 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0232755 101-43280-304 Orono Preserve Special Services 59.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0233618 602-16500 2018 Sewer Improvements Law/Legal Services 2,695.00 BOLTON & MENK INC. 06/10/2019 111934 0233621 101-43280-304 Lakeview Addition 15-3723 Special Services 59.00 Total 111934: 41,731.00 BUSINESS ESSENTIALS 06/10/2019 111935 WO -543330- 101-41900-201 Copy Paper Central Services 166.50 Total 111935: 166.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 OOOOG-162 101-41600-307 Data Practices 05/19 Law/Legal Services 108.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 OOOOG-162 601-49400-307 Water Matters Water 123.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 OOOOG-162 651-49910-307 Storm Water Storm Water 248.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 OOOOG-162 101-41600-307 Liquor Ordinance Law/Legal Services 992.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 OOOOG-162 101-41600-307 General Legal 05/19 Law/Legal Services 1,133.23 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0004G-150 101-42110-307 Police Matters 05/19 Police Department 46.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0115G-105 101-41600-308 Code Enforcement 05/19 Law/Legal Services 201.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0150G-95 101-41600-307 Contempt Matter 05/19 Law/Legal Services 525.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0201 G-84 101-41600-307 Misc Recordings 05/19 Law/Legal Services 931.85 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0472G-23 601-49400-307 Chlorine Release 05/19 Water 31.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0550G-7 101-43280-307 LA18-000025 3635 Togo Rd Special Services 100.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0571 G-6 101-43280-307 LA18-000078 Orono Orchard Hill Plat Special Services 375.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0583G-6 101-43280-307 LA18-000092 2709 Walters Port Ln Special Services 300.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0601G-1 101-43280-307 LA19-000022 690 Brown Rd Special Services 1,225.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0602G-1 101-43280-307 LA19-000021 4775 North Shore Dr Special Services 175.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0603G-1 101-43280-307 LA19-000030 1095 Ferndale Rd W Special Services 50.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0604G-1 101-43280-307 LA19-000014 4470 Forest Lake Landings Special Services 75.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0605G-1 101-43280-307 LA19-000019 1400 Bracketts Point Rd Special Services 100.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0606G-1 101-43280-307 LA19-000020 3593 Crystal Place Special Services 75.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0607G-1 101-43280-307 LA19-000023 1600 Bohns Point Rd Special Services 75.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0608G-1 101-43280-307 LA19-000024 1385 Orono Ln Special Services 75.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0609G-1 101-43280-307 LA19-000018 350 Stubbs Bay Rd N Special Services 100.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0610G-1 101-43280-307 LA19-000028 Outlot A Ivy Place Special Services 225.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0800G-45 101-42400-307 Staff Meetings 05/19 Building & Zoning 775.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0801G-45 101-41600-307 Council Meetings 05/19 Law/Legal Services 852.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0801G-45 101-41600-307 Council Communication 05/19 Law/Legal Services 387.50 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 4 Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Total 111936: CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES L.P 06/10/2019 111937 2269414 Total 111937: CARDMEMBER SERVICE Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Payee Issue Date Number Number CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/10/2019 111936 0802G-45 101-42400-307 Total 111936: CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES L.P 06/10/2019 111937 2269414 Total 111937: CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/10/2019 111938 050319 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/10/2019 111938 051319 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/10/2019 111938 052219-2 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/10/2019 111938 052419 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/10/2019 111938 052719 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/10/2019 111938 060319 Total 111938: Century Link 06/10/2019 111939 051919 Total 111939: CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 06/10/2019 111940 0016718 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 06/10/2019 111940 0016724 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 06/10/2019 111940 0016732 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 06/10/2019 111940 0016735 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 06/10/2019 111940 0016744 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 06/10/2019 111940 0016750 Total 111940 Description B&Z Assistance 05/19 101-45210-091 beer for resale -Golf Course Department Building & Zoning Golf Course 101-42110-437 Hotel for PLEAA Conference - K. Herzog, H. Gehlen Police Department 101-42110-212 Gas for #261 Police Department 101-45200-223 Parks/Golf Utility Trailer Parks 101-42110-201 Burglary Investigation Baggies Police Department 101-45200-416 Big Island Security Camera Parks 101-45200-441 Registration for Parks/Golf Utility Trailer Parks 101-45210-321 GC phone/internet 5/19/19-6/18/19 101-42110-402 101-42110-402 101-42110-402 101-42110-402 101-42110-402 101-42110-402 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/10/2019 111941 4022226905 101-43000-226 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/10/2019 111941 4022226905 101-43000-221 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/10/2019 111941 4022668079 101-43000-226 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/10/2019 111941 4022668079 101-43000-221 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/10/2019 111941 4022668079 101-43000-404 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/10/2019 111941 4023055011 101-43000-226 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/10/2019 111941 4023055011 101-43000-221 Total 111941 #245 Service #250 Service #246 Service #249 Service #244 Service #248 Service Uniform Shop Towels Uniform Shop Towels Mat Service - PW Uniform Shop Towels Golf Course Police Department Police Department Police Department Police Department Police Department Police Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Invoice Amount 10,452.58 319.60 325.00 10.02 771.57 21.47 29.97 230.84 230.84 567.57 44.90 1,109.98 102.35 48.31 60.84 2.63 60.84 2.63 14.40 60.84 2.63 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Payee Issue Date Number Number CITY OF CORCORAN 06/10/2019 111942 052019 101-43280-319 Police Special Service - McGlynn CITY OF CORCORAN 06/10/2019 111942 060319 101-33490 2nd Qtr 2019 Toward Zero Deaths Grant Total 111942: CITY OF DAYTON 06/10/2019 111943 060319 101-33490 2nd Qtr 2019 Toward Zero Deaths Grant Total 111943: CITY OF MEDINA 06/10/2019 111944 060319 101-33490 2nd Qtr 2019 Toward Zero Deaths Grant Total 111944: CITY OF MINNETONKA BEACH 06/10/2019 111945 052819 101-35105 2019 Admin Fines Total 111945: CITY OF MOUND 06/10/2019 111946 052819 101-35105 2019 Admin citations Total 111946: City of Wayzata\DMV 06/10/2019 111947 060419 231-45650-441 Chevy Cobalt Case #17-7953 Total 111947: CLINT SCHUMANN 06/10/2019 111948 042319 601-49400-437 Class C Water Exam Fee CLINT SCHUMANN 06/10/2019 111948 042319 602-49450-437 Sewer Exam Fee CLINT SCHUMANN 06/10/2019 111948 042319 601-49400-441 Class C Water License Fee CLINT SCHUMANN 06/10/2019 111948 042319 602-49450-441 Sewer License Fee Total 111948: COMMERCIAL ASPHALT 06/10/2019 111949 190515 101-43000-224 Blacktop Patching Total 111949: DUSTIN RIEF 06/10/2019 111950 041619 101-41300-331 Mileage Reimb Total 111950: Department Special Services Water Sewer Water Sewer Public Works Department Administration Page: 5 Jun 06. 2019 11:06AM Invoice Amount 4,048.37 8,239.31 8,239.31 4,554.36 4,554.36 1,252.50 1,252.50 2,528.32 32.00 55.00 23.00 45.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 6 Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Payee Check Issue Date Check Number Invoice Number Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount EMBEDDED SYSTEMS INC. 06/10/2019 111951 343914 101-42110-403 Siren Maint 07/01/19-12/31/19 Police Department 1,107.00 Total 111951: 1,107.00 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #25 06/10/2019 111952 B122762 710-49970-416 Neptune Software Maintenance 3,070.25 Total 111952: 3,070.25 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 06/10/2019 111953 3270-441455 701-49800-222 Unit #490 Battery 137.99 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 06/10/2019 111953 3270-442091 601-49400-227 Anti -seize Lubricant Water 8.99 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 06/10/2019 111953 3270-442119 101-42110-221 Squad Headlights Police Department 25.98 Total 111953: 172.96 GMH ASPHALT 06/10/2019 111954 957 101-43000-408 Patching Streets Public Works Department 22,283.87 GMH ASPHALT 06/10/2019 111954 PAY1 435-20600 2019 Street Improvements 12,216.99- GMH ASPHALT 06/10/2019 111954 PAY1 435-48972-590 2019 Street Improvements 244,339.87 Total 111954: 254,406.75 GRAFIX SHOPPE 06/10/2019 111955 127656 101-42110-403 Crime Fund Decal - Bikes Police Department 157.88 Total 111955: 157.88 GRANICUS INC. 06/10/2019 111956 113651 614-49840-329 Streaming 5/5/19-5/4/20 Cable Franchise 6,917.40 Total 111956: 6,917.40 GREAT LAKES COCA-COLA 06/10/2019 111957 3615206173 101-45210-092 beverages for concessions resale -GC Golf Course 488.40 Total 111957: 488.40 HEATHER GEHLEN 06/10/2019 111958 051919 101-42110-437 Reimburse Meals PLEAA Conf Police Department 15.71 Total 111958: 15.71 Hoff Barry P.A. 06/10/2019 111959 15079 101-41600-306 Contempt Matter Law/Legal Services 2,596.70 Total 111959: 2.596.70 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 7 Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Department Invoice Amount Administration 973.60 Police Department Police Department Parks Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Payee Issue Date Number Number 158.26 [CMA MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 06/10/2019 111960 2019 101-41300-433 2019 Membership D. Rief #675184 Total 111960: INTOXIMETERS 06/10/2019 111961 628870 101-42110-240 Mouthpieces Total 111961: JAY DEMBOUSKI 06/10/2019 111962 052319 101-42110-437 reimb meal for training Total 111962: JOHN DEERE GOVERNMENTS 06/10/2019 111963 116588624A 101-45200-223 Parks Fertilizer Spreader JOHN DEERE GOVERNMENTS 06/10/2019 111963 116588624-R 101-45200-223 Front Loader Attachment Total 111963: KELLY HERZOG 06/10/2019 111964 051719 101-42110-437 PLEAA Conference Mileage Reimb KELLY HERZOG 06/10/2019 111964 051719 101-42110-437 PLEAA Conference Meal Reimb Total 111964: KENNETH BECK 06/10/2019 111965 052219 101-42110-437 reimb meal for training Total 111965: LAKE MTKA CONSERVATION DI 06/10/2019 111966 041819 651-49910-433 2nd Qtr 2019 levy pmt Total 111966: LOGIS 06/10/2019 111967 47106 710-49970-401 Network Service LOGIS 06/10/2019 111967 47136 101-42110-310 Police Records 5/19 LOGIS 06/10/2019 111967 47200 710-49970-221 Entrust Tokens - PD Total 111967: MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 06/10/2019 111968 21307102 101-42110-212 Unleaded Fuel MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 06/10/2019 111968 21307103 701-49800-212 Diesel Fuel MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 06/10/2019 111968 21307122 101-42110-212 Unleaded Fuel Department Invoice Amount Administration 973.60 Police Department Police Department Parks 850.00 Parks 5,228.32 6,078.32 Police Department 143.84 Police Department 14.42 158.26 Police Department 9.67 Storm Water 31.25 Police Department 8,579.00 15.00 Police Department 869.30 577.15 Police Department 2,404.81 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Payee Issue Date Number Number Total 111968: MCFOA 06/10/2019 111969 060319 101-41300-433 membership renewal N. Dickhausen Administration Total 111969: MEDIACOM 06/10/2019 111970 052119 614-49840-329 Internet 06/2019 Cable Franchise Total 111970: MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTA 06/10/2019 111971 MAY2019 101-20809 May 2019 SAC MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTA 06/10/2019 111971 MAY2019 101-39610 May 2019 SAC Total 111971: METRO WEST INSPECTIONS S 06/10/2019 111972 1988 101-42400-310 Inspection Services April 2019 Building & Zoning Total 111972: MHSRC/Range 06/10/2019 111973 629430-7094 101-42110-437 EVOC Law Enforcement Trg-K. Beck Police Department MHSRC/Range 06/10/2019 111973 629430-7120 101-42110-437 EVOC Law Enforcement Trg-J. Wittke, T. Wittke Police Department Total 111973: MIKE WOCKEN 06/10/2019 111974 052319 101-42110-437 reimb meal for training Police Department Total 111974: MINNETRISTA PUBLIC SAFETY 06/10/2019 111975 060319 101-33490 2nd Qtr 2019 Toward Zero Deaths Grant Total 111975: MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 06/10/2019 111976 053119 101-34210 Sales Tax 5/2019 MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 06/10/2019 111976 053119 601-39610 Sales Tax 5/2019 MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 06/10/2019 111976 053119 101-37910 Sales Tax 5/2019 MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 06/10/2019 111976 053119 101-37920 Sales Tax 5/2019 MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 06/10/2019 111976 053119 101-37930 Sales Tax 5/2019 MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 06/10/2019 111976 053119 101-37940 Sales Tax 5/2019 MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 06/10/2019 111976 053119 101-37970 Sales Tax 5/2019 Page: 8 Jun 06. 2019 11:06AM Invoice A-- 3,851.26 -- 3,851.26 45.00 45.00 1,187.00 1,187.00 7,455.00 74.55- 8,851.00 8,851.00 425.00 850.00 1,275.00 10.18 10.18 1.00 34.00 1,286.00 445.00 117.00 65.00 25.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 9 Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Payee Check Issue Date Check Number Invoice Number Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount Total 111976: 1,973.00 Modern Power Solutions 06/10/2019 111977 0261 701-49800-403 Portable Generator Maintenance 6,547.50 Total 111977: 6,547.50 MOUND TRUE VALUE 06/10/2019 111978 160497 101-42110-240 Blade, Velcro -X Police Department 9.48 MOUND TRUE VALUE 06/10/2019 111978 160767 101-42110-221 Cleaning Wipes Police Department 34.44 Total 111978: 43.92 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 06/10/2019 111979 1212138-00 101-45210-403 High Height of Cut Kit Golf Mower Golf Course 344.38 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 06/10/2019 111979 1212522-00 101-45210-404 Golf Irrigation Gaskets Golf Course 31.24 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 06/10/2019 111979 1213149-00 101-45210-403 Mower Roller Scrapers Golf Course 325.16 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 06/10/2019 111979 1213690-00 101-45210-404 Golf Irrigation Repair Golf Course 182.53 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 06/10/2019 111979 1213690-01 101-45210-404 Golf Irrigation Repair Golf Course 208.38 Total 111979: 1,091.69 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/10/2019 111980 317395 101-43000-240 Center Punch Public Works Department 4.99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/10/2019 111980 317524 101-45200-223 Dock Caps Parks 4.77 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/10/2019 111980 317745 101-45200-223 Swim Bouys Parks 7.47 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/10/2019 111980 988907 101-45200-223 Swim Bouys Parks 5.49 Total 111980: 22.72 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS. 06/10/2019 111981 6732000620 101-21710 Pera life 06/2019 352.00 Total 111981: 352.00 NEWEGG INC 06/10/2019 111982 1302030468 710-49970-416 PC for Council Chambers 409.99 NEWEGG INC 06/10/2019 111982 1302034247 710-49970-221 Replacement Laptops/Upgrades - PD 1,711.92 NEWEGG INC 06/10/2019 111982 1302043928 710-49970-221 Flash Drive - City 6.51- NEWEGG INC 06/10/2019 111982 1302050977 101-42110-221 Fingerprint Reader - Mound - PD Police Department 78.99 NEWEGG INC 06/10/2019 111982 1302052462 710-49970-416 Laplink - New Computers - City/PD 229.95 NEWEGG INC 06/10/2019 111982 1302053545 101-42110-221 Portable Drive for Evidence (PD) Police Department 88.99 NEWEGG INC 06/10/2019 111982 1302056394 710-49970-221 Computer - H. Gehlen - PD 409.99 NEWEGG INC 06/10/2019 111982 1302056989 710-49970-221 Monitor Stand - N. Dickhausen/A. Hengtes - CH 89.98 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Page: 10 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Department Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Payee Issue Date Number Number Central Services 18.99 Police Department 217.06 300.01 26.05 Total 111982: 26.05 Police Department 87.00 Police Department 129.00 NORTHERN DEWATERING INC 06/10/2019 111983 36899 101-43000-240 Gasket for Ends of Hose Total 111983: 60.00 OFFICE DEPOT 06/10/2019 111984 3154173490 101-41900-201 Office Supplies OFFICE DEPOT 06/10/2019 111984 3154174400 101-41900-201 Office Supplies OFFICE DEPOT 06/10/2019 111984 3187251920 101-42110-201 Office Supplies - PD Total 111984: OLSEN CHAIN AND CABLE INC 06/10/2019 111985 637068 701-49800-403 Replacement Lifting Sling Total 111985: Perry's Truck Repair 06/10/2019 111986 17833 101-42110-402 Tow #425 Perry's Truck Repair 06/10/2019 111986 17834 101-42110-436 Tow Dodge Charger Perry's Truck Repair 06/10/2019 111986 17846 101-42110-402 Tow #248 Perry's Truck Repair 06/10/2019 111986 17847 231-45650-436 Tow/Siezed Toyota Camry Perry's Truck Repair 06/10/2019 111986 17848 101-42110-402 Tow #254 Perry's Truck Repair 06/10/2019 111986 17851 101-42110-402 Tow #248 Total 111986: PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 06/10/2019 111987 17607 234-45680-404 Lurton Park Dormant Mow Total 111987: RANDYS ENVIRONMENTAL SER 06/10/2019 111988 051719SCU 603-49500-442 2019 -Spring City Clean Up Day RANDYS ENVIRONMENTAL SER 06/10/2019 111988 MAY2019 101-41900-404 Garbage Service RANDYS ENVIRONMENTAL SER 06/10/2019 111988 MAY2019 101-45200-404 Garbage Service RANDYS ENVIRONMENTAL SER 06/10/2019 111988 MAY2019 101-45210-404 Garbage Service Total 111988: ROB HOWELLS 06/10/2019 111989 051519 101-45210-095 Golf Ball - Youth Clinic Page: 10 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Department Invoice Amount 3,013.30 Public Works Department 13.54 13.54 Central Services 63.96 Central Services 18.99 Police Department 217.06 300.01 26.05 26.05 Police Department 87.00 Police Department 129.00 Police Department 90.00 209.82 Police Department 80.00 Police Department 60.00 412.50 Central Services 374.08 Parks 487.20 Golf Course 76.33 8,952.61 Golf Course 32.20 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Page: 11 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Department Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Payee Issue Date Number Number 1,900.00 Golf Course 197.61 197.61 9,748.66 Total 111989: 9,748.66 Police Department 56.02 Police Department 152.79 ROGERS POLICE DEPARTMEN 06/10/2019 111990 060319 101-33490 2nd Qtr 2019 Toward Zero Deaths Grant Total 111990: 5,995.35 5,995.35 43.40 SECURITY & SOUND CO 06/10/2019 111991 21116 101-42110-404 Police Door Controller Total 111991: SHERWIN WILLIAMS 06/10/2019 111992 1063-3 101-45210-223 GC Paint Total 111992: SHI 06/10/2019 111993 B10006594 710-49970-221 PD Toughbooks - 2 Total 111993: SIRCHIE FINGER PRINT LABS 06/10/2019 111994 0402583 -IN 101-42110-240 red tape/evidence bags SIRCHIE FINGER PRINT LABS 06/10/2019 111994 0403204 -IN 101-42110-240 White tape Total 111994: SiteOne Landscape Supply 06/10/2019 111995 91851148-00 101-45210-404 Christmas Tree Electrical Restoration Total 111995: SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PO 06/10/2019 111996 060319 101-33490 2nd Qtr 2019 Toward Zero Deaths Grant Total 111996: SUN LIFE FINANCIAL 06/10/2019 111997 0719LIFE 101-15998 Life Ins-July/2019 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL 06/10/2019 111997 0719LIFE 101-21710 Life Ins-July/2019 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL 06/10/2019 111997 0719STD 101-21714 STD-July/2019 Total 111997: T W TUPY INC 06/10/2019 111998 053119 601-49400-227 Rock for Water Main Breaks T W TUPY INC 06/10/2019 111998 053119 101-43000-224 Rock for Shouldering Rds Page: 11 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Department Invoice Amount 32.20 3,898.19 3,898.19 Police Department 1,900.00 1,900.00 Golf Course 197.61 197.61 9,748.66 9,748.66 Police Department 56.02 Police Department 152.79 208.81 Golf Course 262.78 262.78 5,995.35 5,995.35 43.40 1,063.20 901.45 Water 1,065.37 Public Works Department 1,065.36 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Page: 12 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Department Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Payee Issue Date Number Number 1,759.87 Golf Course 62.96 62.96 Police Department 200.94 Total 111998: 200.94 401.88 Police Department 1,052.64 TALLEN AND BAERTSCHI 06/10/2019 111999 052219 101-41600-306 Prosecution Services -05/2019 Total 111999: 1,435.50 Police Department 1,039.50 2,475.00 THE HARTFORD 06/10/2019 112000 0719LTD 101-21713 LTD 7/2019 Total 112000: THE HOME DEPOT 06/10/2019 112001 1280200 101-45210-223 Cleaning Supplies - GC Total 112001: THOMSON WEST 06/10/2019 112002 840187461 101-42110-311 West Information THOMSON WEST 06/10/2019 112002 840353379 101-42110-311 West Information Total 112002: U.S. AutoForce 06/10/2019 112003 4805931 101-42110-402 Squad 246 Tires Total 112003: US Bank Equipment Finance 06/10/2019 112004 385812169 710-49970-413 Copiers Total 112004: VANGUARD CLEANING SYSTE 06/10/2019 112005 66204 101-41900-407 Janitorial service VANGUARD CLEANING SYSTE 06/10/2019 112005 66204 101-42110-407 Janitorial service Total 112005: WEST HENNEPIN PUBLIC SAFE 06/10/2019 112006 060319 101-33490 2nd Qtr 2019 Toward Zero Deaths Grant Total 112006: WILLIAM CARSTENS 06/10/2019 112007 052319 101-42110-437 Reimb meal for training Page: 12 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Department Invoice Amount 2,130.73 Law/Legal Services 2,846.87 2,846.87 1,759.87 1,759.87 Golf Course 62.96 62.96 Police Department 200.94 Police Department 200.94 401.88 Police Department 1,052.64 1,052.64 596.76 596.76 Central Services 1,435.50 Police Department 1,039.50 2,475.00 5,396.16 5,396.16 Police Department 9.11 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 5/29/2019 - 6/10/2019 Golf Course Golf Course Storm Water Department Page: 13 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Invoice Amount 9.11 155.00 155.00 1,647.00 295.00 1,942.00 124.00 124.00 467,202.43 Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Payee Issue Date Number Number Total 112007: WILLIAMS TOWING 06/10/2019 112008 6537208 231-45650-436 tow case #19004341 Total 112008: YAMAHA MOTOR CORP. 06/10/2019 112009 670893 101-45210-415 Golf Cart Rental -18 Cars YAMAHA MOTOR CORP. 06/10/2019 112009 670985 101-45210-415 Utility Cart Rental Total 112009: ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS 06/10/2019 112010 0175521 -IN 651-49910-227 Disposable Gutter Broom Total 112010: Grand Totals: Golf Course Golf Course Storm Water Department Page: 13 Jun 06, 2019 11:06AM Invoice Amount 9.11 155.00 155.00 1,647.00 295.00 1,942.00 124.00 124.00 467,202.43 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 4 Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: Approval of Garbage Hauler Licenses Presenter: Anna Carlson, Agenda Consent Agenda City Clerk Section: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to approve the Garbage Hauler Licenses for the license period of June 1, 2019 to May 31, 2020. 2. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the Garbage Hauler licenses as listed in Exhibit A for the license period of June 1, 2019 to May 31, 2020. The Garbage Hauler License Applicants in Exhibit A have submitted all of the requested documents and have met all requirements. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the Garbage Hauler licenses listed in Exhibit A for the license period of June 1, 2019 to May 31, 2020. Exhibits A. Listing of Garbage Hauler Licenses Prepared By: AMC Reviewed By: AMC Approved By: JS)�W Exhibit A Garbage Hauler License Applicants License# Business Name Payment Amount GH19-000001 Randy's Sanitation 390 GH19-000002 Waste Management 90 GH19-000003 Republic Services 120 GH19-000004 Veit Container Corp dba Veit Disposal Systems 90 GH19-000005 Baldy Sanitation Inc. 165 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 5 Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: Approval of Rental Licenses Presenter: Anna Carlson, Agenda Consent Agenda City Clerk Section: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to approve the Rental Licenses for the license period of June 10, 2019 to December 31, 2019. 2. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the rental licenses as listed in Exhibit A for the license period of June 10, 2019 to December 31, 2019. The Rental License Applicants in Exhibit A have submitted all of the requested documents and have met all requirements. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the rental licenses listed in Exhibit A for the license period of June 10, 2019 to December 31, 2019. Exhibits A. Listing of Rental Licenses Prepared By: AMC Reviewed By: AMC Approved By: JS)�W Exhibit A City Council 2019 Rental Licenses License# Licensee Total License Fees RL19-000009 Mitchell Johnsen 100 RL19-000010 Renters Warehouse — Jacob Koch 100 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: Appointment of 2019 Seasonal Employees Presenter: Jason Goehring Agenda Consent Agenda Parks and Golf Course Supervisor Section: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain Council approval of seasonal employees. 2. Background. The hourly pay is proposed to be $12.00-14.00 for the Golf Course Clubhouse Attendants and Brush Site Attendants; $12-$16 for Parks and Golf Course Maintenance Employees, and $10-$16 for Utilities Maintenance Workers; and a pay range of $15.00-$20.00 for the Clubhouse Manager. The Clubhouse Manager will be enrolled in the coordinated PERA plan. All other seasonal employees will fall under the 6 month PERA Classification and are therefore excluded from PERA membership. 3. Seasonal Employee Appointments and Candidates. 4. Staff Recommendation. I recommend approval to hire of the seasonal employees in Table 3. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve hiring the seasonal employee as in the list above. Prepared By: JG Reviewed By: Approved By: -T)R Name Position Wage Remarks ($/hr) Robert Howells G.C. Clubhouse Manager $20.00 Returnee Paul Tolzmann G.C. Clubhouse Attendant $13.00 Returnee N Scott Prochnow G.C. Clubhouse Attendant $13.00 Returnee Stuart Mayer Brush Site Attendant $13.00 Returnee Mitchell Hall Parks and Golf Maintenance $15.00 Returnee Danielle Middendorf Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 Returnee c a o Marshall Hambro Clubhouse Attendant $13.00 Returnee cMarie Jorland Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 Returnee o. a� Diana Otrey Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 Returnee Q Wendy Middendorf Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 Returnee Rebecca Anderson Seasonal Utilities Maintenance $13.00 Returnee Ron Steffenhagen Parks and Golf Maintenance $13.00 Returnee • ?� Calvin Schmidt Parks and Golf Maintenance $13.00 Returnee N Andrew Charrier Parks and Golf Maintenance $12.00 New hire Sally Thompson Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 New hire Approved Paul Haug Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 New hire March 19, 2019 Approved Megan Schiller Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 New hire May 13, 2019 Fermin Aragon Parks and Golf Maintenance $12.00 New hire Grace Mattila Parks and Golf Maintenance $12.00 New hire Approved Chad Stowell Parks and Golf Maintenance $14.00 New hire May 28, 2019 Requesting Max Bjorklund Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 New hire Approval 4. Staff Recommendation. I recommend approval to hire of the seasonal employees in Table 3. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve hiring the seasonal employee as in the list above. Prepared By: JG Reviewed By: Approved By: -T)R AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 7 Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: LA18-000057 — City of Orono Text Amendment: Plumbing in Accessory Buildings — Ordinance & Summary Ordinance Presenter: Melanie Curtis Agenda Consent Agenda Planner Section: 1. Purpose. To adopt an ordinance and summary ordinance regarding changes to Accessory Building and Structure setbacks. Background/ Summary. In December, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 222 and Summary Ordinance No. 223 regarding changes to the regulations relating to accessory buildings and accessory structures. This was a comprehensive amendment meant to capture all of the language changes/edits we determined necessary as well as provide a thoughtful revision to the required setbacks of both accessory buildings and accessory structures. The requirement for the building to be "conforming with respect to location, size, and height" was intended to be removed from each of the conditional use sections of the preceding sections, to be replaced with language consistent with the adopted language in Section 78-1437. The revised ordinance corrects the inconsistency. 2. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. In May, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing for this text amendment. It was discussed and the Planning Commission voted 7 to 0 on a motion to approve the proposed ordinance and summary ordinance. 3. Public Comment. To date no comments from the public have been received. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED. Council should consider adopting or amending the draft Ordinance and Summary Ordinance. Exhibits A. Draft Ordinance B. Draft Summary Ordinance C. Draft Planning Commission Minutes References Ordinance No. 222, Third Series PC Staff Reports and Exhibits 052019: Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance (Strikethrough & Underline format) Exhibit B. Ordinance No. 222 Prepared By: YYIGG Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: -Sb ORDINANCE NO. , THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND BUILDNGS THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 78-228. — Conditional uses. shall be amended to read as follows: Within any R -1A one -family residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: (6) Provision of a bathtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: a. The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with a bathtub or shower will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. b. The council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. C. The acsvr i hi iildiRg s C nfnrminn imnoGatierrirsize and gnr d. The property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the accessory building will not be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. 2. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. SECTION 2. Section 78-253. — Conditional uses. shall be amended to read as follows: Within any R-1 B one -family residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: (6) Provision of a bathtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: a. The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with a bathtub or shower will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. Page 1 of 5 b. The council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. C The aGGecnni building is C nfnrming in InGatien0 size and hek h4 d. The property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the accessory building will not be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. 2. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. SECTION 3. Section 78-303.- Conditional uses. shall be amended to read as follows: Within any LR -1A one -family lakeshore residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: (7) Provision of a bathtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: a. The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with a bathtub or shower will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. b. The council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. c. The aLGeGGEFy buldiRg 06 G/)E)rMRg ORlE)G atiE)n' size and he ht d. The property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the accessory building will not be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. 2. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. SECTION 4. Section 78-328.- Conditional uses. shall be amended to read as follows: Within any LR -1 B one -family lakeshore residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: (7) Provision of a bathtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: Page 2of5 a. The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with a bathtub or shower will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. b. The council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. C The aGGessery building is Genferming in InGafien size and heilvh+ dThe property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the accessory building will not be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. 2. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. SECTION 5. Section 78-348. — Conditional uses. shall be amended to read as follows: Within any LR -1 C one -family lakeshore residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses without a conditional use permit: (8) Provision of a bathtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: a. The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with a bathtub or shower will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. b. The council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. c. The aGGes.7ery building lding is Genferming in leGatien size and height dThe property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the accessory building will not be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. 2. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. SECTION 6. Section 78-367. - Conditional uses shall be amended to read as follows: Within the LR -1 C-1 one -family Lakeshore residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses without a conditional use permit: (8) Provision of a bathtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: Page 3 of 5 a. The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with a bathtub or shower will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. b. The council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. C The aGGessery building is Genferming in InGafien size and heilvh+ d—The property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the accessory building will not be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. 2. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. SECTION 7. Section 78-393. – Conditional uses. shall be amended to read as follows: Within any RR -1A one -family rural residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses without a conditional use permit. (6) Provision of a bathtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: a. The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with a bathtub or shower will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. b. The council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. c. The aGGessery building lding is Genferming in leGatien size and height dThe property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the accessory building will not be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. 2. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. SECTION 8. Section 78-418. - Conditional uses shall be amended to read as follows: Within any RR -1 B one -family rural residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses without a conditional use permit: (6) Provision of a bathtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: Page 4 of 5 a. The council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with a bathtub or shower will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. b. The council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. C The onn000E)ry b iildiRg io G040FMORg in !E)Gatlr,r, size and hekji d. The property owner agrees to the filing of a covenant in the title of the property providing that the accessory building will not be: 1. Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. 2. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. 3. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this day of , 2019 on a vote of _ ayes and _ nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota. ATTCQT- r "N Dennis Walsh, Mayor Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of 2019. Page 5 of 5 SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO. , THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE REGARDING THE REGULATIONS FOR ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, on , 2019, Ordinance No. , Third Series, was adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that, because of the lengthy nature of Ordinance No. Third Series, the following summary of the ordinance has been prepared for publication. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the ordinance adopted by the Council amends Chapter 78 of the Orono City Code regarding the applicable regulations governing accessory buildings and accessory structures. This ordinance amends the Orono Code by simplifying the location of the setback regulations for accessory buildings and accessory structures within Chapter 78 and modifies some of the regulations for the same. The complete ordinance is available for inspection by any person during the City's regular office hours. APPROVED for publication by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, this day of , 2019. CITY OF ORONO M. Dennis Walsh, Mayor Anna Carlson, City Clerk Summary Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of 2019. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. 4. LA18-000057 CITY OF ORONO, TEXT AMENDMENT RELATED TO PLUMBING IN ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, 8:20 P.M. — 8:27 P.M. Curtis noted in December the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 222 and Summary Ordinance No. 223 regarding changes to the regulations relating to accessory buildings and accessory structures. This was a comprehensive amendment meant to capture all of the language changes/edits Staff determined necessary as well as provide a thoughtful revision to the required setbacks of both accessory buildings and accessory structures. The requirement for the building to be "conforming with respect to location, size, and height" was intended to be removed from each of the conditional use sections of the preceding sections to be replaced with the language outlined in Staff's report. The amendment would affect those changes as originally anticipated as well as remove the current conflict and ambiguity in the Code. To date, no public comments have been received. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 8:23 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 8:23 p.m. McCutcheon indicated he would be in support of the application. Erickson stated he is not sure of the application given the amount of paperwork concerning accessory buildings. Curtis noted Staff is only requesting the one change tonight. Ressler asked if the change would be a simplification of the ordinance. Curtis stated Staff is asking that words be deleted that were intended to be deleted the first time around but were missed. Bollis indicated he is fine with the changes. Gettman indicated he has no issues with the request. Thiesse stated he is fine with the request. Libby stated he is fine with the change. Ressler stated the City is trying to simplify the ordinance and that he is in support of it. Gettman moved, Bollis seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000057, City of Orono, Text Amendment Related to Plumbing in Accessory Buildings. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator -e� q,\ From: Melanie Curtis, Planner 1'Y1GGl 'A` `d Date: 20 May 2019 L Subject: #LA18-000057, Text Amendment (correction): Plumbing in Accessory Buildings Public Hearing Background In December, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 222 and Summary Ordinance No. 223 regarding changes to the regulations relating to accessory buildings and accessory structures. This was a comprehensive amendment meant to capture all of the language changes/edits we determined necessary as well as provide a thoughtful revision to the required setbacks of both accessory buildings and accessory structures. Affected Code Sections: 78-228(6) Conditional uses. (R -1A) 78-253(6) Conditional uses. (R-113) 78-303(7) Conditional uses. (LR -1A) 78-328(7) Conditional uses. (LR -113) 78-348(8) Conditional uses. (LR -1C) 78-367(8) Conditional uses. (LR -1C-1) 78-393(6) Conditional uses. (RR -1A) 78-418(6) Conditional uses. (RR -1B) The requirement for the building to be "conforming with respect to location, size, and height" was intended to be removed from each of the conditional use sections of the preceding sections, to be replaced with language consistent with the following: "Sec. 78-1437. - Plumbing. Because the provision of plumbing fixtures and wastewater plumbing in accessory buildings has the potential to allow such buildings to be used as dwelling units, and because it is the policy of the city to limit residential development density to the allowed densities within the respective zoning districts, plumbing in accessory buildings shall be regulated as follows: (1) The provision of outside sillcocks and indoor water supply shall be allowed in any accessory building. (2) Installation of any combination of fixtures requiring wastewater plumbing that does not include a shower or bathtub shall be allowed in any accessory building, subject to provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from such fixtures, and subject to the property owner's executing a covenant providing that the accessory building will not be: Used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by the city or if allowed by this Code. b. Used as a dwelling unless a guest house conditional use permit is obtained. Rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. (3) Installation of any combination of fixtures requiring wastewater plumbing that includes a shower or bathtub shall be allowed only in an accessory building which meets one of the following criteria: FILE #LA18-000057 20 May 2019 Page 2 of 2 The accessory building has been approved for a guest house conditional use permit; or b. The accessory building has been approved for a bathtub or shower in accessory building conditional use permit." The amendment would affect those changes as originally anticipated, as well as remove the current conflict and ambiguity in the Code. The Planning Commission should open the Public Hearing, receive public comments, and discuss the amendment. The Planning Commission may choose to move this amendment forward to the City Council; or table the application if further discussion or changes are warranted. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance (Strikethrough & Underline format) Exhibit B. Ordinance No. 222 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 8 Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: Swearing in of Junior Cadets Presenter: Correy Farniok, Agenda Public Safety Report Orono Police Chief Section: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to swear in the Junior Cadets into the Growth Through Opportunity Program (GTO). Prepared By: C.Farniok Reviewed By: C.Famiok Approved By: j1V AGENDA ITEM Item No.: Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: 2018 Transfers - Pavement Management Presenter: Ron Olson Agenda City Administrator's Finance Director Section: Report 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to approve additional 2018 Transfers. 2. Background. Transfers between city funds require the approval of the City Council. The Council previously approved a number of 2018 transfers at the meeting of December 10, 2018. There are three additional transfers that need approval. a) The first involves the transfer of excess fund balance from the General Fund to the Pavement Management Fund. The amount of fund balance transfer is $450,000 from 2017 and $550,000 from 2018. This transfer was discussed as part of the road discussion at the council work session held on 4/22/19. b) The Second transfer is for the excess fund balance from the Insurance Fund. At the council meeting of 10/8/2018 the Council passed a resolution setting the maximum fund balance of the Insurance fund at $300,000. As part of the road funding discussion in April, excess fund balance in the amount of $310,000 was identified as being transferred to the Pavement Management Fund. c) The final transfer involves the transfer of funds from the 2014 debt service fund to the Water Fund. In both 2014 and 2015 a transfer in the amount of $103,000 was made from the Water Fund to the Debt Service Fund for the water portion of these bonds. Because the water fund is an enterprise fund, debt payments are made directly from the enterprise fund, not the debt service fund. This transfer is to return the funds to Water Fund where the debt payments are being recorded. 3. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the 2018 Transfers as presented. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the 2018 transfers and loan payments as presented on the attached schedule. Exhibits A. Schedule of 2018 Interfund Transfers B. April Work Session Memo Prepared By: 11C Reviewed By: 1b9a Approved By: JS)�4Z City of Orono Schedule of 2018 Interfund Transfers From la General Pavement Management Fund General Pavement Management Fund Insurance Fund Pavement Management Fund 2014 Debt Service Fund Water Fund Amount Purpose $ 450,000.00 2017 Excess Fund Balance Transfer $ 550,000.00 2018 Excess Fund Balance Transfer $ 100,000.00 Excess fund Balance Transfer $ 206,000.00 Return Debt Service Fund to Water Fund To: Mayor and Council From: Ron Olson, Finance Director Subject: Pavement Management Fund Date: March 18, 2019 Attachments: 1. Funding Summary The major funding for the 2019 Street Maintenance Project ($1,179,255) is from the Pavement Management Fund (PMP). As the Council is aware, the City has been working for towards fully funding the City's PMP for a number of years. Prior to 2016, the funding was through the sale of bonds and fund balance transfers. In 2016, in order to bring more stability to pavement funding, a property tax in the amount of $183,000 was levied. This amount has been increasing annually and in 2019 the Pavement Management Levy is $544,450. In 2018, the annual lease revenue received from telecommunication companies leasing space for antenna on the city water towers was redirected from the Water Fund to the PMP fund. In 2019, this is estimated to be $120,000. Current estimates are that the annual amount needed for fully funding the PMP is $1,000,000. The difference between the amount required and the tax levy has been being made up through the transfer of fund balances that exceed the balances required by the City's fund balance policy. Funding of the 2019 street projects will also require fund balance transfers. The fund currently has a negative balance as road projects have been being approved with the understanding that fund balance transfers would be made. In October of 2018 the Council set a fund balance maximum for the Insurance Fund at $300,000. The current balance is $610,000 and the excess is required to be transferred to another fund. Staff's recommendation would be to transfer the balance to the Pavement Management Fund for the 2019 projects. As indicated in the attached funding summary, the transfers required for the 2019 projects are: • 2017 General Fund transfer $450,000 • 2018 General Fund transfer $550,000 • 2018 Insurance Fund transfer $310,000 The balance of the funding will be from funds budgeted in the 2019 budget. It is anticipated that the long term funding of the Pavement Management Fund will be achieved in the near future. In 2023, with the final payment of the 2016 GO Refunding Bonds, there will be $300,000 of property tax levy freed up. With the continuation of reasonable annual increases of the Pavement Management Levy, and the availability of the additional levy funds in 2023, the Pavement Management Fund can be fully funded. This will eliminate the need to depend on fund balance transfers and provide a stable funding source for the City's road infrastructure. AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 10 Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: City of Orono Text Amendment: Water Meter - Ordinance Presenter: Adam Edwards, PE Agenda City Engineer / Public City Engineer Section: Works Department 1. Purpose. The purpose of this council action is to adopt amendments to the city code for water meters. 2. Background. Earlier this year the Council previously authorized a meter change out. In preparation for the project staff reviewed current city code as it pertains to meters and identified some area requiring updates and clarity. 3. Summary. Recommended changes are at Exhibit B. Key changes include: a. Reference to meters as "radio -read water meter". New meter have integrated radio readers as opposed to the radio transmitter being a separate device. b. Identifying the Meters as city property. c. Addition of a meter replacement process. d. Clarification/ consolidation of the new construction process. e. Addition of paragraph titles. f. Change of the service charge in the fee schedule from quarterly to monthly. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED. Motion to adopt the approval resolution and change to the Fee Schedule Exhibits A. Draft Ordinance B. Fee Schedule Change References City Code Prepared By: Reviewed By: _Sb)R Approved By: -TV ORDINANCE NO. , THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO WATER METERS THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Sec. 14-81. - Water meters shall be amended by adding and deleting text to read as follows: Sec. 14-81. - Water meters. {ay Requirement. All properties connected to the city water system must have a properly functioning and calibrated radio -read water meter of the appropriate size and type to obtain an accurate recording of the water used at the full range of anticipated flow rates. All water meters a required +„ have a preper4y f1JRGtiGRiRg arid Galibrated remete reader IGGated OR the outside ef the buildiRg iR aR easily aGGessible andvisible IGGa+iOR (1) Maintenance, Repair and Replacement. The City shall maintain and repair or replace all meters when rendered unserviceable through ordinary wear and tear. Where replacement, repair or adjustment of any meter is rendered necessary by the act, neglect or carelessness of the owner or occupant of any premises, any expense caused by the City thereby shall be charged against and collected from the owner or occupant of the premises. (2) City Property. Water meters shall be and remain the property of the City and may be removed or replaced or changed as to size and type by the City whenever deemed necessary. (3) Access to Read Meters. City employees delegated for that purpose shall have free access at reasonable hours of the day to all parts of every building and premises connected with the municipal water supply system for reading of meters and inspections. The City shall be authorized to make adiustments in water charges where in their oainion the amount billed is erroneous due to meter deficiencv or other mistake. (b) Meter Replacement. Installation of a radio -read capacity water meter shall be required on all structures served by the municipal water system. If a property owner does not authorize entry onto the property to allow installation of the meter within 60 days after the City requests entry, a surcharge fee as set forth in fee schedule will be applied. Tho nr^nor+„ owner shall be responsible for retaining+ho serv!GeS of a "Gensed plumber for the PUFGhase and iRstal1atiGR ef all required water meters and rernete readers. All water meters arid remote readers are to be P61FGhased threugh the Gity, arid the Got reserves the right to Se'eGt the brand arid type of meter to be used fer P--;;r--.h �Afater GerViGe GE)RReGtieR. The IiG8Rsed plumber shall ebtaiR a permit from the Gity arid shall PLIFGhase and iRstall the water meters normal 'usage shall be the . sihility of the n eFty 9WRer (c) New Construction. A city-appreved provided water meter and remote reader is required before either a temporary or permanent certificate of occupancy will be issued for any building with city water service. The property owner shall be responsible for retaining the services of a licensed plumber for the installation of all required water meters and remote readers. (d) Meter Reading. The city normally reads water meters and bills for water usage on a quarterly basis. If the city is unable to obtain an accurate water meeting reading because of a nonfunctioning or inaccessible water meter or remote reader, the city will estimate the quarterly water bill based on the past water usage for the property. (1e) Failure to read. The city will provide notification to the property owner of the inability to obtain an accurate water meter reading and the city's need to obtain access to the property to allow for correction of the problem by the city. The property owner shall cooperate with the city to allow for correction of the situation in a prompt manner. If the property owner is nonresponsive or uncooperative in coordinating with the city to allow for repair of the water meter and remote reader, the city reserves the right to add a nonrefundable service charge for a nonfunctioning or inaccessible water meter to the next quarterly water bill. (f2) Service charge.The amount of this service charge shall be determined by ordinance and listed in the city fee schedule. This service charge will be added to future quarterly water bills and the water bill estimated until the property has a properly functioning and accessible radio -read water meter water motor and remote rondo.. The city also reserves the right to shutoff water service to any property that has had a nonfunctioning or inaccessible water meter or remote reader for more than six months after the property owner is notified of the situation. (Code 1984, § 3.10(10); Ord. No. 217 2nd series, 3-25-2002) SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this day of , 2019 on a vote of _ ayes and _ nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of 2019. ORDINANCE NO. _, THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO THE 2019 FEE SCHEDULE THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Exhibit C Utility Rates and Fees, Ordinance No. 202, Third Series, entitled 2019 Fee Schedule shall be amended by adding and deleting text to read as follows: QuarterlyMonthly Service Charge for Non -Functioning or Inaccessible Water Meter $100.00 SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance establishing the 2019 Fee Schedule shall be published as a Summary Ordinance and shall be effective on January 1, 2019 and publication. ADOPTED this 10th day of June, 2019 on a vote of _ ayes and _ nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of , 2019. AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 11 Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: LA19-000017 — Stephen and Jennifer Paidosh, 4300 North Shore Drive, ROW Vacation Presenter: Melanie Curtis Agenda Planning Department Planner Section: Report 1. Purpose. This application is regarding a request to vacate the rights-of-way of Forest Boulevard and Bluff Street situated between 4300 North Shore Drive and 1453 Park Drive. 2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was received on March 1, 2019 and considered to be complete on April 2, 2019. The 60 day rule does not apply to vacation requests. Background/ Summary. The applicants are requesting to vacate the unimproved right-of-way of Bluff Street and a portion of the undeveloped right-of-way of Forest Boulevard directly abutting their property to the east. The rights-of-way were originally dedicated with the plat Saga Hill Revised. The applicants have included a narrative with their application attached as Exhibit B. There is an existing City stormwater catch basin and pipe in the right-of-way; the applicant has proposed the City maintaining an easement over these structures. The neighboring property owner to the east (1453 Park Dr) has indicated their support of the vacation, based on this, staff considers both property owners to be requesting the vacation. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. On May 20', the Planning Commission held a public hearing. Following the public hearing the Planning Commission voted 6 in favor and 1 (Erickson) against on a motion to deny the requested vacation. The Draft 2020-2040 Community Management Plan loosens the guidance regarding right-of-way vacations. Staff provided the relevant sections from the Transportation and Parks/ Open Space chapters for the Planning Commission. Planning Commissioner Erickson provided additional paragraphs from the Transportation chapter for the record. The entire Lake Access section from the Transportation chapter, and the relevant Parks, Trails, and Open space excerpt is attached as Exhibit B. Staff did not include the paragraphs in Exhibit B because staff deemed them not relevant. Current CMP 2020-2030 transportation chapter citations are attached as Exhibit C. Staff's recommendation of denial is not based on the proximity of other lake access options, staff's recommendation is based on the professional belief that vacating public property which provides access to the Lake, especially those which contain infrastructure or improvements is not advisable. Vacation of these properties is forever, and future needs are not known. It is important to note that a vacation, if approved by the Council, identifies for the County that the property does not hold a public purpose, and the County will then assign the property as appropriate. It is assumed that the property, if vacated, will be split down the middle, and each adjacent owner would receive half, but this will not be confirmed until the vacation is approved. 5. Public Comment. Comments from the neighbors were received and are attached as Exhibit F. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends denial of the vacation request. If the Council were to support a vacation, staff recommends that an easement of appropriate width be acquired from each property owner for continued use and maintenance of the storm sewer facilities. Prepared By: YY1GG Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: -Sb)R AGENDA ITEM COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council should make a decision regarding the vacation request and direct staff to draft a resolution reflecting your decision for adoption at the June 24t' meeting. Exhibits A. Proposed Vacation Survey B. Draft CMP 2020-2030 Excerpts C. CMP 2010-2030 — Transportation Excerpts D. Draft PC Minutes E. PC Staff Report F. Public Comment G. Aerial Photos References Utility Company Comments PC Exhibits 05/20/19 Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Narrative Exhibit C. Existing & Proposed Survey Exhibit D. Comp Plan Table 4A-9 Exhibit E. DNR Comments Exhibit F. Utility Company Comments Exhibit G. City Engineer Comments Exhibit H. Public Comments Exhibit I. Property Owners List Exhibit J. Plat Map Exhibit K. Aerial Photos Prepared By: YY1GG Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: -Sb)R DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTIES SURVEYED Parcel 1: Lots 1 and 2, Block 16, SAGA HILL REVISED, Hennepin County, Minnesota, together with that portion of vacated Canal, Vine Place, Park and Washburn Street accruing thereto by reason of said vacation. Parcel 2: Lot 9, Block 15, SAGA HILL REVISED, Hennepin County, Minnesota, together with that portion of vacated Forest Boulevard accruing thereto by reason of said vacation. STANDARD NOTES 1) Site Address: 4300 North Shore Drive, Orono, MN 55364 2) A title opinion was not furnished to the surveyor as part of this survey. Only easements per the recorded plat are shown unless otherwise denoted hereon. 3) Flood Zone Information: X (area determined to be outside of the 0.2% annual chance floodplain) and Zone A (Areas subject to inundation by the 1 -percent -annual -chance flood event determined by detailed methods. No Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) is determined for Zone A. per Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 27053CO284F, effective date of November 11, 2016. 4) Parcel Area Information: Parcel 1: Gross Area: 33,219 s.f. – 0.763 acres (as measured to ordinary high water line) Parcel 2: Gross Area: 16,883 s.f. – 0.388 acres (as measured to ordinary high water line) 5) Benchmark: Elevations are based on MN/DOT Geodetic Station Name: SAMS which has an elevation of: 941.04 feet (NGVD29). 6) Zoning Information: The current Zoning for the subject property is LR1B (One Family Lakeshore Residential - 1 acres per the City of Orono's zoning map dated September 16, 2016. The setback are as follows: Principal Structure Setbacks - Street(s): 35 feet Side: 10 feet/20 feet street side Rear: 30 feet Lake: xx feet (From Ordinary High Water Line) Height: 30 feet Hardcover: 25 percent of lot area Please note that the general restrictions for the subject property may have been amended through a city process. We could be unaware of such amendments if they are not in a recorded document provided to us. We recommend that a zoning letter be obtained from the Zoning Administrator for the current restrictions for this site. All setback information and hardcover data for planning and design must be verified by designers, architect or planner. 7) Utilities: We have shown the location of utilities on the surveyed property by observed evidence only. There may be underground utilities encumbering the subject property we are unaware. Please note that we have not placed a Gopher State One Call for this survey. There may or may not be underground utilities in the mapped area, therefore extreme caution must be exercise before any excavation takes place on or near this site. Before digging, you are required by law to notify Gopher State One Call at least 48 hours in advance at 651/454-0002. 8) Wetland Delineation: No wetland delineation was performed. SURVEY LEGEND DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT DESCRIPTION A 20.00 foot wide drainage and utility easement, over, under and across that part of the following described parcel: That part of Bluff Street and that part of Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the southwesterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, and the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 16, all in said "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", and which lies northerly of a line described as commencing at a found "PK" nail set in a 2 inch pipe on the northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence on an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 42 minutes 13 seconds East along said northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15 a distance of 254.89 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 9, a distance of 52.30 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 486.93 feet, a central angle of 06 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds, and a chord which bears South 74 degrees 40 minutes 12 seconds West for 52.28 feet to a point of compound curvature and being the point of beginning of the line to be described and a point to hereinafter be referred to as Point "A"; thence South 77 degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East, tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 60.47 feet to the easterly line of that part of Washburn Avenue vacated in Document No. 2457839, filed in the Hennepin County Recorders Office and there terminating. The centerline of said easement is described as beginning at said Point "A"; thence South 77 degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East a distance of 48.82 feet; thence North 11 degrees 15 minutes 30 seconds West a distance of 312.22 feet to the shore of Lake Minnetonka and there terminating. PROPOSED AREA INFORMATION Parcel 1: Gross Area: Street Vacation Area: 33,219 s.f. 7,809 s.f. - 0.763 acres (as measured to ordinary high water line) - 0.179 acres (as measured to ordinary high water line) Total: 41,028 s.f. – 0.942 acres (as measured to ordinary high water line) Parcel 2: Gross Area: 16,883 s.f. – 0.388 acres (as measured to ordinary high water line) Street Vacation Area: 7,797 s.f. – 0.179 acres (as measured to ordinary high water line) Total: 24,680 s.f. – 0.567 acres (as measured to ordinary high water line) O• - CAST IRON MONUMENT WOE WALKOUT ELEVATION BITUMINOUS 0 CATCH BASIN FFE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION LAKE 1 BUILDING SETBACK LINE 4 FLARED END SECTION GFE GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION CTv CABLE TV DQ GATE VALVE TOF TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEV. EJW CONCRETE CURB < GUY WIRE LOE LOWEST OPENING ELEV. a. CONCRETE 'Cf' HYDRANT © CABLE TV PEDESTAL _960 _ CONTOUR EXISTING O SURVEY MONUMENT SET ❑E ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER 9so CONTOUR PROPOSED • SURVEY MONUMENT FOUND OE ELECTRIC MANHOLE -,—,—,—,—o— GUARD RAIL A SURVEY CONTROL POINT OE ELECTRIC METER Dr DRAIN TILE E LIGHT POLE © GAS METER ELc ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND Q Q � © GAS VALVE —X—X— FENCE POWER POLE ❑H HAND HOLE Fo FIBER OPTIC UNDERGROUND QS SANITARY MANHOLE ® SANITARY CLEANOUT SOIL BORING GAS— GAS UNDERGROUND TREE CONIFEROUS OHu OVERHEAD UTILITY � SIGN 972.5 GROUND ELEVATION TREE DECIDUOUS RAILROAD TRACKS ® STORM DRAIN OT TELEPHONE MANHOLE > SANITARY SEWER ❑T TELEPHONE PEDESTAL >> STORM SEWER STORM MANHOLE ® TRAFFIC SIGNAL TEL TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND Z�S YARD LIGHT Qu UTILITY MANHOLE UTL UTILITY UNDERGROUND ❑A A/C UNIT ❑u UTILITY PEDESTAL WATERMAIN © WELL w •. 929. JULY 27, EDGE OF WATER LOC WATON ER ELEVATION: ORDINARY HIGH 92g.4(NGVD29) ORDINARY HIGH A T EXISTING LINEAR FEET 46± FEET WATER LINE, ORD PINARY HIGH ROPOSED LINEAR FEET AFEET WATER LINE: 71– + 930.7 STREET VACATION DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF AREA TO BE RELEASED TO PARCEL 1 DESCRIPTION OF AREA TO BE RELEASED TO PARCEL 2 That part of Bluff Street and that part of Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin The west half of the following described parcel. The east half of the following described parcel. County, Minnesota" which lies between the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the southwesterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, and the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the That part of Bluff Street and that part of Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, That part of Bluff Street and that part of Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 16, all in said "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", and which lies Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of northerly of a line described as commencing at a found "PK" nail set in a 2 inch pipe on the northeasterly line of said the southwesterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, and the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the the southwesterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, and the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the Lot 9, Block 15; thence on an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 42 minutes 13 seconds East along said northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 16, all in said "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", and which northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 16, all in said "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", and which northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15 a distance of 254.89 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the lies northerly of a line described as commencing at a found "PK" nail set in a 2 inch pipe on the northeasterly line lies northerly of a line described as commencing at a found "PK" nail set in a 2 inch pipe on the northeasterly line southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 9, a distance of of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence on an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 42 minutes 13 seconds East along of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence on an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 42 minutes 13 seconds East along 52.30 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 486.93 feet, a central angle of 06 said northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15 a distance of 254.89 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the said northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15 a distance of 254.89 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds, and a chord which bears South 74 degrees 40 minutes 12 seconds West for 52.28 feet southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 9, a distance southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 9, a distance to a point of compound curvature and being the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 77 of 52.30 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 486.93 feet, a central angle of 52.30 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 486.93 feet, a central angle degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East, tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 60.47 feet to the easterly line of 06 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds, and a chord which bears South 74 degrees 40 minutes 12 seconds West for of 06 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds, and a chord which bears South 74 degrees 40 minutes 12 seconds West for of that part of Washburn Avenue vacated in Document No. 2457839, filed in the Hennepin County Recorders Office 52.28 feet to a point of compound curvature and being the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence 52.28 feet to a point of compound curvature and being the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence and there terminating. South 77 degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East, tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 60.47 feet to the South 77 degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East, tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 60.47 feet to the easterly line of that part of Washburn Avenue vacated in Document No. 2457839, filed in the Hennepin County easterly line of that part of Washburn Avenue vacated in Document No. 2457839, filed in the Hennepin County Recorders Office and there terminating. Recorders Office and there terminating. a `OT FNNDI CORNIP 3/4" c a VTNEAsj ER OF SO ) � N\ _ O (9 0) \� �o�K �5 ���� 304'3+/ 254 89 16 V. 5 ' – B o < E OF �O\ 9, S\4 42 B G\NN\NG - o %� SNEASCER p0\N t0 .^Oh \` v � PARCEL 2 °� '` I '0 o� QQ P INT 966..3x / jU 930.8 C) t\+1- : . : ., : I STRAlva '�� .9; P'"' : : : : : : I : I : : � : L> �- BOX ;8-130, I 932.3 ' 929.6 rj __ . :A : : : : : : : : : : : .� B OF 1I E' I 1 1 N .�i 1�. . I• .�- ox. s s5I.5 . . . .�. . . . 0 53 a _B 4/ . . . . . . _ y 1° _- PE MAP 18 . �' _ —B I c ; . . . 312.2? 946E 3� E g4 ASH 30" _ 5 _ S1� 951.9 30.5. _ _ : : : 949 MAP 14" _B��es� G �� , 1 . _ .. -. . . . . . . '.G �. 952.5�L�B —�` 0 I. Bim— 1 PIN 6" �H� . Vd 929.b 15" PLASTIC PIPE 928.8 _ 929. 929.6 I C'\L� ID \J v . T 1 92 DOCK 929 929. �4NEXONKA AIDE KE) A _- (1 OR��� �N JULY 27, 2018 – �� ' GE OF WATER LOCATE 0 929 4(NGVD29) + FEET WATER LINE:103_ GH WATER ELF", HGH: LINE. 128± FEET '.� ORDINARY H T ORDINARY HIGH WATER <\ LI EAR FEET A EXISTING (NEAR FEET AT ORDINARY _ PROPOSED L – S / ") . �I 0 -\-7 J . . . . . II: : . XTENSION: NpR�HE��TERL - \ 300 00 B —�` j� �R65.3CD /: • STEREY E .OF . THS• � . —. —8�—�`—BSB` ,� ��.) ��- ��I POR_T1 8 OCK 16� B�B��—B�` WOE= tA; �� �� < �� ,,\`\p �fSTRPy01-1�- aseLI—� 0e, 958.5 i`;�5_ _ .,�X-r y11`1� . I _��L�� NORTHEASTEREY a Fc� o ss7.1 765.1311 _ E r-: :o: o a NOF " / PORTIO KT16 ui —� _STRA�GH� OT OC T _� B� --- OF � z . . � EINE 30.5 929.6 930. gym MENU C �I r 93 - MAP 30" PIN 8" Q ( FCST 966.0 965.8 �/ PARCEL 1 o tc; 1 El cn 957.2 959.3 9 S9�MAP 16" 966.0 k lB\ 960.0 N �W 4 I c� / u ASH 8" N d �/ 962.3 35_' N �i N r' ASH 10" 4, n �`d` 956.3 1 PIN 8":cd: o� CO o 962. o (0 ASH 8" ��ar TREE iN -- � N MAP 48" 957.8 _ s� W m oo // 930.8 I 937.3 ASH 10 BOX 14"�� 0 965.5 END IP 3/4' x • 4 m 956.9 E3o95X811 C�.2�� �BBB�/ ssaL 966.3 h TOP -� FND PINCH �s� MAP 10'0 66.0 U 30.7 BseL-BSB 959.4 1 114' 996 / 65 g 0 949.6 3 `J -1 WIL 36" 951.4 959. p r 933.3 /B�`— NWIL 36" L_BSBLBSBL C 934.9 _BseL—ese 262 %seL $so- ° 33 o rhl—�`ASH 30"%% 0"a 3\g•� 0' asoL I 1 1—�L— 938.0 ° 55 35 1 0 , 33 IN �� m � _BsN\\ - �Bso` \ o 0.6 - WOE= -FIRE PIT IP 3 4 959.2 FND I 931.4 9� t T 1 +/ 9 _D 930.5 --7 � G— a 929.6 930.7 r 1 I I I 29.6 � I L T ND PINCH 671 I,F3 112755 I I FIELD CREW NO. L --w— 2/- USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/ORCT CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTYC LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. y Dated this is day of Ma h, 2019. David B. Pemberton, PLS Minnesota License No. 40344 pemberton@sathrc.com CLS 0� `� u' / o cc "" N c�FRs LL, /? 7�> lq Forest Q m a� I 5 m FILE NO. 68770-001 LAKE 1 x a 5 o Fence/Improvements ties are shown on .9 CD I E the side of the boundary line that m° LL x / 4+/- +/x the fence is located on. CHECKED X SITE f LD EJW N N w ( NOR Y O r O Bearings are based on the Hennepin County Coordinate System (NAD 83 - 1986 adj.) 20 10 0 10 20 40 \ 9 C-) o SCALE IN FEET w •. 929. JULY 27, EDGE OF WATER LOC WATON ER ELEVATION: ORDINARY HIGH 92g.4(NGVD29) ORDINARY HIGH A T EXISTING LINEAR FEET 46± FEET WATER LINE, ORD PINARY HIGH ROPOSED LINEAR FEET AFEET WATER LINE: 71– + 930.7 STREET VACATION DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF AREA TO BE RELEASED TO PARCEL 1 DESCRIPTION OF AREA TO BE RELEASED TO PARCEL 2 That part of Bluff Street and that part of Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin The west half of the following described parcel. The east half of the following described parcel. County, Minnesota" which lies between the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the southwesterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, and the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the That part of Bluff Street and that part of Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, That part of Bluff Street and that part of Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 16, all in said "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", and which lies Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of northerly of a line described as commencing at a found "PK" nail set in a 2 inch pipe on the northeasterly line of said the southwesterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, and the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the the southwesterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, and the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the Lot 9, Block 15; thence on an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 42 minutes 13 seconds East along said northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 16, all in said "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", and which northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 16, all in said "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", and which northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15 a distance of 254.89 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the lies northerly of a line described as commencing at a found "PK" nail set in a 2 inch pipe on the northeasterly line lies northerly of a line described as commencing at a found "PK" nail set in a 2 inch pipe on the northeasterly line southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 9, a distance of of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence on an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 42 minutes 13 seconds East along of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence on an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 42 minutes 13 seconds East along 52.30 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 486.93 feet, a central angle of 06 said northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15 a distance of 254.89 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the said northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15 a distance of 254.89 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds, and a chord which bears South 74 degrees 40 minutes 12 seconds West for 52.28 feet southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 9, a distance southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 9, a distance to a point of compound curvature and being the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 77 of 52.30 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 486.93 feet, a central angle of 52.30 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 486.93 feet, a central angle degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East, tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 60.47 feet to the easterly line of 06 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds, and a chord which bears South 74 degrees 40 minutes 12 seconds West for of 06 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds, and a chord which bears South 74 degrees 40 minutes 12 seconds West for of that part of Washburn Avenue vacated in Document No. 2457839, filed in the Hennepin County Recorders Office 52.28 feet to a point of compound curvature and being the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence 52.28 feet to a point of compound curvature and being the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence and there terminating. South 77 degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East, tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 60.47 feet to the South 77 degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East, tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 60.47 feet to the easterly line of that part of Washburn Avenue vacated in Document No. 2457839, filed in the Hennepin County easterly line of that part of Washburn Avenue vacated in Document No. 2457839, filed in the Hennepin County Recorders Office and there terminating. Recorders Office and there terminating. a `OT FNNDI CORNIP 3/4" c a VTNEAsj ER OF SO ) � N\ _ O (9 0) \� �o�K �5 ���� 304'3+/ 254 89 16 V. 5 ' – B o < E OF �O\ 9, S\4 42 B G\NN\NG - o %� SNEASCER p0\N t0 .^Oh \` v � PARCEL 2 °� '` I '0 o� QQ P INT 966..3x / jU 930.8 C) t\+1- : . : ., : I STRAlva '�� .9; P'"' : : : : : : I : I : : � : L> �- BOX ;8-130, I 932.3 ' 929.6 rj __ . :A : : : : : : : : : : : .� B OF 1I E' I 1 1 N .�i 1�. . I• .�- ox. s s5I.5 . . . .�. . . . 0 53 a _B 4/ . . . . . . _ y 1° _- PE MAP 18 . �' _ —B I c ; . . . 312.2? 946E 3� E g4 ASH 30" _ 5 _ S1� 951.9 30.5. _ _ : : : 949 MAP 14" _B��es� G �� , 1 . _ .. -. . . . . . . '.G �. 952.5�L�B —�` 0 I. Bim— 1 PIN 6" �H� . Vd 929.b 15" PLASTIC PIPE 928.8 _ 929. 929.6 I C'\L� ID \J v . T 1 92 DOCK 929 929. �4NEXONKA AIDE KE) A _- (1 OR��� �N JULY 27, 2018 – �� ' GE OF WATER LOCATE 0 929 4(NGVD29) + FEET WATER LINE:103_ GH WATER ELF", HGH: LINE. 128± FEET '.� ORDINARY H T ORDINARY HIGH WATER <\ LI EAR FEET A EXISTING (NEAR FEET AT ORDINARY _ PROPOSED L – S / ") . �I 0 -\-7 J . . . . . II: : . XTENSION: NpR�HE��TERL - \ 300 00 B —�` j� �R65.3CD /: • STEREY E .OF . THS• � . —. —8�—�`—BSB` ,� ��.) ��- ��I POR_T1 8 OCK 16� B�B��—B�` WOE= tA; �� �� < �� ,,\`\p �fSTRPy01-1�- aseLI—� 0e, 958.5 i`;�5_ _ .,�X-r y11`1� . I _��L�� NORTHEASTEREY a Fc� o ss7.1 765.1311 _ E r-: :o: o a NOF " / PORTIO KT16 ui —� _STRA�GH� OT OC T _� B� --- OF � z . . � EINE 30.5 929.6 930. gym MENU C �I r 93 - MAP 30" PIN 8" Q ( FCST 966.0 965.8 �/ PARCEL 1 o tc; 1 El cn 957.2 959.3 9 S9�MAP 16" 966.0 k lB\ 960.0 N �W 4 I c� / u ASH 8" N d �/ 962.3 35_' N �i N r' ASH 10" 4, n �`d` 956.3 1 PIN 8":cd: o� CO o 962. o (0 ASH 8" ��ar TREE iN -- � N MAP 48" 957.8 _ s� W m oo // 930.8 I 937.3 ASH 10 BOX 14"�� 0 965.5 END IP 3/4' x • 4 m 956.9 E3o95X811 C�.2�� �BBB�/ ssaL 966.3 h TOP -� FND PINCH �s� MAP 10'0 66.0 U 30.7 BseL-BSB 959.4 1 114' 996 / 65 g 0 949.6 3 `J -1 WIL 36" 951.4 959. p r 933.3 /B�`— NWIL 36" L_BSBLBSBL C 934.9 _BseL—ese 262 %seL $so- ° 33 o rhl—�`ASH 30"%% 0"a 3\g•� 0' asoL I 1 1—�L— 938.0 ° 55 35 1 0 , 33 IN �� m � _BsN\\ - �Bso` \ o 0.6 - WOE= -FIRE PIT IP 3 4 959.2 FND I 931.4 9� t T 1 +/ 9 _D 930.5 --7 � G— a 929.6 930.7 r 1 I I I 29.6 � I L T ND PINCH 671 I,F3 112755 I I FIELD CREW NO. BY DATE REVISION USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/ORCT CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTYC LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. y Dated this is day of Ma h, 2019. David B. Pemberton, PLS Minnesota License No. 40344 pemberton@sathrc.com CLS 0� `� u' / o cc "" N c�FRs LL, /? 7�> lq Forest Q TWP.117-RGE.23-SEC.07 V FILE NO. 68770-001 LAKE 1 Fyer C Lake AN VIEW Hennepin County I O RO N O ) MINNESOTA AVE, �IFIy DBP C CHECKED SITE f LD EJW N N w ( NOR O r T Y C \ 9 C-) o M A A d o �w Z m w P E > ? Sy0RF a_ Q Q � w •. 929. JULY 27, EDGE OF WATER LOC WATON ER ELEVATION: ORDINARY HIGH 92g.4(NGVD29) ORDINARY HIGH A T EXISTING LINEAR FEET 46± FEET WATER LINE, ORD PINARY HIGH ROPOSED LINEAR FEET AFEET WATER LINE: 71– + 930.7 STREET VACATION DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION OF AREA TO BE RELEASED TO PARCEL 1 DESCRIPTION OF AREA TO BE RELEASED TO PARCEL 2 That part of Bluff Street and that part of Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin The west half of the following described parcel. The east half of the following described parcel. County, Minnesota" which lies between the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the southwesterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, and the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the That part of Bluff Street and that part of Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, That part of Bluff Street and that part of Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 16, all in said "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", and which lies Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of northerly of a line described as commencing at a found "PK" nail set in a 2 inch pipe on the northeasterly line of said the southwesterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, and the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the the southwesterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, and the northwesterly extension across it of the straight portion of the Lot 9, Block 15; thence on an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 42 minutes 13 seconds East along said northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 16, all in said "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", and which northeasterly line of Lot 1, Block 16, all in said "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota", and which northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15 a distance of 254.89 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the lies northerly of a line described as commencing at a found "PK" nail set in a 2 inch pipe on the northeasterly line lies northerly of a line described as commencing at a found "PK" nail set in a 2 inch pipe on the northeasterly line southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 9, a distance of of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence on an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 42 minutes 13 seconds East along of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence on an assumed bearing of South 14 degrees 42 minutes 13 seconds East along 52.30 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 486.93 feet, a central angle of 06 said northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15 a distance of 254.89 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the said northeasterly line of said Lot 9, Block 15 a distance of 254.89 feet to a found 3/4 inch iron pipe marking the degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds, and a chord which bears South 74 degrees 40 minutes 12 seconds West for 52.28 feet southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 9, a distance southeast corner of said Lot 9, Block 15; thence southwesterly along the southerly line of said Lot 9, a distance to a point of compound curvature and being the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 77 of 52.30 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 486.93 feet, a central angle of 52.30 feet on a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 486.93 feet, a central angle degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East, tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 60.47 feet to the easterly line of 06 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds, and a chord which bears South 74 degrees 40 minutes 12 seconds West for of 06 degrees 09 minutes 16 seconds, and a chord which bears South 74 degrees 40 minutes 12 seconds West for of that part of Washburn Avenue vacated in Document No. 2457839, filed in the Hennepin County Recorders Office 52.28 feet to a point of compound curvature and being the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence 52.28 feet to a point of compound curvature and being the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence and there terminating. South 77 degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East, tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 60.47 feet to the South 77 degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East, tangent to the last described curve, a distance of 60.47 feet to the easterly line of that part of Washburn Avenue vacated in Document No. 2457839, filed in the Hennepin County easterly line of that part of Washburn Avenue vacated in Document No. 2457839, filed in the Hennepin County Recorders Office and there terminating. Recorders Office and there terminating. a `OT FNNDI CORNIP 3/4" c a VTNEAsj ER OF SO ) � N\ _ O (9 0) \� �o�K �5 ���� 304'3+/ 254 89 16 V. 5 ' – B o < E OF �O\ 9, S\4 42 B G\NN\NG - o %� SNEASCER p0\N t0 .^Oh \` v � PARCEL 2 °� '` I '0 o� QQ P INT 966..3x / jU 930.8 C) t\+1- : . : ., : I STRAlva '�� .9; P'"' : : : : : : I : I : : � : L> �- BOX ;8-130, I 932.3 ' 929.6 rj __ . :A : : : : : : : : : : : .� B OF 1I E' I 1 1 N .�i 1�. . I• .�- ox. s s5I.5 . . . .�. . . . 0 53 a _B 4/ . . . . . . _ y 1° _- PE MAP 18 . �' _ —B I c ; . . . 312.2? 946E 3� E g4 ASH 30" _ 5 _ S1� 951.9 30.5. _ _ : : : 949 MAP 14" _B��es� G �� , 1 . _ .. -. . . . . . . '.G �. 952.5�L�B —�` 0 I. Bim— 1 PIN 6" �H� . Vd 929.b 15" PLASTIC PIPE 928.8 _ 929. 929.6 I C'\L� ID \J v . T 1 92 DOCK 929 929. �4NEXONKA AIDE KE) A _- (1 OR��� �N JULY 27, 2018 – �� ' GE OF WATER LOCATE 0 929 4(NGVD29) + FEET WATER LINE:103_ GH WATER ELF", HGH: LINE. 128± FEET '.� ORDINARY H T ORDINARY HIGH WATER <\ LI EAR FEET A EXISTING (NEAR FEET AT ORDINARY _ PROPOSED L – S / ") . �I 0 -\-7 J . . . . . II: : . XTENSION: NpR�HE��TERL - \ 300 00 B —�` j� �R65.3CD /: • STEREY E .OF . THS• � . —. —8�—�`—BSB` ,� ��.) ��- ��I POR_T1 8 OCK 16� B�B��—B�` WOE= tA; �� �� < �� ,,\`\p �fSTRPy01-1�- aseLI—� 0e, 958.5 i`;�5_ _ .,�X-r y11`1� . I _��L�� NORTHEASTEREY a Fc� o ss7.1 765.1311 _ E r-: :o: o a NOF " / PORTIO KT16 ui —� _STRA�GH� OT OC T _� B� --- OF � z . . � EINE 30.5 929.6 930. gym MENU C �I r 93 - MAP 30" PIN 8" Q ( FCST 966.0 965.8 �/ PARCEL 1 o tc; 1 El cn 957.2 959.3 9 S9�MAP 16" 966.0 k lB\ 960.0 N �W 4 I c� / u ASH 8" N d �/ 962.3 35_' N �i N r' ASH 10" 4, n �`d` 956.3 1 PIN 8":cd: o� CO o 962. o (0 ASH 8" ��ar TREE iN -- � N MAP 48" 957.8 _ s� W m oo // 930.8 I 937.3 ASH 10 BOX 14"�� 0 965.5 END IP 3/4' x • 4 m 956.9 E3o95X811 C�.2�� �BBB�/ ssaL 966.3 h TOP -� FND PINCH �s� MAP 10'0 66.0 U 30.7 BseL-BSB 959.4 1 114' 996 / 65 g 0 949.6 3 `J -1 WIL 36" 951.4 959. p r 933.3 /B�`— NWIL 36" L_BSBLBSBL C 934.9 _BseL—ese 262 %seL $so- ° 33 o rhl—�`ASH 30"%% 0"a 3\g•� 0' asoL I 1 1—�L— 938.0 ° 55 35 1 0 , 33 IN �� m � _BsN\\ - �Bso` \ o 0.6 - WOE= -FIRE PIT IP 3 4 959.2 FND I 931.4 9� t T 1 +/ 9 _D 930.5 --7 � G— a 929.6 930.7 r 1 I I I 29.6 � I L T ND PINCH 671 I,F3 112755 I I FIELD CREW NO. BY DATE REVISION USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/ORCT CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTYC LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. y Dated this is day of Ma h, 2019. David B. Pemberton, PLS Minnesota License No. 40344 pemberton@sathrc.com CLS 0� `� u' / o cc "" N c�FRs SU R� �� 1SAT H R E-BERGQUIST INC. N 7 TWP.117-RGE.23-SEC.07 STREET VACATION EXHIBIT PREPARED FOR. STEVE PAIDOSH FILE NO. 68770-001 LAKE 1 DBP 4/2/2019 EASEMENT DESC./REV. DESC. Hennepin County DRAWN O RO N O ) MINNESOTA 1 DBP CHECKED i. � 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 co �� WWW.SATHRE.COM P01 EJW DATE 08/02/18 CMP Part 4A. Transportation Plan LAKE ACCESS. PRESER VA TION AND MANAGEMENT Orono's lakes provide a significant recreational resource for all Orono residents. This value was long ago realized by City leaders. In order to provide lake access for the general public, as well as to provide for fire department access to the lake as a water source, a number of lake access corridors were created as the shore land developed. These typically are platted, dedicated right-of-ways leading from the local road system to the shoreline, and are commonly from 16' to Win width. These right-of-ways (often referred to as "fire lanes" or "lake access roads") vary considerably in their proximity to traffic, parking availability, proximity to housing, lakeshore conditions, and other factors that effect their recreational value. Some of these corridors have been maintained by the City for local swimming beaches or as winter snowmobile and ice -fishing accesses. Certain accesses have docks for fishing, and some have ramp areas suitable for launching a small boat. However, most do not have designated parking available, and are primarily intended to serve the neighborhood rather than the general public. A number of these access corridors have steep topography, shallow water depths, undesirable lake bottom conditions, and/or dense vegetation and experience little or no usage. Of the City lake accesses shown in Table 4A-9, half of those located outside of Big Island are either undeveloped or closed to public use. In addition to Orono's relatively small public lake access corridors, other governmental agencies own and operate significantly larger lake access properties in Orono. These include the DNR Maxwell Bay Access, Hennepin County's North Arm Access and Hennepin County's Noerenberg Gardens Memorial Park. These three large facilities benefit from Metro Transit bus service on their County Road 51 frontage, and are used regularly by visitors from the greater metropolitan area and beyond. The Noerenberg Gardens lack the docks and ramps supplied at the nearby Maxwell Bay and North Arm locations, however the Noerenberg shoreline in Maxwell Bay is a popular place for boaters to anchor and swim. Even more popular destinations for Lake Minnetonka boaters are the Hennepin County beach at Cruiser's Cove on Big Island, and Orono's Big Island Park, which has dockage and hiking areas. Orono also owns and operates Summit Park on Long Lake. Orono offers public lake access through five commercial marinas within its boundaries. Its private recreational facilities with lake shore are Camp Teko on North Arm Bay and the Minnetonka Power Squadron on Big Island. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 4A, Page 16 CMP Part 4A. Transportation Plan Table 4A-9: City of Orono Lake Minnetonka Access Points - Designated Use and Current ID Access Name Plat Between Designated UPDATED 4-24-2018 or Street Name Section Address #s Use # Notes Brown's Bay (Lower Lake) 1 End of Orono Lane 2-S 1355/1385 Not open for public use; plat map indicates questionable abutment of shoreline - Shoreline Drive - 2-S Across from Shore Fishing Hennepin County provides an informal parking area "Molly's Corner" 1410 and trashcans at this wide spot along Shoreline Drive; (Outlot A, Shoreline popular fishing spot; winter vehicular access feasible. Dragonfly Hill) Fire Boat dockage Smith Bay (Lower Lake) 2 Shoreline Drive at 10-S Adj to 1955 Winter Only Winter vehicular access allowed. Spates 3 North Shore Drive 10-S Tracts S&U, RLS 192; these tracts are on the steep at Shoreline Drive slope adjacent to Shoreline Drive; due to slope and safety issues this access point is not open for public use Crystal Bay -- North Shore Drive 9-S 2605/2655 No longer a public access ("Town Road") 4 North Shore Drive 8-S 3498/3510 Winter Only 30' wide platted road right-of-way at Baldur Park Road -- North Shore Drive 17-N 3685/3705 33' wide eastward extension of North Shore Drive east of Shadywood (Hennepin County jurisdiction) Road 5 Shadywood Road at 17-N 1998/2000 15.2' wide platted alley - closely abutting homes on Sunset Dr either side 6 Crystal Bay Road 17-S Adj to 2264 66' wide platted road extending to Lakeshore; City also (West end) Shadywood owns 4 adjacent tiny lakeshore parcels to the east for an additional 200' of shoreline, over which a number of inland private parcels claim deeded access rights for "boating and bathing"... status currently under discussion 7 Crystal Bay Road 17-S 3405/3415 20' relocated alley from Railroad property to (Relocated shoreline; potential lake access from railway corridor. extension of The only known documentation is Doc. #507616 deed Bayview Place in filed Nov. 10, 1908 from Wallace et al to Priebe which plat of "Wallace's states that the 20' strip is "heretofore taken for street Addition...") purposes" and notes that the platted alley between Lots 18 and 19 was vacated by the District Court. 8 Crystal Bay Road 17-S 3339/3345 25' wide platted roadway; contains municipal sewer (Platted extension of lines, potential access from neighborhood and Hillside Place) Railroad/Trail corridor to lakeshore Maxwell Bay 9 Gibbs Landing - Fox 4-S Adj to 3125 Pedestrian Tax records show access as Outlot A, owned by owner St. year-round, of 3125, City has easement over Outlot, City vehicles winter maintains access only City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 4A, Page 17 CMP Part 4A. Transportation Plan Stubbs Bay ID Access Name Plat Between Designated Use Section Address #'s 10 Eastlake Street 5-N 3424/3465 Winter Only 30' platted road gated March I - Dec. 1 I I Bayside Rd. at 5-N 3580/3640 Fishing Dock 33' platted road ("Oak Street" in plat of "Bay View Stubbs Bay Rd. Park") Also used for winter access by snowmobiles off Luce Line 12 Bayside Rd 5-N Across from NA Two 60' platted roads and one 65' platted road to the 3640, 3700, Lake (Park, Spring, and Maple Streets in plat of Bay View Park; and Theresa St. in plat of Ottoville on Lake 3750 Bayside Minnetonka). These potential access points are not opened for public use. 13 Bayside Rd. 5-N West side of NA 30' realigned platted road (Realigned "Lake Street" in 3775 Bayside the plat of Ottoville on Lake Minnetonka) (See street file 3775 Bayside). Not opened for public use. 14 Westlake Street 5-N 372/389 30' platted road right-of-way extending to lakeshore; walking access only. North Arm Bay 15 Park Lane 6-S 607/649 Fishing Dock 60' wide platted road, paved to shoreline - usable for boat launch but there is no parking available 16 Oak Street 6-S Adj to 4119 30' wide platted road, not developed, steep slopes and ravine limit use 17 Baldur Park Road 8-S Across from NW end of platted developed road as it extends to 1384/1392 shoreline 18 Oak Place (Platted 8-S 3768/3818 40' wide platted undeveloped road extending from road in plat of North Shore Drive across platted Cherry Ave to Shore "Crystal Bay Dr shoreline; mostly wetland or under water View") 19 Sandy Beach 8-S 3898/3908 Swimming 60' wide platted roadway used for City beach (Extension of Maple Beach Cherry Ave Place) 20 Grant Street 8-S 1310 Spruce/ 50' wide platted road, undeveloped 1330 Cherry P1 21 Spruce Place 8-S 1250/1260 40' wide (remaining after partial vacation) platted roadway, undeveloped 22 Loma Linda Avenue 8-N 1098/1130 Fishing Dock 40' wide platted road; also useful for vehicular access Forest Lake 23 Forest Lake Landing 7-N 4415/4440 60' wide platted road right-of-way , access not developed, walking use only 24 Elmwood Avenue 7-N South of 1199 20' wide platted road/alley undeveloped right-of-way leading to shoreline 25 "Summit Avenue" 7-S 1067/1101 50' wide platted road undeveloped right-of-way to (Extension of shoreline Elmwood Avenue) 26 "Buff Street" 7-S West side of 50' wide platted road right-of-way to shoreline, not 1453 Park Dr developed West Arm Bay 27 North Shore Drive 7-S "4795" 33' platted right-of-way corridor extension of Co. Rd. west end (adjacent 19 plus tax -forfeited Lot 10, Block 6, `Bergquist and Shoreline to Orono/M'trista Wicklund's Park...'; undeveloped corridor primarily border) for drainage purposes due to very steep slopes City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 4A, Page 18 CMP Part 4A. Transportation Plan ID Access Name Plat Between Designated Use Section Address #'2 28 North Shore Drive 7-S 4731/4745 40' platted road right-of-way extension in plat of at "Adams Street" `Bergquist and Wicklund's Park..." undeveloped, Extension very steep, used for drainage 29 Rest Point Lane 7-S 1340/1345 33' platted right-of-way corridor, pavement does not extend to lake 30 Rest Point Road 7-S 1405/1410 16' platted road right-of-way widens to about 40' at shoreline, paved but no boat launching available 31 Orchard Beach 7-S West of 1530 50' platted road right-of-way extends to shoreline; tree Place growth and topography limits vehicular access 32 Highwood Lane 7-S 4156/4167 20' platted alley right-of-way to shoreline; steep slope Extension to shoreline, undeveloped Highwood Rd 33 Highwood Road 7-S 4051/4075 20' platted alley right-of-way to shoreline, not Alley developed 34 Corral Road 17-N 1785/1825 20' platted alley mainly for drainage but also walking Extension access Concordia 35 Fagerness Point 18-N Across from Accretions to the 40' originally platted road in the plat Accretions 1965/1985 of "Fagerness'; title registrations by most abutting owners have resulted in dedicated right-of-way no longer abutting shoreline; it appears that there is no public access remaining Fagerness Pt Rd Spring Park Bay 36 Casco Point Beach 20-S 2871/2879 Swimming 60' wide platted road ("Carman St") used as a City Beach swimming beach Casco Pt Rd 37 Casco Circle 20-S 3195/3205 60' wide platted road right-of-way to shoreline at the south side of Casco Circle - undeveloped Carmans Bay 38 "Ivy Lane" (Ivy 20-S 3486/3508 60' wide platted road right-of-way extending to Place) shoreline east of Ivy Place - steep, used for drainage 39 "Spring Street" 20-S 2600/2618 40' wide platted road right-of-way from Casco Point Road to shoreline along south side of plat of "Kaster Cove" - undeveloped, walking access only Casco Pt Rd 40 Carman Street 20-S 2490 Carman/ 30' wide platted road right-of-way extending to shoreline, fishing dock 3555 Frederick 41 Lydiard Beach 20-S End of Swimming 66' wide platted road right-of-way extending to Lydiard Rd Beach shoreline, used as a City swimming beach Big Island A N. End of "Lawn 23-N 110 33' wide platted roadway adjacent to Lot 46, Morse Avenue" Island Park B E. end of "Tooisit 23-N 110/120 33' wide platted roadway adjacent to Lot 45, Morse Avenue" Island Park - slope makes use difficult C Unnamed Street 23-N 120/140 90' wide platted r'dway between Lots 38 and 39, Morse Island Park - City has established drivable gravel road for emergency & service vehicle access D "Bay Place" 23-N 210/260 50'+1- wide platted roadway between Lots 21 and 54, Morse Island Park City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 4A, Page 19 CMP Part 4A. Transportation Plan ID Access Name Plat Between Designated Use Section Address #'s E "Meadow Lane East 23-S 280/290 20' wide platted roadway between Lots 59 and 60, Extended" Morse Island Park - steep slope makes use difficult F "Meta -Comet 23-S 340 33' wide platted roadway between Lot F Morse Island Avenue South" Park and Lot 3, Morse Island Park 2nd Addition G "Massasolt Avenue 23-S 440/450 33' wide platted roadway between Lot 1, Morse Island West End" Park and Lot 1, Scrivers subdivision of Lot E, Morse Island Park - steep slope H "Meadow Lane 23-S 450/460 16' platted alley between Lots 5 and 6, Morse Island Alley" Park - drivable for emergency and service vehicles I "Pleasant View 22-S 570/600 30' platted roadway between Lot 9, Pleasant View Street" Lake Minnetonka and Lot 3, Island Pointe TRANSIT Orono is categorized as a Transit Market Area IV. Transit Market Area IV has lower concentrations of population and employment and a higher rate of auto ownership. It is primarily composed of Suburban Edge and Emerging Suburban Edge communities. This market can support peak -period express bus services if a sufficient concentration of commuters likely to use transit service is located along a corridor. The low-density development and suburban form of development presents challenges to fixed -route transit. General public dial -a -ride services are appropriate in Market Area IV. The three primary routes serving Orono are Express Route 67-5-645 and 677, which provide express service to downtown from the Mound, Navarre and Wayzata commercial areas along County Road 15, and Express Route 674 which provides similar express service to western and central Orono, Long Lake and Wayzata. The TPP's Transit Investment Plan does not show any transitway investments planned for Orono in the Current Revenue Scenario. (See Map 4A-7).To expand the reach of these fixed routes, the City will promote dial a ride services throughout the city. The Transportation Policy Plan discusses the expansion of Transit Advantages, though none are expressly identified within Orono boundaries. Given the limited right of way and the growing congestion of County Road 15 through Navarre, improvements and programs to expand Transit Advantage in the area should be closely considered. FR F, ThNT Freight transportation in Orono is primarily served by a Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) rail line parallel to US 12. There are no freight facilities within Orono. The BNSF rail line does not cross any roadways within the City. There are no large freight traffic generators within the City. Most truck and rail traffic is passing through Orono on trips to, from, and through the Twin Cities. Heavy truck traffic is for the most part constrained to roads under Hennepin County and State Jurisdiction. (See Map 4A-8) The development of the lake areas in Orono as seasonal recreational in the late 1800s early 1900's established many of the transportation patterns found throughout the community. In the lake areas, this pattern led to roads that are substandard to today's standards. Local residential roads are not designed for heavy freight movement. As the City expands its maintenance program, improvements to turning radii, width, and stormwater retention are considered. There are no known locations where truck access is not available. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 4A, Page 20 CMP Part 4E. Parks, Trails, and Open Spaces any acquisitions will be for ecologically significant lands that abut existing park land, land that provides improved access to existing parkland and trails or land that facilitates the development of the planned trail system. (Supports goals 2, 5, 6) 9. The City's park dedication fund will be used for purchase of additional park land and/or for improvement of existing park land. Consistent with Minnesota Statutes, this fund will not be used for park maintenance or recreation operating expense. (Supports goal 6) 10. Where possible, recreational facilities will be designed to be barrier -free so that handicapped citizens have reasonable access to facilities. Orono will ensure that select new parks are constructed with accessibility in mind and to incorporate Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) design standards with projects to upgrade existing parks. (Supports goals 1, 3, 5) 11. Orono will maintain Lake Access for all residents. With shore land abutting a dozen separate bays in Lake Minnetonka, Orono has a commitment to maintaining access via the dedicated access corridors. It is the City's intent to permanently retain for public use all existing lake access corridors and fire lanes, regardless of the current level of use or maintenance. (Supports goal 5) To this end, the City will follow these policies: ■ Requests for vacation of dedicated lake access right of ways will be evaluated carefully, in particular where equal or better lake accesses are not available nearby. The City will identify and take necessary action to preserve the public's right to use of any such accesses which exist but which may not have been formally dedicated. ■ The City will endeavor to work with property owners adjacent to lake access corridors to ensure that both the rights of the public and the rights of the private landowner are upheld. 12. The city will conduct a periodic (10 year cycle) park usage and needs community wide survey to determine if residents' needs are being met. (Supports goal 1) 13. The city will review the existing park and facilities conditions to identify needed maintenance upgrades and replacements. 14. The city will provide sufficient funding for the administration and maintenance of the existing parks, trials and open space system as part of the regular City budget levy. Other sources of park funding such as development park fees, grants, support from local organizations, private donations, will be used for acquisitions, capital improvements and major renovations. (Supports goal 6) City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 4E, Page 8 CMP Part 4A. Transportation Plan roads to serve new residential developments of 3 or more units; by limiting the number of curb cuts per residence; by prohibiting direct access to principal arterials; and by a number of other regulations involving the location, type and number of access points to the arterial roadway system. It is the City's policy that new direct access to arterials is to be minimized to the greatest extent possible. However, many of southern Orono's arterials near the Lake Minnetonka shoreline have historically served a dual function as both arterials and as local/collector streets, due to geographic and topographic limitations. Minimization or consolidation of existing driveway and local street access points along these unique roadways is a complex matter which will often require the cooperation of multiple property owners. The City will encourage the use of shared driveways along existing developed arterials wherever feasible. Further, the City will continue to investigate the feasibility of closing existing direct local street access points to principal and minor arterials where suitable alternative access points may be established. LAKE ACCESS PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT With more than 40 miles of Lake Minnetonka shoreline and nearly 5 miles of additional lake shorelines, Orono's lakes provide a significant recreational resource for all Orono residents, not just for those who own property abutting the lakes. This value was long ago realized by the City fathers, as well as by early land developers. In order to provide lake access for the general public, as well as to provide for fire department access to the lake as a water source, a number of lake access corridors were created as the shoreland developed. These typically are platted, dedicated right-of-ways leading from the local road system to the shoreline, and are commonly from 16' to 66' in width. The historic level of use of these right-of-ways (sometimes referred to as "fire lanes" or "lake access roads") ranges from minimal to year-round. Certain of these corridors have been maintained by the City for local swimming beaches or as winter snowmobile and ice -fishing accesses. Certain accesses are provided with docks for fishing, and some have ramp areas suitable for launching a small boat. However, most do not have designated parking available, and are primarily intended to serve the neighborhood rather than the general public. A number of these access corridors have steep topography and experience a relatively low level of usage. The value of these corridors to the general public both now and in the future is too great to be measured. While an access corridor or fire lane may appear to an adjacent landowner as abandoned, there may well be a future public need for that corridor that may not be obvious today. The Minnesota Supreme Court in 1944 (Application of Baldwin, et al No. 33721 for vacation of a platted dedicated lake access road) upheld the value of retaining the public's right to access the lake. In an excerpt from the findings of the Court: City of Orono Community Management Plan 2008-2030 Page 4A-31 CMP Part 4A. Transportation Plan This court requires no proof that Lake Minnetonka is a priceless heritage of the people of Minnesota, to bepreserved and passed onto posterity. Judicial notice will betaken of the fact that it is one of the most precious jewels in the string of Ten Thousand Lakes of which Minnesota is so justly proud... Because of its wide expanse and proximity to our metropolitan areas, it is much frequented and used for boating, fishing, picnicking and bathing -perhaps more than any other lake in the state. Its shore line of nearly 100 miles is dotted with permanent homes and summer cottages, not only at its waters edge, but extending far back from the shore. But the use of the lake is not confined to dwellers on its shore or nearby. During the summer season especially, it is the mecca for thousands upon thousands of urbanites, not so fortunate as to possess a lake home, who -young and old alike - seek its shores and waters for diverse recreational purposes. To those who do not indulge inactive recreation, it affords the opportunity of communing with nature at its best. With the increase in thepermanent lake population, however, the extent of lakeshore available to the public generally and the means of public access to the lake have diminished and therefore become increasingly valuable from year to year... we must not forget that the public includes persons other than those in the immediate vicinity. The general public has a true concern in the recreational facilities offered by the lakes which nature has so freely given us in this state. Their generous sharing by all will make for a healthier and happierpeople. The many not fortunate enough to be able to acquire the advantages of ownership of lake shore properties should not be deprived of these benefits. This we would do if we permitted streets leading to the lakeshore to be vacated.. 'The loss to thepublic of 150 feet of shoreline out of a total of approximately 100 miles may to the Baldwins seem inconsequential or even infinitesimal and nothing to be disturbed about. But, of this 100 miles ofprecious shoreline, only a small fraction has been reserved for the public, and if the courts should create a precedent by permitting a single inroad, however small, upon the public's share of the shoreline, other inroads will inevitably follow, until the aggregate becomes areal threat to the public'sfree access to the lake. To avoid any possibility of such a result, the courts should with equal vigor repulse the first, the second, and every other assault upon thepublic domain. ' Less than I% of Orono's lake shoreline has been dedicated as public access corridors. Nearly all the rest is privately owned, and not available to the public for lake access purposes, save for the DNR Maxwell Bay Access, Hennepin County's North Arm Access and the City's Summit Park on Long Lake. Hennepin County's Noerenberg Gardens Memorial Park, while abutting Lake Minnetonka, has deed restrictions that disallow use for docking or launching boats. With shoreland abutting a dozen separate bays in Lake Minnetonka, Orono has a commitment to maintaining access via the dedicated access corridors. Orono's lake accesses are enumerated in Table 4A-8. Lake Access Policies It is the City's intent to permanently retain for public use all existing lake access corridors and fire lanes, regardless of the current level of use or maintenance. To this end, the City will follow these policies: Requests for vacation of dedicated lake access right-of-ways will be denied in all cases except where equal or better lake access will be granted nearby in return. 2. The City will identify and take necessary action to preserve the public's right to use of any such accesses which exist but which may not have been formally dedicated. 3. The City will endeavor to work with property owners adjacent to lake access corridors to ensure that both the rights of the public and the rights of the private landowner are upheld. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2008-2030 Page 4A-32 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. NEW BUSINESS 1. LA19-000017 STEVE AND JENNIFER PAIDOSH, 4300 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION, 6:32 P.M. — 7:18 P.M. Steve Paidosh, Applicant, was present. Curtis stated the applicants are requesting to vacate the unimproved right-of-way of Bluff Street and a portion of the undeveloped right-of-way of Forest Boulevard directly abutting their property to the east. The rights-of-way were originally dedicated with the plat of Saga Hill Revised. There is an existing City storm water catch basin and pipe in the right-of-way. Part of the applicant's proposal includes providing an easement over these structures. The challenge with vacating rights-of-way is that vacation is final. Should the public or the City desire access to the lake or have utility needs in the future, the cost to taxpayers to reacquire lake frontage will be at a premium. Vacation reduces options for the City in the future. While the City will consider requests for vacations, these particular rights-of-way have improvements and vacation is not supported by state statute. The importance of access to the lake is outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has reviewed the vacation request and provided comments. The DNR opposes the vacation. Their analysis indicated that the proposed vacation does not provide a public benefit, nor does it protect future public use of the land to access the lake as the statute dictates. Written comments from the other abutting neighbor have been received and have been included in the Planning Commission packet. The Planning Staff should review whether the requested vacation follows the Comprehensive Plan, whether the request meets the statutory requirements for approval, and whether approving this action would set a precedent for future lake access vacations. Staff recommends denial of the request to vacate the two rights-of-way because the vacation does not meet the criteria for approving a vacation as outlined in the state statute. Erickson stated he noticed in Staff's report that it references the draft guideline in Sections 4A and 4E, but for the quotation of Section 4A, the second half was left out. Erickson asked why that was omitted. That section reads as follows: "In addition to Orono's relatively small lake access corridors, other governmental agencies own and operate significant larger lake access properties in Orono. These include the DNR Maxwell Bay access, Hennepin County's North Arm access, and Hennepin County's Noerenberg Gardens Memorial Park. These three large facilities benefit from metro transit bus service on County Road 51 frontage and are used regularly by visitors from the greater metropolitan/Hennepin County area and beyond." Erickson noted that the Hennepin County boat ramp at 3700 North Shore Drive is a two -minute drive from the site that is being considered now and the state DNR boat ramp at 3366 North Shore Drive is a three-minute drive. Ressler asked whether there are any questions for Staff regarding the application. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Erickson asked why that was not included in Staff report. Curtis stated she does not recall why the whole entire section was not included in the report. Barnhart indicated Staff did not feel that was relevant to this lake access. Barnhart noted there is a utility within the right-of-way, and according to the Comprehensive Plan, while it does open the door for vacation of certain rights-of-way, it does not say that all will be kept or vacated. Gettman asked whether there was any historical or planned use for that access. Curtis indicated it does serve for storm water runoff but does not provide access to the lake at this time. Thiesse noted historically they served a purpose, which was for access to the lake. Bollis asked approximately how many of these accesses exist in Orono. Curtis stated she does not have an exact number. Barnhart stated to his knowledge there are between 27 to 35. Ressler asked if this right-of-way is earmarked for utility improvement in the future. Curtis indicated there is an existing catch basin and storm water pipe. Libby asked how big the culvert is. Thiesse indicated it is 15 -inch. Steve Paidosh, Applicant, stated their original purpose here was to tear down the existing family home and build a new home on the property. Another purpose was to relocate the public street access to the property from County Road 19 or North Shore Drive to Park Drive, which is a small residential street. Relocation of that street access requires the new structure to be positioned differently than the current home. The existing house is a walkout rambler and the new design is for an L-shaped home. When the garage is built out like that, it has to be pushed further back, and that is when issues with the setback to the neighbor came up. Paidosh indicated he spoke with Christine Mattson originally trying to understand what the rules are and the required setbacks. A meeting was then held with the architect to discuss the home design and an updated survey was required to determine the building envelope. The architect then notified them that the structure would exceed the setbacks due to the change in access. The architect suggested a meeting be held with the City of Orono to discuss the possibility of a lakeside variance. Paidosh indicated he met in early January with Jeremy Barnhart, who then proposed the option of vacating the rights-of-way and stated in his view he felt Staff would be open-minded to that versus pursuing a variance. The vacation application was then submitted along with all the other proper documents. Staff informed us at that time that Planning Staff was now not supportive of the request and that a variance might be better. Paidosh stated after discussing the matter, he and his wife decided not to pull the application. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Paidosh noted building plans and setbacks are not required for land vacation and that they cannot create structure drawings until after the vacation application. Paidosh stated they would like to treat Bluff Street as an unimproved right-of-way, with the rationale that 50 percent goes to one side and 50 percent to the other. If a line is drawn from that point up to the neighbor on the west, that would allow the house to shift down without pursuing a vacation, and what Jeremy had proposed solved the setback problem. Paidosh stated this is not an attempt at a land grab for either himself or his neighbor and that he would be accepting additional tax liability without receiving much use of the land due to the proposed easement to maintain the catch basin and storm water pipe. The easement would prevent him from building on the vacated land. The house could probably be slid up slightly from the current setback and they are not constructing a McMansion. Paidosh stated the only benefit he would get is the ability to build a new structure beyond the current setback. Until the first meeting with Jeremy, they were not aware of a land vacation and their intent in meeting with Staff was to gain guidance and understand what a reasonable lakeside setback for the structure would be and to help keep the costs down. Paidosh commented the process has been a bit frustrating due to the lack of continuity within the Planning Department in supporting the vacation application. Paidosh suggested this option not be discussed if there is no appetite for supporting it and that he is open to other suggestions. Erickson asked whether a new driveway would be created. Paidosh indicated there would be and that they have had to go to all -wheel drive vehicles due to issues with their current driveway. The other side has a more gradual slope and that they look at this as an opportunity to relocate it. Erickson stated any time someone can have their entrance on a lower traffic road, that has very positive implications for traffic safety. Paidosh stated his triplets will be driving soon and it is a safety factor. In fairness to Planning Staff, they have been supportive of the driveway relocation. Thiesse asked whether they could access from the other side if the garage is placed on that side of the house. Paidosh indicated it is pretty steep topography and would likely create other issues. Erickson asked whether the applicant has given any thought to planting any native grasses along the shoreline to help improve water quality. Paidosh stated people have approached them on that in the past and that it might be something he would consider in the future. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:52 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:52 p.m. Thiesse noted he did not hear any benefit to the City for vacating the rights-of-way and that the DNR and City Staff is against it. Thiesse stated he does not recall the City ever vacating any property that provides access to the lake, and for that reason, he would have to say no to the request. Gettman stated he has a neighbor who has a narrow lot like this and that they have been told numerous times they cannot build that far down because of the two neighboring homes as well as issues with getting the house to fit outside the easement. Gettman indicated he is struggling to find a justification for the vacation and that he has not heard what other kind of easement adjustment there could be or whether this is the last resort. Bollis stated he does not see a public benefit to the vacation and that he would like to see a variance application. Bollis asked if there any type of setback issue with relocating the driveway onto Park Lane. Curtis stated the City Engineer had also suggested the relocation of the driveway access. Erickson stated to some extent the vacation benefits the other neighbor more than the applicant because that property is smaller and narrower to begin with, which currently is a nonconforming use at four -tenths of an acre in a one -acre zone. By taking advantage of this vacation, that neighbor would pick up more land, which would allow that property owner to be more in compliance. Erickson stated the City should always try and get people going in the positive direction towards the ordinances whenever they can. In addition, both neighbors would have the benefit of the vacated property, which would go on the tax rolls, especially with the applicant constructing a new house. Erickson indicated he likes the shifting of the driveway to Park, and if the applicant would be willing to plant some native grasses, that would have some environmental benefits. After serving on the Watershed District for five years, Erickson stated if they think about invasive species on the lake, such as zebra mussels and how they got from Duluth to Lake Minnetonka, the only answer is from boat accesses. The eggs of the zebra mussel are microscopic, go undetected on a boat, and then go into the lake when that boat is launched. Similar things could be said about other invasive species. Theoretically, if there were no boat accesses on Lake Minnetonka, there would be no zebra mussels or milfoil. The City already has a goodly number of accesses, and as was mentioned earlier, the Hennepin County boat ramp is two minutes way and the state has a huge facility that is three minutes away. Erickson stated it would be a lot more of a problem if they were to try to develop this right-of-way into a lake access. Curtis noted that is not what is being proposed and lake access is not the only purpose for having it. Erickson stated Park Drive is 966 feet above sea level and the high-water mark of Lake Minnetonka is 929 feet, which means there is a drop of 37 feet from front to back and creates about a 12 percent average grade. The City has other accesses that are relatively flat and much more developable and practical and safe. Erickson stated his reading of the state statute does not preclude an easement for drainage and that it says the governing body of a municipality may vacate any publicly owned easement or any portion thereof MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. which is not being used. While there is a portion that is being used, the City has the authority to vacate all of it except for that portion which is being used as a storm sewer. One way to accomplish that would be to vacate the whole thing subject to an easement, and the applicant has expressed a willingness to provide an easement for the storm sewer, which is essentially the same thing as what the state statute is saying. As far as the DNR goes, in the second half of their letter, they acknowledge that if the City should choose to vacate the entire parcel, that easements are okay for utilities. The DNR also recommended that the City encourage the applicant to relocate his driveway on Park Drive, which is all of the things that the applicant is volunteering to do. Libby asked if there is any intention to construct on the portion of the vacated right-of-way. Paidosh indicated there is not. Libby noted the easement would still leave the responsibility to the City for maintaining the storm sewer. With the City actually having a 15 -inch culvert there, which seems like it is working very well even with the 100 -year rain events, that storm sewer likely will have to stay there, and the City will still have to have access. Even if no structure is built there, the City will still need access, and even with the easement there could still be a hindrance of some type. Libby indicated his tendency is not to be in favor of vacating the right-of-way. McCutcheon stated Orono is a lakeshore city and that there are various ordinances in place to help protect the lake. McCutcheon indicated he probably is not in favor of this request, but given the setbacks and in looking at other variances that have been granted in the past, there might be some wiggle room and he would recommend that approach. Ressler asked whether having that drainage easement means something has been created and needs to be maintained. Curtis indicated that is true. Ressler noted there was a previous application for a variance where the structure was coming right up against the property of the Railroad Authority and that the City is even more sensitive to lakeshore. Ressler stated he does not know if the City has ever considered granting something less permanent, such as a land lease where it can be revoked after a certain period of time. Ressler stated he knows these accesses and easements have also partially been put in place for emergency vehicles, and asked whether there are other accesses on Forest Lake Bay. Paidosh indicated there are but they likely would not be used for emergency vehicle access due to the grade. This access is tree covered and has a steep grade, which would probably require a lot of grading changes if there is to be vehicle access to the lake. There is a place across the lake where the street comes close to the lake. Paidosh indicated he is not sure if it is public property but the homeowners' association owns it, and that is where he would go to save someone's life on the lake rather than this spot. Paidosh stated the reason behind the storm sewer being located in this right-of-way is that there was a house built two doors down and they regraded the property. The proposed grading was missed on the MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Watershed plan and it pushed the water down to his lot and the neighbor's property. That property owner got permission from the DNR to run a direct line down, which is why that 15 -inch line was put there. Gettman asked why he has chosen to follow this path rather than pursue a variance. Paidosh stated he is following the process that was initially recommended. Erickson stated as it relates to the comments about emergency use, he does have some personal experience with that. A few years ago somebody with a boat came up to a neighbor's house and the person went in the house. The police were called, and when they arrived, the police did not ask where the fire lane was and they did not ask who owns what. Erickson indicated the police went across his lawn and out on his dock, and that he got the impression that had he objected, it really would not have mattered. The police also went on the neighboring property. Eventually the water patrol came up. Erickson stated if someone is drowning on the lakeshore, they would access in as straight of a line as possible and that the whole thing about these fire lanes being needed for emergency use is overblown. Orono has approximately 50 of these fire lanes and half of them have never been used. This one just happens to have a storm sewer on it. Ressler stated in his view there is merit for emergency access and that the problem with the Hennepin County access was that they did not have a boat at that spot, which is now allowed. Thiesse noted that was a Hennepin County right-of-way. Ressler stated there are lots of parts of Lake Minnetonka located in Orono that may not serve any future use. If there is another area that could potentially be of future use that emergency vehicles could utilize, that would be easier. Ressler stated perhaps a variance is more suitable here and easier to obtain than a vacation, which is permanent and sets a standard. Ressler stated he does not see enough mitigants here to approve the vacation. Erickson moved to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000017, Steve and Jennifer Paidosh, 4300 North Shore Drive, subject to an easement being given. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Gettman moved, Libby seconded, to recommend denial of Application No. LA19-000017, Steve and Jennifer Paidosh, 4300 North Shore Drive. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 1, Erickson opposed. Date Application Received: 03/01/19 Date Application Considered as Complete: 04/02/19 60 -Day Review Period Extension Expires: 07/31/19 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Melanie Curtis, Planner h'1GG Date: 20 May 2019 Subject: #LA19-000017, Stephen and Jennifer Paidosh, 4300 North Shore Drive, ROW Vacation Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting City approval of vacation of the undeveloped right-of-way of Bluff Street and a portion of the undeveloped right-of-way of Forest Boulevard situated between 4300 North Shore Drive and 1453 Park Drive. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends denial. Background The applicants are requesting to vacate the unimproved right-of-way of Bluff Street and a portion of the undeveloped right-of-way of Forest Boulevard directly abutting their property to the east. The rights-of-way were originally dedicated with the plat Saga Hill Revised. The applicants have included a narrative with their application attached as Exhibit B. There is an existing City stormwater catch basin and pipe in the right-of-way; the applicant has proposed granting an easement over these structures. Applicable Regulations: ✓ MN State Statute 412.851 VACATION OF STREETS The council may by resolution vacate any street, alley, public grounds, public way, or any part thereof, on its own motion or on petition of a majority of the owners of land abutting on the street, alley, public grounds, public way, or part thereof to be vacated. When there has been no petition, the resolution may be adopted only by a vote of four-fifths of all members of the council. No vacation shall be made unless it appears in the interest of the public to do so after a hearing preceded by two weeks' published and posted notice. The council shall cause written notice of the hearing to be mailed to each property owner affected by the proposed vacation at least ten days before the hearing. The notice must contain, at minimum, a copy of the petition or proposed resolution as well as the time, place, and date of the hearing. In addition, if the street, alley, public grounds, public way, or any part thereof terminates at, abuts upon, or is adjacent to any public water, written notice of the petition or proposed resolution must be served by certified mail upon the commissioner of natural resources at least 60 days before the hearing on the matter. The notice to the commissioner of natural resources does not create a right of intervention by the commissioner. At least 15 days prior to convening the hearing required under this section, the council or its designee must consult with the commissioner of natural resources FILE #LA19-000017 20 May 2019 Page 2 of 4 to review the proposed vacation. The commissioner must evaluate: 1. the proposed vacation and the public benefits to do so; 2. the present and potential use of the land for access to public waters; and 3. how the vacation would impact conservation of natural resources. The commissioner must advise the city council or its designee accordingly upon the evaluation. After a resolution of vacation is adopted, the clerk shall prepare a notice of completion of the proceedings which shall contain the name of the city, an identification of the vacation, a statement of the time of completion thereof, and a description of the real estate and lands affected thereby. The notice shall be presented to the county auditor who shall enter the same in the transfer records and note upon the instrument, over official signature, the words "entered in the transfer record." The notice shall then be recorded with the county recorder. Any failure to file the notice shall not invalidate any vacation proceedings. ✓ MN State Statue 462.358 Subd. 7. Vacation The governing body of a municipality may vacate any publicly owned utility easement or boulevard reserve or any portion thereof, which are not being used for sewer, drainage, electric, telegraph, telephone, gas and steam purposes or for boulevard reserve purposes, in the same manner as vacation proceedings are conducted for streets, alleys and other public ways under a home rule charter or other provisions of law. A boulevard reserve means an easement established adjacent to a dedicated street for the purpose of establishing open space adjacent to the street and which area is designated on the recorded plat as "boulevard reserve". ✓ Orono Citv Code. Sec. 78-9. - Vacation of streets. allevs and public >?rounds. Vacation of streets, alleys and public grounds shall follow the procedures set forth in this chapter; except that such vacation shall require a petition by a majority of the landowners abutting the property to be vacated, and a hearing preceded by two weeks' published and posted notice, all as required by Minn. Stat. § 412.851. The council may vacate any publicly owned utility easement or boulevard reserve which is not being used for sewer, drainage, electric, telegraph, and telephone, gas and steam purposes or for boulevard reserve purposes, in the same manner as vacation proceedings are conducted for streets, alleys and other public ways. A boulevard reserve means an easement established adjacent to a dedicated street for the purpose of establishing open space adjacent to the street and which area is designated on the recorded plat as boulevard reserve. ✓ Orono's (Draft) 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Chapter 4A - Lake access, preservation and management Orono's lakes provide a significant recreational resource for all Orono residents. This value was long ago realized by City leaders. In order to provide lake access for the general public, as well as to provide for fire department access to the lake as a water source, a number of lake access corridors were created as the shore land developed. These typically are platted, dedicated right-of-ways leading from the local road system to the shoreline, and are FILE #LA19-000017 20 May 2019 Page 3 of 4 commonly from 16' to 66' in width. These right-of-ways (often referred to as "fire lanes" or "lake access roads") vary considerably in their proximity to traffic, parking availability, proximity to housing, lakeshore conditions, and other factors that effect their recreational value. Some of these corridors have been maintained by the City for local swimming beaches or as winter snowmobile and ice -fishing accesses. Certain accesses have docks for fishing, and some have ramp areas suitable for launching a small boat. However, most do not have designated parking available, and are primarily intended to serve the neighborhood rather than the general public. A number of these access corridors have steep topography, shallow water depths, undesirable lake bottom conditions, and/or dense vegetation and experience little or no usage. Of the City lake accesses shown in Table 4A-9 (Exhibit D), half of those located outside of Big Island are either undeveloped or closed to public use. Orono's (Draft) 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 4E Parks. Trails. and Oben Spaces 1. Orono will maintain Lake Access for all residents. With shore land abutting a dozen separate bays in Lake Minnetonka, Orono has a commitment to maintaining access via the dedicated access corridors. It is the City's intent to permanently retain for public use all existing lake access corridors and fire lanes, regardless of the current level of use or maintenance. (Supports goal 5) To this end, the City will follow these policies: ■ Requests for vacation of dedicated lake access right of ways will be evaluated carefully, in particular where equal or better lake accesses are not available nearby. The City will identify and take necessary action to preserve the public's right to use of any such accesses which exist but which may not have been formally dedicated. ■ The City will endeavor to work with property owners adjacent to lake access corridors to ensure that both the rights of the public and the rights of the private landowner are upheld. Engineer/Public Works Director Comments 1. The rights-of-way currently serve as a city drainage way. There are a catch basin and storm pipe which drain the surrounding area located within both rights-of-way. The rights-of-way should not be vacated while they serve a public purpose. 2. The City could consider encroachments within the right-of-way as long as they do not impact its current public use. 3. The City should entertain any request from the owners of 4300 North Shore Drive to have their driveway access moved from North Shore Drive to Park Drive via this right-of- way. Staff Analysis The challenge with vacating rights-of-way is that vacation is final. Should the public or the City desire access to the lake, or have utility needs in the future, the cost to taxpayers to reacquire lake frontage will be at a premium. Vacation reduces options for the City in the future. While the comp plan notes that the City will consider vacation, these particular rights-of-way have improvements, and vacation is not supported by state statute. The importance of access to the lake is outlined in the comprehensive plan. FILE #LA19-000017 20 May 2019 Page 4 of 4 DNR Comments The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has reviewed the vacation request and provided comments (Exhibit E). They opposed the vacation. Their analysis indicated that the proposed vacation does not provide a public benefit nor does it protect future public use of the land to access the lake. Public Comments Staff received written comments from the other abutting neighbor at 1453 Park Drive. See Exhibit H for the submitted comments. Issues for Consideration 1. Does this request follow the Comprehensive Plan? 2. Does this request meet the statutory requirements for approval? 3. Would approving this action set precedent for future lake access vacations? 4. Are there any issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the request to vacate the rights-of-way because the vacation does not meet the criteria for approving a vacation as outlined in the state statute. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Narrative Exhibit C. Existing & Proposed Survey Exhibit D. Comp Plan Table 4A-9 Exhibit E. DNR Comments Exhibit F. Utility Company Comments Exhibit G. City Engineer Comments Exhibit H. Public Comments Exhibit 1. Property Owners List Exhibit J. Plat Map Exhibit K. Aerial Photos 27 March 2019 Ms. Melanie Curtis Planner City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 RE: Application #LA19-000017 for Vacation of Public Right -of -Way for "Bluff Street" and "Forest Boulevard" This letter is to inform you that I'm willing to accept the addition of the eastern most 25' of Forest Boulevard and Bluff Street to my property as defined by the most current Sathre-Berquist, Inc. survey titled "Street Vacation Exhibit" for Parcel 2 that was prepared for the Vacation of Public Right -of -Way Application #LA19-000017 submitted to the City of Orono by my neighbor Mr. Stephen Paidosh. I realize the addition of the vacated property may allow me to expand my current home. However, I fully understand there is no guarantee of this opportunity. I understand the acceptance of this vacated property does not require that I expand my current home either now or in the future. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me by phone at 441-505-2493 or by email at lok@renre.com . All the best, Justin O'Keefe 1453 Park Dr Orono, MN 55364 o 40000 _ s4� ,o- .•f r"'� _'Y'_i11rr: i _ ;v.} — _ n'F 4 �3* vo 47 �]. M� •� -''4-' plc y J 53 Tior +. 46. j Yr • .n - - a d a �'"' - "{5�•R. ^ •*["ti-� �.. .� i'..k -...FII ~- - Jv • y �a �1. r I ,+ a, � _ I � �,. k,__ .. - �. - J '�+s ^�I �� �`A 4 a .� .. i- ti�� ' �_ ,� - . ,, - - << _� w � _ �. _: 1 � i � � AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 12 Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: LA19-000018 — Chris and Rachel Bollis, 350 Stubbs Bay Road North, Preliminary Plat — Resolution Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart, AICP Agenda Planning Department Community Development Director Section: Report 1. Purpose. To consider the preliminary plat for 350 Stubbs Bay Road North and adopting resolution approving the same. 2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was deemed complete on April 3, 2019. The 120 -Day review period will expire on August 1, 2019. 3. Background. The City Council reviewed this application at their meeting on May 13. The Council directed the revision of the plans to reflect the following changes: a. Widen the private road to 24 feet b. Add a cul de sac at the end of the private road The applicant has revised his plans, incorporating this direction. The City engineer has reviewed the road plans and recommends the road be centered within the right of way, as proposed it is shifted to the north (setback 8 feet from the north property line). The applicant proposes a non - centered road to protect existing evergreens that provide screening to the adjacent property owner. Section 78- 420- Lot Area/ Width: 4. Public Comment. No comments for or against the proposal have been received. 5. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution as drafted. The resolution references the plans provided. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED City Council should review the approval resolution and adopt or amend. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. Plat dated 2-26-19, last revised 6-5-19 C. City Council report dated May 13, 2019 References PC staff report and exhibits for meeting April 15, 2019 City Council minutes May 13, 2019 Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: J J)J Approved By: JS)�6Z Gross Dry Dry buildable Wetlands Frontage Frontage area Buildable requirement (acres) (Feet) requirement (acres) (acres) (acres) (Feet) Lot 1 2.44 2.03 2.0 0.41 367 1 200 149 (200 Lot 2 7.77 3.49 2.0 4.28 adjusted) 200 4. Public Comment. No comments for or against the proposal have been received. 5. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution as drafted. The resolution references the plans provided. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED City Council should review the approval resolution and adopt or amend. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. Plat dated 2-26-19, last revised 6-5-19 C. City Council report dated May 13, 2019 References PC staff report and exhibits for meeting April 15, 2019 City Council minutes May 13, 2019 Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: J J)J Approved By: JS)�6Z CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 350 STUBBS BAY ROAD FILE NO. LA19-000018 WHEREAS, on March 1, 2019, Christopher W and Rachel A Bollis, a married couple ("Applicants"), applied for a preliminary plat for the property legally described in Exhibit A, (hereinafter the "Property"); WHEREAS, on April 15, 2019, after published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, on April 15, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat; and WHEREAS, on May 13, 2019, the City Council reviewed the application and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby approves the requested preliminary plat as described above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning the Property: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #LA19-000018. The analysis contained within staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference. 2. The Property is located in the RR -1B Zoning District. 3. The property is guided for Low Density Residential in the 2030 Community Management Plan and in the draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 4. The Property contains 10.21 acres in area. 5. The property will be served by individual well and septic systems, on site. 6. The Property is exempt according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 7. The parcel will be subdivided into 2 buildable lots. All lots conform to the size and width requirements of the city code. 8. Access to the property is via the existing private driveway off of Stubbs Bay Road North. This driveway will be converted to a private road in accordance with the Subdivision requirements. 9. The Parks, Trails and Open Space element of the Orono Community Management Plan (CMP) has no current plans for parks that specifically require dedication of park land from this property. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants preliminary plat approval to allow the subdivision of the property into 2 lots, as depicted on the plans dated Feb 26, 2019, last revised June 5, 2019 prepared by Sathre-Berquist, attached as Exhibit B, subject to the following conditions: A. Project Specific Conditions 1. Applicable general engineering comments and or conditions provided by City Engineer shall be suitably addressed by applicant. 2. Easements shall be provided as required by the City Engineer. 3. Upon evidence of pre -settlement history, the developer will contact the city and the State Historical Preservation Office prior to proceeding. 5. The following estimated fees are due at the time of final plat unless otherwise noted. These fees are based on the 2019 Fee schedule and the fee schedule in effect at the time of Final Plat approval will govern. a. Stormwater and Drainage Trunk: The property will be subject to the Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee (SW&DT Fee) of $8,060 (Number of new lots (1) times per lot amount ($8,060)). b. Sewer: Not Applicable c. Water: Not Applicable d. Park dedication: $5,550 ($5,550 x 1 new lot). Total: $13,610.00 2 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL B. General conditions imposed on preliminary plats shall apply, and are as follow: Provision of a septic compliance report that supports the second site on lot 2. 2. Extension of the road, or an easement through the wetland buffer to coordinate the driveways serving the two lots. Watershed approval of driveway through the wetland buffer. 4. Appropriate traffic control signage within and pertinent to the site shall be installed by the Developer subject to the City Engineer's review and approval. 5. Applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council that all requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as administrator of the WCA regulations on Orono's behalf, are complied with. 6. Erosion control shall adhere to "Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" and to the approved SWPPP. All erosion controls as required by the City and the MCWD shall be in place prior to commencing grading and excavation on the site. All such erosion control measures shall be maintained in working order until the site is vegetated and stabilized. 7. The construction limits shall be clearly marked with adequate fencing to prevent any construction damage or disturbance of any trees and vegetation outside of the construction limits area. The developer shall protect the septic sites with snow fencing. 8. This approval is based upon the known issues that may affect this project, but this approval does not limit the City from revising or amending these conditions as the review process continues. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. 10. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. it. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by filing a final Plat application within one year of the date of Council approval, or the preliminary plat will expire on that date (May 13, 2020). CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL l� 12. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may result in the termination of any authority granted herein. C. Plans and Specifications. The following plans and specifications shall be submitted for review and approval by the City and other appropriate jurisdictions: 1) Final plat. D. Platting Process. Applicant shall complete all requirements for Final Plat Approval as follows. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the City Administrator 2 weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second Monday of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1). Record plat drawings in the form of two (3) mylar copies (one copy for the City's records and one for filing with Hennepin County) and one (1) copy reduced to 1" = 200'. Drawing to include: A. Lot lines platted per preliminary plat survey/drawing by Sathre-Berquist dated Feb 26, 2019, last revised June 5, 2019 attached hereto as Exhibit B, except as modified herein. B. Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' along exterior property lines and 5' along the interior property lines. C. Dedication of "Drainage Easements" over all drainageways. D. Name of plat. 2). Legal documents required: A. Title opinion addressed to the City or a title insurance policy in favor of the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C. One original copy of any private covenant, homeowners' association agreement or other private restriction intended to be filed in the chain of title of the property at the time the final plat or survey is recorded. D. Signed Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit for construction of improvements. The City Engineer shall establish the amount to be provided in the Letter of Credit. 4 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 3). Fees required: Application fee, Park dedication, Stormwater and Drainage Trunk enumerated above. E. Development Agreement. Development Approval is contingent upon the successful execution of a Development Agreement between the applicant and the City. Such Agreement shall address all specific City requirements for the development. F. Financial Guarantee. The Development Agreement shall include a financial guarantee by the applicant to ensure the completion of site improvements, including the construction of the private road and cul de sac. Costs shall be estimated by the developer, confirmed by the city engineer, and the applicant shall provide to the City a financial guarantee of 150% of the improvement costs. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 10' day of June, 2019. ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor 5 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Exhibit A Legal Description CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Exhibit B Preliminary Plat CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 H ry 0 z Q 0 ry Q m C0 m lb C0 i 0 0 I II I I I� I I I I II I I El r \ \ ` i \i r \ / 'EP71D O T 2 T 30 i T N m m 33 — I \ LOt 1 30 15: 105,12p, total _ 87,254 - up nd I _ h1 \\ 1 1 I I / I I I II I I I I I SEPTIC SETBACKS: Wetlands - 50' Property Lines - 10' Wells - 50' Buildings - 20' Wells - 25 feet from any interior plumbing & 50' from plumbing building exit Notes: 1.) The septic area protection fencing locations must be inspected and approved by the City Engineer prior to any land disturbing activities. SYMBOL LEGEND LOT LINE \ MANAGE3 MNRAM 10-2418 � PARCEL BOUNDARY LINE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS RIGHT-OF-WAY - WELL SEPTIC SITE / SOIL BORING LOCATION CAW BENCHMARKIFOUNDIP • WETLAND BUFFER MONUMENT V 1 I 25'SEP IC SETS' -ot 2 — -- — 1 168 - total SEPTIC PROTECTION FENCING — -- — 48 upland r A h UTILITY POLE rQ� \\ 1 1 I I / I I I II I I I I I SEPTIC SETBACKS: Wetlands - 50' Property Lines - 10' Wells - 50' Buildings - 20' Wells - 25 feet from any interior plumbing & 50' from plumbing building exit Notes: 1.) The septic area protection fencing locations must be inspected and approved by the City Engineer prior to any land disturbing activities. SYMBOL LEGEND LOT LINE ENGINEER GAT—:BERGQ—NC. c152)47—.e_, Ax css:l4,so,a CHARLES a�E®SA, REGOM �ING CONTACT SURVEY "oENaESM BUILDING SETBACK BOUNDARY — — - PARCEL BOUNDARY LINE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS RIGHT-OF-WAY - WELL SEPTIC SITE basebollis SOIL BORING LOCATION CAW BENCHMARKIFOUNDIP • WETLAND BUFFER MONUMENT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I PRE CONSTRUCTION SILT FENCE — -- — POST CONSTRUCTION SILT FENCE — -- — SEPTIC PROTECTION FENCING — -- — WOODFIBERBLANKET r DITCH CHECKS h UTILITY POLE rQ� TREE SAVED O TREE REMOVED ®+ SEPTIC SITE ZONING DISTRICT STANDARDS (PROPOSED AND EXISTING ZONING: RR -113) 1. MINIMUM LOT AREA=87,120 S.F. 2. MINIMUM LOT WIDTH =200 FT. 3. MIN CORNER LOT WIDTH = 200 FT. 4. FRONT YARD SETBACK = 50 FT. 5. SIDE YARD SETBACK = 30 FT. 6. SIDE YARD ABUTTING ROAD = 50 FT. (see City Code) 7. MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK (MRYSB)=50FT. 8. MAXIMUM STRUCTURE HEIGHT: 2.5 STORIES OR 30 FT. 9. MAX. BLDING FOOT PRINT (PRINCIPAL = 2400 S.F.) PLAN DESIGN DATA (SINGLE FAMILY HOMES) 1. MINIMUM LOT AREA=87,120 SF. 2. PROPOSED LOT WIDTH = 200 FT. 3. PROPOSED 60 FT. BUILDING PAD 4. OUTLOT WIDTH = 50 FT. 5. STREET WIDTH =26 FT. B -B MIN - DESIGN 30'B -B 6. C -D -S RADIUS = 40 FT. 7. C -D -S ENTRANCE RADIUS = 20 FT. 8. ROW RADIUS =50 FT. WETLAND SERVICES PROVIDED BY JACOBSON ENVIRONMENTAL, PLLC. 10-24-18 PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR ENGINEER GAT—:BERGQ—NC. c152)47—.e_, Ax css:l4,so,a CHARLES a�E®SA, REGOM �ING CONTACT SURVEY "oENaESM DEVELOPER 1,111- -s�s,. EMAIL -1.11l-— RR -113: 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS SIDE : I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS s� CITY PROJECT NO. R11 60 30 0 30 60 120 SCALE IN FEET DRAWING NAME NO. BY I DATE I REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS s� CITY PROJECT NO. R11 FILE NO. basebollis 01 CAW 02/26/19 ADJUST LOT LINES _ _ _ _ INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I 0Rs R�F'< 1I' T — N S E 10114-001 DRAWN BY 02 h 03/20/19 ELIMINATE BUFFER ON EXISTING LOT y AM A DULY REGISTER PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE " Y CAW 03 CAW 04/0_5/19 l AUTERIZATIO,ICONEXPRESS SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY LAWS OF THE STATE O NESOTA. r y l P i CHECKED liY 04 CAW 05/30/19 _ _ _ _ _ADJUST TURN AROUND INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY.,,, 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 O RON O 2 LOT SPLIT - 02-26-19 DRAWING NAME NO. BY I DATE I REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS s� CITY PROJECT NO. FILE NO. basebollis 01 CAW 02/26/19 ADJUST LOT LINES _ _ _ _ INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I 0Rs R�F'< — PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN 10114-001 DRAWN BY 02 CAW 03/20/19 ELIMINATE BUFFER ON EXISTING LOT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AM A DULY REGISTER PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE " CAW 03 CAW 04/0_5/19 LOT LINES AUTERIZATIO,ICONEXPRESS SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY LAWS OF THE STATE O NESOTA. r SATHRE—BERGQUIST INC. CHECKED liY 04 CAW 05/30/19 _ _ _ _ _ADJUST TURN AROUND INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY.,,, 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 O RON O 2 LOT SPLIT - 02-26-19 _ _ _ _MODIFY — SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD AN ILLEGITIMATE m (952)4766000 CAW 05 CAW 06/05/19 _ _ _ _ TRACKING EXHIBIT _ _ _ — USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING '" `o MINNESOTA DATE _ FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. odes Wiemer loge, P.E. ONF e'`' RS via CHRIS BOLLIS 1 06/17/15 Dale: / / ZO Lid. No. �`` / 8 \ _ \ \ \ \—j"\ -\1111 I ', I -------------------� II-ttLI _ --------------- -------- __ - V A I I \\ - \ � e MANAGEI MNRAM 10-24-18 z etand_w MANAGE 3 NRM QO 3 �m \ �i DO 711 (n,�' by CO i 1 _ 2, \ 1 O T t $ETBA IC 1 -- - SEPT -I I I \ I / O „ 2 "^ Lot 2 30 T N 339,768 `totaly `v \ 153,448 upland y v I Qt 1 105, total v 87,254 MANM 2418 AGG2 MNRAI \ \ I I I 1 \ \ I \ ea \ � m I I I N I rO /w i \ I I \ `\ 1004 l 1 I \ l\ \ I I \ I I 1 l \ 1 \ \\ \ \\ III I \ I 1 m - __ _ 1 - � \II II III 111 I \11 1 \\ 1006 I \ i I I \ -- - �_ i -- /a��-� '- - %701, I I 1 \ \ - _--- - _ iots - `v vvv �� vvv vv `� A V♦ v � / � 1 A V A / / j � II I I 1 _ _ - -- __ — -- �, __ ' i I�20 42g, k-- - -'0i 12C <2 -1028 �_ _- -�\ ��� \ \ \\\ \ \\ ___--g90 992_ 1 � SII Wetland 2 MANAGEI MNRAM 10-24-18 X01 \ \ I \ I � I 1 I � Il vv I \ I 9 \ I \v I v l \I I ll I I I \ I I 1 \WING NAME NO. BY DATE I REVISIONS USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS s�4, basebollis 01 CAW__02/26119 _ _ _ _ _ADJUST LOT LINES _ _ _ _ INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTER PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE 2�,as BENCHMARKIFOUNDIP IRAWN BY CAW 02 03 CAW_ CA_W 03/2_0/19 04/0_5/19 _ ELIMINATE _BUFFER _ON EXISTING LOT L_OT_LINES SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY LAWS OF THE STATE O NE OTA. W N SATHRE-BERGQUIST INC. 1ECKED BY 04 CAW _ _ _ _ _ADJUST TURN AROUND_ INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. TREE SAVED O 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAVZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 CAW 05 __05/30119 CAW 06/05/19 _ _ _ _MODIFY _ _ _ EXHIBIT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING m m DATE - -- _ --- _ _ _ _ _TRACKING _ _ _ _ ----------- -- ------ _ FROM ILLEGITMATE USE. odes Wiemer loge, P.E. Date: / / ZO Lic. No. `/ / 9 O cNFRB P�Pt,? 06/17/15 CITY ORONO, MINNESOTA SEPTIC SETBACKS: Wetlands - 50' Property Lines - 10' Wells - 50' Buildings - 20' Wells - 25 feet from any interior plumbing & 50' from plumbing building exit Notes: 1.) The septic area protection fencing locations must be inspected and approved by the City Engineer prior to any land disturbing activities. SYMBOL LEGEND LOT LINE ENGINEER EATHRE-BERGG—INC. WA—A. MINNESOTA 9 a.NU.(11141.a C REu�N®gin Ha - SURvEYING E� T. com BUILDING SETBACK BOUNDARY - - - PARCEL BOUNDARY LINE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS RIGHT-OF-WAY - WELL SEPTIC SITE SOIL BORING LOCATION BENCHMARKIFOUNDIP • WETLAND BUFFER MONUMENT PRE CONSTRUCTION SILT FENCE - -- — POST CONSTRUCTION SILT FENCE -- — SEPTIC PROTECTION FENCING - -- — WOODFIBERBLANKET r DITCH CHECKS UTILITY POLE rQ� TREE SAVED O TREE REMOVED ®+ SEPTIC SITE ZONING DISTRICT STANDARDS (PROPOSED AND EXISTING ZONING: RR -1B) 1. MINIMUM LOT AREA 87,120 S.F. 2. MINIMUM LOT WIDTH = 200 FT. 3. MIN CORNER LOT WIDTH - 200 FT. 4. FRONT YARD SETBACK = 50 FT. 5 SIDE YARD SETBACK = 30 FT 6 SIDE YARD ABUTTING ROAD 50 FT (see City Code) 7 MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK (MRYSB) = 50 FT. 8. MAXIMUM STRUCTURE HEIGHT: 2.5 STORIES OR 30 FT. 9. MAX. BLDING FOOT PRINT (PRINCIPAL = 2400 S.F.) PLAN DESIGN DATA (SINGLE FAMILY HOMES) 1. MINIMUM LOT AREA =67,120 SF. 2. PROPOSED LOT WIDTH = 200 FT. 3 PROPOSED 60 FT. BUILDING PAD 4. OUTLOT WIDTH = 50 FT. 5. STREET WIDTH =24 FT. EOP-EOP MIN 6. C -D -S RADIUS = 40 FT. 7. C -D -S ENTRANCE RADIUS = 20 FT. 8. ROW RADIUS =50 FT. PREPARED BY PREPARED FOR ENGINEER EATHRE-BERGG—INC. WA—A. MINNESOTA 9 a.NU.(11141.a C REu�N®gin Ha - SURvEYING E� T. com DEVEILOPER I'll, 11 n�mmoo �emel.mo RR -113: 2 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS -F FRONI REAR spa* 60 30 0 30 60 120 SCALE IN FEET SITE E � I PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN 2 LOT SPLIT - 02-26-19 CHRIS BOLLIS M A P FILE NO. 10114-001 1 DRAWING NAME NO. BY I DATE I REVISIONSUSE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROMILLEGITMATEUSE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR SPECIFICATION WAS BY ME OR DER MY DIRECT N AND AM DUEDY REG S ERUN PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER THET I LAWS OF THE STATE O NESOTA. �J ��2r/(P _ w 9� s�Eas S�R i w , 1:: -' �, SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 m `� `�� SNF Rs °� CITY PROJECT NO, TURN EXHIBIT _ _ 2 LOT SPLIT 02-26-19 CHRIS BOLLIS FILE NO. 10114-001 basebollis 01 CAW 02/26/19 CAW 03/20/19 CAW 04/05/19 -- --- CAW__ 05/30/19 CAW 06/05/19 — — — — — ADJUST LOT LINES _ _ _ _ _ —ELIMINATE BUFFER ON EXISTING LOT ADJUST LOT LINES -- _ _ MODIFY TURNAROUND -- _ _ _ _ TRACKING EXHIBIT _ _ _ _ — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — DRAWN BY 02 CAW 03 ORONO, MINNESOTA i / — CHECKED 8Y 04 CAW 05 DATE — 06/17/15 arleslemerlage,P.E. Date: �J� l Lic. No. Ll i i 9 0 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: Date: May 13, 2019 Item Description: #LA19-000018, Chris and Rachel Bollis, 350 Stubbs Bay Road North, Preliminary Plat— Resolution Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart, AICP Agenda Planning Department Community Development Director Section: Report 1. Purpose. To consider the preliminary plat for 350 Stubbs Bay Road North and adopting resolution approving the same. 2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was deemed complete on April 3, 2019. The 120 -Day review period will expire on August 1, 2019. 3. Background. The property owner proposes the subdivision of his property into two buildable lots, each meeting the minimum lot area size and frontage requirements, though one of the lots is uniquely shaped and offers limited buildable area. Section 78- 420- Lot Area/ Width: The attached Planning Commission memo provides the analysis for the proposed subdivision, and is attached as Exhibit D. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. The Planning Commission reviewed the project at their meeting on April 15th. The minutes from that meeting are attached. Note that Commissioner Bollis, as property owner, abstained from the vote and removed himself from the dais during the discussion. The main discussion at the Planning Commission level involved the requirement of the cul de sac and the private road width. Cul de sac. The property owner proposes a hammerhead turn -around versus a cul de sac. While the Fire chief supports a hammer head, the city code requires a cul de sac, to facilitate the turning movements of large vehicles, including emergency vehicles, school buses, garbage/ refuse haulers, and delivery trucks. After much discussion, the Planning Commission did not support a departure from the city code. Private road width. The property owner proposes pavement width of 20 feet, the city code requires 24 feet wide. The applicant has stated that the reduced width protects existing screening evergreen trees. Staff did not support the deviation from the width, but the Planning Commission supported the width at 24 feet wide for the first 50 feet (to coincide with the first driveway serving the adjacent property, 300 Stubbs Bay), and the remainder being 20 feet wide. The Planning Commission did recommend approval of the preliminary plat, with staffs recommended 5 conditions, though condition #3 (the driveway width) was amended. The draft Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: Approved By: Gross Dry Dry buildable Wetlands Frontage Frontage area Buildable requirement (acres) (Feet) requirement (acres) (acres) (acres) (Feet) Lot 1 2.44 2.03 1 2.0 0.41 367 1 200 149 (200 Lot 2 7.77 3.49 2.0 4.28 adjusted) 200 The attached Planning Commission memo provides the analysis for the proposed subdivision, and is attached as Exhibit D. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. The Planning Commission reviewed the project at their meeting on April 15th. The minutes from that meeting are attached. Note that Commissioner Bollis, as property owner, abstained from the vote and removed himself from the dais during the discussion. The main discussion at the Planning Commission level involved the requirement of the cul de sac and the private road width. Cul de sac. The property owner proposes a hammerhead turn -around versus a cul de sac. While the Fire chief supports a hammer head, the city code requires a cul de sac, to facilitate the turning movements of large vehicles, including emergency vehicles, school buses, garbage/ refuse haulers, and delivery trucks. After much discussion, the Planning Commission did not support a departure from the city code. Private road width. The property owner proposes pavement width of 20 feet, the city code requires 24 feet wide. The applicant has stated that the reduced width protects existing screening evergreen trees. Staff did not support the deviation from the width, but the Planning Commission supported the width at 24 feet wide for the first 50 feet (to coincide with the first driveway serving the adjacent property, 300 Stubbs Bay), and the remainder being 20 feet wide. The Planning Commission did recommend approval of the preliminary plat, with staffs recommended 5 conditions, though condition #3 (the driveway width) was amended. The draft Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: Approved By: AGENDA ITEM resolution has been written to accommodate Planning Commission's recommendation. 5. Public Comment. No comments for or against the proposal have been received. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution as drafted. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED City Council should review the approval resolution and adopt or amend. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. Plat C. PC Minutes dated April 15, 2019 D. PC Staff report E. Applicants Narrative References PC exhibits for meeting April 15, 2019 Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: Approved By: AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 13 Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: LAI 9-000027 — Mike, Johnsrud, 135 Luce Line Ridge, Variance Presenter: Laura Oakden Agenda Planning Department Planner Section: Report 1. Purpose. The applicant is requesting a variance to exceed the allowed square footage for an oversize accessory structure from 1,200 to 1,432 square feet. 2. 15.99 Deadline. The application was deemed complete on April 25, 2019. Following the 60 -day rule the review period ends June 24, 2019. 3. Background. The property is located in a planned residential development within the RR-lA zoning district. The property is permitted to have a total of 2,400 accessory building square footage. It is permitted to have one oversized accessory structure (OAB) but no single structure may exceed 1,200 square feet. The existing detached building was built in 2017. The property owner is requesting to add a 280 square foot addition to the existing 1,152 square foot building, creating a 1,432 sq.ft. building. This would be 232 sq.ft. over the allowed 1,200 sq.ft. footprint. The code allows a second accessory structure (not to exceed 999 sq.ft.) on the property. Staff finds the submitted application does not meet the practical difficulties standards. The request for a variance does not establish any demonstrable difficulty unique to the property. The applicant has indicated they can meet the City Code by building a separate accessory structure. There are not any unique circumstances with the land or the use to support a variance to allow an accessory building larger than the code would permit. The applicant has not demonstrated that the property is unique to support the variance, and the use of the property has been achieved via the construction of the home and the 1,152sq foot accessory structure. The applicant has stated they need the addition to allow for trailer storage due to theft and vandalism. The applicant states an addition to the existing building would be better financially, environmentally, and neighborly. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. The Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed variances. Commissioners discussed the City Code for allowing one OAB and also allowing up to 2400 total of accessory building square footage. Concerns were addressed regarding overall massing coverage for the property. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance request with a 4-3 vote with the condition to prohibit any additional accessory structures on the property. The Commission also advices that legal counsel should be consulted before enacting this condition for future use of the property. The City Attorney advises that any condition placed on a variance must have a clear nexus (connection) to the regulation, ie the condition should clearly mitigate the concern. In this situation, restricting the property owner (and future owners) from lawful additional square footage of accessory buildings (sheds, garages, etc.) doesn't mitigate the massing concern. 5. Public Comment The applicant submitted signatures of support from his neighbors and the HOA. No public comments were submitted. Prepared By: Laura Oakden Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By -T)a 6. Staff Recommendation. Planning Staff recommend denial based on the submitted practical difficulties. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council should review the submitted application and direct staff to draft a resolution. If a motion is made to approve for the request, council should provide staff with applicable practical difficulties Exhibits A. Proposed Plans B. DRAFT PC Minutes C. PC Staff Report References PC Exhibits Exhibit A. Exhibit B. Exhibit C. Exhibit D. Exhibit E. Exhibit F. Exhibit G. Application Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Proposed Site Plan Proposed Plans and Elevations Narrative Neighboring property signatures Property Owners List and Plat Map j�cff e D x 10 1.s ✓ f f —I' ;1� s1x 013.3 x 1028.7 1030 f — 1027 / / 1032 x 1032.6 103a-4 3Dt 2.5 O azoco �1035.03033. ��— — ' x 1027. ROCK % Y~ CA O % 13OULDER5 6 7 1034.4 f x 103 Vice x 1034.2 r f uo cc) J i x 1027.6 cv rn _ _ A — a 1035.5 cv 9e o £0 E?(1STING GARAGE 65 Cb O x1 1.6 f D v G. 1036.3 �.L�p1 �103%�°•D P° .°A X1037.34 P P P 1@37. - a .. D x 1036.5 Electo 4 G S.9 ter. I 1fl�� m b.° x 1036.8 x 1 D37.1 00 ng Gas o a nb D Metero � I � O^� S � J � A — 63.7— — �c ©� �'OOI p-�G o gl r aG na 8. . 0£o� EXISTING �F� HOUSE < l+ti X135 ' 1038.3 4 p Retaining 1v I 38 Wall 0 h 1 D 70 '16 �Lrl 0 b£0 0 2.8 q,. 40. a �0��. x 1037.2 1 / b G aD 40 61 T. V> \ \ t-IEAD \O 1d o PLANTER �3> 6 ,0 �"5 O a s ` LUO m � 0�'Lou fo Q O of co z � of r) Lu Lu z z z of Q z O Lu Lu wOfz m U o LU z zof Q U 12 > 0 0 ct) i 4 = F of 2 z U)< O w O Q< z L >_L z W J--z(D 0 -co <Z F wz06Of z� UUw0LL D2iLL 0 HU)�_jUi (� J U) U) QU) F z W z O (D LL J- W Q W W 0 00 00 00 00 0 000 000 000 000 TONT ELEVATION SCALE : 1/4" = 1 '-0" UJ Ln V -. n/ 0 U) LU G z .. z z - - - - _ LuQ J W J J UJ Lo c —�Q LEFT 5I DE ELEVATION BIGHT SIDE ELEVATION 2 SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0" O LL U) 4� Q J a_ DRAWN BY: ADAM NOVACEK DATE: PACK ELEVATION 03-30-2019 SCALE : 1/8" = P-0" SHEET 1 OF 2 v s � =LU �J w r� 3 Q ow I w�m �o �v Z Qo w w 0 0= 3 2'-0" 12'-0" zz z d Q j z o w w JLLJ ~ d p CO W O z Z w' Q OU >0Y000 Q d' of 2 z 2 Z 3: w � a ((0 J J z d(n�Qz�� wz.sOf�z� r O U) U W o o LL LL =�mwU)-w I- (� J w p J =o�mCCJCa I� op=0(D>_o ILL IO m T_�EU)�E((n Q > I = 0 I co F- L NEW LEAN-TO ADDITION EXI5TING POLE SHED o m Q N N mQ ROOF LOUVERS AS REQ'D 1777 V J U cq ASPHALT SHINGLES 15# FELT Lo _ i 12 MOISTURE GUARD 14 15/32" OSB ROOF SHTG. ' ^ co V ' H -CLIPS � Li J Z ROOF EDGE 2x6 CIA G W L Q - (` TO BOTTOM SOFFIT IT & FASCIA OF BEAM2- g 1/2" LVL CONT. HDR 'r z -' W -- II [6x8 Coil Roll -u P Door _ 1 NAIL -LAM POSTS @ � (SEE FLOORPLAN) O.C. O J 8X12 O.H. DOOR I I II II � W LLJ Lo InN 18"x10" CONC. FTG. W/HOLD DOWN BLK. 4'- 0 X 3'- 0 ® MIN 60" BELOW GRADE 3 2'-0" 12'-0" � O LL U) Q ELOOK PLAN LEAN-TO SECTION J SCALE 1/4" = l' -O' SCALE 1/4" = P-0" DRAWN BY: ADAM NOVACEK DATE: 03-30-2019 SHEET 2OF2 s F a t % `4 •, x e �"t "i;Cl]I-mmD1211 0 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Jon Ressler, Commissioners Chris Bollis, Bob Erickson, Matt Gettman, Dennis Libby, Mark McCutcheon, and John Thiesse. Representing Staff were Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, City Planners Melanie Curtis and Laura Oakden, and Recorder Jackie Young. Chair Ressler called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. LA19-000027 MIKE JOHNSRUD, 135 LUCE LINE RIDGE, VARIANCE, 7:18 P.M. — 7:56 P.M. Mike Johnsrud, Applicant, was present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting a variance to exceed the allowed square footage for an oversized accessory structure from 1,200 to 1,432 square feet. The property is located in a planned residential development within the RR-lA zoning district, which is a 5 -acre zoning district. The property is permitted to have a total of 2,400 accessory building square footage. It is permitted to have one oversized accessory structure, but no single structure may exceed 1,200 square feet. The existing detached building was built in 2017. The property owner is requesting to add a 280 square foot addition to the existing 1,152 square foot building creating a 1,432 square foot building. This would be 232 square feet over the allowed 1,200 square foot footprint. The code allows a secondary accessory structure not to exceed 999 square feet on the property. The proposal meets the setbacks. The application regulations have been included in Staff's memo. Staff finds the submitted application does not meet the practical difficulties standards. The applicant has indicated they need the additional square footage for trailer storage due to theft and vandalism and safety and security for their possessions. The applicant further believes that the addition is financially beneficial, environmentally beneficial, and neighborly. Staff finds the applicant can meet the City Code by building a separate accessory structure. There are not any unique circumstances with the land or the use to support a variance to allow an accessory building larger than the code would permit. The applicant has not demonstrated that the property is unique to support the variance and reasonable use of the property has been achieved via the construction of the house and the 1,152 square foot accessory structure. To date no public comments have been received, but the applicant did submit signatures of the neighbors in support of the project. Gettman asked what the required amount of space between the two buildings is. Oakden stated to her understanding it is ten feet according to state building code. Gettman asked whether there is that room. Oakden indicated they could possibly pivot the building slightly to achieve that ten feet or construct it on the other side of the property. Gettman asked whether other options were discussed with the applicant. Oakden stated a specific location was not discussed and is left up to the applicant. Oakden stated it is her belief the applicant did speak with other staff members about possible options. Mike Johnsrud, Applicant, stated he would like to add on to his current structure since where the gravel area currently is a structure will not fit. The proposed location is the most environmentally friendly spot. The elevation is quite steep behind the existing structure, so getting down there creates a number of problems. To the right of the existing structure is where this structure would sit. Johnsrud indicated he spoke with the neighbor to the right and that a structure could be located 20 feet away from the property line but that would require the removal of at least five trees. No grading or tree removal would be necessary if the addition was constructed in the proposed location. The structure would also not be seen from the road. In addition, the homeowners' association was contacted, who sent out a letter to every member, and none were opposed to it. Johnsrud stated in his view this is the most neighborly thing to do since it would be further away, is less expensive, and more environmentally friendly. Gettman asked what other restrictions are imposed by the homeowners' association. Johnsrud stated he is not sure what those would be. Gettman stated unless there is no other choice, it is difficult to approve the variance. Johnsrud stated there might be restrictions in the HOA documents but he is not aware of them. Gettman asked whether there is a restriction on cutting down trees. Johnsrud stated to his knowledge there is not but he is not completely sure. Libby asked if the homeowners' association has an architectural committee. Johnsrud stated there is a volunteer architectural committee and that all of these materials were approved by the HOA. Libby asked whether the floor surface of the new addition would be concrete. Johnsrud indicated it would be gravel and the exterior would match what is currently there. The front would have brick and the two sides would be LP siding. Ressler noted the homeowners' association would be enforcing their rules separate from this application. Erickson stated the square footage fits within the total amount allowed for the property, and as he reads the regulation, if the applicant separated the addition by a few feet and made a second building, that would be okay, but because it is being combined with the other structure, then it requires a variance. Johnsrud stated his understanding is that as long as there is a 10 -foot separation, he can construct another 999 square foot building, but he cannot add on to this structure because it would go over the 1,200 square foot limit. Erickson asked if the applicant would be willing to sign away any other options to construct a second building in the future. Johnsrud indicated he would and that there are very few options on the lot for the second structure. Ressler asked whether that condition could be imposed by the City. Barnhart stated to his knowledge the City cannot take away those rights and that he would have to check with the City Attorney. Erickson indicated he is leaning towards granting the variance but subject to the stipulation that there will not be a second structure on the property. McCutcheon commented he is not a fan of this ordinance since it does not take into account a situation like this. The neighbors approve of the proposal, it is environmentally friendly, no additional driveway is needed, and the structure will be well screened. The only negative is it is against the ordinance, but he is allowed to build another 999 square foot structure. McCutcheon stated it is a good-looking garage and he is all for it. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. McCutcheon stated common sense -wise the proposal makes sense. It does not seem like the applicant is asking for much and that he agrees with every point the applicant made. Libby commented he is a boat and trailer guy but that the City has stipulations and guidelines for good reasons and Staff's recommendation is not to grant it. Erickson indicated he would agree with Commissioner McCutcheon, especially since the applicant would be giving up his rights to construct a second building on the property. Ressler noted the City cannot prohibit him from building another structure. Barnhart stated Staff will verify with the City Attorney on whether such a condition could be imposed but that Staff would like to hear comments from the Planning Commission on the application outside of that condition. Bollis stated what he sees makes a lot of sense, but it does not fit within the code. Bollis indicated he would be in favor of allowing the variance with the condition that there is no secondary building. Gettman asked why there is a 1,200 square foot restriction on an individual accessory building and how that number was picked, especially when another 999 square foot structure can be built on the lot. Oakden stated one of the purposes is the size of the lot. Since this lot is under three acres, it would fall under that threshold. Curtis stated the table is a sliding scale and is based on the size of the lot. The amount of allowable square footage increases as the lot size gets bigger. Curtis indicates she does not know what the rationale was when that limit was created in the 1990s. Barnhart stated Staff did not change that ratio with the latest amendment. Staff encounters that question quite a bit and runs into situations where the next applicant will come forward and want one extra foot. Staff does not have sheaths of information to back up the number, but that is where it has been set, and the application has to be judged based on the uniqueness of the lot. Gettman asked if there is some practical difficulty in not conforming with the 1,200 square foot limit. Gettman indicated he is not in favor of a variance. Thiesse stated part of the ordinance is to control massing, but in controlling massing, the City will let him build a larger structure than what he is requesting, which is really not controlling massing. Thiesse stated in his view a new building would be wider and have a peaked roof on it, which creates more massing than what the applicant is proposing. Thiesse stated in his mind they are meeting the intent of the code since it is to reduce massing. Ressler commented an argument could be made that a 5 -foot setback variance would probably be easier to get a variance for than this. Thiesse asked if the Planning Commission could look at an oversized structure in lieu of an accessory structure. Barnhart stated the Planning Commission can encourage the application of a condition foregoing a second structure. Ressler stated perhaps they could change the language and say that this is the accessory structure and that they are just allowing him to attach the second structure. Ressler indicated he is in support of the application on the condition that some sort of contingency be attached allowing no other structure later. Oakden stated if the City Attorney determines that condition is not deemed feasible, Staff would like some other direction from the Planning Commission. Ressler stated without that contingency in place, he personally would not be in favor of it since it is not allowed by the ordinance. If the stipulation is not in place, he would recommend denial. Thiesse noted this has to do with the fact that the property owner is allowed an additional 999 square feet, and if this is approved, the applicant would only be allowed 300 and some feet of another structure. McCutcheon stated under common sense, if the goal is to reduce massing, the ordinance should be looked at again to see why someone cannot have one large building versus two. Ressler asked whether he would still be in support of the structure if a condition preventing a second structure were not allowed. McCutcheon indicated he would be in favor of it either way. Ressler stated if they want to change the ordinance, that is something that could be considered in the future, but that the Planning Commission has to go off the rules as they exist today. Libby stated in his view the idea of trying to limit the applicant from building more structure later by placing a contingency on the approval is not within the scope of the Planning Commission's decision to make. Libby indicated he would not be in favor of recommending a contingency that would deprive this applicant from having other structures on his property without him obtaining legal counsel, and that the Planning Commission has a guideline to follow regardless if they feel it is flawed at this point. Erickson indicated he would be in favor of a motion to approve the variance and at the same time ask Staff to work on an appropriate condition that might apply to this particular application. Ressler asked if Commissioner Erickson's motion would be based on the condition and recommendation to deny the applicant's right to a future structure at some point. Erickson stated he would approve it subject to language being drafted. Gettman suggested they ask the City Attorney how that language could be attached to the deed since a variance would be allowing a successor property owner to put another accessory structure on the property. Barnhart stated he is hearing some support from the Commission about supporting the variance with a desire to limit the construction of a second structure. The Commission's questions about opening the door to others is why the Commission reviews the practical difficulties, the uniqueness of the lot, and the standards for the variance. If those items do not meet the standards, the application should be denied, and reviewing the ordinance for possible changes is separate from this application. Libby asked where it would leave them if the motion is passed and the attorney declines the proposal. Barnhart stated if the motion is done as recommended, the City Council can choose what they want to follow. The City Council can either remand it back to the Planning Commission for further discussion or they can make a different motion. Ressler stated identify some practical difficulties Erickson moved, Bollis seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000027, Mike Johnsrud, 135 Luce Line Ridge, granting of a variance to exceed the allowable square footage for an oversize accessory structure, with the condition that a second accessory structure not be allowed on the property at any point in the future. Thiesse stated he can vote for the motion in order to get it before the City Council, but that he is not in favor of the stipulation. McCutcheon stated the ultimate goal is to reduce massing and that he would be in favor of the variance without the condition. Ressler noted the Planning Commission will be voting on the motion that includes that condition. If the motion fails, a new motion can be made. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 3; Gettman, McCutcheon, and Libby opposed. Date Application Received: April 17, 2019 Date Application Considered as Complete: April 25, 2019 60 -Day Review Period Expires: June 24, 2019 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Laura Oakden, Planner Date: May 21, 2019 Subject: LA19-000027, Mike, Johnsrud, 135 Luce Line Ridge, Variance, Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a variance to exceed the allowed square footage for an oversize accessory structure from 1200 to 1,432 square feet. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends denial of the request. Background The property is located in a planned residential development within the RR -1A zoning district. The property is permitted to have a total of 2,400 accessory building square footage. It is permitted to have one oversized accessory structure but no single structure may exceed 1,200 square feet. The existing detached building was built in 2017. The property owner is requesting to add a 280 square foot addition to the existing 1,152 square foot building creating a 1,432 sq.ft building. This would be 232 sq.ft over the allowed 1,200 sq.ft footprint. The applicant refers to the addition as a "lean-to" but the addition will be fully enclosed and secure. The code allows a second accessory structure (not to exceed 999 sq.ft) on the property. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-395- Setbacks: DISTRICT RR -1A/ PRD Required per PRD Existing Proposed Front 50' +/- 140' No Change Rear 100' +/- 154' No Change Side (West) 20 +/- 115' No Change Side (East) 20' 61.5' 57' Section 78- 395 - Lot Area/Width: DISTRICT RR -1A/ PRD Lot Area Lot Width Required 217,800 s.f. (5 acres) 300' Actual (approve with PRD) 116,740.8 s.f. (2.68 acre) 278' Applicable Regulations: Variance (78-1434) No accessory building shall exceed 1,000 square feet of footprint area; except that accessory buildings in excess of 1,000 square feet shall be considered oversized and will be allowed under the following conditions: LA19-000027 May 20, 2019 Page 2 of 5 (2)An OAB is regulated by the following table: Lot Area Maximum Individual OAB Maximum Allowed Total of All Accessory Building (acres) Footprint Area (square feet) Footprint Areas on a Property (square feet) 2.00-3.00 1 1,200 1 2,400 Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The applicant has stated their intent is to add to an already existing oversized building instead of building a new separate building. The request doesn't not meet the intent of the ordinance to limit the sizing of OAB based on lot size. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Oversize Accessory buildings are permitted and are consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; "I intend to add on to an existing structure rather than build a new structure. Adding a lean-to on to the existing structure is reasonable for financial, environmental and neighborly good. We have been told that we are able to build a new structure up to 1000 sq. feet but this lean to would be much smaller, 1/4 to 1/3 the size of a new stand alone structure." b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; "Our issues are three fold: financial, environmental and neighborly. Financial - an addition on to our existing structure will cost significantly ('50%) less than building a new structure. Materials and labor (smaller than a new structure, less wall square footage, able to use existing building as 25% of this project), sitework (there is existing gravel where this project will be placed, there will not have to be any prep work, we will cut down zero trees with with a lean to). Landscaping will be close to zero (gravel there now. Will not have to augment LA19-000027 May 20, 2019 Page 3 of 5 driveway or remove any soil to accommodate a lean to). Neighborly, we will have increased setback distance than required, remove zero trees, keep the "wild brush barrier" between us neighbors, therefore, the neighbor won't have clear line of sight to the lean to. Plus we will use the same exterior products on the lean to that we used on our existing structure. An addition on to our existing structure is less cost, more environmentally friendly and the more neighborly choice." and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. "This variance would increase the character of the locality by not removing trees, by not disturbing the environment, by not removing the "wild brush barrier," and by not having to haul fill in our haul fill out. This lean to will not be able to be seen from the road in front of our house. A new stand alone structure would be able to be seen from the road." Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The applicant has stated that economic considerations have been a factor as well as environmental and neighborly. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as the use for an Oversize Accessory Structure is an allowed use in the PRD/ RR -1A District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. No special conditions apply to allow for a larger oversize accessory building then what is permitted. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The applicant states trying to make everyone adhere to the same standards does not work and should be looked at as a case-by-case basis. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Allowing this variance will allow for further enjoyment of the property by creating addition storage space to keep possessions secure. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. The applicant states allowing the variance will increase safety and health for the applicant because they won't have to worry about their possessions. The applicants statement can be met by also following the City Code preventing the need for a variance. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The applicant has stated they need the addition to allow for trailer storage due to theft and vandalism. The applicant has concerns regarding safety and security of their possessions. The request for a variance does not establish any demonstrable difficulty unique to the property. LA19-000027 May 20, 2019 Page 4 of 5 The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Septic System Status Staff has completed a preliminary review of the project for compatibility with the septic system, and has determined that the project is not likely to impact the existing or future septic sites. Practical Difficulties Statement Applicant has provided supporting documentation regarding the applicable Practical Difficulties attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Practical Difficulties Analysis Staff finds the submitted application does not meet the practical difficulties standards. The applicant has indicated they can meet the City Code by building a separate accessory structure. There are not any unique circumstances with the land or the use to support a variance to allow an accessory building larger than the code would permit. The applicant has not demonstrated that the property is unique to support the variance, and the use of the property has been achieved via the construction of the home and the 1,152sq foot accessory structure. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. The applicant submitted neighboring signatures. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that the practical difficulties are met for this request? 2. Does the Planning Commission find there are unique circumstances with the property, that don't also pertain to other properties? 3. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Does the Planning Commission conclude any other findings where the applicant must receive this variance and cannot meet the city code in any way? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends denial based on the submitted practical difficulties. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Proposed Site Plan Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Narrative Exhibit F. Neighboring property signatures Exhibit G. Property Owners List and Plat Map LA19-000027 May 20, 2019 Page 5 of 5 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 14 Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: 19-000028 — Steve Eggert, o/b/o Lake West Development, LLC, unaddressed PID 2011723420039, Variance from Subdivision requirements Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart, AICP Agenda Planning Department Community Development Director Section: Report Purpose. To consider a variance to allow the future replatting of the property, removing the access outlot. Provide staff direction on drafting a resolution approving or denying the variance. 2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was considered to be complete on April 29, 2019. The 60 -Day review period will expire on June 28, 2019. Background. The properties involved are Outlot A and Lot 1, Block 1, Ivy Place, a plat approved in 2018. The variance is requested because Ivy Place was originally created as a front lot/ back lot, which requires a 30' wide outlot (Outlot A). The applicant, who was the original developer of the property, and the buyer (now owner) of Lot 1 desire to replat Outlot A and Lot 1 into one lot. This would give Lot 1 lake frontage on the lagoon side, and with it opportunity for a dock. Access to lot 2 would be provided via an easement through Lot 1. The applicant contends that some of the original plat documents showed the dock adjacent to Outlot A. When reviewing plats, the city council does not review building footprints, landscaping, hardcover, docks, etc. as final as these are A. Not applied for, and B. likely to change, as the footprint and hardcover have. Current CUP/ dock permit and replatting applications are being reviewed. The applicant has provided responses to the practical difficulty questions, attached as Exhibit D. Staff's Planning Commission report, including its' analysis of the practical difficulties is attached as Exhibit A. A copy of the plat is provided as Exhibit C. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. On May 201, the Commission reviewed the proposal and held the public hearing. Their minutes are attached as Exhibit B. Commissioners noted that the variance seems to correct an oversight. One commissioner noted that an inability to dock a boat in a sheltered area was a practical difficulty. They recommended approval 7-0. 5. Public Comment. No public comments have been received. The owner of Lot 1, Rusty Kocon voiced his support. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff notes that the purpose behind the outlot requirement has been satisfied by the proposal, and the unique factors are unlikely to be replicated. Staff requests Council direct staff to draft a resolution in support or opposition to the application. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Staff requests Council direction, draft a resolution for denial or draft a resolution of approval. In either case, provide reasons. Exhibits A. PC Staff report B. PC Minutes — Draft C. Ivy Place Plat D. Practical Difficulties Statement Prepared By: J. Barnhart References PC Exhibits May 20, 2019 Reviewed By: -Sb)R Approved By: -TV Date Application Received: April 22, 2019 Date Application Considered as Complete: April 29, 2019 60 -Day Review Period Expires: June 28, 2019 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director Date: May 20, 2019 Subject: #19-000028, Steve Eggert, O/B/O Lake West Development, LLC, unaddressed PID 2011723420039, Variance from Subdivision requirements Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a variance from the code provision that requires a separate outlot providing access to a back lot. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends the Commission determine if the practical difficulties and other standards are addresses satisfactorily. Background The applicant desires to replat the property to provide Lot 1 with lake frontage on the lagoon (west) side of the property and an easement through Lot 1 to serve Lot 2. Replatting will be a separate process. Plat History. The properties involved are Outlot A and Lot 1, Block 1 of Ivy Place, a subdivision approved in June of 2018 (Final Plat, Exhibit C). Outlot A is owned by the original developer (now represented by the applicant) and Lot 1 is owned by Russell Kocon and Jacqueline Gibney. Ivy Place was originally divided into three parcels as part of the Casco Point Addition plat. These three parcels did not have direct connection to a public or private street; access was provided via an easement, since vacated. In 2017, the developer filed a subdivision application, and prepared a plat showing the two new building sites in a front lot/ back lot configuration. A front lot/ back lot configuration allows for subdivision when a property does not have sufficient frontage on a street to satisfy the lot width requirements for both lots. Both lots are lake lots, lot width is measured at the lake and 75 feet landward. In lieu of street frontage, an access outlot is required. For Ivy Place, the required outlot is located along the west portion of the plat, adjacent to the lagoon side of the peninsula and Lot 1. Lot 2 has lake frontage on the two sides, lot 1 has lake frontage only on the east (Carman Bay) side. Dock Requirements. Docks are permitted to property owners with lake frontage, along their lake frontage. As noted above, Lot 1 does not have Lake Frontage on the lagoon side. FILE # 19-28 May 20, 2019 Page 2 of 5 LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 - Hardcover Calculations: Lot 1, Block 1 Before Stormwater Total Area in Allowed Existing Proposed Overlay District Zone Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover Tier 6,641 s.f. 6,328 s.f. 8,602 s.f. Tier 1 26, 563 s.f. (25 %) (23.75%) (25 %) (23.8%) Lot 1, Block 1 After Stormwater Total Area in Allowed Existing Proposed Overlay District Zone Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover Tier 9,052 s.f. 8,602 s.f. Tier 1 36, 206 s.f. (25 %) (23.75%) Incorporating Outlot A into the area of Lot 1 alters the hardcover coverage calculations for that lot. The area of lot 1 gets larger, and by virtue of Section 78-1682, the portion of the driveway that serves lot 1 is counted as hardcover for lot 1. The portion of the driveway that serves lot 2 is not counted as hardcover against lot 1 or lot 2, until the driveway enters lot 2. The increase of 2,274 sq ft of hardcover, and the increase of 9,643 sf of lot area yields a hardcover percentage of 23.75 (Hardcover analysis, Exhibit D). Applicable Regulations: Double frontage lots, access to lots, and front/ back lot divisions. (82-256) (Exhibit E) Special standards for back lots created after January 1, 1994. (78-1370) (Exhibit F) Governing Regulation: Variance (Section 78-123) In reviewing applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with this chapter. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. According to MN §462.537 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The intent of the ordinance is the provision of a separate lot protecting access to a back lot FILE # 19-28 May 20, 2019 Page 3 of 5 while not introducing additional density. The access can be provided via an easement, and the nature of these lots do not lend themselves to further subdivision, i.e. density. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The use of the property remains residential, consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The use of the property remains the same. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The condition of the property prior to development, configured as three separate lots, was not created by the developer. Peninsula and dead end and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance, allowing access to the back lot via an easement versus an outlot will not be discernable to the character of the locality. Additionally City Code 78-123 provides additional parameters within which a variance may be granted as follows: 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations alone have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. S. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The applicant does not demonstrate any special conditions. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The applicant does not demonstrate any special conditions. The lot is within a peninsula, and the potential to extend the drive beyond the subdivision is not likely. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. This is not the case here. The right of a dock within a lagoon or cove is not a protected right. The adjacent property has lake frontage on the bay side, allowing a dock for this lake property. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. The variance would allow the replatting of the lots without the provision of an outlot. The applicant states that this will not impact the health, welfare etc. not requiring the outlot in front lot/ back lot could have far reaching consequences related to lake densities and access questions in the future. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The variance does seem to be a convenience. The applicant's argument that the dock was "approved in the original FILE # 19-28 May 20, 2019 Page 4 of 5 submitted plans" suggests the house, hardcover, and other features of that plan were approved. The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is located. Practical Difficulties Statement Applicant has provided supporting documentation regarding the applicable Practical Difficulties attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Practical Difficulties Analysis Review of the practical difficulties suggests that the variance is in keeping with the intent and purpose of the ordinance. The purpose behind the requirement of a separate outlot for front/ back lot configurations is in part to consolidate driveway accesses, prevent flag lots, and allow for an HOA for maintenance. These concerns are addressed in the unique configuration of the lot, and while the outlot is currently owned by the owner of lot 2, and ownership would transfer to the owner of lot 1, an appropriate maintenance agreement could be filed. The property, at the end of a peninsula is not of the applicants making. This uniqueness of this property, including its status at the end of a peninsula, and no actual frontage on a public or private street is not likely to be replicated elsewhere in the community. The lack of an outlot is not likely to alter the essential character of the community. To the community, there is no perceptible difference between an outlot and an easement. This is the situation today, where the northern terminus of Ivy Place is actually within a private easement; Ivy Place right of way ends at 3550 Ivy Place, one lot to the south of the apparent terminus. (Ivy Place Street, Exhibit G) The applicant notes that the dock was shown on a concept plan. This is correct, the preliminary site plan presented to the City Council (as part of the preliminary plat) and the site plan (as part of the final plat, attached as Exhibit H) showed two docks. However, it is not customary to review these types of improvements for final approval because in most situations these are conceptual and often change. As the footprint and hardcover proposals changed. Further, the application did not request dock approval, or hardcover approval, or building footprint approval. Finally, it should be noted that not all of the site plan sheets, even those showing the footprint of the building, included the docks. Miscommunication between the developer and the city is not a practical difficulty. It may be appropriate to note that there are existing sanitary sewer easements in this area, protecting an underground (and water) trunk line. Even if the variance was to be approved, the location of the existing, live sanitary sewer trunk would preclude the placement of a permanent dock over that easement. The City does not permit permanent improvements over easements that could jeopardize their functionality or the city's ability to service them. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. FILE # 19-28 May 20, 2019 Page 5 of 5 Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation The Planning Commission should determine if the standards are adequately satisfied. Practical difficulty appears to be satisfied, and the property on a true peninsula could support uniqueness; Though the need for the variance to support a "substantial property right" fails to recognize that the property has been improved with a single family dwelling, and a dock may be installed on the east side. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Ivy Place Final Plat Exhibit D. Hardcover Analysis Exhibit E. Section 82-256 Exhibit F. Section 78-1370 Exhibit G. Ivy Place Street Exhibit H. Plans provided as part of plat review Exhibit 1. Public Notice Information MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. 3. LA19-000028 STEVEN EGGERT ON BEHALF OF LAKE WEST DEVELOPMENT, OUTLOT A IVY PLACE, VARIANCE, 7:56 P.M. — 8:20 P.M. Curt Fretham and Steve Eggert, Lake West Development, was present Barnhart stated the applicant is looking to replat the property to provide Lot 1 with lake frontage on the lagoon side of the property and an easement through Lot 1 to serve Lot 2. Currently there is not lake frontage due to the outlot. The purpose behind the requirement of a separate outlot for front/back lot configurations is in part to consolidate driveway accesses, prevent flag lots, and allow for maintenance. The lack of an outlot is not likely to alter the essential character of the community. The applicant has provided supporting documentation regarding the applicable practical difficulties and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. The applicant notes that the dock was shown on a concept plan. However, it is not customary to review these types of improvements for final approval because, in most situations, these are conceptual and often change as the footprint and hardcover proposals change. Further, the application did not request dock approval or hardcover approval or building footprint approval. Miscommunication between the developer and the City is not a practical difficulty. Replatting Lot 1 and the outlot will increase the size of Lot 1. When those two parcels are combined into one, the size of Lot 1 would be 9,600 square feet bigger and an additional amount of hardcover would be added to Lot 1, but it does not exceed the allowable limit. Staff's analysis concluded that many of the variance standards are met. The Planning Commission should determine if the standards are adequately satisfied, and if the Planning Commission feels the standards for a practical difficulty are satisfied, a motion recommending approval of the variance should be made. Thiesse asked what has changed about the application from a 30,000 -foot view. Barnhart stated from a perception standpoint for the neighborhood, the change between an outlot and an access easement would not be noticed. Thiesse stated he did not notice a dock on the plans the first time this was reviewed and that it was his impression there would be a dock on the lagoon. Barnhart noted the Planning Commission is not approving or reviewing the docks at this time, and if it is a seasonal dock, a permit through the City would be required. Ressler requested Staff show an overhead view of the area. Barnhart pointed out Outlot A, Lot 1, and Lot 2 on the overhead. One of the unique factors is that Outlot A connects to the end of Ivy Place, which does not continue through to the neighboring lot. That access is via a private easement between private property owners. Barnhart noted the City rarely sees this situation. Page 1 of 3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Curt Fretham, Lake West Development, stated as they went through this process, they tried to address everything upfront. The dock was clearly an oversight during the process. Fretham noted they did not show the dock on all the plans, such as the utility and tree removal plans, since that is typically not done. The dock was shown, however, on a number of the plans, but was not shown on the final plat because it would not be included on that. Fretham stated the proposal cleans up the lakeshore side and gives the homeowner a nice view of the lake as well as everybody else on the lake. Fretham noted they did not realize there was a separate permit process with the City and that they received the permits for the two docks from the LMCD. They were informed that Orono is the only city that requires a separate permit from the LMCD. Fretham stated if someone drives by, they would not be able to tell if it is an outlot or an easement down to the lake. It is important to us because the lot was sold and plans for that dock were shared with the purchaser. The new property owner was excited to have a dock. Fretham stated he did not stand up to his end of that deal in that transaction and that he is attempting to correct the situation. If a dock is not possible, he is not sure how the situation will turn out, but that he is attempting to get the property owner what was promised. McCutcheon asked if they want permanent dock or a seasonal dock. Fretham stated they made a permanent dock application to the LMCD, who approved it, but they were told they also had to obtain a permit from the City because it attaches to the land. Fretham stated it is not a matter of a dock or not, but it is a matter of where it should be placed. The property still has 129 feet of lakeshore on the lakeside and it is a matter of where the right place to put the dock is. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 8:11 p.m. Rusty Cocoon, Shoreview, stated when they saw the dock on the plan, they were excited about it, and that they are planning on planting native grass down by the lake. The outlot will be plowed and maintained and is basically a private drive. There will be very little traffic down there and the road is basically one and a half lanes. Cocoon stated he does not believe it will disrupt the public by having a dock down there. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 8:13 p.m. Thiesse asked if Lot 2 deeded the lot back to Lot 1, whether that would solve the same problem. Barnhart indicated it would. The ordinance requires the outlot but there are other ways to address the concerns. Ressler asked if Staff has any preference on how to handle this. Barnhart stated what is being proposed is a variance that allows the two lots to be replatted as one. At a minimum, the City will require a variance. From a practical difficulty standpoint and the uniqueness of the situation, the situation is not likely to be replicated elsewhere in the community. Page 2 of 3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, May 20, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse noted the City has approved what is going on out there and that he can see a practical difficulty since in the past any person who has had an opportunity to put a boat in a sheltered area has been allowed to do so. Thiesse stated in his view it is a reasonable proposal. Gettman stated he would support this as a plausible way of getting it resolved. Bollis indicated he is in favor of the dock on that side but that he does not know whether this is the easiest way to do it or not. Barnhart stated Staff did look at a number of solutions and that the City does not see a lot of variances when it comes to this. Staff feels this is the best solution they can think of. Erickson stated he is leaning in favor of the variance and that he agrees with the statement in the report that the end of the peninsula is not of the applicant's making and is unique to this property. Because of that uniqueness, there is not a concern about this setting a precedent. Libby indicated he also would support a variance. McCutcheon stated he agrees with the comments made by the other commissioners and that it appears to be an oversight. Ressler stated he does not see any malicious intent and that this appears to be an oversight. Barnhart noted the Planning Commission is not approving that other information just because it happens to show up on a plan. A practical difficulty is not that it showed up on a plan previously since a number of things show up on a plan but are later changed. Barnhart noted the Planning Commission did not approve other changes that were made to the plan after they reviewed it. Ressler stated this solution seems reasonable and that he would be in support of this particular application. Libby moved, Gettman seconded, to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000028, Steven Eggert on behalf of Lake West Development, Outlot A, Ivy Place, granting of a variance. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Page 3 of 3 Found Spike IVY PLACE KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Barbara Lupient, Trustee, and successor Trustees, of the Barbara Lupient Revocable Trust a/a/d April 13, 2000 and Richard Lupient, fee owner of the following described property situated in the State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin, to wit: Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Casco Point Addition Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as IVY PLACE and do hereby dedicate to the public for public use forever the easements for drainage and utility purposes as shown on this plat. In witness whereof said Barbara Lupient, Trustee, and successor Trustees, of the Barbara Lupient Revocable Trust u/a/d April 13, 2000, has hereunto set her hands this day of , 2018. STATE OF MINNESOTA, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2018, By: Barbara Lupient, Trustee, and successor Trustees, of the Barbara Lupient Revocable Trust u/a/d April 13, 200 Notary Numic, Hennepin County, Minnesota Notary Printed Name In witness whereof said Richard Lupient, has hereunto set his hands this day of Richard Lupient STATE OF MINNESOTA, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2018, By: Richard Lupient Notary Public, Hennepin County, Minnesota Notary Printed Name 2018. My Commission Expires: My Commission Expires: SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE I Rory L. Sysntelien do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on the plat; that all monuments depicted on the plat have been or will be set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat. Dated this day of , 2018. Rory L. Synstelien, Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 44565 STATE OF MINNESOTA, COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Notary Public, Hennepin County, Minnesota ORONO, MINNESOTA day of , 2018, by Rory L. Synstelien Notary Printed Name My Commission Expires: This plat of IVY PLACE was approved and accepted by the City Council of Orona, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this day of 2018. If applicable, the written comments and recommendations of the Commissioner of Transportation and the County Highway Engineer have been received by the City or the prescribed 30 day period has elapsed without receipt of such comments and recommendations, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subdivision 2. City Council of Orono, Minnesota By: , Mayor By: , Clerk RESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE SERVICES, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that taxes payable in 2018 and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat. Dated this day of , 2018. Mark V. Chapin, Hennepin County Auditor By: , Deputy SURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin County, Minnesota Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 3838.565 (1969), this plat has been approved this day of Chris F. Mavis, Hennepin County Surveyor By: REGISTRAR OF TITLES, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that the within plat of IVY PLACE was filed in this office this day of 2018. Martin McCormick, Registrar of Titles By: , Deputy 2018. REVISION SUMMARY FINAL PLAT 4 Most westerly corner of Lot 185, TAYLOR'S SUBDIVISION OF SPRING PARK LOTS Most southerly corner of Lot \ L \ 30 15 0 15 30 60 185, TAYLOR'S SUBDIVISION OF SPRING PARK LOTS SCALE IN FEET Bearings are based on the Hennepin County Coordinate System DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: 5 5 � a 2a - - - - - J L NOT TO SCALE Being 5 feet in width when adjoining side and rear lot lines, unless otherwise indicated, and 10 feet in width when adjoining right of way lines unless otherwise indicated, as shown on the plat. C0.2 'I f i " JL I Le G R 0 U P 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CivilSiteGroup.com PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM LA19-000028 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Zoning Chapter. Response: The property owner (Lake West) would like to propose a variance to deed the Outlot to the adjacent owner (Rusty Kocon). The new owner (Rusty Kocon) would be able to use their "principle" lot abutting the cove area to apply for a permanent dock similar to neighboring properties within the cove. Please note there was at one time already an existing dock for the previous owner of the property prior to Ivy Place final plat. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. Response: The original intent was a re -plat from three lots to two, technically not a subdivision. During the submittal process, docks were drawn on concepts, denoted on plans to be relocated, and proposed on site/landscape plans. The landowner (buyer at the time) had assumed this would not be an issue as it was not brought up during the approval process. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality as there are other permanent and temporary docks (approx. 17) within the cove. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Response: N/A 5. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116106, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. Response: Vacated right-of-way for less development. Three lots to two (re -plat), not technically a subdivision (discussed over the phone). 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. Response: N/A 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. Response: N/A 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. Response: The Outlot is immediate adjoining the property in question (Lot 1, Block 1 of Ivy Place). If granted, the variance would allow the properties to be re -platted as one, allowing a permanent dock on the south-east side abutting the cove. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. Response: N/A 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Response: The previous approval process led the owner of Lot 1, Block 1 to believe he could place a dock on the cove side of the property (on the Outlot). The granting of this application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Response: The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Response: The granting of this variance will not serve as a convenience to the applicant but will allow the ability to dock within the cove as approved in the original submitted plans for the Ivy Place development. AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 15 Date: June 10, 2019 Item Description: LA19-000044 — City of Orono Adoption of 2020-2040 Community Management Plan - Resolution Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart Agenda Planning Department Community Development Director Section: Report 1. Purpose. The purpose of this item is to consider Adoption, via resolution, the 2020-2040 Community Management Plan (CMP) completing the 2020-2040 Comprehensive Planning Process. To adopt, 4 of the 5 Council members must vote in the affirmative. 2. Background. As authorized by the City Council in December, 2018, and with changes authorized in February, 2019, staff submitted the 2020-2040 CMP to the Metropolitan Council (Met Council). Minor, formatting/ organizational changes requested of the Met Council are shown as underlined and/ or struck - through text. At their meeting, following the recommendation of the Community Development and Environmental committees, the Metropolitan Council authorized for adoption the plan, with some comments. Their approval document is provided as Exhibit C. A timeline of recent activity is provided as Exhibit D. The full plan, separated by chapter, is attached as Exhibits B-1 through B-11. Staff has prepared a resolution approving the CMP as proposed. Neither the Plan nor the resolution reflects recent Council discussion regarding the following: Re -guide the NW corner of Willow Drive and Wayzata Blvd to density "like the Stonebay townhomes". The Stonebay townhomes has been developed at a density of 6 units per acre. 2. Re -guide the city property east of the Long Lake Fire Station on Willow to park/ open space. Park/ Open Space is intended for large natural or open spaces, not local pocket parks. Re -guiding the property to park removes this area from the development computations. Public parks are a permitted use in all residential zoning districts. The Council may approve the resolution as drafted (and the Plan as provided), or direct staff to formally introduce changes to the Plan, which will need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and Council prior to resubmitting to the Met Council. Staff's analysis of these two changes, and their impact on the plan follows. Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: JS)�6Z Approved By _T GW The potential changes suggested by the Council are shown in red text. : qF Impacts to Net Density by Land Use (Table 3B-5) and Household projections (Table 3B- 6). Based on properties identified in Table 3B-4. Planned Development Area Net Residential Acres (NRA) # of units (NRA x lowest guided density) Urban Low Residential (0.5-2 u/a) 139.9 62.5 Urban Medium Residential (3-10 u/a) 11.0 32.9 Remove Willow Drive "Garden" Property -3.4 -10.2 Add Willow and Wayzata Property 11.1 Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Residential (10-20 u/a) 47.2 471.9 Urban High Density Residential (20-25 u/a) 16.2 324.0 Remove Willow and Wayzata Property -73.8 Totals Per Plan (Table 3B-5) 214.2 891.3 Net Density of Sewered Growth 4.16 Adjusted Totals 210.8 818.35 Adjusted Net Density 3.88 RP Household Growth (Table 313-6) by year 2030 by year 2040 Required 523 340 Provided 547 343 Adjusted 547 270 Adjusted Surplus (Deficit) 24 (70) Both of these actions would impact the plan in meeting its density and growth projection goals. Sewered density. The city is required to maintain a minimum 3.0 units per acre within its sewered areas. With these proposals, the Net Density decreases from 4.16 units per acre to 3.88, still above the minimum 3.0 units per acre. Sewered units. The city must also provide opportunities for the projected growth in the sewered areas for 2030 and 2040. If the Council wishes to enact the changes discussed, the Council will need to identify appropriate location for 70 new sewered households for the decade ending in 2040, either by expanding the MUSA, by increasing planned densities within the current boundary, or a combination of both. The Met Council requires a minimum density of 3 units per acre for new MUSA areas, to meet this density and the growth 24 acres of new MUSA area will need to be proposed. The comprehensive plan advisory committee and the Planning Commission recommended placing the density as proposed, rather than increasing density elsewhere. The Comprehensive Plan identifies a number of actions necessary to take within 9 months of adoption of the Plan. Major ones include: Actions Response Update the zoning map to reflect land use The zoning ordinance must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, per state statute. changes Historically, the City Council has approved a rezoning as part of a development proposal. Staff is researching options that will satisfy the state statute while preserving the Councils desire to additional review. Complete I&I mitigation assignment (Part Ongoing, projects included in Capital Improvement Plans 413, p10) Educate renters and owners on Fair Information to be distributed on the city website and as part of the rental licensing process. Housing practices (Part 3C, P 19). The potential zoning map changes are illustrated on Exhibit E. The City Code will also need to be reviewed to remove or update references to the 2008-2030 Comprehensive Plan, or to reflect the new land use goals and policies. These will be identified and prioritized in the future. 3. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends adoption of the 2020-2040 CMP as presented and resolution (Exhibit B), formally adopting the 2040 CMP. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt by Motion (and with at least 4 affirmative votes) the resolution adopting the 2020-2040 Community Management Plan. Exhibits Exhibit A. Resolution Draft Exhibit B-1 Chapter 1 Introduction Exhibit B-2 Chapter 2 Plan Foundation Exhibit B-3 Chapter 3A Environmental Protection Plan Exhibit B-4 Chapter 3B Land Use Plan Exhibit B-5 Chapter 3C Housing Exhibit B-6 Chapter 4A Transportation Exhibit B-7 Chapter 4B Sanitary Sewer Exhibit B-8 Chapter 4C Water Supple Exhibit B-9 Chapter 4D Public Services Exhibit B-10 Chapter 4E Parks/ Open Space/ and Trails Exhibit B-11 Chapter 5 Plan Implementation Exhibit C. Met Council authorization letter Exhibit D. Timeline Exhibit E. Zoning Map changes identified Exhibit F. Applicable State Statutes CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 041 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2020-2040 CITY OF ORONO COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FILE NO. LA18-000044 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation located within Hennepin County and within the planning jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Council; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1976 and with Minnesota Statutes Chapters 462 and 473, the City of Orono in November 1981 adopted a comprehensive municipal plan known as the 1980 City of Orono Community Management Plan to provide for the orderly development of the City; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the 1995 amendments to the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, the City of Orono in November 2001 adopted an update of the 1980 CMP entitled the 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan to provide for the continued orderly development of the City; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the Metropolitan Systems Statement issued to Orono by the Metropolitan Council in 2005, the City of Orono approved a revised, updated version of the 2000-2020 CMP, to be known as the 2008/-2030 Orono Community Management Plan; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the Metropolitan Systems Statement issued to Orono by the Metropolitan Council in 2015, the City of Orono approved a revised, updated version of the 2008-2020 CMP, to be known as the 2020-2040 Orono Community Management Plan ("the Plan"); and WHEREAS, on April 26, 2018, the Plan was distributed to neighboring communities and affected agencies; and WHEREAS, on August 27, 2018, the Plan was distributed to the Metropolitan Council for preliminary comment; and WHEREAS, after due published notice, on October 25, 2018 the City of Orono held an open house where interested parties could provide comment on the Plan; and WHEREAS, after due published notice, on November 19, 2018 the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the Plan, at which time public was able to comment; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the comments received from adjacent municipalities and other affected jurisdictions, as well as the preliminary comments received from the Metropolitan Council CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 041 in a letter dated November 13, the Plan was subsequently modified to address those comments; and after due published notice, on November 19, 2018 the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the Plan, at which time public was able to comment; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 473.858 requires a local government unit to submit its proposed comprehensive plan to the Metropolitan Council following recommendation by the Planning Commission and after consideration, but before final approval by the governing body of the local governmental unit; and WHEREAS, on December 10, 2018, the Orono City Council following review of the Plan, receipt of additional comments , authorized the Plans submittal to the Met Council, and WHEREAS, on December 27, 2018, the 2020-2040 Community Management Plan was submitted to the Metropolitan Council. WHEREAS, on May 23, 2019, the Metropolitan Council formally granted approval of the Plan as revised, finding that the Plan meets all Metropolitan Land Planning Act requirements, conforms to the regional system plans including transportation, aviation, water resources management and parks, is consistent with Thrive MSP 2040, and is compatible with the plans of adjacent jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council, in addition to the Advisory Comments and Review record, adopted the following recommendations: 1. Advise the City: a. That is changes are made to the City's Water Supply Plan resulting from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) review of the Plan, the city will need to provide the Council and the DNR with the updated information. b. To provide the date the City adopts the final Local Water Management Plan (LWMP) to the Council when that Plan is approved. A copy of the final adopted LWMP that will be included in the final Plan document must be submitted to the Council, if it differs from the draft version the Council reviewed. c. To revise Table 7 of the DNR template to reflect the fact that there are several systems in Orono, because the Water Supply chapter of the plan still shows inconsistent information from the Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP) submitted to the DNR. d. To implement the advisory comments in the Review Record for Transportation, Forecasts, and Housing. 2. Approve the City of Orono's Comprehensive Sewer Plan component of the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 041 WHEREAS, on May 23, 2019 the Metropolitan Council indicated to the City via letter authorizing the 2020-2040 Comprehensive Plan be into effect. This action requires formal resolution of the city Council NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby formally adopts the 2020-2040 City of Orono Community Management Plan as approved by the Metropolitan Council, as the City's official comprehensive municipal plan pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.355. This Plan shall also be cited as the Community Management Plan or CMP. The intents, purposes, and policies of the CMP shall be implements by the ordinances of the City, which ordinances shall hereafter be amended as necessary to be in conformance with the objectives of this Plan. The CMP may from time to time be amended by resolution of the City Council, following a public hearing. Any amendments shall be subject to review by the Metropolitan Council. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this day of , 20_. ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor CMP Part 1. Introduction TABLE OF CONTENTS CMP PART 1 INTRODUCTION Purpose Title Scope Overview Figure 1-1: The Urbanization Spiral Community Management Plan Organization Appendix Map 1-1: Regional Location 2 2 2 4 5 City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 1, Page 1 CMP Part 1. Introduction CMP PART 1 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE The purpose of this plan is to document and reinforce the established goals, policies and principles of the City of Orono as a guide for orderly and economic private development and public improvement in the years ahead. Major emphasis is on the needs and involvement of people. The Plan discusses how people can manage their environment, how people have become involved with municipal decisions, how people can create and continue the lifestyle and community that we know as Orono. This Plan is a revised, expanded and updated version of Orono's 2010-2030 Community Management Plan (CMP). It reflects the City's long-established philosophy, goals and policies that were first introduced in the 1974 Orono Comprehensive Guide Plan and later solidified within the 1980 Orono CMP. Major policy direction remains relatively unchanged but the content has been revised and updated to reflect the changes the City and the Metropolitan Area has undergone since 2010. TITLE The title of this document is the Community Management Plan. Throughout this document, the Community Management Plan will be abbreviated as "CMP". SCOPE The scope of this Plan is intended to include almost every factor that influences investments or improvements in the City, whether by private individuals or government involvement. Each section of the Plan stands on its own merits yet is an integral part of the whole. For instance, Orono's history and natural features are explored as factors explaining and constraining contemporary decisions. The Land Use Management section becomes the primary tool for formulation of zoning regulations and development proposals. Planning of transportation, recreation and sewer services allows for coordination of capital investment with land management and regional system capacity. Relevance of the Plan is important as concepts must be current to be fully understood or implemented. Regular and ongoing reviews are to be conducted by the Planning Commission and City Council to renew this understanding in light of changing attitudes and events. Careful reading will reveal that Orono's past history and current goals have remained essentially the same. Therefore, the reader is advised that for all intents and purposes, this Plan and its impact on local development are intended to be permanent. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 1, Page 2 CMP Part 1. Introduction OVERVIEW The basic concerns and philosophies of Orono citizens have evolved through the City's history and its intimate ties with Lake Minnetonka. Map No. 1-1 locates Orono in relationship to Minneapolis and the western suburbs. More importantly, it clearly indicates the relative importance of Orono to the total watershed of Lake Minnetonka. No other city bordering the Lake has as much water area, as much shoreline, or as much watershed land area as Orono. Orono is committed to effective land use planning and permanent environmental protection in an effort to preserve the great resources of Lake Minnetonka for the benefit of all regional residents. The people of Orono, though of diverse interests, have been drawn together by a slow-paced lifestyle and quiet amenities. Their common tie is a commitment to maintain those attractions of which Lake Minnetonka is the most visible example. In the 1950's, increasing urbanization all around Lake Minnetonka threatened to environmentally "kill" the Lake by uncontrolled discharge of nutrients. Citizens became concerned. Their first reaction caused lake area municipalities to begin extending sewer systems to eliminate individual septic system discharges. This helped the situation at first, but by 1968 lake water quality was still diminishing. Citizens became alarmed. At this point the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency joined with the newly organized Lake Minnetonka Conservation District to commission a study of lake pollution. Entitled "A Program for Preserving the Quality of Lake Minnetonka", the "Harza Study" (as it will be referred to hereafter) found that this nutrient input, particularly phosphorus, was being generated from two principal sources: the seven municipal sewage treatment plants; and urban stormwater runoff coming from within the watershed. The first pollution source, nutrient rich effluent outflowing from the municipal sewage treatment plants, was systematically eliminated during the late 1970's and early 1980's by multi-million dollar construction of sewer interceptors designed to remove effluent from the watershed. But stormwater runoff is a different matter. Compared to point -source sewage pollution, the collection and treatment of non- point source stormwater runoff is relatively difficult, costly, and often impractical. Lake Minnetonka is fed by neither spring nor tributary. The sole replenishment comes from storm water runoff from the watershed, of which over one-third flows from or through Orono. Lake Minnetonka, second only to Lake Michigan in this region, has an extremely long 25 -year flush -out period. This means that careful and continuous attention must be given to the quality of runoff into the Lake. The various studies conducted in the 1960's and 1970's recommended that lakeshore density be limited and that the natural system of wetlands and marshes be forever protected and preserved as the only practical, economic method of filtering nutrients from storm water runoff. Implementation of density limitations relies on breaking the "Urbanization Spiral", the development paradox that results from providing urban -level municipal services for new development. The paradox is that if municipal services are extended into rural zones, the cost of these services taxes the land to the point that higher density development is required. Particularly in the case of sewers, even if extended to City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 1, Page 3 CMP Part 1. Introduction existing pockets of development "to solve a pollution problem", inflation, topography and sparse settlement combine to increase costs. Such costs can be paid only by increasing development densities, which in turn cause increasing levels of storm water nutrient pollution. This spiral results in even greater levels of pollution than the original sewage 'problem' might have been. For example, Eugene Hickock's 1973 Storm Water Impact Statement for the Metropolitan Council identified up to 10 times more phosphorus alone from urban storm water runoff than from Orono's low-density rural land use. In response to the above concerns, Orono became a nationally recognized leader in espousing environmental protection. Land use planning since the 1950's has stressed the environmental advantages of low density development. Shorelands, wetlands and natural drainage systems have been preserved by tradition and by ordinance. Comprehensive planning was underway by the mid-1960s. In 1974, the first published Plan, as approved by the Metropolitan Council, established as its foremost guiding principle the protection and preservation of Lake Minnetonka and its associated wetlands. The 1980 Community Management Plan and its subsequent 2000-2020 update reinforced these principles and have served as the basis for management of development in Orono for the past three decades. LAKE POLLUTION NON -POINT SOURCE INCREASED HARD COVER MORE RUN-OFF MORE POLLUTANTS FROM LAKE POLLUTION LAWN- FERTILIZATION. POINT SOURCE 9 VEHICLE EXHAUST IMMINE SOU OE-ICEING AND SfiREET HEALTH HAZARD SWEEPING ALTERNATIVES STUDIED SEWER EXTENSION ORDERED LAND SUBDIVISION TO SPftEA6 UNIT COSTS OF ASSESS- MENTS IPROPERTY ASSESSMENTS POSE FINANCIAL BURDEN DUE TO SPECIAL CONSTRUC- TION IN WETLAND TERRAIN, LARGE LOT ACREAGE AND SCATTERED DEVELOPMENT Figure 1-1: The Urbanization Spiral Illustrates the development paradox that faces Orono if municipal services are extended into rural areas. Orono has consistently made the decision to limit the extension of urban services into rural areas. The combination of low density residential development, establishment of privately owned and maintained roads, and use of septic systems and wells has provided Orono with unique and sustainable neighborhoods that are not only self-sufficient but collectively have a low environmental impact. Enforcement of the policies necessary to create and maintain these rural neighborhoods has been consistent and effective. Today, Orono still faces the same issues as other outlying communities, although Orono is no longer the 'outer ring' that it was 20-30 years ago. Development pressures continue as speculators view our remaining open spaces seeking to put them to a "highest and best use". The Metropolitan Council has recognized an City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 1, Page 4 CMP Part 1. Introduction urgency to curtail "Urban Sprawl" by making more efficient use of the remaining undeveloped land within the 7 -county Metro area. Yet Orono has an obligation to its residents, both those who live on the Lake and those who reside in the rural area, to preserve these two complementary lifestyles. Orono accepts its obligation to the citizens of Minnesota who treasure Lake Minnetonka as a unique and valuable natural resource and who expect it to remain in a usable condition. Orono's ongoing plan to preserve the watershed of Lake Minnetonka is sound, environmentally correct, and in step with regional planning for metropolitan needs. COMMUNITY MANA GEMENT PLAN OR GANIZA TION This document has been divided into six parts in order to make it more readable and understandable to citizens and other interested parties: Part 1 forms a brief introduction and overview of planning concerns. Part 2 provides a foundation for Orono's plan - the history, community philosophy and general goals and policies that have shaped and will continue to guide Orono's planning strategy. Part 3 encompasses Orono's Land Use Plan, defining how Orono will develop in the coining two decades, and defining Orono's housing and environmental protection programs. Part 4 contains detailed plans for how Orono will provide a balanced and appropriate level of public facilities and services, addressing transportation systems, sewer and water facilities, parks and open spaces, and the broad range of community services such as public safety, education, private utility and communications systems. Part 5 contains a brief description of ordinances and programs for implementation of the Plan, and expresses the City's commitment to coordination of services and programs with surrounding municipalities as well as other governmental agencies. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 1, Page 5 2040 Comprehensive Plan Regional Location Map^^ BOLTON ti M & MENK ,may Orono, MN February 2018 s' Real People. Real Solutions. 41 Wright Co Sherburne Co Sibley Co Le Sueur Co Legend e de St. Paul & Minneapolis Metro Counties Other Counties 0 10 Miles Source: MnGeo nepin Co wMWV Scott Co Isanti Co Ramsey Co St. eaPaul Minnpolis Rice Co Chisago Co Washington Co Z71 Goodhue Co ap 1-1 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation TABLE OF CONTENTS CMP PART 2 COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOUNDATION Historical Background 2-1 Table 2-1: Important Dates in Orono's History 2-4 Community Demographic Profile 2-5 Chart 2-1: Population 2-7 Table 2-2: Orono Population, Households, & Employment 2-8 Table 2-3: Population Changes in Surrounding Communities 2-8 Table 2-4: Household Trends 2-9 Table 2-5: Population by Age 2-9 Table 2-6: Households by Current Age of Householder 2-10 Table 2-7: Household Income Ranges 2-10 Community Philosophy 2-10 Community Goals and Policies 2-12 Comprehensive Planning Strategy 2-18 City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 1 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation CMP PART 2 COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOUNDATION HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Every community has a unique character arising from its location, natural resources, history and population. Orono is no exception to this rule. But Orono's plan for the future may be exceptional, because its basic premise is the maintenance and furtherance of our very own unique features. Orono's corporate history dates to 1858 when Minnesota became a state, and western Hennepin County was surveyed and divided into townships. All of Orono south of Watertown Road was located in Excelsior Township, with the area north of Watertown Road being located in Medina Township. But the citizens of Orono, few as they were, found the going difficult in having to negotiate the lake in order to transact business in far -away Excelsior. So, in 1868, the townships were realigned with everything north of the Narrows becoming part of Medina. The separate Township of Orono was created out of the southern half of Medina on April 9, 1889. The name Orono was brought to the area by Major George Brackett, a native of Orono, Maine, who first used it to designate the area now known as Brackett's Point. Orono Township once included areas now part of neighboring cities. Minnetonka Beach was incorporated out of Medina Township in 1884. Long Lake was incorporated from Orono Township in 1906. Long Lake expanded, Wayzata grew westward, and then Spring Park was incorporated in 1952. Finally, effective January 1, 1955, Orono Village was incorporated encompassing all the remaining parts of the township including the settlements of Navarre, Crystal Bay, Orono and Bederwood (Stubbs Bay). A number of minor boundary changes have occurred since then, including detachment of the tip of Three Points Peninsula to Mound in 1963; annexation of small strip from Minnetrista in 1980 for McCulley Road; detachment of the Fleming Trail Addition to Long Lake in 1993; and annexation of property along North Ferndale and West Ferndale Roads from Wayzata in 1994 in exchange for detachment of a property along Highway 12 to accommodate Wayzata's public works facilities. The history of Orono's development is one of conversions: conversion of the Lake Minnetonka shoreline from Big Woods to summer homes in the late 1800's and early 1900's, a second conversion from lakeshore summer homes to year round residences since WWII; and conversion of the off -lake woods and prairie openings into farmland in the 19th century, with a more recent conversion from farms to low-density residential homesites beginning in the 1950's. Orono's first Township zoning regulations were adopted in 1950, and grew progressively more strict through the next two decades. Several residential and commercial zones were initially established, requiring minimum lot area and width standards, and defining allowable uses. The first wetland protection ordinance was established in 1963, about the same time that municipal sewers were first provided to the Navarre area. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 3 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation Perhaps the single most important event that has shaped Orono's development in the last half -century was the City-wide rezoning in 1975. Much of the City had been zoned for residential development with 1 -acre lots by 1967, with most of the Navarre area around Lake Minnetonka being zoned 1/2 -acre, and a few areas in northeast Orono requiring 1-1/2 or 2 -acre lot sizes. The 1975 rezoning took into account two important factors. First, that creating and maintaining a low density of development in the watershed is critical to preserving Lake Minnetonka; and second, that lots must be large enough to accommodate on- site sewage treatment systems on a permanent basis, due to the high cost of sewering and the "urbanization spiral". As a result, the 1975 rezoning established a minimum lot size of 2 acres (or 5 acres in northwest Orono) for 80% of Orono's land area. This had a dramatic effect not only in slowing development, but in effect capping the City's ultimate potential population at around 10,000 rather than the 30-40,000 that had been predicted under typical suburban development scenarios. Purposely Left Blank City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 4 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation Table 2-1: IMPORTANT DATES IN ORONO HISTORY 1803 The Louisiana Purchase: U.S. acquires 828,000 square miles of land from France for about 3C an acre 1822 W. J. Snelling and Joe Brown explore the upper reaches of Minnehaha Creek and sight Lake Minnetonka 1851 Treaty of Traverse des Sioux opens lands west of Mississippi for settlement; ratified by U.S. Senate in 1852 1852 Hennepin County organized; first township surveys conducted 1853 First settlers arrive in what is now Orono: Rev. Stephen Hull at 'The Narrows'; Stephen Bean of Maine at north shore of Stubbs Bay; John Carman at Spring Park; James and Francis Maxwell on Maxwell Bay. 1855 Arrival of many settlers in the Orono and Long Lake area: David Lydiard, Eleazer Dickey and Miles Bayer, all of Nova Scotia; the Edwin Turnham and George Maxwell families settle in Medina; the French, Fox and Fogelman families bring first horses to region; John Carman filed first subdivision in Orono, "Town of Tazaska" for land lying between North Arm, Forest Lake, West Arm and Crystal Bay, on May 3, 1855 1856 First sawmill in Orono on the Watertown Road, erected by Long Lake founder George Knettle; 'Tamarack' Post Office begun at home of Henry Stubbs; first stageline extended through Orono to Irvin Shrewsbury's corner in Independence 1858 Minnesota becomes 32nd state 1860 The Governor Ramsey, built by Charles Galpin, becomes first steamboat on Lake Minnetonka; many area roads surveyed by B.F. Christlieb, including "Harrington Road" (now Ferndale Road); final year that Chief Shakopee and his band of Sisseton Dakota winter at Teepee Hill (Union Cemetery ). 1861 Union Cemetery Association formed 1863 First church in area, Presbyterian Church of Medina, formed in the Old North (Lydiard) School, near Wolsfeld Lake. 1868 Railroad reaches Long Lake; land on north shore of Lake Minnetonka annexed from Excelsior township to Medina township 1870 Joel Stubbs patents sorghum processing unit, replacing wheat as major crop for a decade 1873 First dredging and widening of 'Hull's Narrows' opens upper lake for navigation 1880 George A. Brackett purchases 'Starvation Point' from Nathan Stubbs, renames it'Orono Point' after boyhood home in Maine; Saga Hill colony begun on north shore of North Arm 1882 James J. Hill's spur line to Minnetonka Beach opens in conjunction with grand opening of Hotel Lafayette in June, 1882, helping to make Lake Minnetonka an internationally known resort destination; development grew up around the railroad stops such as Crystal Bay and Navarre 1884 Areas of Minnetonka Beach, Navarre and Spring Park added to Medina Township 1889 Town of Orono formed from parts of Medina and Excelsior Townships 1894 Village of Minnetonka Beach formed 1898 Formation of Minnetonka Fruit Growers Association 1906 Village of Long Lake incorporated, first telephone lines begun City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 5 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation 1906 New Orono town hall constructed in Crystal Bay 1913 New library begun at Long Lake Bank 1917 St. George Catholic Church founded 1923 Leo Feser begins building Orono Golf Course 1932 Trinity Lutheran Church formed 1930's Drought hits midwest, Lake Minnetonka level drops 6 feet 1950 First Orono Township Zoning Ordinances adopted 1951 Village of Spring Park incorporated 1955 Orono becomes an incorporated village 1963 Orono sewer plant constructed near French Lake, Navarre area provided with municipal sewers 1965 May 6 - Tornado devastates parts of Orono, Navarre hard hit 1970 Navarre municipal water system constructed 1974 Orono becomes a city; new zoning ordinances enacted to maintain low density development ca. 1973 U.S. Highway 12 freeway section extended to Orono's eastern border 1980 Orono sewer plant decommissioned, replaced by Metro interceptor transporting Orono's wastewater to Blue Lake Treatment Plant in Shakopee 1981 McCulley Road Ring Route opens to traffic providing an alternative to County Road 15 for east -west traffic 1989 Orono commemorates its Centennial Year 1992 Orono municipal offices, police, and public works relocated to new complex on Old Crystal Bay Road North across from Orono Schools 2000 Question of proposed consolidation with City of Long Lake receives positive response from Orono voters but fails in Long Lake 2000 William and Susan Lurton donate 39 acres for Passive, natural environmental park. 2001 City Council approves Orono Woods Senior Housing, creates first Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District 2006 Orono acquires Big Island Veterans Camp 2006 Navarre Fire Station 2 added 2008 Completion of new Highway 12 "Super 2" segment from Orono's eastern border to County Road 6 2015 Lakeview Golf Course redeveloped as residential development 2015 City expands Hackberry Park as part of a living trust with the Gleason Family 2016 Dayton property, one of the last Big Woods parcels, develops as estate residential. Sources: Excerpts from "Orono, Minnesota 1889-1989: 100 Years By the Waters of Minnetonka" edited by James R. Roehl, Excerpts from "Picturesque Minnetonka"published by Excelsior -Lake Minnetonka Historical Society, 1976, City files. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 6 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation COMMUNITYDEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE The population of Orono was estimated by the Met Council in 2016 as 7,691. This represents an increase of 254 people since 2010. Total number of households was estimated to be 3,037 in 2016, and increase from the 2,826 households reported in 2010. The persons per household has decreased steadily since 1970, then a high of 3.43 persons per household to 2.529 estimated now. The following Chart 2-1 illustrates Orono's relatively rapid growth during the period 1920-1950 (averaging around 60% per decade); a decline in the rate of growth from 1950 to 1970 (slowing to 20% per decade); and relatively slow growth since 1970 (less than 5% per decade). This slow rate of growth is expected to continue for the next 20 years based on the City's current zoning and planned land use and the amount of undeveloped property. Orono is primarily a bedroom community, with 70% of its land area guided for residential use. Annual population increases over the last 30 years have averaged less than 1% per year. Table 2-2 shows this growth in Households, Population, and Employment since 1970. Chart 2-1 10000 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 ' 0 Population 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 est. est. est. Sources: U.S. Census 1920-2000; Met Council Systems Statement Forecasts 2010-2040 City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 7 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation Table 2-2: Orono Population, Households, & Employment 1970 - 2040 Year 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 Population 6,787 6,845 7,285 7,538 7,437 8,100 8,800 9,500 Households 1,976 2,291 2,613 2,766 2,826 3,200 3,560 3,900 Persons per Household 3.43 2.99 2.79 2.73 2.63 2.53 2.47 2.44 Employment 500 809 980 951 1,562 1,700 1,780 1,800 Source: U.S. Census, Metropolitan Council Surrounding communities have undergone varied rates of population increase in recent decades, as shown in Table 2-3. Among cities that have a smaller geographic area that has been developed for many years (Long Lake, Mound, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, Wayzata) the population increase over the period 1970- 2010 has been relatively small, ranging from 0%-20%, with Spring Park being the anomaly in that it grew by nearly 54%, due to the construction of many multi -family housing units. Among those cities that have a larger geographic area approaching township size, the population increase for Independence, Minnetrista, & Medina was approximately 77 to 122%, with Plymouth and Orono at opposite ends of a much wider range. While Plymouth more than quadrupled its population over 30 years, Orono's increased by only 10%. Table 2-3: Population Change in Surrounding Communities 1960-2000 COMMUNITY 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Percentage Increase 2000- 2010 Percentage Increase 1970- 2010 Independence 1,446 1,993 2,640 2,822 3,236 3,524 9% 77% Long Lake 996 1,506 1,747 1,984 1,842 1,780 -3% 18% Medina 1,472 2,396 2,623 3,096 4,005 4,903 22% 105% Minnetonka Beach 544 586 575 573 614 522 -15% -11% Minnetrista 2,211 2,878 3,236 3,439 4,358 6,384 46% 122% Mound 5,440 7,572 9,280 9,634 9,435 9,045 4% 19% Orono 5,643 6,787 6,845 7,285 7,538 7,437 -1% 10% Plymouth 9,576 18,077 31,615 50,889 65,894 70,720 7% 291% Spring Park 668 1,087 1,465 1,571 1,717 1,674 -3% 54% Tonka Bay 1,204 1,397 1,354 1,472 1,547 1,486 4% 6% Wayzata 3,219 3,700 3,621 3,806 4,113 3,692 -10% 0% City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 8 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation Table 2-4 illustrates that household sizes have been decreasing steadily since 1970, to an anticipated level of 2.44 in 2040. Table 2-4: Household Trends Year Households Percent Change in Households Household growth Household Size (persons per household) 1970 1976 ---- 0-4 3.43 1980 2291 15.94% 315 2.99 1990 2613 14.05% 322 2.79 2000 2763 5.74% 150 2.73 2010 2862 3.58% 99 2.63 2020 (Est.) 3200 11.81% 338 2.53 2030 (Est.) 3560 11.25% 360 2.47 2040 (Est.) 1 3900 9.55% 1 340 2.44 Sources: 1970-2010 US Census Data; City records; Met Council forecasts Population by Aye Table 2-5 indicates the range in ages of Orono's population in 1990, 2000, and 2010. The Table also includes the Metropolitan Area's age breakdown in 2010. The average age in 1990 was 35 years with the median age being slightly higher at 36 years. As of the 2000 US Census, the median age had climbed substantially to 40.7 years, as compared to 34.2 years for the Twin Cities area. Table 2-5: Orono Population by Age, 1990, 2000 and 2010 Age Range 1990 Percentage 2000 Percentage 2010 Percentage Twin Cities MSA 0-4 484 6.60% 453 6.00% 344 4.63% 4.57% 5-9 549 7.50% 577 7.70% 580 7.80% 7.39% 10-14 542 7.40% 639 8.50% 664 8.93% 6.92% 15-19 487 6.70% 543 7.20% 532 7.15% 6.93% 20-24 302 4.10% 187 2.50% 181 2.43% 6.80% 25-34 978 13.40% 597 7.90% 400 5.38% 14.49% 35-44 1483 20.30% 1414 18.80% 914 12.29% 13.70% 45-54 1199 16.50% 1578 20.90% 1559 20.96% 14.66% 55-64 643 8.90% 874 11.60% 1323 17.79% 12.42% 65-74 408 5.60% 420 5.60% 587 7.89% 6.67% 75-84 162 2.20% 206 2.70% 269 3.62% 3.30% 85+ 48 0.70% 50 0.70% 84 1.13% 1.12% 7,285 7,538 7,437 Sources: 1990 & 2000 U.S. Census, Metropolitan Council City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 9 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Population by Age I 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 85+ ■ 1990 2000 2010 In 2010, Orono's median household income was $111,000 compared to that of the seven county metro area ($65,200), as shown in Table 2-7. In 2016, the gap widened, $119,400 to $70,900. Table 2-7: Median Household Income Orono 7 County Region 1990 Census $ 62,900.000 $ 36,600.00 2000 Census $ 88,300.000 $ 54,300.00 ACS 2006-2010 $ 111,000.000 $ 65,200.00 ACS 2012-2016 $ 119,400.000 $ 70,900.00 Source: US Census and American Community Survey COMMUNITY PHILOSOPHY Orono's Community Management Plan is a statement by the citizens as to what we are, where we have been, and where we are going. Orono will retain its own special identity through careful growth management in the best interest of the environment, the natural resources, the watershed of Lake Minnetonka and the community of citizens, both present and future. Orono's past growth and development patterns have been greatly influenced by the extensive and varied natural features found within our borders. Map 313-2a in the Land Use Section of this Plan indicates the pattern of land use as it exists today. It is apparent that development has been drawn by the lakes and clustered by the many bays and marshes. The most significant resource is Lake Minnetonka. The largest lake in the metropolitan Twin Cities City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 10 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation area, Minnetonka has 22.4 square miles of surface area and approximately 130 miles of shoreline running along numerous bays, channels and inlets. Lake Minnetonka's watershed, including the Lake itself, encompasses 123 square miles, and approximately 115 of the contributing watershed lies in Orono. Orono has two distinct personalities: The historically developed lakeshore and the rural woods, fields and open spaces. Both areas are primarily residential in nature, relying upon the existing town center of Navarre and other nearby cities such as Long Lake, Spring Park, Wayzata, Mound and Maple Plain for shopping, employment, and entertainment activities. The concern of the residents is to provide for continuing maintenance and preservation of those natural resources and social amenities which attracted people to Orono in the first place. Near the lake, density of development has to be regulated in order to minimize the resultant stormwater runoff pollution which, if unrestricted, could permanently alter and destroy the ecology of this very unique resource. Away from the lake, the natural marshes and wetlands are to be protected as the primary and most practical method of storm water filtration and enhancement. Steep slopes will be protected from over -development and erosion. Woodlands will be preserved as wildlife habitat, erosion protection, noise barriers and places for personal solitude and contentment. Orono's primary goal of preserving the water quality and level of Lake Minnetonka can only be accomplished by maintaining the basic integrity of the natural watershed. Open space is to be cherished and protected. In urbanized areas, recreational needs go hand-in-hand with the necessities of light, air, and solar access. Views of the lakeshore are invaluable property rights and personal experiences. In rural areas, the open fields and pastures are witness to the rural lifestyles active in Orono, and each property owner has the ability to provide for his own varied recreational needs. Institutional and commercial needs have been met by the existing centers with no need for future expansion. The geographic relationships between the many lake area communities expand the services available to Orono residents beyond the City's borders. The many industrial, retail -commercial and health care facilities readily accessible locally and regionally are adequate to serve the needs of Orono residents. School populations are increasing slowly, and new technologies and program demands require some expansion of existing facilities but no new centers. Orono's population growth has been historically slow, allowing for gradual service increases and fiscal security. Public facilities have been provided and will continue to be improved at a level sufficient for protection of health and safety, but unobtrusively enough to allow continued self- independence and maintenance of rural lifestyles. The basic philosophies of the CMP are to the extent possible consistent with the policies and guidelines contained in the Metropolitan Council's 112040 Regional Development Framework". Future urban density in the urban area along the lake is to be in -fill development where existing urban services are available. Rural land use in the low-density residential lakeshore areas and in the area away from the lake, is to be free from expanded urban services except when necessary to protect the public health or to eliminate negative impacts to surface and groundwaters. In all neighborhoods, provisions are made for protection of environmental assets and for provision of open space and recreational amenities. Housing opportunities in and near Orono are available in a wide range of alternatives consistent with the availability of public services. Existing and planned sewer and transportation facilities are capable of servicing the planned density of development, and land use patterns are consistent with and complementary to those of neighboring cities. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 11 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation Orono's managed growth policy means that the need to use and enjoy Lake Minnetonka will be balanced with protection of its water quality and accessibility for future generations. This policy means that the acceptance of growth and development changes will be balanced with conservation of our resources and natural amenities, and maintenance of our small town social character. Orono intends to remain two communities in one. The historically developed area around and near the Lake Minnetonka shoreline has been called "Urban" because of historic developed density with lots typically one acre in area or smaller and the availability of a limited level of urban services. The area away from the Lake has been termed "Rural" because of the lack of density, the abundance of open space and the citizens' commitment to maintain this type of development. The majority of Orono's 'Rural Area' has been zoned to require a minimum of 2 acres of dry buildable land per residential lot, with an area in the northwest corner of the City requiring at least 5 dry buildable acres. When wetlands and roads are factored in, nearly 80% of the City's land will be developed at densities averaging from approximately 1 unit per 3 gross acres up to 1 unit per 7 gross acres, sufficient to meet the City's environmental protection goals. The Metropolitan Urban Service Area ("MUSA") was established by Metropolitan Council to define the extent of areas where urban services will be provided and urban scale development will occur. As part of its Metro 2040 Regional Growth Strategy developed in 1996, Metropolitan Council for discussion purposes suggested that all but the northwestern tip of Orono will be in the MUSA by 2020. However, the City Council in the City's 2000-2020 CMP included a much smaller area within the MUSA to be consistent with the extent of City -planned municipal sewer extensions, and to be consistent with the development plans of our neighboring municipalities. Map 313 -lin the Land Use Chapter depicts Orono's defined "Urban" areas (where zoning density will range from 1 unit per acre to as many as 25 units per acre) and its "Rural" areas (where ultimate developed density will range from 1 unit per 5 acres to 1 unit per 2 acres). Orono's 2010-2030 MUSA as approved by Met Council in 2008 reflect a clear intent to bring municipal sewer to lakeshore and shoreland areas where needed, as well as to existing concentrations of population where septic systems may not be suitable for the long-term. But most of all, Orono citizens have located the MUSA line and have defined the urban and rural areas to be consistent with their plans for permanent use and development of the City. COMMUNITY GOALS AND POLICIES The goals and policies of this plan have met the test of time in Orono. The basic premise of maintaining distinct urban and rural neighborhoods continues a hundred -year tradition. The commitment to environmental preservation remains uppermost in the list of priorities of Orono's residents. The inter - reliance of lake area communities for shopping and commercial needs, for housing variety and for provision of basic public services is both historic and economically practical. The following goals and policies reflect the basic philosophies of Orono. Goals and policies affecting the entire City are grouped in an "overall" category. In addition, more detailed goals and policies are separated under their appropriate "urban" or "rural" classification. Finally, each separate CMP chapter has detailed goals and policies relating to that particular subject. GENERAL GOALS AND POLICIES Orono's Planning Goals City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 12 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation The foremost guiding principle and goal of Orono's planning is to protect and preserve Lake Minnetonka, and all Lakes and natural resources, its water quality, and its recreational assets. This goal continues a commitment established half a century ago. It includes preservation of the associated marshes, wetlands and natural drainageways as the primary, most practical and cost efficient method of preventing flooding and of filtering out the nutrient pollution from stormwater runoff. Maintaining a low-density rural area away from the lake, and managing the quality of runoff that flows directly to the lake, are important elements of this goal. 2 To retain the existing urban -rural land use pattern on a permanent basis. 3. To maintain our local character and identity. This local character is defined by strong neighborhoods, preponderance of wildlife, open spaces, lakes, and wetlands. 4. To protect and preserve our many natural resources including all lakes, creeks, marshes, wetlands, woodlands, groundwater and steep slopes. 5. To preserve open space, light, air, and solar access for all citizens while maintaining night sky. 6. To protect the general public health, safety and welfare through the development of ordinances, policies, and infrastructure that provides safe, efficient streets and neighborhoods, transportation alternatives, parks and opens spaces. To guide investment and reinvestment in the City at densities consistent with environmental protection and the planned land use pattern. The city's focus is in development and redevelopment is preservation of established character, rather than the creation of a new character. 8. To protect the financial stability of the City, providing an adequate level of services at efficient cost to the taxpayer. Orono's Planning Policies 1. Future development will be guided to protect and enhance the Lake Minnetonka watershed. Lake Minnetonka has local and regional significance as a vital ingredient in human experience and in the quality of life of all Orono residents. No development will be permitted that would have a detrimental effect on the Lake. 2 Urbanization will not be expanded into the existing rural areas. Orono's Community Management Plan is not a staged growth plan, and therefore the Urban area will not be expanded into the Rural Area. Urban services will not be expanded into the Rural Area except when necessary to protect the public health, or to avoid or eliminate negative impacts to surface and groundwaters. 3. The existing and planned Urban Area is fixed. Orono's Urban Area is fixed by the various elements of the Community Management Plan, and is shown on Map 313-1. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 13 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation 4. The boundary between Orono's Urban and Rural areas is not strictly defined by the MUSA boundary. The boundary between Orono's Urban and Rural areas is defined by the density of development and level of public services intended to be provided. Orono will not define its Urban and Rural areas based merely on whether municipal sewer is provided. The MUSA boundary has been amended by the City in the past to allow for retrofitting of existing Rural Area neighborhoods with municipal sewer, to solve existing sewage treatment problems. In these areas, the zoning has not changed to allow for additional development at urban densities, and urban services other than sewer have not been provided. 5. Future expansions of the sewer system into the Rural Area to solve existing neighborhood sewage treatment problems or along the lakeshore to avoid or eliminate potential negative impacts on lake water quality will not result in a reclassification of those neighborhoods from Rural to Urban. Expansion of the sewer system into the Rural Area will not result in the provision of additional urban services, nor will it result in changes to allowed development densities. 6. Additional urban development will occur only in the designated Urban Area. Additional urban development will occur in the urbanized areas consistent with the capacities of the existing urban services and at limited densities consistent with all environmental constraints. 7. Additional rural development will occur in the designated Rural Area. Additional rural residential and quasi -agricultural development can occur in the rural areas without taxing the limited capacities of existing rural services. Rural development will occur at limited densities consistent with self-supporting on-site sewer and water services and with maintenance of natural amenities, open space and other rural community characteristics. 8. Natural features and sensitive environments will be protected by ordinances based upon extensive inventory, analysis and established environmental protection guidelines. Natural resource information will be used and evaluated in review of all significant land use developments. Ordinance provisions will be reasonably established, fairly interpreted and strictly enforced. 9. Historically significant buildings, places and settings will be identified and preserved. The character of Orono receives much of its identity from our unique pattern of development. Individual sites provide a glimpse into the past and are a valuable addition to Orono Character. These sites include the Orono Golf Course, and the Pillsbury Summer House. Programs will be established to identify and help preserve this heritage for future generations. Where necessary, special consideration will be made to encourage retention of significant public or private amenities. 10. Housing programs will be pursued to provide safe, affordable homes for all citizens. Housing opportunities will be provided for citizens of all ages and income City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 14 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation levels either within Orono or within the adjacent town centers of Long Lake and Spring Park where the necessary support services for a wider range of housing opportunities are readily available. Rehabilitation programs will be identified and stressed to increase the livability and energy efficiency of the existing housing stock. 11. Transportation facilities will be provided and improved consistent with local service needs and with a coordinated program of area -wide transportation priorities. Transportation planning will be sensitive to local land use and environmental concerns, and to local service needs. Through traffic adds significant traffic level through limited corridors through the lake region. The city will encourage its transportation partners to develop and implement improvements and transportation alternatives to ensure safe and efficient travel. Levels of maintenance will vary between urban and rural areas. Alternative routings and alternative transportation modes will be explored. 12 Programs and services will be coordinated between the many interrelated governmental agencies. Orono will continue to pursue coordinated services with the County, with adjacent municipalities, with the school districts and with specialized districts such as lake conservation, watershed or joint powers districts, all for the purpose of providing consistent, high quality services at affordable cost to the taxpayer. 13. Orono strives to establish a low profile governmental presence emphasizing individual citizen responsibility rather than over- inclusive governmental authority. Orono recognizes that the individual citizen often can do for himself more quickly, efficiently and at lesser cost, things that in other areas are left to government by default. It is here that the strength of the Orono citizens has its most direct benefit in maintaining our rural, small-town vitality. 14. Orono will continue to emphasize active citizen participation in policy formation and policy administration. Local meetings have always had the friendly, open-door characteristic of New England Town Meetings. Communication with the residents, both on general matters and on specific neighborhood development proposals, will continue to be a priority policy of this Plan and of this City. Education will continue to be a critical element in establishment and administration of City policies. 15. It is Orono's firm conviction that the goals, policies and programs outlined in this CMP undeniably in the best interests of all Orono citizens, both current and future. This Plan emphasizes full use of existing public services and facilities without leap -frog expansion of unnecessary services into Orono's rural areas. This Plan reinforces the national concern for energy conservation through retrofitting and rehabilitation of existing structures, through coordinated transportation planning and through emphasis on natural rather than mechanical solutions to storm water and waste water treatment. This Plan emphasizes reliance on and efficient use of natural features and existing services rather than arbitrary duplication of efforts between competing municipalities. This Plan is built on understanding and acceptance of Orono's unique location and environmental constraints. Working with these factors will improve our quality of life; ignoring them would destroy it. This plan serves future residents of City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 15 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation Orono through the preserve and enhancement of the uniqueness of Orono. Urban Area Goals and Policies Urban Community Goals 1. To maintain the identity and small town character of the individual neighborhoods. Urban developments will be developed to continue the architecturally diverse house pattern previously established. 2. To provide opportunities for neighborhood commerce, education and social facilities to serve Orono's urban and rural residents alike. 3. To improve the quality of life and neighborhood aesthetics while maintaining the existing diversity of housing and shopping opportunities. 4. To prevent overly dense development or any excessive demand for services which would in any way adversely affect Lake Minnetonka or its associated wetlands or drainage areas. 5. To provide municipal facilities and services at a level consistent with small town urban requirements. Urban Planning Policies 1. Future urban development will be carefully integrated into the existing neighborhoods. 2. The City will encourage commercial facilities and social centers that complement the existing available services. The city recognizes the value commercial facilities and social centers have on the quality of life for Orono residents. The City will favor those developments oriented toward local neighborhood needs, recognizing the integrated service area of all adjoining lake -area communities. 3. Private landowners and developers will be encouraged to improve the image of their neighborhoods. Programs will be pursued to encourage maintenance and upkeep of all properties and to promote the rehabilitation of older or under -used properties. Commercial areas will be encouraged to provide a coordinated approach to identity, aesthetic and neighborhood appeal. 4. Urban developments will be screened for environmental sensitivity. Most of Orono's urban neighborhoods are located very close to Lake Minnetonka; therefore any urban development has the potential for direct adverse impact on the lake. Storm water runoff control, erosion and sedimentation are particular concerns requiring careful design attention in all new urban developments. In addition, particular care will be taken to preserve open spaces, wooded areas and solar access. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 16 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation 5. Urban developments will be limited to the extent that they can be adequately served by the existing or planned public facilities and services. New development will not be permitted to exceed the existing or planned capacity of local roads, utilities, parks, police and fire protection. Where development within the urban area requires local extension of roads or utilities, such extension will be the full responsibility of the developer, not the general taxpayer. 6. Higher levels of public services will be provided in the urban area than in the rural area. The greater land use density and the greater number of residents combine to require more intensive levels of public services. Police, fire, and ambulance calls are more frequent. Roads, parking lots, parks, and playgrounds require more maintenance. Public sewer and water is necessary because of population density and proximity to the lake. All of these factors combine to increase the cost of government in the urban portions of the city. Rural Area Goals and Policies Rural Community Goals 1. To maintain the rural character of open spaces and closeness to the natural environment. 2. To retain the opportunity for rural commerce such as farming, orchards, greenhouses, stables and similar activities which require limited services but relatively large amounts of open space. 3. To retain the opportunity for a diversity of housing types and alternative use expectations. 4. To prevent the encroachment of urban development or any activity which would in any way adversely affect Lake Minnetonka or its associated watershed. 5. To evaluate public service requests so as to limit the financial burdens on the community and the landowners alike. Rural Planning Policies Future rural developments will be guided so as to have minimal impact on the land or on the existing rural neighborhoods. Rural developments will be permitted only at rural densities and only where the land is capable of self-supporting the necessary on-site sewer and water services. Care will be exercised to ensure that no new development encroaches upon its neighbor's open space activities. 2. Rural neighborhoods will be reserved for low-density residential and quasi - agricultural land uses. Commercial services will continue to be provided in the urban areas of Orono and adjoining municipalities. No new commercial or industrial activities will be permitted in the rural service area except those quasi -agricultural uses that do not require central sewer or other urban services. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 17 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation 3. Rural developments will be screened for environmental sensitivity. Most of Orono's rural land includes major or minor drainageways and wetlands all intricately tied to Lake Minnetonka. Therefore, each rural development will require particular care to prevent encroachment on these vital resources and to ensure protection of the soil vegetation and drainage patterns. In addition, consideration will be given to protection of woodlands and special open vistas having general public benefit, as well as protection and enhancement of drainageways and water quality; protection and enhancement of ecological communities; reinforcement and establishment of ecological connections throughout the City; augmentation and preservation of enclosure and buffering; preservation and improvement of views; and preservation or reinterpretation of local landmarks. 4. Rural developments will be limited to the extent that they can be served by the existing or planned public facilities and services. New development will not be permitted if it requires the extension of unplanned urban services into the rural area. Privately constructed and maintained roads and recreational facilities will be favored over requirements for additional public facilities. Buildings and structures must be located and designed for rural levels of police and fire protection. 5. Special planning considerations are required for those rural areas located on Lake Minnetonka islands. It is impossible for the City to provide island residents with normal public services such as police, fire, ambulance, sanitation or transportation. Therefore, all of these needs must be met by the individual property owners who choose to develop land on the islands. Because of this combination of factors, the City has determined that private island development must be managed in a manner that allows for private individual use of recreational property only in strict compliance with enhanced development and environmental performance standards applicable specifically to the islands. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING STRATEGY PLANNING GOALS 1. To identify community characteristics, needs, issues and aspirations. 2. To formulate and maintain long-term goals for future community growth and management. 3. To formulate and maintain policies, ordinances and programs designed to implement the community goals. 4. To continue, rather than change, the direction of development and preservation established by previous Community Management Plans. PLANNING POLICIES 1. The CMP is designed as a management tool for city officials, staff and citizens in the conduct of both public and private activity within the city. 2. The CMP is designed to encourage effective and coordinated methods of implementation to City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 18 CMP Part 2. Community Management Plan Foundation properly balance private incentives and the protection of the public interest. 3. The CMP is designed to help coordinate the various implementation tools such as regulations, ordinances, public procedures, and public expenditures. 4. The CMP is intended to be a living document to be used on a day to day basis. 5. The CMP is intended to be reviewed and updated when necessary. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 2, Page 19 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS CMP PART 3A ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN Environmental Protection Plan 3A-2 Table 3A-1: Lake Minnetonka Physical Statistics 3A-4 Table 3A-2: Lake Sizes 3A-4 Table 3A-3: Streams 3A-5 Orono's Natural Resources 3A-7 Figure 3A-1: Land Cover 3A-9 Orono as a Rural Oasis 3A-10 Surface Water Management Plan 3A-11 Flood plain Management 3A-14 Shoreland Management 3A-14 Solar Access Protection 3A-14 Table 3A-4: Solar Potential 3A-14 Figure 3A-2: Solar Potential 3A-15 Quality of Life Preservation 3A-17 Environmental Protection Policies 3A-17 Appendices Map 3A-1: Lake Minnetonka Map 3A-2: Wetlands and Drainageways Map 3A-3: Soil Associations Map 3A-4: MLCCS Level 1 Land Cover Map 3A-5: Flood Map Map 3A-6: Shoreland Overlay Appendix 3A -A Surface Water Management Plan City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 1 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan CMP PART 3(A) ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN The presence and character of relatively undisturbed natural resource areas including lakes, marshes, wetlands, and woodlands is a major factor affecting the character of Orono. LAKE MINNETONKA Lake Minnetonka is the single most significant natural feature in Orono and in the entire western part of Hennepin County. Lake Minnetonka, as shown on Map 3A-1, is actually a series of separate lakes or "bays" interconnected by narrows or channels. The outlet of Lake Minnetonka is at Gray's Bay in the City of Minnetonka, where it discharges to Minnehaha Creek which eventually flows into the Mississippi River. ■ Lake Minnetonka has substantial public value as a recreational asset, as an environmental resource and as a setting for private residential development. Lake Minnetonka is dependent upon watershed runoff for all replenishment. All water is received from precipitation falling within the immediate watershed. Most of this water enters the Lake by direct runoff through a series of five major streams and their associated lakes, marshland and sub -watersheds. Lake Minnetonka's ecology makes it easily susceptible to pollution hazards. The combination of a single -source local water supply, relatively small watershed area, many channel restrictions between separate bays, and a single outlet, have resulted in Lake Minnetonka having an extremely long 25 -year flush out period for complete water change. The hazard is that once pollutants enter the Lake, they tend to remain for a long time and they are not easily diluted. ■ Lake Minnetonka has historically suffered from two problems which directly affect its environmental health and its value as a public amenity. One problem which has been worsening with urbanization trends is a deterioration in water quality caused by eutrophication. Eutrophication is the aging process by which natural waters are enriched with nutrients that may stimulate excessive plant growth, including floating algae, attached algae, and rooted weeds. Eutrophication may occur naturally, as sediments accumulate in lake basins over geologic time or it may be induced artificially as a result of human activities, as in Lake Minnetonka. Much of Lake Minnetonka has become more eutrophic during the past century, but sedimentation has been negligible. Instead, the accelerated eutrophication of the Lake, which is due to increased inputs of nutrient elements, particularly phosphorus and nitrogen, is evidenced by the increased growth of algae and weeds. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 2 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan ■ The other problem is hydrologic instability. Because the lake level is dependent upon precipitation, wide ranges in water elevation have occurred over the years. During the 1930's, a general drought left the lake below normal level for 11 years with a maximum decline of more than 6 feet. In recent years, however, more urbanization has increased the amounts of direct storm water runoff resulting in high water levels and in some cases flooding problems for low-lying properties. Management of runoff and protection of water quality have now become primary objectives of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Map 3A-1 illustrates Lake Minnetonka's relationship with the city of Orono. The problems of Lake Minnetonka were intensively studied by many agencies in the 1960's and 19701s. These agencies included the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the Metropolitan Council, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the City of Orono. The major publications addressing Minnetonka's problems and which formed the basis for the goals and policies of Orono's 1980, 2000-2020, and 2010-2030 CMPs, and this update, are as follows: 1969 Overall Plan for Water Management; MCWD 1971 "Harza Study", A Program for Preserving the Quality of Lake Minnetonka; LMCD & Mn. PCA 1973 Shoreland Management Regulations of the Mn. DNR 1973 Stormwater Impact Investigation for the Metropolitan Council 1974 Surface Water Management Plan for the City of Orono 1979 208 Water Quality Management Plan for the Metropolitan Council Orono's special involvement with Lake Minnetonka is based upon the real concerns of our affected citizens and our intimate and important impact on the total lake environment. While Orono's population is not as large as that of other municipalities in the Lake Minnetonka Watershed, Orono does have the largest land area and potential environmental impact of any local unit of government. Orono is the largest city totally within the Watershed. Orono has one-sixth of the total dry land in the watershed, one-eighth of the wetlands and one-third of the lake surface. Orono encompasses one-third of Lake Minnetonka's total shoreline. Over 30% of the total Watershed's surface runoff flows through or from Orono on its way to the Lake. No other community has the same potential as Orono for affecting Lake Minnetonka's water quality or water quantity, therefore, no other single community has as heavy a responsibility for careful protection of this general resource as Orono. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 3 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan Table 3A-1: Lake Minnetonka Physical Statistics Lake Classification Lake Minnetonka Portion within City of % in Orono DNR MPCA Orono Impaired Water Water Surface Area 14,300 acres 4,750 acres 33% Shoreline Length 131 miles' 40.4 miles2 31% Watershed Area 71 sq. mi. dry land 22 sq. mi. wetlands 13.4 sq. mi. 19% 27-161 7 sq. mi. other water bodies 23 sq. mi. basin 2.7 sq. mi. 12% 26 of Lk. Mtka 123 sq. mi. 0.6 sq. mi. 9% Lydiard Lake 89 7.4 sq. mi. 32% 27-159 N 4.1 sq. mi. 20% ' MCWD Water Resources Management Plan 2City calculation ORONO'S LAKES. CREEKS AND WETLANDS Other significant lakes in Orono include Long Lake, Mooney Lake, Lydiard Lake, Lake Classen and Dickey's Lake. Lydiard Lake and Dickey's Lake drain into Long Lake which flows into Long Lake Creek and eventually Tanager Lake (bay) of Lake Minnetonka. Lake Classen drains into Stubbs Bay of Lake Minnetonka and Mooney Lake drains through Plymouth and Wayzata before discharging into Wayzata Bay of Lake Minnetonka. Table 3A-2 below provides some general information on all of Orono's lakes. Table 3A-2: Lake Sizes and Shoreland Classifications Lake Classification Total Basin Area (Acres) Basin Area in City of Orono (Acres) OHWL DNR MPCA Protected Waters Inventory Number Impaired Water Natural Environment (NE) Lake Classen 117 117 974.5' 27-162 N Dickeys Lake 20.6 20.6 974.5' 27-161 N French Lake (South Basin Only) (Includes 78 ac. wetlands) 26 26 985.5' 27-140 Y Lydiard Lake 89 89 930.0' 27-159 N (Includes 20 ac. wetlands) Lake Katrina 1133 126 1970.9' 127-154 N (Includes 26 ac. wetlands in Orono) Recreational Development (RD) Long Lake 320 210 944.3' 27-160 N Mooney Lake 118 10 988.0' 27-134 Y Tanager Lake (Part of Lk Mtka) -74 -74 929.4' 27-149 Y General Development (GD) Forest Lake (Part of Lk Mtka) -127 -127 929.4' 27-133 Y Lake Minnetonka 14,310 4,750 929.4' 27-133 Y Source: City Records, DNR, MPCA Impaired waters list, 2014 City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 4 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan Lydiard Lake is the most rural of Orono's lakes, being surrounded by heavily wooded rolling hills. Dickey's Lake has become surrounded by low density residential development over the past 30 years. Lake Classen is surrounded by orchards, woods and open fields with a handful of homes overlooking its' waters. The Orono School District maintains a nature study area and waterfowl ponds on Classen's east shore. Mooney Lake's shore is relatively undeveloped in Orono and Medina, but the lake's watershed has received growing pressures from urbanization in Plymouth, including usage conflicts, elevation concerns due to lack of a natural outlet, and urban storm water pollution inflow. Long Lake is the second largest and 2nd most actively used lake in Orono. The east and west shores have been developed at rural residential densities. The north shore has mixed rural residential areas and one denser housing cluster dating from the 1930's. The south shore is bordered by the City of Long Lake and is urbanized to the same degree as much of Lake Minnetonka. Long Lake has experienced storm water problems as well as increased usage pressures. In recent years, the expansion of Carp and other fish have suspended solids, degrading water quality. The Cities of Medina, Long Lake, and Orono have agreed to study the issue. Orono also has identified a number of protected tributary streams which are subject to Shoreland regulations. These are shown in the following table: Table 3A-3: Protected Tributary Streams Tributary Name From: To: Impaire d Water Section Township Range Section Township Range Long Lake Creek 35 (Basin 160-P) 118 23 10(Basin 141-P) 117 23 N "Wolsfeld" Creek 27 (City limit) 118 23 26(Basin 160-P) 118 23 Y Tributary to Wolsfeld Creek from Holy Name Lake 26 (City limit) 118 23 27 118 23 Dickeys Lake Creek 27 (Basin 161-P) 118 23 34 (Basin 160-P) 118 23 N Stubbs Bay Creek (aka Classen Creek 32 (Basin 162-P) 118 23 5 (Basin 133-P) 117 23 N Painter's Creek 30 (Basin 154-P) 118 23 31 (City limit) 118 23 Y Source: City Records, MPCA The second most significant and most universal natural amenity in Orono is its many wetlands and marshlands comprising Lake Minnetonka's upland drainage system. Orono's nearly 1600 acres of marshland and wetlands comprise fully one-sixth of the City's land area. Map 3A-2 indicates how the marshland and drainageways are scattered throughout the City. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 5 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan These natural ponding areas serve an integral function within the natural ecological system of Lake Minnetonka. The "Harza Study" includes quantitative data identifying how the wetland soils easily retain phosphorus, and how marsh plants take up and incorporate large amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus into their growing tissue. Thus, the marshlands are the primary pollution filters for Lake Minnetonka's surface water runoff. Since marshes and small lakes in the watershed aggregate nearly as much area as the main body of Lake Minnetonka, their potential for supplying water to the subsurface formations is appreciable. In addition, marshes provide diversity in the kinds of open space available within the region. They provide a habitat which is uniquely suited for certain birds and mammals. They can be utilized to provide storage of storm runoff with minimal disruption to their function as a habitat for wildlife and their ability to reduce the phosphorus input to the lake. Development Impacts on Wetlands. When urban development occurs, the function of the natural drainageways and filtration system is adversely affected in three ways: The speed and quantity of the storm water runoff are increased as the absorption ability of the land is eliminated with hardcover (houses, driveways, roads, etc.). This increase in the speed and quantity of storm water runoff causes the third adverse effect, which is the increase of the amount of nutrients which are contained in the storm water runoff which now has less time in the natural marsh filtration system to be purified before entering the lake. Nutrients contained in dying vegetation, lawn fertilizers, and from other urban sources are discharged into the lake faster and in greater quantities as the level of urbanization increases. (Harza Study) Orono does not rely solely on the ability of the natural filtration system of the marshes and drainageways to purify storm water so necessary for the preservation of Lake Minnetonka. Supplementary Stormwater Ponding & Alternatives. While Orono's Surface Water Management Plan adopted in 2002 places a significant emphasis on preservation of wetlands, it also provides for the establishment of supplementary stormwater management ponds to help counteract the impacts of development within the watershed. NURP (National Urban Runoff Program) pond design criteria are primarily based on the removal of suspended particles such as sand, silt, etc. Secondary design criteria enhance the capability of NURP ponds to remove other pollutants such as trace metals, hydrocarbons, nutrients (such as phosphorus) and pesticides. Phosphorus is mainly removed through biological uptake in algae and aquatic plants. When the algae die, the nutrients fall to the bottom of the pond and become part of the sediments. Ponds in the Twin Cities area designed according to NURP standards have total phosphorus removal efficiencies of 47 to 68 percent according to Walker. Possibilities for improving this include (1) increasing mean pond depth; (2) promoting infiltration; (3) promoting plug flow conditions (i.e. multiple cell ponds); (4) applying chemicals to precipitate out the ortho-phosphorus (alum treatments); (5) encouraging growth of certain aquatic plants; and (6) design of outlet structure to provide extended detention of large runoff events. Whether each of these enhancements can or should be incorporated is dependent on the desired level of control and other site specific conditions. Constructed wetlands have potential benefits as well as drawbacks. Additionally, the cost of constructing stormwater ponds and storm sewer systems is enormous compared to the cost of wetland preservation. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 6 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan Vegetated buffers, green strips adjacent to hard surfaces, permeable pavements that incorporate runoff treatment features, and rain gardens are just some of the additional tools available for supplementing runoff management. Nutrient management technologies such as NURP ponds or alum treatments will give Orono an added tool to manage runoff from rural densities, but Orono will not rely solely on man-made systems for preserving water quality. ORONO'S NATURAL RESOURCES Soils Orono's land forms are highly varied as the result of four separate glacial scourings. Surface features include islands, peninsulas, narrow land bridges, the lakes, bays and marshes, and a few shallow outwash basins. The highest elevations range from about 1060 feet above mean sea level in the northern part of the City down to the normal water level of Lake Minnetonka at elevation 929.4 MSL. The soils in the City of Orono (Map 3A-3) originated from drift materials deposited by meltwaters of the glaciers. Generally, the soil types consist primarily of clay and loam materials on the uplands and organic, wet materials in the lowland areas. Consequently, the ability of each soil type to adequately accommodate development varies considerably in Orono. Careful examination of each site is needed to determine the most appropriate land use for individual properties. Map 3A-3 references 7 different classes of soils. These classes are: Group A soils have a high infiltration rate and low runoff. These soils consist of deep, well drained sands or gravelly sands and have a high rate of water transmission. Group B soils have a moderate infiltration rate. This group consists chiefly of deep well drained soils with a moderately fine to moderately coarse texture and a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C soils have a slow infiltration rate. This group consists of soils with a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or fine textured soils and a slow rate of water transmission. Group D soils have a very slow infiltration rate and high runoff potential. This group is composed of clays that have a high shrink -swell potential, soils with a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is placed in group D because of a high water table it may be assigned to a dual hydrologic group: A/D, B/D, or C/D. The first letter of the pair represents the soil's group if drained and the D represents the natural condition. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 7 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan Orono's native vegetation is primarily woodland interspersed with localized areas of wet prairie marshlands. Northern Orono and many areas along Lake Minnetonka's shore contain vestiges of Minnesota's Big Woods with hardwood forests of oak, maple, elm, and basswood. Much of these have been thinned into scattered stands, as shown on Map 3A-4, but major forests remain in north central and north east Orono, especially around Lydiard Lake and in the MNDNR's Wolsfeld Woods and Wood Rill nature areas. In addition, 100 year old settlements have by now added mature stands of various evergreens and other decorative trees and shrubs. Tree Preservation Policy 1. The City finds that its trees and woodlands provide numerous benefits including: soil stabilization, reduction of storm water runoff, improvement of air quality, reduction of noise pollution, protection and increase of property values, privacy, energy conservation through natural insulation, and natural habitat for birds and other wildlife. 2. It is the City's policy to preserve and protect significant trees, stands of trees and wooded buffer areas. 3. The City will study whether adoption of additional tree protection and replacement ordinances is necessary to accomplish these goals. 4. The eradication of exotic vegetation species such as buckthorn will be encouraged in all wooded areas. However, in Shoreland areas where complete removal of buckthorn may leave a relatively bare lakeshore, plans for revegetation may be required. Orono's Ground Water Supplies Orono enjoys the same abundant ground water resources from the Twin Cities artesian basin as does most of the metropolitan area. In addition, our generally heavy clay soil layers near the surface have protected the ground waters from surface pollution. Most areas of the City have had no difficulty obtaining potable water supplies drawn from the Jordan aquifer with wells ranging in depth from 75 to 200 feet. Only occasional wells have had to go deeper. Land Cover Summary. In 2006, Hennepin County published the Natural Resource Inventory for Orono which is included here by reference. The land cover classification encompassed the entire incorporated area of the City (approximately 15,400 acres) of which 1/3 is open water. Artificial surfaces, which include residential areas, farmsteads, commercial lands and other areas with greater than four percent impervious surfaces, accounted for an additional 20% of Orono's total area. Forest and woodland cover combined accounted for an additional 20% of Orono, with herbaceous vegetation types (wet meadows, cattail marshes, etc.) and planted, maintained or cultivated vegetation types (agricultural crops, hayfields, pastures) each comprising 13% of the City. The figure 3A -I below illustrates Orono's MLCCS Level One Land Cover, as does Map 3A- 4. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 8 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan Heibaceous W40 Vegetation }q Sparse 3 �p Shnibland i -Vegetation 1% 0% Woodland 2% Open Water 33% Forests _ 18%v 00) 14 Planted. Maintained Artificial or Cultivated -Surface Vegetation 20% 13% Figure 3A-1 Land cover Natural Resource Inventory Results. The Inventory identified 358 individual natural community remnants, covering a total of 2,549 acres or approximately one-fourth of Orono's land area. These included eight forest types, one woodland type, two shrub -land types, four herbaceous wetland types, and one upland grassland type. Each of the remnants was categorized with regards to quality as either high, good, moderate or low. Nearly half of this acreage (1,148.2 acres) is encompassed in Maple -Basswood Forest remnants ranging in size from 0.2 acres to 113.2 acres. Oak Forests comprise 369 acres, and Lowland Hardwood Forests total 157 acres. Other forest types identified include Aspen Forest (4.4 acres); Tamarack Swamps (25.4 acres); Floodplain Forests (14.5 acres); Black Ash Swamps (56.9 acres); and Mixed Hardwood Swamp (3.1 acres). Oak Woodland/Brush-land totals 38.0 acres. Shrub -lands identified in the inventory include Willow Swamp (30.4 acres) and Alder Swamp (2.8 acres). Herbaceous wetlands documented in the inventory include 568 acres of Cattail Marsh ranging from 0.1 acres to 106.1 acres in size; 11.9 acres of Wet Meadow; 2.5 acres of Poor Fen; and 74.2 acres of Mixed Emergent Marsh. Upland grasslands include Mesic Prairie totaling 29.3 acres. Aggregate Orono does not benefit from aggregate (Sand/ gravel) resources in a commercially viable scale. Consequently, there are no plans to open or allow for aggregate mining within the city of Orono. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 9 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan ORONO AS A "RURAL OASIS" In 2005, the City of Orono commissioned DSU, Inc. to quantify several goals intended to preserve the Cities Rural Oasis Identity. That study is retained as an appendix in the 2008-2030 CMP and is incorporated by reference here. The goals and guiding principles identified by that study are highlighted here: Goals Future development in Orono must achieve the following goals: Goal #1: Promote the conservation and enhancement of the quality of surface water and wetlands throughout the city, particularly Lake Minnetonka. Goal #2: Ensure the preservation and enhancement of the existing "rural character" of the city. Guiding Principles In order to guarantee that future development in Orono will achieve the above goals, these "Guiding Principles" for development shall be followed in the City of Orono: Guiding Principle #1: Promote ecologically sensitive stormwater management. Applying an ecologically -based stormwater management system will improve ecosystems by reducing both reliance on manmade infrastructure and reducing downstream runoff of contaminants. Guiding Principle #2: Establish and maintain native ecological communities. Conserving and improving natural and semi -natural areas will provide wildlife habitat and support natural ecological functions (i.e. drainage, filtering, buffering, etc). Guiding Principle #3: Establish and maintain ecological connections. Creating ecological connections will enhance stormwater collection and conveyance, promote ecological and wildlife corridors, and provide recreational opportunities for residents. Guiding Principle #4: Preserve and augment corridor enclosure. Maintaining and improving the extent of roadway corridor enclosures will promote community aesthetics associated with the city's rural character. Guiding Principle #5: Preserve views. Mitigating the visual impacts of development will also preserve the aesthetic elements of the landscape. Guiding Principle #6: Preserve and maintain landmarks and unique points of local character. Preserving distinct cultural features will maintain a familiar sense of place in the community. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 10 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan The city, in the review of this CMP, added a 7t" guiding principal: Guiding Principle #7: Continue to work to educate property owners and residents on the effects development and use have on the environment and character of the community. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT Surface Water Management Plan Introduction The City of Orono's 2018 Local Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) attached as Appendix 3A -A is an update of the 2011 SWMP. This Surface Water Management Plan has been developed to serve as a comprehensive planning document to guide the City of Orono in conserving, protecting, and managing its surface water resources. The SWMP provides an inventory of water resource related information including the results of assessments conducted by other governmental units, both local and state. From this inventory and assessment, Orono sets forth its goals and policies and implementation program. The SWMP also seeks consistency with the goals and policies of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and with the requirements and guidance provided in the Metropolitan Council's 2040 Water Resources Management Policy Plan. Within this document additional information such as amendment procedures, subwatershed modeling, and other engineering details are included. Statutory Requirements This SWMP meets the requirements detailed in Minnesota Statutes 103B and Minnesota Rules 8410, administered by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. Minnesota Statute 10313.201 states that the purposes of the water management programs are to: 1. Protect, preserve, and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems; 2. Minimize public capital expenditures needed to correct flooding and water quality problems; 3. Identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and groundwater quality; 4. Establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and groundwater management; 5. Prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems; 6. Promote groundwater recharge; 7. Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities; and City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 11 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan 8. Secure the other benefits associated with the proper management of surface and groundwater. This plan is also consistent with the goals and policies of the Metropolitan Council's 2040 Water Resources Management Policy Plan, and the goals, rules and management objectives of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) with whom Orono partners in its management activities. Though intended to serve Orono until 2028, this plan may be periodically amended to remain current with local practices and policies and to maintain Orono's compliance with MCWD rules and State of Minnesota laws and rules. NPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit Since 2003 Orono has operated its stormwater management program under a permit issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). This permit is called the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Permit and authorizes Orono to discharge stormwater to waters of the state under certain conditions. This permit is included by reference. Under its permit coverage, Orono has implemented a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) to addresses the MS4 Permits six minimum control measures, as listed below: 1. Public education 2. Public involvement 3. Illicit discharge detection and elimination 4. Construction site runoff control 5. Post -construction runoff control 6. Pollution prevention in municipal operations The City's SWPPP contains several Best Management Practices within each of the listed control measures. These were identified using a self-evaluation and input process with City staff. Many of the goals and policies discussed in the SWMP are directly related to requirements listed in the NPDES program. As a result, the implementation section of this plan references items listed in the City's SWPPP. Goals, Policies and Strategies The City of Orono highly values the natural resources within its jurisdiction and seeks to protect surface and groundwater storage systems, effectively manage expenditures to correct flooding and water quality problems, prevent erosion into surface waters, promote groundwater recharge, enhance wildlife habitats and water recreational facilities, and improve the water quality of all water resources. Therefore, the city established the following goals. Specific policies and implementation strategies are listed in the SWMP. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 12 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan 1. Maintain or improve the physical, chemical, biological, and aesthetic condition of surface water resources. 2. Develop and implement plans as necessary to reduce pollutant loads for waters that do not meet Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) as approved by the EPA. Coordinate City efforts with applicable Implementation Plans as approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 3. Minimize and mitigate the impacts of urban stormwater runoff on water resources. 4. Manage and protect wetlands to maximize wetland functions and improve surface water resources. 5. Manage Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems to ensure proper design, installation, operation, maintenance or replacement in order to eliminate health hazards or illicit discharges to water resources. Connect properties with SSTSs to city sanitary sewer as soon as feasible. 6. Manage and protect natural upland areas adjacent to surface water resources to mitigate degradation of surface waters and increase the quantity, quality and biological diversity of natural areas. 7. Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater resources. 8. Provide the public with the knowledge, skills, and motivation to protect and improve surface water and groundwater resources. Implementation Planning SWMP includes a plan for implementation water resource improvements. The plan identify potential projects in the following categories: 1. Stream and shoreline restoration projects. 2. Outlet control structure repair or replacement projects. 3. Localized storage, volume reduction, and water quality improvement sites. 4. Wetland restoration sites 5. Natural upland restoration sites. The projects included will be used for planning purposes and will require further development prior to inclusion in the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The City of Orono partners with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District in the administration of Surface water management programs. This agreement is referenced in Section 3.21 in appendix 3A -A. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 13 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT An element of surface water management addressed in the SWMP Goals is the management of flood plains and wetlands. The City of Orono originally adopted a Flood Plain Ordinance in 1970, which has since been revised and updated on a regular basis, most recently with Hennepin County's mapping revision in November, 2016. The principles of flood plain regulation go hand-in-hand with those of stormwater management. The City will be best served by retention of open land uses which would locate permanent structures and artificial obstructions in a manner that would not obstruct the passage of waters nor destroy the natural public waters, marshes and wetlands within the City. The Ordinance is compliant with the rules and regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program codified as 44 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 59--78, as amended, so as to maintain the community's eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program. Orono's defined flood plains are depicted on Map 3A-5. SHORELAND MANAGEMENT The City of Orono in 1992 adopted a comprehensive Shoreland Management Ordinance, pursuant to the authorization and policies contained in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103F, Minnesota Regulations Parts 6120.2500-6120.3900, and the planning and zoning enabling legislation in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462. In 2012, this ordinance was amended to better promote the public health, safety and general welfare by providing for the wise subdivision, use and development of shorelands abutting public waters that exist within the City's corporate boundaries. Orono's defined Shoreland Overlay District is depicted on Map 3A-6. SOLAR ACCESS PROTECTION Minnesota Statutes 473.859 requires that local comprehensive plans include an element for the protection and development of access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. The City of Orono will protect such access by requiring minimum standards for lot sizes, amounts of open space, yard setbacks, and maximum height of buildings for urban and rural residents. Land uses should not preclude the possible use of solar energy systems. The Metropolitan Council has estimated the City's solar potential as follows: Table 3A-4 Solar Potential Rooftop Gross Rooftop Generation Gross Potential Potential Generation Potential Potential (Mwh/yr) (Mwh/yr) (Mwh/yr)Z (Mwh/yr)z 14,656,623 1 442,509 1,465,662 44,251 Figure 3A-2 displays the City's Solar Suitability Analysis. Protecting solar access means protecting solar City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 14 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan collectors (or the location of future collectors) from shading by adjacent structures or vegetation. Existing structures and buildings in the City generally do not present significant shading problems for solar energy systems and the City's promise of open, rural spaces is intended to protect that condition. Most single family attached and detached homes are one or two stories and most multi -family, commercial, and industrial buildings are three stories or less. Solar energy systems and equipment are generally a permitted use if attached to structures. The zoning ordinance provides standards for the protection and establishment of these solar energy systems. While these ordinance standards help protect solar access, it is not possible for every part of a building or lot to obtain unobstructed solar access. Mature trees, topography, and the location of structures can limit solar access. However, on most properties the rooftop of the principal building would be free of shading by adjacent structures. Therefore, the majority of property owners in the City could utilize solar energy systems, if they so desired, as a supplement or alternative to conventional fuels. It is not desired by the City of Orono to expand solar collection at the expense of clearcutting and wholescale tree removal. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 15 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan Gross Solar Potential City of Orono, Hennepin County Figure 3A-2 D.5 f 2 3 rn�Es Gross Solar Potential (Watt-hours per Year) - High : 1277133 Not Low: 900001 _ Solar Potential under 900,000 watt-hours per year County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Wetlands and Open Water Features Source: University of Minnesota U -Spatial Statewide Solar Raster. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 16 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan QUALITY OF LIFE PRESERVATION Orono's primarily residential character has resulted in an environment that is relatively free from the noise pollution of major roadways, the light pollution of commercial and industrial development, and other negative impacts such as odors, vibration, toxic emissions, glare and visual clutter that are common in non-residential areas. The residents of Orono place a high value on the quality of life provided by the lack of such negative impacts. The City of Orono is committed to preserving the qualities that make Orono an attractive residential community while providing an adequate level of the necessary services, commerce and industries required to support the community. Preservation of Dark Skies A key element that adds to the quality of life in Orono is its dark night sky. The ability to view a naturally dark, star -filled sky is a precious resource as valuable as our forested landscapes and our fresh air and clean water. But this inspiring amenity can be easily lost in the presence of inappropriate and unnecessary outdoor lighting. While artificial lighting is necessary for safety and security, the quality of that lighting can have a profound effect on our night-time security and enjoyment. Night Sky Policies 1. The City finds that preservation of the night sky is an important factor in maintaining the quality of life in Orono, and that inappropriate and unnecessary outdoor lighting can lead to glare, light trespass, sky glow and other negative impacts inconsistent with dark skies. 2. Orono will encourage the use of efficient and properly designed outdoor lighting to limit the occurrence of these negative impacts while providing for the necessary levels of safety, security and visibility appropriate to the area being illuminated. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION POLICIES The Goals and Policies of this Chapter are basic to the remaining sections of the Community Management Plan. Without environmental stability, Orono's character and vitality would be lost. With environmental care and concern, Orono citizens expect their forefather's heritage to live on for generations to come. Environmental Protection Goals 1. Preserve, conserve, and enhance the water quality of Lake Minnetonka and all other lakes in Orono. 2. Expand education of the benefits and value of environmental features in Orono. 3. Preserve, conserve, and enhance the City's marshland, wetland and natural drainage system. 4. Provide for surface water management such that the City is protected from both flooding hazards and pollution hazards. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 17 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan 5. Protect the City's ground water resources from pollution and from depletion. 6. Protect the City from air, water and noise pollution. 7. Preserve, conserve, and enhance open space, light and air, including solar access for all properties. 8. Preserve a reasonable amount of native woodlands as an integral part of Orono's heritage. 9. Protect and preserve a reasonable amount of natural wildlife habitat in woodlands and wetlands. 10. Protect the land from soil erosion and the hazards of dust and siltation. 11. Preserve greenways and open space corridors. 12. Promote conservation and enhancement of the quality of surface water and wetlands throughout Orono, particularly Lake Minnetonka. 13. Ensure the preservation and enhancement of the existing "rural character" of the city. 14. Preserve Orono's night skies and minimize light pollution. General Policies For Natural Resource Management 1. Orono will promote and support the formulation and implementation of environmental protection policies by other Lake Minnetonka area municipalities and responsible government agencies. 2 Environmental protection policies will continue to be utilized in the formation of all other goals and policies in this CMP. Orono's commitment to environmental quality is carried throughout each element in this comprehensive plan, coloring the goals, policies and implementation practices in every facet of municipal responsibility. 3. Development density will be limited to a level which will not overload the natural surface water drainage and filtration system. 4. Surface water runoff will be directed through the natural drainage system. Direct runoff into the lake will be avoided and will be prohibited whenever possible. 5. Natural drainageways will be favored over artificial storm sewers. Where storm sewers are needed, all efforts shall be taken to minimize their impacts on receiving waters. 6. The wetlands and marshlands of the city will be protected and preserved as wildlife habitats, as unique open spaces, and as the only economically practical method of flood protection and storm water runoff filtration. Orono's recently updated wetland protection ordinances in concert with the additional regulatory authority of the MCWD, the MnDNR, MnBWSR and the Corps of Engineers will continue to provide an aggressive program to retain and enhance the viability of the City'swetlands. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 18 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan 7. Protection of the City's marshland, wetlands and drainageways shall include protection of adjoining lands and prevention of drainage, filling, dredging or wetland vegetation removal. 8. Protection of lake resources will allow reasonable access, use and enjoyment while preventing overcrowding and excessive encroachment. In conformance with MnDNR Shoreland Management regulations for Recreational Development lakes, the City will continue to prohibit overly dense development within 1,000 feet of Lake Minnetonka. In conjunction with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, lake use regulations will be promoted to limit excessive boat density and overuse of sensitive bays. Land use regulations will continue to be refined and enforced to provide reasonable control over building density, land alteration and lakeshore encroachment. 9. Lake shorelines will be protected from alteration. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. The establishment and preservation of vegetated buffers along lake shorelines will be promoted and encouraged. Clearcutting of the lakeshore will continue to be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, natural stone rip rap shoreline protection as well as bioengineering (plant -based) solutions for shoreline stabilization will be encouraged. The use of artificially constructed seawalls will be discouraged except where no other shoreline stabilization options are feasible. 10. Lake bed alterations will be discouraged because of adverse short-term and long-term effects on water quality. Dredging will be deemed appropriate in limited circumstances only where absolutely necessary to maintain existing natural riparian access permanently lost by something beyond the control of the landowner. Periodic low water conditions or the owner's desire for deeper draft watercraft are not sufficient reasons for disrupting sensitive lake beds. 11. Development or alteration of floodplains will be restricted. Most of the City's identified floodplains are located along the shoreline or within designated marshlands and will be protected by other provisions applicable to those areas. 12- Natural resource investigation will be required as part of all development proposals. This will include topographical information, soil analysis, drainage plans, vegetation plans, erosion control measures and similar site data related to each project, whether public or private. The extent of each such review will be determined by probable environmental impact. 13. On-site water retention facilities will be required as part of all residential, commercial or industrial development projects whenever necessary to maintain or improve the existing storm water runoff patterns as required by law and Ordinance. 14. Land use and development will not be permitted at the expense of environmental protection. 15. Erosion control plans and programs will be required in all land alteration projects. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 19 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan 16. Erosion control Best Management Practices shall be applied to all land alteration projects. 17. Citizen efforts to protect and enhance the natural environment will be encouraged. The City will encourage individual citizens and private groups or organizations to be pro -active in the preservation of the environment in which they live. Activities such as reforestation, prairie and wetland restoration, buckthorn removal, minimizing use of phosphorus on lawns establishment of lakeshore buffer strips and rain gardens, lake and stream trash cleanup, and other citizen -driven efforts are an important element in Orono's commitment to environmental protection. 18. Protection and preservation of greenways and open space corridors will be considered as part of the development process. The City will strive to provide connectivity between and among natural and semi- natural open spaces. Remnant natural areas will be preserved to the greatest extent possible, and will be connected where appropriate by greenways that may incorporate water resources and larger wetland systems, semi -natural communities, and restoration of degraded natural areas. 19. New development will be required to adhere to the methods of Conservation Design in order to achieve the City's environmental protection goals. New development shall adhere to the six Guiding Principles established through the Orono Rural Oasis Study, including: ■ Promotion of ecologically sensitive stormwater management. ■ Establishment and maintenance of native ecological communities. ■ Establishment and maintenance of ecological connections. ■ Preservation and augmentation of corridor enclosures. ■ Preservation of views. ■ Preservation and maintenance of landmarks and unique points of local character. 20. Preservation of Orono's dark night skies will be promoted by encouraging the use of appropriate outdoor lighting design. Urban Area Policies for Natural Resource Management 1. Land use standards will limit the impact of urban encroachment on Lake Minnetonka. Minimum lot widths will space out docks and structural encroachments while increasing areas of natural vegetation. The City will support the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District in its ongoing efforts to limit the number of boats per property and the amount of public waters available for private docking and boat storage. 2. Retention of natural vegetation will limit the impact of urbanization as visible from the lake. Building heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitions against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes. Retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. Changes to the topography of lakeshore lots with the intent of creating `walkout' situations will be discouraged because such land alterations result in an unnatural lakeshore character. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 20 CMP Part 3A. Environmental Protection Plan 3. Direct runoff into the lake will be minimized. Standards regarding the amount of impervious hardcover will continue to be aggressively enforced for residential properties within 1000 feet of the shoreline. The percentage of hardcover allowed within established lakeshore setback zones shall be limited in accordance with Orono's hardcover ordinance which has been in effect in form since 1975. 4. All existing urban wetlands will be maintained and protected for surface water retention and filtration. 5. City maintenance practices will be designed to improve storm water quality, including salt use and snow storage policies. 6. A significant amount of natural woodlands and open space will be retained on each property. Retention of the natural environment requires careful siting and preservation of trees and open space on each urban property. 7. All developments will be designed to assure protection of light, air, and solar access for neighboring properties. Requirements for minimum lot size, amounts of open space, minimum yard setbacks, and maximum building heights will be designed to assure protection of these values for all urban residents. Rural Area Policies for Natural Resource Management 1. Land use standards will limit the pollution loading of rural marshes and drainageways. Rural densities will be low enough to ensure permanent reliance upon satisfactory on-site sewer and water systems where municipal sewer is not feasible and to ensure that rates of phosphorus and nitrogen generation will not adversely affect the water quality in the natural drainage system. 2. Rural land use densities will allow maximum retention of private woods and open space. Low rural densities will accommodate home -sites without affecting the traditional vistas of open fields and woods. The retention of these woodlands and marshlands will then assure permanent habitat for our abundant wildlife. 3. Rural wetlands and marshland will be maintained and protected for surface water retention and filtration. 4. The City will promote farming and animal management practices designed to conserve the soil and ground water and minimize pollution. 5. Land use standards will limit the impact of rural encroachment on Orono's rural lakeshore areas. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3A, Page 21 NL ©�BO LTO N 2040 Comprehensive Plan Lake Minnetonka O & MENK Orono, MN November 2018 Real People. Real Solutions. I I I Rice Lake I I 1 I 1 I Independence 1 I Medina I Medicine Pioneer CreekI I Lake t I I Maple � — I I Lower Plain I Lake ' — Minnetonka I Plymouth • Crystal Ba Lake ♦ r Long Lake-, ** •,`�♦ � — — A --------------Minnetonka •�."•� •�♦ �...... to.. L—�— — 1 1 Orono . Minnehaha N : , _+ Wayzata , 'Creek • _ 66 40 o r — / � • _ _ _\ Woodland �\ U) oMinnetrista _ , • �•• Minnetonka • I I L — I BeachDee haven ! Minnetonka E I I Spring,Par k, p f W s J • . ♦ ' ' / I Mound T ♦ _ J l I Tonka Bay i I I \,Greenwood\ oShorewood I— I i/—\ z I 1 Excelsior y / D I LI— r I l Upper Lake --ter I y I Minnetonka Hen ounty I -- -- — — — — —— -- I i Carver unt � I � w I / I I M I Legend e a Lake Minnetonka o r� City Limits I `I Watershed Boundary J r Surrounding Chanhassen Lakes & Ponds Communities I Rivers &Streams QCounty Boundary 0 1.s I Miles Chaska I Map 3A-1 0 Source: MnGeo 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN °° 12 sta 0 Turner Road '0•„ , .. .. .,..m.F.... ._.........r.....,...,...� � ao, �m 0 Drake Dr_� e _ ° 0 0 UK N Lake Gree. I pve Clasen \,ke" , as z IND o e��o 0 �a Moline Road ° i wA m hos a wn Roaa, 19N r � � 2 6 � aYs;ae a Cn a j cya d J h' Stubbs r woa d r Bay F— z5 'o c� Lydiard 0. CD °o Lake Kelley �p�NY Long m '' * `• Lake „gDaniels St 1 1 I 12 ..,,: �i -Ra ,` Grand A �Orcfiard��n �,�• y� pF` "•� 009 Lake 0 i 'a'4 .i ... ,�-Wayzata Blvd c 1 � 0 - • Painter a �� ° Amsh rE83a W Branch Road County Road 151 W _& �North v ArmMaxwell LakeTanagerj r 1� Bay French Sunnyfield Road E IJ Forest Marsh v Lake Shore Dr O z � c Denning I 2 Bay m 0 '' ♦ Smith Game Farm Road c Bracketts g l, z J a <0 Pve Moot . ......� '« 9t Y w 'c° _ Lake 7_4 Arm E ( 1 G Z 0 • 6q�e Lake > Dickey H 1 do' 3: 'Lake = ` ��Pad - prin �• • z5 'o c� Lydiard 0. CD °o Lake Kelley �p�NY Long m '' * `• Lake „gDaniels St 1 1 I 12 ..,,: �i -Ra ,` Grand A �Orcfiard��n �,�• y� pF` "•� 009 Lake 0 i 'a'4 .i ... ,�-Wayzata Blvd c 1 � 0 - • Painter a �� ° Amsh rE83a W Branch Road County Road 151 W _& �North v ArmMaxwell LakeTanagerj r 1� Bay French Sunnyfield Road E IJ Forest Marsh v Lake Shore Dr O z � c Denning I 2 Bay m 0 '' ♦ Smith Game Farm Road c Bracketts g l, z J a 3 Pve 4th Ave N 1� ay Point UWest Dutch Arm Crystal Bo hns �•���' �� •' �. Lake > Bay Point. - oint.•Harrison • Ha rrison .. - �.� �' Bay 1 Lynwood Blvd - • • - • • _ .. _ . t + 1 ; 1 o v Shoreline Dr - � + Lafayette 1 <,yric,Ave .. �, Bay Legend e �• ''��` .�.-' _'' �.• •• -' City Limits Lakes & Ponds -..rPark Sprinc; 1 Carman's �• Bay ► Bay ♦ � ., �•' 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams Q 0 3,500 e Feet nc� Casco Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, ' • Point 1 Hennepin County, MnDOT L erts IV, d x /0 Wetlands � & E BOLTON K November 2018 Real People. Real Solutions. Wayzata Bay Min QHighldnb vi J JQ Rutledge Road fr— / ti Azure Road Par Wetlands Stormwater Ponds ,,,4 I � ' 22,a oe Z l J � 3 Q,th Ave N Ave { Y 1 Map 3A-2 National Wetlands Inventory z J a 3 Pve 4th Ave N 1� J ?F rd E Map 3A-2 National Wetlands Inventory 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN `� 12 Moot a, Turner Road a v Lake Drake Dr3 w w w r o Z ♦ E • 6t1j e V a !` o o Orrwwrwl, ®� load sh q�.eh 1 V • w e Spring G�eeK �PveN q o m r w� w:Z 1 + as Z \� y 1P{rt? •..r-� it h10 V co a e eA ° Daniels Strch" 1 P • c Moline Road c o WA °� v . 1 �jGran�LL /�° r%°!a a 9' Lake19 NO '� '/`• i ` `� � 1 'A° ♦ i� W9 1 \® + Y ♦1 Wd aYside 1 w 1 _d • 1 ♦ 1 _ .. Yzata Blvd W ,A, Iwwwl P r a• 12 V m 0 Painter a W Branch Road Sunnyfield Road E a f0 0 D: m Game Farm Road E Dutch Lake Z c,p Jenning' Bay ,a Harrison L Bay Legend e •r City Limits Lakes & Ponds 1, +t 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams w 0 3,500 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT 1 J ■ m w r Fox StP A Ipyw �! +■ r w w r Raw w w w r ■� w w w w w M �w,f �0 ♦✓° r�. N" Y_ o Browns 1 ° Ir - Maxwell a■ 1� Lake- Bay BaYTFrench Marsh 1 E t�5hore or Q 1 1 �•w` , - Smith Bracketts •♦ _ Bay Point 1 �.✓' ►., 1 We, .� 1 Crystal Boh, •✓� �`� 1 Bay Pnir �`�• 1 oe •r.w 1 Imo• 1 �'✓ •w•.,�.'1 1 1 SJR lil Lafayette ! i <yricAve r kw.w.w-w•w•♦ Bay J Springy p, 1 ' `40• - Soils November 2018 r0 O Wayzata Bay Ave Soils By Drainage Class BOLT MENK Real People. Real Solutions. Unclassified C B/D A C A/D C/D B Map 3A-3 Ave N Z c J a 0 0 w 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN M W Turner Road a O Drake Dr Minnesota Land Cover Classification November 2018 Katrina � 12 ! " Sta Moon Lake 10 m r.. z rn G / �+ r416 p Ar no Lake F �e = 1 gr Pve N i v1 Cl i,se 1 Z \, l - a }' � 3 iL..2+ +1 �t z Q 0 0 c ° Moline Road w Q 19N 26 W Branch Road` County Road 151 Sunnyfield Road E \ a 0 0 is m Game Farm Road Dutch Lake Jenning' Bay Harrison Bay ell Kelley ,PV Y� , O v .,o baa r O _ z ,•. 161, 0 t, } - ."' cf H Daniels St `1 1 c 12 .• 1 LL o �, dR m r v' . t' Orchard [:• y 1 1 ev V / �o s. v f Grand Ave Ln �, Z04 .0 5 � Oi P . +� � � r � ;hg La -k,- `+ 1 � • ` g 3r " d,Ave Ro kir ..,f` � e 0 tf 1 a 4` 'gip •t !`."" 41 �aYsige 1� �y.�� -e ' . d yam" Pa • 1 1 Wayzata Blvd W�r� ��i ND • a.Ar p O. e s.� �► Stubbs 49 6 .,, • .�, ` + w 1 i Bay AM. E . m r.. '1 A..1 ox StpV no ft IL L rY ° 1 i+ �♦ •. + + North r`�,"p. 0 Am - 4 1 Bay Forest Shore s r • Lake — D •*% *# 1 SII West •�~ j Crystal Bohr �� 1 Bay Point 4*f 1 5 1 1 1 Lafayette ; Bay Legend eJw ''� �r: City Limits Lakes & Ponds Spring] Carman's V. , Park M+ Bay Bay 1� t 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams �'� V 0 3,500 nif`o� �� as Feet C Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, � Poi 1 Hennepin County, MnDOT / y Aver' BOLTN /1 & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. i"" z c J 3 gc� Ave z 1 > 5 3 Q) 4th Ave N > f U 1` U c —or St4e `F Rice St F wayZata Blvd E -CO Lake St E � m q) �oAaa Pe Fo�cL51601 k to, t MLCCS 11. 5-10% 31. Forest Impervious 12. 11-25% 32. Wetland Impervious Forest 13. 26-50% 51. Shrubland Impervious 52. Wetland 14. 51-75% Shrubs Impervious 61. Tall _15. 76-100% Grasses Impervious 62. Wetland �3 a 21. Short Grasses Emergent Veg. 63. Dry Tall 22. Agricultural Grasses Par Land 90. Open 23. Maintained Tall Grass Water 92. Wetland 24. Tree Open Water Plantation Map 3A-4 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN fi,q-' Xlr`�t-t M 0 rn Turner Road 'a m 0 Drake Dr 3 rlr, c p 3 U U / i ,,'" ' 0 / o Moline Road m r IL 19N i, V oadRaIlItI r si W Branch Road- Countv Road 151 FEMA Floodplain � & E BOLTON K November 2018 Real People. Real Solutions. Katrina: 12 Lake �'/ St r �'. % Y d Moon .. _ ..�....,.,.a^ ._....-.. i c Lake E •1 �4 z R 2 o � l f' rr, a .• 3 Dickey v woad q�e H 1 ' Lake r °_ Laky o� - . f- Spring, �� , 1 j _ Cis �1� R �� S�a3� �� Lyd% - . a Z —W—.Kelley Kelley;po-Y.,. aQ P°GO�.�., '�. Lake Lakes 1 Ix' / �y Danielsst ~�i -r,_, Il X� � 12 o "`/ v Grand A �OrcFiard��' • Y < 0 W/ I WL 9 Lake 00. Q0 �aysige �Ff'�1' w .io, , •' 1 .. aYzata Blvd W ,Q 1 s rd 1 (_ p.( oda 12 1 � 1 � � � Gy9c � . � % � � 1 � / R� art o �4{ 1� 1 J . { `� :•r 1 v� Lake st � ' ( Fox Sr `° - w ; �►'� �, ,� �° mom t> r Ave Z_ z c J 3 Aver y _ 4th Ave N > North o Brow, 1 P_e((Wayzata �' U Arm �aITe nagei, Bay l� Bay Maxwell i% ��// "' lake { 1 Bay o/ French / / �' • ��� ,Sunnyfield Road E Foresf Mi��h % - % 1 i �•,,/ ro . /, Lake Shore Dr /i 0 Jenning'so Bay M �-•� � �, Game Farm Road � Smith Bracketts • Point 1 i / to 111We. i // j Dutch : " /oo Cryst % Lake i > 1 / Bay Point ♦ /„ .�.� 1 �..-• i r' y � i ••.A* Harrison �••�s.. I �� s..•�. 1 4F '� 1 Minnetonka Blvd eBay �'� �.•"- .r�i� � 1 w a Lynwood Blvd / {.�.��..I 1 0 L' . 1 ; �3� Highlantl Ave ��� m c �S`^ ' U Shoreline Dr / ' J Lafayette a—Rutledge Road i / �♦ --- Azure•Road a i , /� _•- -' i <,yric.Ave �l .��.�� Bay `I " Day PI 01 Legend ;� �''� �• - �` �� par Flood Hazard Zones y �I /, /, 100 Year Floodway o _ Cit Limits Lakes & Ponds i /Sprint Floodplain s �' , r / ..t • //r Park - , 0, , /���/ ,� �' Carman 'a 1 M �1 / Bay Ba+� �♦ ,� �i %/ 500 Year 1 t 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams hili,' . '♦ a� �[ Floodplain y 0 3,500 .e� ,` Ca Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, •ter°i i %-- Map 3A-5 ts Hennepin County, MnDOT r'��'�•�'�� ( //�! e`r�wd 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN r, CD cc Turner Road a �a L / L j 2 ..�� ileo-ii�bi Lake _ . .. Sta,. !, F ...�....�,...�,...� Moot a°. 0 o ` / Drake Dr 3 Shoreland Overlay District Lake da -1 0 E o V Setback z �a Overlay a 0 Stubbs 0 0 L3 Painter v,oad Dickea0, load Al Lake Classen c 0ee1 �pveN m a Qa �� Lake m � Kelley�l 151 c a e �•0 V ` Z m c North p y 12 Moline Road 0 G Browns LL v dP t6 m x a - Ja 19N mown Roan ake Shoreland Overlay District BOLTON November 2018 (D & M E N K Real People. Real Solutions. City Limits Lakes & Ponds Sprinc, —..� Park ; Carman s Bay 1 Bay •• •�. 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams Q ; '••� • 0 3,500 .tee Feet n `• • Casco Point 1 Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, �•. Hennepin County, MnDOT �'' —" —•' — k L L / L • ,rs/ae •QQ Q L Moot /°. w Shoreland Overlay District Lake da -1 Gy9c w a E _ Setback z �a Overlay Streams 0 Stubbs q�e Painter v,oad Dickea0, load Al Lake 3 ■ • �0 0• Spring R WaYzata Blvd m a Lydiard �� Lake m � 151 a0' �0 City Limits Lakes & Ponds Sprinc, —..� Park ; Carman s Bay 1 Bay •• •�. 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams Q ; '••� • 0 3,500 .tee Feet n `• • Casco Point 1 Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, �•. Hennepin County, MnDOT �'' —" —•' — k L • ,rs/ae •QQ �,� � J d /°. w Shoreland Overlay District da O' ado, Gy9c w a Lakeshore G1Q1 . • Setback Floodplain �M— Overlay Streams 0 Stubbs rr- Painter v,oad 9 Lar, rn� ■ • �0 0• Bay Fox St m _ WaYzata Blvd a `° N W Branch Road —: 12 County Road 151 a0' V ` c North p Browns 0 Arm Maxwell Bay ake 1� Bay French Smith Sunnyfield Road E rJ Bay Forest Marsh Shore � Lake � � Dr n Z c Jenning's 1 2 Bay 1 m 0 E � 1 • • �• Game Farm Road �• •' 0 1 West ,•� • Dutch v Crystal Bohns •• �. Lake > Bay Point •• ��'•�• m Harrison ! �.._� •.� Bay Lynwood Blvd E — - • — • • _ .. _ • t 1 v Shoreline or - aBay 4,yric.Ave Lafayette Ba y ,• • / �''� %'• Legend •'•• City Limits Lakes & Ponds Sprinc, —..� Park ; Carman s Bay 1 Bay •• •�. 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams Q ; '••� • 0 3,500 .tee Feet n `• • Casco Point 1 Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, �•. Hennepin County, MnDOT �'' —" —•' — k L Ave Wayzata Bay E Ave N Minn dnl a Blvd 1 I w Shoreland Overlay District Protected O' ado, Tributaries Lakeshore G1Q1 . • Setback Floodplain �M— Overlay Streams rr- 9 Lar, ■ • �0 0• WaYzata Blvd W —: 12 1 ` Browns I;ea , F Tanage Bay ake I I Smith Bracketts I Bay Point I P 4innet--' I I n I 1 Ave Wayzata Bay E Ave N Z C, Minn dnl a Blvd I w Shoreland Overlay District Protected ®District Boundary Tributaries Lakeshore Included Setback Floodplain �M— Overlay Streams Z C, Q& MLENK Real People. Real Solutions. Submitted by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2638 Shadow Lane, Suite 200 Chaska, MN 55318 P: 952-448-8838 Adopted by Orono City Council on April 22nd, 2019 Surface Water Management Plan Orono, Minnesota I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 0 '(2c -64g "4 Robert Bean, Jr., P.E. Registration No. 40410 Date: 2-18-2019 City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan BOLTON & MENK, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS ORONO - SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Table of Contents ExecutiveSummary......................................................................................................... i 1 Introduction............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose............................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Study Area....................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Land Use Overview and Philosophy................................................................................. 2 1.4 Land Use, Comprehensive Plan and Special Areas and Considerations .............................. 4 1.5 SWMP Structure.............................................................................................................. 6 2 Physical Environment............................................................................................. 7 2.1 Climate............................................................................................................................ 7 2.2 Geology........................................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Topography and Soils....................................................................................................... 8 2.4 Surface Water Resources.................................................................................................. 9 2.5 Impaired Waters............................................................................................................. 10 2.6 Monitoring and Data Collection...................................................................................... 11 2.7 Groundwater Resources.................................................................................................. 11 2.8 Ecological Resources...................................................................................................... 12 2.9 Potential Pollutant Sources............................................................................................. 14 3 Regulatory Setting................................................................................................ 15 3.1 State -Wide Regulation.................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Local Regulation............................................................................................................ 16 3.3 City of Orono................................................................................................................. 17 3.4 Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD).............................................................. 18 3.5 Hennepin County............................................................................................................ 19 3.6 Three Rivers Park District............................................................................................... 19 3.7 Metropolitan Council...................................................................................................... 19 3.8 State Board of Soil and Water Resources (BWSR).......................................................... 20 3.9 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)................................................................ 20 3.10 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) ....................................................... 20 3.11 Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)........................................................................ 20 3.12 Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB)............................................................. 20 3.13 Minnesota Department of Transportation(MnDOT)........................................................ 21 3.14 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)................................................................ 21 3.15 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(USACE)........................................................................ 21 3.16 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)......................................................... 21 3.17 Natural Resources Conservation Service(NRCS)............................................................ 21 3.18 U.S. Geological Survey.................................................................................................. 21 3.19 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service........................................................................................ 21 3.20 Water Resource Agreements........................................................................................... 21 4 Major Issues, Goals, and Policies.......................................................................... 23 4.1 Surface Water Management............................................................................................ 23 City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan 4.2 Impaired Waters............................................................................................................. 24 4.3 Urban Stormwater Management...................................................................................... 25 4.4 Wetland Management..................................................................................................... 28 4.5 Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTSs)............................................................. 29 4.6 Upland Natural Resources.............................................................................................. 29 4.7 Groundwater Management.............................................................................................. 30 4.8 Education....................................................................................................................... 31 5 Water Resources Assessment and Implementation Plan ........................................ 32 5.1 General Assessment Procedures...................................................................................... 32 5.2 Stream and Shoreline Restoration................................................................................... 33 5.3 Outlet Control Structure Improvements........................................................................... 33 5.4 Localized Stormwater Management Improvements......................................................... 35 5.5 Wetland Restoration....................................................................................................... 43 5.6 Natural Area Preservation and Restoration...................................................................... 43 5.7 Education....................................................................................................................... 45 5.8 Surface Water Management Costs and Funding Considerations ....................................... 46 6 Administration.....................................................................................................47 6.1 Review and Adoption Process......................................................................................... 47 6.2 Collaboration with Other Entities.................................................................................... 47 6.3 Plan Amendments.......................................................................................................... 49 7 Appendices...........................................................................................................50 Appendix A: Figures StudyArea...................................................................................................Figure No. 1 Existing Land Use.......................................................................................Figure No. 2 Future Land Use...........................................................................................Figure No. 3 Soils.............................................................................................................Figure No. 4 Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) ...............................Figure No. 5 National Wetland Inventory and DNR Public Waters ....................................Figure No. 6 Impaired Waters...........................................................................................Figure No. 7 Storm Sewer Map.........................................................................................Figure No. 8 Appendix B: Subwatershed Maps: 10 -yr and 100 -yr Events Appendix C: Modeling Methodology Appendix D: Modeling Results Appendix E: Capital Improvement Plan Appendix F: Water Resources Agreements City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan CITY OF ORONO - SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Executive Summary This Surface Water Management Plan has been developed to serve as a comprehensive planning document to guide the City of Orono in conserving, protecting, and managing its surface water resources and comply with the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act, Minnesota Statue 103B.235, Minnesota Rule 8410, and the requirements of the local watershed management organizations. This document provides an inventory of water resource related information including the results of assessments conducted by other governmental units, both local and state. From this inventory and assessment, Orono sets forth its goals and policies and implementation program. The plan is organized as follows: 1. Section 1 offers an introduction to and purpose of the Plan, including a location map of Orono, an overview of Orono's land use, and philosophy of ecologically based planning. 2. Section 2 of this Plan provides an inventory of land and water resources within the City including a description of the physical setting, available and pertinent water resources data, and important natural and conservation areas. 3. Section 3 includes a comprehensive documentation of the regulatory agencies influencing the management of surface water resources in Orono. 4. Section 4 outlines Orono's major issues, goals and policies, as well as implementation strategies, pertaining to water resources management. 5. Section 5 provides a current assessment of surface water management in Orono, including stormwater modeling and identification of corrective actions. 6. Section 6 outlines the continued administration of this plan with respect to plan updates and amendments, as well as annual reporting requirements to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). City of Orono Page i Surface Water Management Plan ORONO- SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 1 Introduction 1.1 PURPOSE This report provides the City of Orono with a Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) that will guide surface water and stormwater management activities conducted by the City over the next 10 years. This Plan meets the requirements detailed in Minnesota Statutes 103B and Minnesota Rules 8410, administered by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. Minnesota Statute 10313.201 states that the purposes of the water management programs are to: 1. Protect, preserve, and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems; 2. Minimize public capital expenditures needed to correct flooding and water quality problems; 3. Identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and groundwater quality, 4. Establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and groundwater management; 5. Prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems; 6. Promote groundwater recharge; 7. Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities; and 8. Secure the other benefits associated with the proper management of surface and groundwater. This plan is also consistent with the goals and policies of the Metropolitan Council and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Though intended to serve Orono until 2028, this plan may be periodically amended to remain current with local practices and policies and to maintain Orono's compliance with MCWD rules and State of Minnesota laws and rules. The Orono SWMP emphasizes a cooperative approach to surface water and stormwater management with all available partners. This approach assumes the public benefit is maximized when capital expenditures are closely coordinated between all interested parties. Listed below is the contact information for the City of Orono and MCWD: City of Orono — http://www.ci.orono.mn.us/ Adam Edwards, Public Works Director/City Engineer 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 — aedwards(i�ci.orono.mn.us Minnehaha Creek Watershed District — http://www.minnehahacreek.org 15320 Minnetonka Boulevard Minnetonka, MN 55345 952-471-0590 1.2 STUDY AREA Orono lies in western Hennepin County and encompasses much of the northern shore of Lake Minnetonka. Lake Minnetonka is Orono's central feature and the protection of Lake Minnetonka has guided the City's land use planning decisions for decades. Figure 1 provides Orono's location within the Metropolitan Area. Orono is bounded on the north by the City of Medina; on the east by Plymouth and Wayzata; on the south by Tonka Bay; and on the west by Spring Park, Mound, Minnetrista, and Independence. The City encompasses most of the southern quarter of Township I I8N, Range 23W and the northern half of Township 117N, Range 23W, and lies entirely within the boundaries of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). MCWD spans a multitude of municipal boundaries; therefore, cooperation between communities within the watershed is necessary to effectively manage the watersheds' resources. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 1.3 LAND USE OVERVIEW AND PHILOSOPHY Orono, located within the Central Hardwood Forest region of Minnesota, was originally covered with hardwood forest vegetation intermixed with prairie, lakes, streams and wetlands. The "Big Woods," as this region is often called, consists primarily of maple, basswood, American elm, and oak trees. Between 1850 and 1880, the forests were extensively cleared for agricultural use. ORONOISFORMED The City of Orono was created from parts of Medina and Excelsior townships and included a number of settlements which grew up along the railway lines such as Crystal Bay, Navarre, and Ferndale, as well as others that served the farming or summer home communities such as Tamarack (which later became the City of Long Lake) and Saga Hill. The open areas between these settlements developed in two distinct fashions: the shores of Lake Minnetonka in southern Orono became dotted with summer homes, and the areas away from the lake in central and northern Orono supported cash crop and dairy agriculture and truck farming. DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE A local/county road network was developed to serve these diverse communities, and U.S. Highway 12 provided a regional transportation link as it crossed northern Orono. To support agriculture, early development and road construction, county drainage systems were developed, including ditches that connected many of Orono's large wetlands and marshes to the nearby creeks flowing to Lake Minnetonka. After WWII, full -year homes began to fill in much of the Lake's shoreline, and a scattering of residential subdivisions developed in the more rural areas away from the Lake. As lakeshore development expanded, point source pollution from inadequate septic systems was recognized as not only a health risk but as a factor in the deteriorating water quality of the Lake. Municipal sewer lines were extended along Orono's developed lakeshore starting in the 1960's. The city's municipal sewage treatment plant was one of seven constructed to serve the cities within the Lake Minnetonka watershed. However, these plants were relatively inefficient in phosphorus removal, and each ultimately discharged back into the Lake. IMPACT ON ECOLOGY The ecology of the Lake makes it extremely susceptible to pollution. Due to its many bays (connected by restricted channels), a relatively small watershed area, and its primary source of hydrology being precipitation within the watershed, the Lake has an extremely long 25 -year flush out period for a complete water change. Pollutants entering the lake remain for a long time and are not easily diluted. Lake Minnetonka has historically suffered from two problems that affect its environmental health and its value as a public amenity. The first is deterioration in water quality due to eutrophication, the natural aging process by which lakes are enriched with nutrients that stimulate excessive plant growth. This process has been artificially accelerated as a result of development in the Lake's watershed. The second problem is hydrologic instability. With precipitation as the primary water source, water levels have fluctuated widely depending on rainfall. In more recent years, increasing urbanization of the watershed has resulted in increased amounts of stormwater runoff and, in turn, higher water levels that affect low-lying properties. THE PROBLEM WITH PHOSPHORUS Studies in the 1960s and 70s led to the conclusion that phosphorus is the key nutrient in the ecology of Lake Minnetonka. An overabundance of phosphorus results in excessive algae and weeds, reducing water City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 clarity and making navigation more difficult. Taking steps to limit the amount of phosphorus reaching the Lake was identified as a key element in slowing its eutrophication. The discharge from the seven sewage treatment plants was identified as one of the two primary sources of phosphorus reaching the Lake. As a result, plans were developed and implemented in the late 1970s which redirected the treatment plant discharges, via interceptors, to a regional treatment plant on the Minnesota River near Shakopee. The other phosphorus source identified in the 1970's was stormwater runoff coming from within the watershed. To date this source has not effectively been controlled. At the time, various studies recommended that lakeshore density be limited, and the natural system of wetlands and marshes be forever protected and preserved as the only practical, economic method of filtering nutrients from runoff. It became clear that the problems of ever-increasing phosphorus inputs and stormwater volumes from an urbanizing watershed would become difficult and costly to solve, and should be avoided if possible. PLANNING FOR ECOLOGY The driving force behind Orono's planning has for many decades been the protection of Lake Minnetonka, perhaps the single most important surface water resource in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. One-third of the Lake's surface area and 40% of its shoreline are within Orono's corporate boundaries. Orono's land and wetlands also comprise a significant portion of Lake Minnetonka's watershed. The studies in the early 1970s served to reinforce that future development will have significant impacts on the water quality of the Lake. Water quality in turn has a tremendous impact on the value of the lake as a regional and community resource. TAKING ACTION City leaders concluded that limiting the density and types of development within the City was necessary to preserve and protect the Lake. To this end, in 1975 city-wide rezoning, wetland, and floodplain ordinances were strengthened, and fully 80% of the City's land area was limited to residential lot sizes of no less than 2 acres. A'hardcover' ordinance was also put into effect, limiting the percentage of impervious surface coverage for properties within 1,000 feet of the Lake. These regulatory changes closely followed recommendations from the 1974 Surface Water Management Plan. The result is a city that is primarily low-density residential in character. The majority of Orono designated as "Rural Area" is generally located in the northern and central portions of the city, and is zoned for single-family residences on lots of 2 to 5 acres. The remaining 20%, designated as the "Urban Area," primarily includes homes on lots of/z to 1 acre, with only 2% of the City devoted to commercial and industrial uses. The Urban Area includes the Navarre commercial area and the many lakeshore homes on smaller lots in southwestern Orono, as well as portions of the Highway 12 commercial/industrial area. Orono's 1980 Comprehensive Plan established policies that required property in the rural 2 and 5 -acre zones to develop in a manner that did not require urban services. Metropolitan Council uses the Metropolitan Urban Service Area or MUSA to define those areas under its planning jurisdiction that will develop at urban density or, in unique cases, require sewer service at less than urban density. Refer to the City's Comprehensive plan for more information regarding the MUSA. In addition to local regulations and policies, the EPA has established the Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program as an important component of the Clean Water Act's City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 framework to restore and protect the nation's waters. The program is comprised primarily of a two part process. First, states identify waters that are impaired or in danger of becoming impaired (threatened) and second, for these waters, states calculate and allocate pollutant reduction levels necessary to meet approved water quality standards. Several water bodies located partially or completely within the city boundary have been listed as impaired (see Figure 7), and Orono has been allocated pollutant reduction levels accordingly. The Impaired Waters and TMDL Program is discussed in more detail in subsequent chapters. 1.4 LAND USE, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SPECIAL AREAS AND CONSIDERATIONS Land use is an important factor in estimating surface water runoff, as the impervious surface associated with each land use greatly affects the amount of runoff generated. Figure 2 exhibits existing land uses in Orono and Figure 3 exhibits the projected land uses for the year 2040. It is presumed that continued development will be predominantly residential with some commercial/industrial expansion around Trunk Highway 12 and in the Navarre neighborhood. With these projections, priority areas have been identified for future water resource improvements or enhancements. Additional information regarding existing and planned land use in the area can be found in the City of Orono 2040 Comprehensive Plan. FLOODPLAIN, SHORELAND AND WETLANDS Urbanization leads to increased stormwater runoff as pervious soils are replaced by impervious pavement and roofs. When impervious area increases, runoff volume, runoff rate, and pollution also increase causing negative impacts to downstream water bodies. Stormwater management incorporates planning, designing, constructing, and maintaining facilities and providing services as part of a community -wide program in ways that avoid, minimize, and mitigate negative impacts from new construction and existing development to the maximum extent practicable. Rate control, volume control, water quality improvement, and conveyance are all elements of a constructed stormwater management system. Stormwater management is related to, but differs from, floodplain, shoreland, and wetland management programs. Floodplain management addresses federal, state, and local regulations associated with very large storm events. Floodplain regulations govern land alteration and restrict land use within areas specifically designated as flood prone. Shoreland management addresses state and local regulations associated with protecting the stability and habitats of lake and river shoreland while wetland management addresses federal, state, and local regulations that protect the hydrologic, biologic, and functional values of wetlands. Floodplain management occurs in Orono under the authority of City Code Chapter 78, Article VIII - Floodplain Management. The stipulations of this ordinance apply to officially designated floodplain as described in the most current Flood Insurance Study. Refer to the following link for more information regarding the FEMA 100 -year floodplain areas around the City. haps://msc. fema. goy/portal/advanceSearch# Shoreland management occurs in Orono under the authority of City Code Chapter 78, Article IX- Shoreland Management. Shoreland management classification for public water bodies are provided in Tables 1.2 and 1.3. Refer to the following link for the City Code: haps://Iibrary.municode.com/mn/orono/codes/code_of ordinances City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 4 Table 1.2: Public Waters Classification for Lakes Table 1.3: Public Waters Classification for Streams Tributary Name OHWL feet Protected Waters Inventor I.D. # 1 Natural Environment E lakes TWP R Lake Classen 974.5 162-P Dickey Lake 985.5 161-W French Lake South Basin only) 930.0 140-P Lydiard Lake 970.9 159-P Lake Katrina -- 154-P Wolsfeld Lake Medina -- 157-P 2 Recreational Development RD lakes C. Tributary to Wolsfeld Creek from Holy Name Lake Long Lake 944.3 160-P Mooney Lake 988.0 134-P Tanager Lake 929.4 141-P Hadley Lake (Plymouth) 961.4 109-P 3 General Development GD lakes 23 e. Forest Lake 929.4 139-P Lake Minnetonka 929.4 133-P Table 1.3: Public Waters Classification for Streams Tributary Name From To Sec. TWP R Sec. TWP R a. Long Lake Creek 35 (Basin 160P) 118 23 10 (Basin 141P) 117 23 b. Wolsfeld Creek 27 (City Limit) 118 23 26 (Basin 160P) 118 23 C. Tributary to Wolsfeld Creek from Holy Name Lake 26 (City Limit) 118 23 27 118 23 d. Dickeys Lake Creek 27 (Basin 161P) 118 23 34 (Basin 160P) 118 23 e. Stubbs Bay Creek 32 (Basin 162P) 118 23 5 (Basin 133P) 117 23 f. Painters Creek 30 (Basin 154P) 118 23 31 (City Limit) 118 23 City Code Chapter 78, Article XI, - Wetlands Protection recognizes, preserves, and protects the unique environmental, aesthetic and hydrologic function of Orono's wetlands by regulating the use of these wetlands. Orono's wetland ordinance addresses the damaging effect of runoff rate and pollutant loading on wetland vegetation and wetland fauna. Through a wetland inventory based on wetland functions and values, Orono and MC" have established functions and values based protection program that protects wetlands in proportion to their susceptibility to stormwater impacts with higher levels of protection provided for Orono's most sensitive wetland resources. WATER QUALITY Orono's natural setting and proximity to the Twin Cities makes it a desirable location for both residential development and recreational activities. As the population of Lake Minnetonka's shoreland increased, and as recreational use grew, residents indicated a strong desire to maintain and improve the quality of Lake Minnetonka. It has been demonstrated that surface waters, as biological systems, can be negatively affected by increases in nutrients and toxic chemicals. Phosphorus is the nutrient most commonly managed because it is the limiting nutrient in the growth of algae and vegetation in lakes and wetlands. Soil erosion and sedimentation also play a significant role in poor water quality. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 In the 1950's increasing urbanization all around Lake Minnetonka threatened to environmentally "kill" the Lake by uncontrolled discharge of nutrients. Lake area municipalities began extending sewer systems to eliminate individual septic system discharges, but by 1968, lake water quality was still diminishing. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, together with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, commissioned a study of lake pollution. Completed in 1971, the "Harza Study" (A Program for Preserving the Quality of Lake Minnetonka) found that this nutrient input, particularly phosphorus, was being generated from two principal sources: the seven municipal sewage treatment plants within the watershed and urban stormwater runoff. The first major pollution source, nutrient -rich effluent from the sewage treatment plants, was systematically eliminated by multi-million dollar construction of regional sewer interceptors to remove effluent from the watershed. But stormwater runoff is a different matter. Compared to point -source sewage pollution, the collection and treatment of non -point source stormwater runoff is relatively difficult, costly, and often impractical. The development paradox is that if municipal services are extended into rural zones, the cost of these services taxes the land to the point that development is required. Particularly in the case of sewers, even if extended to existing pockets of development "to solve a pollution problem", inflation, topography and sparse settlement combine to send costs skyrocketing. Such costs can be paid only by increasing the level and density of new development, which in turn causes potential degradation of wetlands and increasing levels of stormwater nutrient pollution. This spiral effect results in statistically even greater levels of pollution than the original sewage "problem" might have generated. The cost of solving this problem, either filtering or rerouting the stormwater, has consistently been judged too expensive. Thus, the recommendation of many studies, as already incorporated in MPCA and MnDNR policy, is that lakeshore density be limited and that the natural system of wetlands and marshes be forever protected and preserved as the only practical, economic method of filtering nutrients from stormwater runoff. In response to the above concerns, Orono became a nationally recognized leader in the 1970's by promoting environmental protection. Land use planning since the 1950's has stressed the environmental advantages of low density development. Long before the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) was passed, shorelands, wetlands and natural drainage systems were preserved in Orono by tradition and by ordinance. Orono's 2040 Land Use Plan will continue this tradition and commitment. 1.5 SWMP STRUCTURE The Orono Surface Water Management Plan is organized as follows: 1. Introduction: offers an introduction to and purpose of the Plan, including a location map of Orono, an overview of Orono's land use and philosophy of ecologically based planning. 2. Physical Environment: provides an inventory of land and water resources within the City including a description of the physical setting, available and pertinent water resources data, and important natural and conservation areas. 3. Regulatory Setting: includes a comprehensive documentation of the regulatory agencies influencing the management of surface water resources in Orono. 4. Major Issues, Goals and Policies: lists the goals and policies identified to address surface water management needs in Orono. 5. Water Resources Assessment and Implementation Plan: provides an evaluation of current surface water management and stormwater resources within Orono. 6. Administration: outlines the continued administration of this plan with respect to updates and amendments, as well as annual reporting requirements to MCWD and the State. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 ORONO- SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 2 Physical Environment This section describes the physical setting within Orono and includes climate, precipitation, geology and soils information. The Minnesota statute that prompts Cities to prepare local surface water management plans requires a land and water resources inventory section. The information presented here is intended to augment information provided by the watersheds in their own plans. 2.1 CLIMATE Orono has a Humid Continental Climate, typified by considerable seasonal temperature differences, hot and humid summers, and cold to extremely cold winters, and is located in USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 4b. Native vegetation has a seven month growing season (April to October) and crops have a five month growing season (May to September). Two-thirds of the precipitation occurs during the crop growing season, with a total of almost 31 inches annually. Refer to Table 2-1 for a 30 year average of temperature and precipitation Data. Refer to Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atlas 14 for estimated precipitation amounts for specific frequencies, durations, and locations at the link listed below. hltps://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds map cont.html?bkmrk=mn Table 2.1: 1981-2010 Monthly Climate Normals (MPLS Flying Cloud AP) Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AugSep Oct Nov Dec Annual Maximum Daily 23.6 29.1 40.6 57.4 69.7 78.7 83.1 80.6 71.5 58.5 41.3 27.1 55.2 Temperature °F Mean Daily 15.4 20.3 32.2 47.2 59.3 69.0 73.4 70.9 61.9 48.9 33.9 19.5 46.1 Temperature °F Minimum Daily 7.2 11.4 23.9 37.1 48.9 59.2 63.8 61.3 52.2 39.3 26.5 12.0 37.0 Temperature °F Average 0.74 0.53 1.77 2.89 3.60 4.33 4.20 4.36 3.54 2.35 1.74 0.80 30.85 Precipitation in. Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2.2 GEOLOGY The geology of the region surrounding Orono is the result of two different geologic processes: • Warm, shallow seas covered the area and created conditions for the formation of sedimentary rocks. These formations are present as bedrock in the area. • Glacial processes have resulted in the development of surficial geology, and therefore, the current landforms. The geology of the City can be generalized characterized as over 100 feet of glacial till/drift overlying sedimentary bedrock. BEDROCK GEOLOGY The bedrock units present beneath the City are marine sedimentary rocks primarily of the Upper Cambrian to Middle Ordovician ages (450 to 500± million years old). Ranging from deeper/older bedrock to relatively shallow/younger bedrock, the geologic units present include the St. Lawrence/Franconia formation, Jordan Sandstone, the Prairie du Chien group, and St. Peter Sandstone. SURFACE GEOLOGY Glacial influence on this area began around 2.5 million years ago and continued until about 10,000 years ago. However, the landscape seen today was almost entirely influenced by activity between 30,000 and City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 16,000 years ago. The dominant geological feature in Orono is the remnant of the deteriorating Grantsburg sublobe of the Wisconsin glaciation, which covered the area until about 16,000 years ago. The landscape of Orono was formed by three glacial processes: • the Lonsdale-Lerdal Till, which left mounds of glacial drift (small rocks up to boulders) that were "dropped out" of the glacier as it "stood still' for a period of time and then retreated • the Emmons-Faribault Moraine formed hills where variably sized till was pushed to the edge of an advancing glacier • irregularly shaped depressions, referred to as "kettles", were formed by large blocks of ice and were filled as the ice melted After glaciation ended, the hills were "worn down" due to natural processes, resulting in the rolling landscape with filled depressions that became the many wetlands and water bodies seen in Orono today. Additional geological information can be found in the Geological Atlas of Hennepin County (Minnesota Geologic Survey, 1989). 2.3 TOPOGRAPHY AND SOILS Most of Orono can be described as gently to steeply rolling with numerous depressions, many of which contain wetlands. Along the shorelines of Lake Minnetonka, the terrain includes steep slopes that sharply grade down to the shoreline, low lying areas just a few feet above lake level, or wetlands that extend away from the main body of water. Elevations generally decrease north to south, with a high elevation of about 1,060 feet above sea level in the northwestern part of the City to the surface elevation of Lake Minnetonka, 930 feet above sea level. There are three major soil associations in the City of Orono. The association in the eastern region of Orono is Lester/Peaty Muck. This association is defined as rolling and hilly medium textured and moderately fine textured soils that developed in glacial till. The western half of Orono consists of the Erin/ Kilkenny/Peaty Muck association; gently undulating to hilly, medium textured and moderately fine textured soils that developed in glacial till. Big Island in Lake Minnetonka (southeastern Orono) consists of the Hayden/Cordova/Peaty Muck association. This soil is nearly level to rolling, medium and moderately fine textured, developed in glacial till. The soils within the City of Orono have generally moderate infiltration rates and create a high to moderate susceptibility to groundwater contamination. The hydrologic soil classification map is shown in Figure 4. The four soil classifications are defined as follows: Group A — These soils have high infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted. The infiltration rates range from 0.3 to 0.5 inches per hour. These soils consist chiefly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands and gravel. Group A soils have a high rate of water transmission, therefore resulting in a low runoff potential. Group B — These soils have moderate infiltration rates ranging from 0.15 to 0.30 inches per hour when thoroughly wetted. Group B soils consist of deep moderately well to well drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. Group C — These soils have slow infiltration rates ranging from 0.05 to 0.15 inches per hour when thoroughly wetted. Group C have moderately fine to fine texture. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 Group D — These soils have very slow infiltration rates ranging from 0 to 0.05 inches per hour when thoroughly wetted. Group D soils are typically clay soils with high swelling potential, soils with high permanent water table, soils with a clay layer at or near the surface, or shallow soils over nearly impervious material. Dual Hydrologic Soil Types — These include A/D, B/D, and C/D. These soils behave like D soils when wet, and act like A, B, or C when dry. The predominance of Type B soils in upland areas indicates moderate infiltration capacity. However, the preponderance of Type D soils around wetlands and lakes indicates low infiltration capacity adjacent to many of the City's water bodies. For planning purposes, infiltration rates listed in the Minnesota Stormwater Manual should be referenced. For design purposes, actual infiltration testing of site soils should be performed to determine permeability rates. 2.4 SURFACE WATER RESOURCES LAKE MINNETONKA Surface water runoff from Orono drains to Minnehaha Creek's upper watershed (the entire Lake Minnetonka drainage area) and flows through parts of three MCWD subwatersheds: 1. Stubbs Bay Creek 2. Painters Creek 3. Long Lake Creek Lake Minnetonka and its bays have a surface area of 22.6 square miles, and are listed as one of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Protected Waters. The lake drains an area of approximately 126 square miles, has a maximum depth of 101 feet, and has an outlet/surface elevation of approximately 930 feet. WATER COURSES There are six streams identified in Orono's shoreland ordinance as protected waters within Orono. Five of these streams are identified on the protected waters inventory for Hennepin County: Long Lake Creek, "Wolsfeld" Creek, Tributary to "Wolsfeld" Creek, Stubbs Bay Creek and Painters Creek. Table 1.3 identifies these streams and their locations. Figure 6 provides mapping of DNR Public Waters. LAKES There are 12 lakes identified in Orono's shoreland ordinance as protected waters within Orono. Table 1.2 identifies these lakes and their Public Classification, Ordinary High Water Level and Protected Waters Identification Number. These lakes are kettle lakes that were formed by large blocks of ice that became stationary while glacial deposits settled around them. As the ice melted, they filled the "kettles" they had formed. As a result of natural processes that have occurred since the end of glacial activity, mineral sediments and decomposing plant materials were deposited in these lakes and have created their current configuration. They vary in depth and shape, ranging from roundish to very irregular and from less than ten feet in depth to a deep spot of 88 feet in Browns Bay on Lake Minnetonka. WETLANDS As stated above, a large percentage of the wetland basins in Orono developed in the depressions created by glacial processes. Wetlands also occur in the nearly flat, sometimes extensive shoreline areas of Lake Minnetonka. These are also considered depressional wetlands. According to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's completed functional assessment of wetlands, the dominant wetland types within Orono are shallow emergent marshes. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 There is also shrub, forested, fresh meadow, and shallow open water wetlands scattered throughout the City. Generally, the USFWS Circular 39 classification of these wetlands includes Types 1 through 7. Figure 6 shows wetlands identified by the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and those larger wetlands that fall under DNR jurisdiction. Additionally, MCWD performed a functional assessment of wetlands within the watershed greater than '/4 acre in size during 2001— 2003. Wetlands were assigned one of four values, Preserve, or Manage 1, 2, or 3. These management classifications are used in regulating and protecting wetlands by the District. For legal purposes, wetland boundaries must be determined by on- site delineation, usually conducted when development occurs in lands adjacent to a wetland. MCWD's Functional Assessment of Wetlands can be found at the following link: http://www.minnehahacreek. org/sites/minnehahacreek. org/files/attachments/Figure%2027"/o20FAW%20 by"/o20Classification.pdf 2.5 IMPAIRED WATERS The Federal Clean Water Act requires states to establish water quality standards, to test surface waters, and formally list those as "impaired" that do not meet the water quality standards. Subsequent sections presents more detail on the impaired waters program and its relationship to Orono's stormwater management program. A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study is the next step for an impaired water, although it can be delayed years after identification of the impairment. The TMDL study can result in very specific water quality obligations for Cities. Once the TMDL Study is accepted by the MPGA, an Implementation Plan must be developed, and MS4 Cities must develop an approach to meet the obligations identified in the TMDL Study. Currently, several water bodies located partially or entirely within the City boundary are listed as impaired, and three different TMDL Studies and Implementation Plans have been completed. The Minnesota State Mercury TMDL addresses impairment due to high levels of mercury. The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Chloride TMDL address impairment due to high levels of chlorides. The Upper Minnehaha Creek Watershed Nutrient and Bacteria TMDL address impairments due to high levels of nutrients and bacteria. Impaired waters in Orono, or those receiving discharge from Orono, are summarized in Table 2.3. Mapping of impaired waters is also depicted on Figure 7. Table 2.3: Impaired Waters" Waterbody/ Listed Impaired Year Year Existing Allowable Watercourse AUID# Pollutant Use Listed TMDL Wasteload Wasteload Approved Painter Creek 07010206- E. Coli Aquatic 2010 2014 700 Recreation Forest Lake 27-0139-00 Nutrient/ Aquatic 2008 2014 118 lbs/yr 39 lbs/yr Eutrophication Recreation Long Lake 27-0160-00 Nutrient/ Aquatic 2010 2014 224 lbs/yr 100 lbs/yr Eutrophication Recreation Lake 27-0133-15 Nutrient/ Aquatic 2008 2014 244lbs/yr 92 lbs/yr Minnetonka Eutrophication Recreation (Jennings Ba Lake 27-0133-12 Nutrient/ Aquatic 2008 2014 269lbs/yr 129lbs/yr Minnetonka Eutrophication Recreation Stubbs Ba Lake 27-0133-14 Nutrient/ Aquatic 2008 2014 31lbs/yr 3lbs/yr Minnetonka Eutrophication Recreation West Arm Mooney Lake 27-0134-00 Nutrient/ Aquatic 2010 2014 1 lb/yr .04 lb/yr Eutrophication Recreation City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 10 Waterbody/ Listed Impaired Year Year Existing Allowable Watercourse AVID# Pollutant Use Listed TMDL Wasteload Wasteload Approved Tanager Lake 27-0141-00 Nutrient/ Aquatic 2010 2014 114 lbs/yr 55 lbs/yr Eutrophication Recreation Wolsfeld Lake 27-0157-00 Nutrient/ Aquatic 2010 2014 3 lb/yr 1 lb/yr Eutrophication Recreation * Refer to the Upper Minnehaha Creek Watershed Nutrient and Bacteria TMDL for allowable bacteria counts per various flow regimes. * * Refer to the City's SWPPP for information regarding Impaired Waters and TMDLs. 2.6 MONITORING AND DATA COLLECTION Orono does not monitor surface water resources nor is it equipped to do so. However, the City will continue to support monitoring of surface waters within the City. Data will be obtained through cooperation and coordination with other various agencies, including the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), adjacent cities, the Three Rivers Park District, the Metropolitan Council, and the Department of Natural Resources. MCWD conducts its own monitoring program, which includes surface waters within the City of Orono. The data is used to assess water bodies with the intent to identify capital improvement needs, evaluate previous capital improvements, provide calibration for its hydrologic, hydraulic, and pollutant loading model, and promote greater understanding of the overall health of the watershed. MCWD uses the Ecosystem Evaluation Assessment Program (E -Grade) to evaluate shallow and deep lakes, streams, wetlands, and uplands for biodiversity, habitat diversity, nutrient cycling, recreation, flood control, and groundwater quality to determine the overall health of the watershed. In addition to phosphorus and chlorophyll concentration and water clarity (data used previously to determine lake grades by the District), E -Grades will also include data on fish, aquatic insects, and wetland vegetation to evaluate resources. Monitoring data from the water bodies sampled by MCWD and E -Grades are available on their website at: www.minnehahacreek.org. Other water quality information can be found from the Three Rivers Park District, Metropolitan Council, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency on the following websites: • Three Rivers Park District: hqp://www.threeriversparks.org • Metropolitan Council: http://www.metrocouncil.org • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency: http://www.pca.state.nm.us 2.7 GROUNDWATER RESOURCES Water quality of surface waters can have great effect on groundwater due to the interaction via groundwater recharge and discharge. Orono relies strictly on groundwater (aquifers) for drinking water, and therefore, groundwater quality is equally as important as surface water quality. In the City of Orono, there are several sources of groundwater, or "aquifers". Of these, there are three significant aquifers from which groundwater are currently being used: 1. The quaternary (water table) aquifer, is found in glacial deposits, 2. The St. Peter aquifer, found in a layer of sandstone just below the glacial deposits, and 3. The Prairie du Chien -Jordan aquifer, found in adjoining dolomite -sandstone below the St. Peter formation. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 11 Most private wells, along with those of the City, draw water from the Prairie du Chien -Jordan complex. The St. Peter and quaternary aquifers are utilized primarily as domestic well sources. Well yields and water table elevations in the quaternary aquifer are dependent on local conditions. In this part of Hennepin County, groundwater flow in the Prairie du Chien -Jordan aquifer is generally to the east/southeast. Groundwater elevations through Orono are about 900 feet (as compared to surface elevations of 930 to 1,060 feet). In the quaternary aquifer, groundwater flow is generally oriented from northeast to southwest to about the middle of Long Lake, and then generally north to south. This may vary locally due to the influence of surface water bodies, the effects of wells, and areas of high aquifer recharge. Elevations of groundwater range from about 970 feet in the northeast corner to 930 at the Lake Minnetonka shoreline. In addition to the known aquifers, areas of perched groundwater have been encountered. Perched groundwater occurs above deposits of low -permeability clay or silt. The clay or silt deposits are apparently not extensive. Perched groundwater often intersects the ground surface to create wetlands or ponds. WELLHEAD PROTECTION The Safe Drinking Water Act requires states to implement protection programs to prevent contamination of public drinking water sources. Therefore, the Minnesota Department of Health requires public water suppliers to delineate and manage Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPA) surrounding public water sources. Orono has an approved Wellhead Protection Plan and designated WHPA and Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) boundaries. Orono's DWSMA has a very low to low vulnerability to contamination. However, the City should review potential developments within these areas to ensure incompatible industries or activities are not located where they will affect water quality of the existing wells. Incompatible activities may include infiltration Best Management Practices in close proximity. Additional information regarding groundwater resources can be found in the City's Wellhead Protection and Water Supply Plans. Also, information regarding DNR permitting for each City well, its location, permitted volume, and number of gallons withdrawn each year can be downloaded from the DNRs website at www.dnr.state.mn.us. 2.8 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES MLCCS AND MCBS The Minnesota Land Cover Classification System, or MLCCS, categorizes urban and built up areas in terms of land cover rather than land use. MLCCS serves as a tool for City staff to integrate land cover preservation into land planning, land use, and zoning decisions. Figure 5 provides MLCCS coverage for Orono. Natural land cover in Orono is dominated by planted and cultivated vegetation or herbaceous vegetation. Orono's planted and cultivated vegetation consists primarily of golf courses, large estate lawns and pasture, while herbaceous vegetation generally occurs in wetland and wetland fringe areas. The Minnesota County Biological Survey (MOBS) began in 1987 as a systematic survey of rare biological features on a county by county basis. The survey for Hennepin County is complete and the Hennepin County map is available on the DNR website. According to the County Biological Survey, a natural community is a certain assemblage of flora and fauna that have a unique set of characteristics. Examples are a "dry prairie", or in Orono, an area of "maple -basswood forest" (big woods). Areas that may not be dominated by a natural community can nonetheless be considered important areas. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 12 There may be individual occurrences of rare, threatened, or endangered species that can also be considered valuable resources yet are not identified by the survey. For Orono, the County Biological Survey map for Hennepin County lists the following important resources. 1. A small portion of maple -basswood forest and cattail marsh within Baker Park Reserve in the very northwest part of the City. 2. A maple -basswood forest referred to as Lowry Woods near the middle/western edge of the City. 3. Noerenberg Memorial Park and Garden along the northern and eastern shores of Crystal Bay and Maxwell Bay, respectively. 4. A small wet meadow and maple -basswood forest on Big Island. There are also two Element Occurrence records (EO) of state or federally listed animals, and one EO of a state or federally listed plant on Big Island. 5. An EO for a state or federally listed animal on the west shore of Carman Bay, and one on the boundary between Orono and Tonka Bay along Highway 19. 6. Two state or federally listed EOs at the channel between Crystal Bay and North Arm. 7. The Ferndale Marsh, owned by The Nature Conservancy at the eastern edge of the City, just south of Hwy 15. 8. Maple -basswood forest, wet meadow, mixed hardwood swamp, tamarack swamp, and three listed EOs in the Wood -Rill State Scientific and Natural Area (SNA) in the northeastern corner of the City. 9. Maple -basswood and lowland hardwood forests in the portion of the Wolsfeld Woods SNA in Orono along its middle/northern boundary. There may be other "remnant" natural communities, and EOs do not necessarily represent existing occurrences of plant or animal species. However, the DNR should be consulted prior to any construction activities at or near these locations. SCIENTIFIC AND NATURAL AREAS The Wolsfeld Woods and Wood -Rill Scientific and Natural Areas (SNA) are located in Orono. The MnDNR manages these and all other SNAs in Minnesota. Minnesota statute stipulates that any water within an SNA is an Outstanding Resource Value Water or ORVW. Specifically, Minnesota Rule 7050.0180 on Nondegradation for Outstanding Resource Value Waters prohibits discharge from the City's stormwater system to Wolsfeld Woods and Wood -Rill. Additionally, Orono is not allowed any new or expanded discharges to these SNAs since the date they were established. Refer to the City's Comprehensive Plan for more information on natural areas, open space, and regionally significant ecological areas. KEY CONSERVATION AREAS The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) has prepared a map identifying key conservation areas found throughout the District. The map identifies several areas within the City of Orono. These key conservation areas consist of wetland complexes and adjacent high priority uplands. The District's strategy in preserving these areas ranges from outright acquisition of high value resources to land owner assistance for enrolling property in conservation programs. Orono's role is to assist MCWD in preserving these areas through municipal planning and zoning authority. The City will be able to use these mapped conservation areas, along with the MLCCS and MCBS data as a tool to integrate preservation of natural resources, including upland areas, into land planning, land use, and zoning decisions. The map of the Key Conservation Areas can be found on the districts website under their comprehensive water resource management plan at: http://www.minnehahacreek.org. Public Park and Open Space The City of Orono has a number of areas designated for park and open space within its corporate boundaries, owned and controlled by a variety of entities, including the City, Hennepin County, Three Rivers Park District, the State of Minnesota, and private owners. The typical uses at these facilities may include recreation, walking, swimming, and passive uses. A number of these areas have been set aside in City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 13 conservation easements or are designated to have minimal to limited development that will result in preservation of natural areas and provide both ecological and water quality benefits. In addition, dedication of fees to support park, recreation or conservation land acquisition are required for new development. Fees are outlined in the City's Fee Schedule available on the City's website. Refer to the City's Comprehensive Plan for more information on parks. 2.9 POTENTIAL POLLUTANT SOURCES Potential environmental hazards within the City include known and potential sources of soil and groundwater contamination listed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA) and wells. Known and Potential Sources of Soil and Groundwater Contamination: The MPCA maintains a database of sites with known or potential soil and groundwater contamination, including Superfund candidate sites, contaminated soil treatment facilities, leak sites, petroleum brownfields, state assessment sites, and voluntary investigation and cleanup sites. The database contains sites that have already been investigated and cleaned up, sites currently enrolled in MPCA cleanup programs, and sites suspected of contamination but found to be clean after investigation. For the most current information, sources can be reviewed on the MPCA's website at the following link: h!Ltps://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/whats-my-neighborhood Wells: Wells are common place in Orono, and when properly installed, they pose no threat for potential contamination of groundwater. However, if improperly installed or abandoned, wells can provide a conduit for pollutants to enter groundwater. The DNR maintains an Index of known wells, some of which have been properly abandoned and sealed. However, those still in operation or abandoned but not properly sealed may allow for contamination of aquifers. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 14 CITY OF ORONO - SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 3 Regulatory Setting This section describes the City's current stormwater management programs and practices and the agencies and organizations having roles in the City's stormwater and surface water management activities. 3.1 STATE-WIDE REGULATION NPDES MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM (MS4) PERMIT Since 2003 Orono has operated its stormwater management program under a permit issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA). This permit is called the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Permit and authorizes Orono to discharge stormwater to waters of the state under certain conditions. Under its permit coverage, Orono must implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) to addresses the MS4 Permits six minimum control measures, as listed below: 1) Public education 2) Public involvement 3) Illicit discharge detection and elimination 4) Construction site runoff control 5) Post -construction runoff control 6) Pollution prevention in municipal operations The City's SWPPP contains several Best Management Practices within each of the listed control measures. These were identified using a self-evaluation and input process with City staff. Many of the goals and policies discussed in this local surface water management plan are directly related to requirements listed in the NPDES program. As a result, the implementation section of this plan references items listed in the City's SWPPP. Additional information regarding the City's SWPPP can be found at the following location: hqp://www.ci.orono.mn.us/index.asp?Tyl2e=B BASIC&SEC={9F03E94A-D39F-4B40-BEFC- DDE3E263F6CF} &DE= {BD839B37-D57F-4DF0-971 B-7B79283E9450 } IMPAIRED WATERS AND TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS The Federal Clean Water Act requires states to establish water quality standards, to test surface waters, and formally list those as "impaired" that do not meet the water quality standards. Subsequent sections presents more detail on the impaired waters program and its relationship to Orono's stormwater management program. A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study is the next step for an impaired water, although it can be delayed years after identification of the impairment. The TMDL study can result in very specific water quality obligations for Cities. Once the TMDL Study is accepted by the MPGA, an Implementation Plan must be developed, and MS4 Cities must develop an approach to meet the obligations identified in the TMDL Study. Currently, several water bodies located partially or entirely within the City boundary are listed as impaired, and three different TMDL Studies and Implementation Plans have been completed. The Minnesota State Mercury TMDL addresses impairment due to high levels of mercury. The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Chloride TMDL address impairment due to high levels of chlorides. The Upper Minnehaha Creek Watershed Nutrient and Bacteria TMDL address impairments due to high levels of nutrients and bacteria. Impaired waters in Orono, or those receiving discharge from Orono, are summarized in Table 2.3. Orono will reduce pollutant loading to address impairments outlined in TMDLs via their Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) inspection and enforcement program, by means of constructed stormwater management facilities, and through their street and storm sewer maintenance program. Additional City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 15 information regarding TMDL requirements and tracking can be found in the City's SWPPP at the link provided above. OUTSTANDING RESOURCE VALUE WATERS Coverage under the MPCAs MS4 General Permit authorizes Orono to discharge stormwater into Minnesota's waters through its Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). The permit does not allow new and expanded discharges to restricted waters as defined by Minnesota rules (7050.0180) unless prudent and feasible alternatives to the new and expanded discharge do not exist. The only rule - listed restricted waters that exist in Orono are the two Scientific and Natural Areas (SNA): Wolsfeld Woods and Wood Rill. NPDES CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY PERMIT In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act, the MPCA issues a general NPDES permit to authorize the discharge of stormwater from construction activity. The Construction Activity Permit does not allow new or expanded discharges to Outstanding Resource Value Waters nor does it allow discharges to waters identified as impaired unless certain conditions are met. For projects that have a discharge point on the project that is within one mile of, and flows to, an impaired water, the permit requires additional water quality treatment and also requires that a portion of this treatment occur through infiltration. According to the permit, certain site conditions such as lack of separation to seasonally saturated groundwater, proximity to bedrock, poor soils, and contaminated soils can eliminate the infiltration requirement. The permit does not include language that eliminates the infiltration requirement for industrial sites and drinking water source protection areas, though the Minnesota Stormwater Manual (produced by the MPGA) supports exemptions in these two cases, as well, and the Minnesota Department of Health guidance for infiltration supports an approach that is protective of drinking water supplies. NPDES INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY STORMWATER PERMIT The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA) issues a general NPDES permit that authorizes the discharge of stormwater for certain industrial activities. This permit covers a multitude of industrial facilities where the exposure of chemicals and other pollutants creates the potential for contaminated runoff to enter surface and groundwater resources. Much like the MS4 permit and the Construction Activity Permit, Industrial Stormwater Permit holders must develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, or SWPPP, that describes control measures to prevent pollutant discharges. As a means of avoiding the permit requirements, industrial facilities can certify a "No Exposure" condition, whereby all significant industrial materials and activities are protected from rain, snow, snow -melt and runoff through a storm resistant shelter. 3.2 LOCAL REGULATION Local regulation occurs through the cooperative efforts of Orono and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Table 3.1 describes the mechanisms by which this local regulation is applied. Table 3.1: Regulatory Mechanisms Official Control Responsibility Mechanism • NPDES MS4 Permit — Orono Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) • NPDES Construction Permit Erosion and . NPDES Multi -Sector Permit Sediment City, MCWD • Orono City Code: Chapter 79 — Construction Site Control Runoff Control. Building Permits incorporate Chapter 79 requirements. • MCWD Erosion Control Rule City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 16 3.3 CITY OF ORONO The City is in charge of all Orono's public facilities, and the Public Works crew maintains city roads, parks, sanitary and storm sewers, and conducts periodic improvements to address water quality issues such as erosion repair and pond dredging. Refer to the City's SWPPP for the storm drainage system mapping and inventory, illicit discharge and elimination program, enforcement response procedures, facilities operation and maintenance, pond assessments and management, inspections, and employee training. The Public Works Department, City Engineer, and City Planner coordinate with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and other outside agencies in water resource management and conservation. The Orono Planning Commission manages comprehensive planning. The City's municipal code is available on the City's website at htW://www.ci.orono.mn.us. The City of Orono has several ordinances that regulate development, redevelopment, and aspects of surface water management. Chapter 79 provides Orono with a Construction Site Runoff Control Ordinance consistent with the NPDES Construction Activity Permit. This ordinance includes an enforcement process providing for right of entry, letter of warning, notice of violation, and emergency corrective action in an escalating series of steps leading to specific penalties. Penalties for noncompliance include stop work orders, withholding building inspections and certificates of occupancy, City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 17 • Orono City Code: Chapter 78. Article IX — Shoreland Shoreland City, MCWD Management • MCWD Shoreline and Streambank Stabilization Rule • Orono City Code: Chapter 78. Article VIII — Floodplain City, MCWD, DNR Floodplain Management • MCWD Floodplain Alteration Rule DNR, USAGE, and ' Orono City Code: Chapter 78. Article XI —Wetlands Technical Evaluation Protection Wetlands Panel (TEP) . MCWD Wetland Protection Rule Members: BWSR & Wetland Conservation Act —MCWD is LGU MCWD or HCD • Orono City Code: Chapter 14. Article III. Division 5. Subdivision 5 — Stormwater Illicit Discharge and Illicit Illicit Connection Discharge City • MS4 Permit — SWPPP Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program • MCWD Illicit Discharge Rule • NPDES Construction Permit • NPDES Multi -Sector Permit Stormwater . Orono City Code: Chapter 78. Article X. Division 6. Runoff City, MCWD Section 78-1579 — Drainage Management . MCWD Stormwater Management Rule • MCWD Waterbody Crossings and Structures Rule Groundwater City, MCWD, MDH • Orono Wellhead Protection Plan . MCWD Appropriations Rule • NPDES Construction Permit Dredging MPGA, MCWD, • MPCA — Managing Dredge Materials and Managing DNR, USACE Stormwater Sediments • MCWD Dredging Rule Natural Area • Orono City Code: Chapter 78. Article XII — Preservation City Conservation Design 3.3 CITY OF ORONO The City is in charge of all Orono's public facilities, and the Public Works crew maintains city roads, parks, sanitary and storm sewers, and conducts periodic improvements to address water quality issues such as erosion repair and pond dredging. Refer to the City's SWPPP for the storm drainage system mapping and inventory, illicit discharge and elimination program, enforcement response procedures, facilities operation and maintenance, pond assessments and management, inspections, and employee training. The Public Works Department, City Engineer, and City Planner coordinate with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and other outside agencies in water resource management and conservation. The Orono Planning Commission manages comprehensive planning. The City's municipal code is available on the City's website at htW://www.ci.orono.mn.us. The City of Orono has several ordinances that regulate development, redevelopment, and aspects of surface water management. Chapter 79 provides Orono with a Construction Site Runoff Control Ordinance consistent with the NPDES Construction Activity Permit. This ordinance includes an enforcement process providing for right of entry, letter of warning, notice of violation, and emergency corrective action in an escalating series of steps leading to specific penalties. Penalties for noncompliance include stop work orders, withholding building inspections and certificates of occupancy, City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 17 revocation of permits, direct correction by the City, action against financial security, and ultimately misdemeanor charges leading to fines, imprisonment or both. The ordinance provisions pertain to projects that disturb one acre or more or involve excavation or grading of 25 cubic yards or more in non- shoreland areas and 10 cubic yards or more in shoreland areas. Orono's Floodplain and Shoreland Ordinances, City Code Chapter 78, include provisions for the protection of these lands. Since 1975, Orono has regulated hardcover on properties within 1,000 feet of lakes through its shoreland ordinance. h1 1992, hardcover regulations were added for properties within 300 feet of Painters, Long Lake, Wolsfeld, Stubbs Bay, and Dickey Lake creeks. Hardcover is any surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the ground. Limiting hardcover helps improve water quality and promotes aquifer recharge. The shoreland ordinance also stipulates setbacks and minimum lot sizes for properties within the defined shoreland overlay district. All this information is provided to project proposers through the City building permit application. Chapter 78 also provides for the protection of wetlands. However, since all wetlands within the City are within the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) and in an effort to avoid overlapping or conflicting regulations, the City defers jurisdiction for the regulation of wetlands to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. If application of MCWD regulations is in conflict with city regulations, the Watershed District requirements shall apply. The City is currently assessing Stormwater Ponds through its MS4 Program. However, the assessment for the entire City has not been completed as of November 2018. The City intends to complete the initial phase of assessment (identify stormwater treatment basins and responsibility) for the entire City by the end of 2019. Once the initial phase is completed, the City intends to begin review of effectiveness and maintenance needs of each individual facility. For private storm sewer infrastructure, the City includes provisions within developer's agreements for each project. These provisions include long term operation and maintenance requirements appropriate for the specific system. Orono constructs developer's agreements that outline requirements for privately owned stormwater facilities. Provision for these private infrastructure maintenance agreements are part of the City's SWPPP. MCWD is responsible for local administration of Construction Site Runoff Control, Permanent Stormwater Management, and the Wetland Conservation Act in Orono. For projects that do not meet MCWD thresholds for their rule requirements, Orono will review these projects with a philosophy of seeking phosphorus reduction through BMP implementation whenever such implementation is feasible and cost effective. At a minimum, any proposed improvements will be required to limit proposed peak stormwater runoff rates for the 2, 10, and 100 year, 24 hour events to existing peak rates for the same events and subject to the minimum criteria outlined in the NPDES MS4, Construction Activity, and Multi -Sector permits as applicable. 3.4 MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT (MCWD) In 1955, the Minnesota State Legislature established the Watershed Act. This act provided the means to create watershed districts, special purpose units of local government with broad authority to regulate land use planning, flood control and conservation issues. In 1982, the legislature approved the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act, Chapter 103B of Minnesota Statutes. This act requires all metro -area local governments to address surface water management through participation in a Watershed Management Organization (WMO). A WMO can City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 18 be organized as a watershed district, as a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) among municipalities, or as a function of county government. The City of Orono's surface water flows to one watershed: the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). This agency has authority for review and approval of this Surface Water Management Plan. MCWD was formed in 1967 and covers portions of numerous cities and townships in Hennepin and Carver counties. These cities and townships include: Chanhassen, Deephaven, Excelsior, Golden Valley, Greenwood, Hopkins, Independence, Laketown Township, Long Lake, Orono, Medina, Minneapolis, Minnetonka, Minnetonka Beach, Minnetrista, Mound, Orono, Plymouth, Richfield, St. Bonifacius, St. Louis Park, Shorewood, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, Watertown Township, Wayzata, and Victoria. MCWD covers the entire area in Orono. MCWD Water Management Plan (WMP). Through its Water Management Plan (WMP/Plan) the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD/District) has defined its role as a regional water planning agency and incorporates a subwatershed focus to address areas of significant resource needs with a level of complexity that requires sustained effort and coordination across multiple partners. Through sustained focus, the District is able to develop a thorough understanding of issues and drivers, build relationships, identify opportunities and coordinate plans and investments with its partners for maximum natural resource and community benefit. While operating on a subwatershed scale, focused within priority areas indicated in its WMP, the MCWD is remaining responsive to its communities District -wide by providing technical resources, regulatory coordination, and in some cases funding. MCWD partnership and level of response is driven by early coordination of land use planning through the implementation of the coordination plan. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's (MCWD) approach to water resource planning recognizes the environmental, social and economic value created when built and natural systems work in harmony. Through its WMP the MCWD emphasizes early coordination of land use and water resources planning with Cities to integrate water resources goals with other public and private goals to add this broader value and quality of life to the community. 3.5 HENNEPIN COUNTY Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services provides technical assistance to county residents, local government units, watershed organizations, and other agencies. They have assisted local governments with implementation of natural resource management plans, the Wetland Conservation Act, natural resource education, and application of sound natural resource practices. Their programs are funded through County allocation, grants, and contracts with local government units, contracts with watershed organizations, and state and federal cost share. 3.6 THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT Three Rivers Park District is an independent, special park district established by the State Legislature in 1957. As a special park district, Three Rivers Park District is charged with the responsibilities of acquisition, development and maintenance of large park reserves, regional parks and regional trails for the benefit and use of the citizens of suburban Hennepin County, Scott County, the metropolitan areas, and the State of Minnesota. The Three Rivers Park District is also responsible for managing the Park District's water resources in cooperation with the surrounding communities and watershed management organizations in a way that is environmentally -responsible and that will maintain lake water quality at or above the levels experienced in 1989. Park District land within the City of Orono includes the Lake Independence and Dakota Rail Regional Trails, Noerenberg Memorial Gardens, Baker Park Reserve, and Big Island. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 19 3.7 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Established by the Minnesota Legislature in 1967, the Metropolitan Council is the regional planning organization for the Twin Cities, seven -county area. The Council manages public transit, housing programs, wastewater collection and treatment, regional parks, and regional water resources. Council members are appointed by the Minnesota Governor. The Metropolitan Council reviews municipal comprehensive plans, including this Surface Water Management Plan. The Council adopted the Water Resources Management Policy Plan in 2015, establishing the expectations to be met in local plans. The Council's goals focus on water quality standards and pollution control, "to reduce the effects of non -point source pollution on the region's wetlands, lakes, streams and rivers." 3.8 STATE BOARD OF SOIL AND WATER RESOURCES (BWSR) The BWSR works through local government agencies to implement Minnesota's water and soil conservation policies. The BWSR is the administrative agency for soil and water conservation districts, watershed districts, watershed management organizations, and county water managers. The BWSR is responsible for implementation of the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act and the Wetland Conservation Act. Staff members are located in eight field offices throughout the state. First established in 1937 as the State Soil Conservation Committee, the agency became part of the University of Minnesota in the 1950's, transferred to the Department of Natural Resources in 1971, and then transferred to the Department of Agriculture in 1982. In 1987, the State Legislature established the current Board of Water and Soil Resources. The Board consists of 17 members, appointed by the governor to four-year terms. Multiple state and local agencies are represented on the Board. In 1992, the BWSR adopted rules (8410), establishing the required content for Surface Water Management Plans. 3.9 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY (MPGA) The MPCA is the state's lead environmental protection agency. Created by the State Legislature in 1967, the MPCA is responsible for monitoring environmental quality and enforcing environmental regulations to protect the land, air and water. The MPCA regulates Orono's management of wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste. The MPCA is the permitting authority in Minnesota for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. 3.10 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) Originally created in 1931 as the Department of Conservation, the DNR has regulatory authority over the natural resources of the state. DNR divisions specialize in waters, forestry, fish and wildlife, parks and recreation, land and minerals, and related services. The Division of Waters administers programs in lake management, shoreland management, dam safety, floodplain management, wild and scenic rivers, the Public Waters Inventory (PWI), and permitting of development activity within public waters. 3.11 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (MDH) The MDH manages programs to protect the public health, including implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act. The MDH has regulatory authority for monitoring water supply facilities such as water wells, surface water intakes, water treatment, and water distribution systems. The MDH also is responsible for the development and implementation of the wellhead protection program. 3.12 MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD (EQB) The EQB is comprised of five citizen members and the heads of ten state agencies that play an important role in Minnesota's environment and development. The EQB develops policy, creates long-range plans and reviews proposed projects that may significantly influence Minnesota's environment. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 20 3.13 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (MNDOT) Within the City, MnDOT administers state highway systems. MnDOT approval is required for any construction activity within state right-of-ways. MnDOT also administers a substantial amount of funding for transportation projects completed in the City. Anticipated activities of MnDOT are periodically published in their State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP). 3.14 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA) The EPA develops and enforces the regulations that implement environmental laws enacted by Congress; however, the MPCA bears responsibility for implementing many of the resulting programs within Minnesota. The NPDES program, the Impaired Waters List, and the Nondegradation Review are all the result of the Clean Water Act, administered by the EPA. 3.15 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (USACE) Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, including subsequent modifications, the EPA and the USACE regulate the placement of fill into all wetlands of the U.S. In 1993, there was a modification of the definition of "discharge of dredged material" to include incidental discharges associated with excavation. This modification meant that any excavation done within a wetland required the applicant to go through Section 404 permitting procedures. In 1998, however, this decision was modified so that excavation in wetlands is now regulated by the USACE only when it is associated with a fill action. 3.16 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) FEMA manages federal disaster mitigation and relief programs, including the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). This program includes floodplain management and flood hazard mapping. FEMA published the initial Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Orono in 2004. The Flood Insurance Study was updated in 2016. 3.17 NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE (NRCS) The Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) is a division of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Formerly named the Soil Conservation Service (SCS), the NRCS provides technical advice and engineering design services to local conservation districts across the nation. The Soil Survey of Hennepin County Minnesota was published by the Soil Conservation Service in 1974. The SCS also developed hydrologic calculation methods that are widely used in water resources design. 3.18 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY The USGS provides mapping and scientific study of the nation's landscape and natural resources. USGS maps provide the basis for many local resource management efforts. 3.19 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE The USFWS works to conserve and protect the nation's fish, wildlife, plants and habitat. The USFWS developed the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) beginning in 1974, to support federal, state and local wetland management work. 3.20 WATER RESOURCE AGREEMENTS Below is a summary of formal agreements and "standard operating procedures" currently in place: • With the Cities of Wayzata and Plymouth o North Ferndale — date of agreement is August 9, 1999 • With the Cities of Medina and Long Lake and with MCWD o Long Lake Creek Watershed Partnership — date of agreement is April 25, 2016 • With MCWD o MOU for Water Planning and Regulation —date of MOU is November 4, 2010 City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 21 o Programmatic Maintenance Agreement — date of agreement is June 21, 2017 o Big Island Nature Park Management Plan • Private Roads o Agreements are required to define drainage associated with private roads to be managed and maintained by the owners; if maintenance falls short, the City performs the work and then charges the owners involved. • Subdivisions o Since 2010, most drainage easements have been written with some level of maintenance obligation in place. • Big Island Conservation Easement o Date of easement is March, 2006 City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 22 CITY OF ORONO - SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 4 MAJOR ISSUES, GOALS, AND POLICIES The City of Orono highly values the natural resources within its jurisdiction and seeks to protect surface and groundwater storage systems, effectively manage expenditures to correct flooding and water quality problems, prevent erosion into surface waters, promote groundwater recharge, enhance wildlife habitats and water recreational facilities, and improve the water quality of all water resources. Therefore, the following issues requiring action have been described, and each issue is followed by the City's goal, specific policies, and implementation strategies. 4.1 Surface Water Management Issues 4.1I Poor management of surface water resources can lead to flooding and low water quality. Goal 4.1G Maintain or improve the physical, chemical, biological, and aesthetic condition of surface water resources. Policies 4.1.1P Continue to administer and maintain the Shoreland Management ordinance in accordance with state regulations. 4.1.2P Continue to administer and maintain the Floodplain Management ordinance in accordance with state regulations. 4.1.3P Evaluate and correct flooding issues on City property as necessary to protect public safety and minimize potential for property damage. 4.1.4P Provide support to landowners in evaluating and correcting localized flooding issues. 4.1.5P Prioritize restoration of eroded areas on natural streams, creeks, wetlands, and lakes on City property. 4.1.6P Promote water quality improvement, runoff volume reduction, and additional storage through wetland and stream restoration, natural area preservation, ponding, infiltration, filtration, impervious surface management, reuse, and other localized stormwater treatment. 4.1.7P Evaluate outlet control structures under City authority for performance and work with landowners, MCWD, and/or the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) to replace or repair the structures if needed. 4.1.8P Promote education regarding the benefits of proper surface water resources management. Implementation Strategies 4.1.15 The City will continue to administer the Shoreland Management ordinance in accordance with state and county requirements. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 23 4.1.2S The City will continue to administer the Floodplain Management ordinance in accordance with state and county requirements. 4.1.35 The City will continue to monitor and evaluate flooding issues on City property as necessary to protect public safety and minimize potential for property damage. Flood improvement projects identified will be prioritized based on available funds, feasibility, potential project partners, and benefits provided. Once projects are identified, this plan will be updated to list projects in Section 5.0 4.1.4S The City will provide assistance to landowners in evaluating localized flooding issues. If potential flooding will damage nearby dwellings or cause significant erosion and sedimentation, the City will partner with the landowner to correct drainage as feasible. The City's contribution will be in the form of engineering recommendations. If a public benefit for the improvement exists, the City will consider cost participation. Approval of cost participation improvements will be by City Council. 4.1.5S Stream and shoreline restoration sites on City property will be identified and prioritized. Restorations will consider available funds, feasibility, possible project partners, benefits provided, bioengineered solutions, and TMDL Implementation Plans. Once restoration areas are identified, this plan will be updated to list the sites in Section 5.0. 4.1.65 In order to provide water quality improvement, runoff volume reduction, and additional storage, wetland and stream restoration, natural area preservation, ponding, infiltration, filtration, impervious surface management, reuse, and other localized stormwater treatment sites will be identified and prioritized. Sites will consider available funds, feasibility, possible project partners, benefits provided, bioengineered solutions, and TMDL Implementation Plans. Once sites are identified, this plan will be updated to list the sites in Section 5.0. 4.1.75 Outlet control structures under City authority will be evaluated for condition and performance and prioritized for repair or replacement. Evaluations will consider design outflows and design outlet elevations as well as available funds, feasibility, possible project partners, benefits provided, bioengineered solutions, and TMDL Implementation Plans. Once sites are identified, this plan will be updated to list the structures in Section 5.0. Structures under the authority of the City will be maintained regularly by City staff and repaired or replaced when performance is evaluated as unacceptable. For structures not under the authority of the City, the City will work with MCWD and MnDNR with the following activities: resolve conflicts between riparian landowners and/or the public, assist with modeling to determine appropriate outflow rate and outlet elevations, assist with structure design and construction, and provide support with maintenance. 4.1.85 Goals, policies and implementation strategies for Surface Water Management will be incorporated into the education programs identified in the City's SWPPP. 4.2 Impaired Waters Issues 4.2I Currently, several water bodies located partially or entirely within the City boundary are listed as impaired. Impaired waters in Orono, or those receiving discharge from City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 24 Orono, are summarized in Table 2.3. Mapping of impaired waters is also depicted on Figure 7 Goal 4.2G Develop and implement practices as necessary to reduce pollutant loads for waters that do not meet Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) as approved by the EPA. Coordinate City efforts with applicable Implementation Plans as approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Policies 4.2.1P Reduce pollutant loading to Impaired Waters in order to restore water quality to State standards. 4.2.2P Promote education regarding the benefits of pollutant load reduction. Implementation Strategies 4.2.1S The City adopts the completed TMDLs and Implementation Plans into this plan by reference and as listed below. This plan will also be updated to incorporate any TMDLs approved in the future. - Minnesota State Mercury TMDL and Implementation Plan - Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Chloride TMDL and Implementation Plan - Upper Minnehaha Creek Watershed Nutrient and Bacteria TMDL and Implementation Plan Refer to individual TMDLs for more detailed information regarding allocations and required reductions. Management of Waste Load Allocations assigned in TMDLs will be provided through the City's SWPPP in accordance with MS4 Permit requirements. 4.2.2S Goals, policies and implementation strategies for Impaired Waters will be incorporated into the education programs identified in the City's SWPPP. 4.3 Urban Stormwater Management Issues 4.3I Land development substantially increases the rate and volume of surface water runoff due to the increase in impervious surfaces. Unmanaged runoff increases sedimentation, pollution, erosion, and flooding downstream and decreases groundwater recharge. Goal 4.3G Minimize and mitigate the impacts of urban stormwater runoff on water resources. Policies 4.3.1P Continue to administer and maintain the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements as they apply to the City of Orono. 4.3.2P Apply regulatory standards that help the City meet its goal for Urban Stormwater Management. 4.3.3P Prioritize potential stormwater management projects that will decrease local runoff rates and volumes and improve water quality. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 25 4.3.4P Maintain the storm drainage system using the practices described in this plan. Public Works Department would be responsible for maintaining system. 4.3.5P Maintain roads using the practices described in this plan. Public Works Department would be responsible for maintaining roads. 4.3.6P Maintain City's database for stormwater related data, such as location and type. 4.3.7P Promote education regarding the benefits of proper urban stormwater management. Implementation Strategies 4.3.1S Any project within the City boundary that requires a NPDES CSW permit must provide a copy of the permit to the City prior to any work. Any facility required to obtain a Multi -Sector permit will be required by the City to do so in accordance with MPCA requirements. The City will continue to maintain its MS4 permit in accordance with State requirements. In addition, a maintained copy of this plan is the first step in being prepared for potential future NPDES requirements. 4.3.25 Rely on the water resource management standards set forth by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), and provide the necessary resources for the implementation of those standards and this Surface Water Management Plan. Employ staff or a consultant to perform the following tasks: A. Review Planning and Zoning Applications with regards to Water Resource Management Standards. B. Inspect BMP installations. C. Enforce BMP maintenance. The City will continue to rely on MCWD to maintain authority for reviewing and approving applications for compliance with MCWD's rules and enforcing those rules as necessary. The City will also review all applications to ensure it is not adversely impacted by proposed improvements (i.e. infiltration over sanitary sewer, potential conflicts with future projects), and at a minimum, any proposed improvements will be required to limit proposed peak stormwater runoff rates for the 2, 10, and 100 year, 24 hour events to existing peak rates for the same events and subject to the minimum criteria outlined in the NPDES MS4, Construction Activity, and Multi -Sector permits as applicable. As private developments and public street and utility improvements are planned, City staff will review the City's stormwater model for potential stormwater issues in the proposed project area, potential TMDL reduction opportunities, and volume reduction opportunities. If an issue has been identified in the model and/or this Plan, the City will review the potential issue in more detail at that time. Future review will include adding detail to the model with survey quality information to adequately evaluate existing conditions, creating site specific models for proposed conditions to evaluate potential solutions and constructability, and updating this Plan and Subwatershed Maps as necessary if improvements are warranted at that time. For any proposed improvements that require stormwater management facilities to meet governmental regulations, the City will require a Stormwater Maintenance and Easement Agreement that defines maintenance, inspection, and reporting responsibilities to ensure BMPs are maintained at an adequate level. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 26 4.3.3S Potential stormwater projects that decrease local runoff rates and volumes and increase water quality should be identified and prioritized. Sites should consider available funds, feasibility, possible project partners, benefits provided, bioengineered solutions, and TMDL Implementation Plans. Once projects are identified, this plan should be updated as needed to list the improvement sites in Section 5.0. 4.3.45 Maintain the storm drainage system with inclusion of the following items: A. Administer inspection program to ensure general maintenance is performed. Stormwater treatment devices should be inspected regularly, as required by the MS4 Permit. B. Maintain energy dissipaters and volume controls to prevent erosion. C. Administer pond inspection program to ensure adequate stormwater management is provided, as required by the MS4 Permit. Ponds should be cleaned when sediment has reduced the volume below the outlet to half of the design volume. D. Properly dispose of accumulated sediment collected from BMPs and any waste generated during maintenance in accordance with state and federal regulations. 4.3.5S Maintain roads with inclusion of the following items: A. Administer inspection program and schedule to ensure general maintenance is performed. B. Maintain retaining walls and pavements to minimize cracks and leakage and prevent failure. C. Properly dispose of accumulated sediment collected from BMPs and any waste generated during maintenance in accordance with state and federal regulations. D. Use techniques such as suspended tarps, vacuums, or booms to prevent paint, solvents, and scrapings from becoming pollutants during bridge maintenance. E. Administer infrastructure safety inspection program. F. Keep drainage ditches free of debris. G. Cover salt storage piles and locate them outside the 100 year floodplain. H. Regulate the application of deicing salts to prevent over -salting of pavements. Consider using trucks with salt spreading calibration devices. I. Use alternative deicing materials, such as sand or salt substitutes. J. Prevent dumping of accumulated snow onto frozen surface waters. K. Establish vegetation on eroded or damaged areas in a timely manner. L. Restrict pesticide and fertilizer use as much as possible. M. Promote native plantings within buffer strips and ditches. N. Administer Street Sweeping program to maximize pollutant removal efficiency. O. Collect and remove road debris in a timely manner. 4.3.6S Employ staff or a consultant to maintain the City's database of the entire storm drainage system. The database will include all facilities associated with stormwater runoff drainage, including catchbasins, storm sewer, wet stormwater ponds, bioretention basins, infiltration/filtration basins, hydrodynamic separators, sump manholes, outlet structures, and any other device used to convey runoff. The database will also include the specific characteristics for all the facilities, including locations, sizes, materials, elevations, areas, volumes, condition, and any other information deemed necessary. The database will be updated annually to include newly constructed or replaced facilities. In order to maintain this database and evaluate the condition of the City's drainage system, the City will inspect 20% of these devices on an annual basis. This database can then be used for Implementation Strategy 4.3.3 to identify and prioritize stormwater projects. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 27 4.3.7S Goals, policies and implementation strategies for Urban Stormwater Management will be incorporated into the education programs identified in the City's SWPPP. The education programs will promote the following practices to the public to help reduce impacts to water resources: A. Maintain a healthy lawn. B. Plant native plants or plants with deep roots to capture more runoff. C. Preserve and maintain native vegetation areas, especially adjacent to streams and wetlands. D. Redirect downspouts to drain on pervious surfaces (grass) instead of impervious surfaces (driveways). E. Install rain gardens to capture localized runoff. F. Restore and/or stabilize shorelines. G. Capture rainwater from rooftops with a rain barrel or cistern and use for irrigation. H. Use a compost bin for leaves, lawn clippings, and other organic waste. I. Test soils for nutrients in order to apply the correct amount of fertilizer. J. Use zero phosphorus fertilizers. K. Keep leaves and lawn clippings out of streets and gutters. L. Pick up pet wastes. M. Limit the use of herbicides and pesticides. N. Wash cars on pervious surfaces to prevent soaps from running off-site. O. Do not dispose any household product into the storm sewer. P. Keep neighborhoods free from litter and debris. 4.4 Wetland Management Issues 4.4I Draining, filling, or excavating wetlands significantly impacts the water quality of downstream surface waters. The loss of existing wetlands leads to increases in sedimentation, pollution, erosion, and flooding downstream and decreases the diversity and integrity of vegetation and wildlife. Goal 4AG Manage and protect wetlands to maximize wetland functions and improve surface water resources. Policies 4.4.1P Achieve no net loss in the quantity, quality, and diversity of existing wetlands through enforcement of Wetland Management regulations. 4.4.2P Promote wetland restoration, as a way to mitigate historical impacts to wetlands and increase the quantity and quality of wetlands locally. 4.4.3P Promote education regarding the benefits of proper wetland management. Implementation Strategies 4.4.1S The City will rely on the water resource management standards set forth by MCWD and their management of the Wetland Conservation Act in Orono. Also, the City will continue to administer City Code as it relates to wetland management and provide the necessary resources for the implementation of those standards and this Surface Water Management Plan. Staff or a consultant will be employed to perform the following tasks: A. Review and approve site improvement plans. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 28 B. Coordinate review and approval of wetland delineations, exemptions, and replacement plans with MCWD. C. Coordinate and attend TEP meetings for pre -application reviews and other WCA related items. D. Coordinate enforcement of replacement wetland monitoring requirements, review of monitoring reports, and certification of replacement wetlands with MCWD. E. Work with DNR and SWCD as necessary to identify and enforce WCA violations. 4.4.2S Potential wetland restoration projects that mitigate historical impacts and increase the quantity and quality of local wetlands will be identified and prioritized. Sites will consider available funds, feasibility, possible project partners, benefits provided, bioengineered solutions, and TMDL Implementation Plans. For planning purposes, MCWD's Functional Assessment of Wetlands will be used to help prioritize restoration areas. Once projects are identified, this plan will be updated as necessary to list the restoration sites in Section 5.0. 4.4.3S Goals, policies and implementation strategies for Wetland Management will be incorporated into the education programs identified in the City's SWPPP. 4.5 Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTSs) Issues 4.5I Failing or improperly maintained Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTSs), more commonly referred to as septic systems, have significant potential to contaminate surface and groundwater resources with nitrates, phosphorus, harmful bacteria, viruses, and other toxic substances. Goal 4.5G Manage SSTSs to ensure proper design, installation, operation, maintenance or replacement in order to eliminate health hazards or illicit discharges to water resources. Connect properties with SSTSs to city sanitary sewer as soon as feasible. Policies 4.5.1P All SSTSs shall obtain a permit as required by City ordinance and shall be operated and managed according to City ordinance and current best management practices. 4.5.2P Promote education regarding the benefits of proper SSTS operation and management. Implementation Strategies 4.5.15 The City will continue the administration and enforcement of its City code and SSTS permitting requirements. 4.5.25 Goals, policies and implementation strategies for SSTSs will be incorporated into the education programs identified in the City's SWPPP. 4.6 Upland Natural Resources Issues 4.6I Loss of natural upland areas can lead to a decrease in the function and quality of surface water resources. Goal City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 29 4.6G Manage and protect natural upland areas adjacent to surface water resources to mitigate degradation of surface waters and increase the quantity, quality and biological diversity of natural areas. Policies 4.6.1P Increase the quantity and quality of existing natural areas through enforcement of existing regulations and the participation of willing landowners in existing preservation and restoration programs. 4.6.2P Promote the restoration of natural upland areas, as a way to mitigate the degradation and fragmentation of natural resources and improve water quality of surface water resources. 4.6.3P Promote education regarding the benefits of proper natural upland management. Public understanding and involvement is essential in maintaining and restoring natural upland areas. Implementation Strategies 4.6.15 Employ staff or a consultant to administer City code (i.e. Shoreland Management, Conservation Design, etc.), the SWPPP as required by the MS4 Permit, and the strategies outlined in this Plan. Also, engage interested land owners in conservation and preservation of natural areas as opportunities arise. 4.6.2S Potential natural upland restoration projects that mitigate the degradation and fragmentation of natural resources and improve water quality of surface water resources will be identified and prioritized. Sites will consider available funds, feasibility, possible project partners, benefits provided, bioengineered solutions, and TMDL Implementation Plans. Once projects are identified, this plan will be updated annually to list the restoration sites in Section 5.0. 4.6.35 Goals, policies and implementation strategies for managing natural uplands will be incorporated into the education programs identified in the City's SWPPP. 4.7 Groundwater Management Issues 4.7I Groundwater quality and availability can be significantly impacted by many different land use activities. Goal 4.7G Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater resources. Policies 4.7.1P Protect groundwater quality and groundwater supplies. 4.7.2P Promote groundwater recharge, if soil conditions allow. 4.7.3P Promote education regarding the benefits of proper groundwater management. Implementation Strategies 4.7.1S The City will provide support or assistance to the following activities: City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 30 A. Work with landowners to identify and seal potential contaminate sources, such as unused, unsealed wells and failing storage tanks. B. Administer the strategies outlined in the City's Wellhead Protection Plan. C. Support the MPCA in regulating storage tanks. D. Implement water conservation efforts, as necessary. 4.7.25 The City will provide LID recommendations to developers during the planning phase via comment and review letters and promote incorporation of LID techniques and BMPs into site designs. 4.7.35 Goals, policies and implementation strategies for managing natural uplands will be incorporated into the education programs identified in the City's SWPPP. 4.8 Education Issues 4.8I Most potential contamination threats, sources of pollution, and increases in stormwater runoff to water resources are related to human activities. Goal 4.8G Provide the public with the knowledge, skills, and motivation to protect and improve surface water and groundwater resources. Policies 4.8P Increase public awareness, understanding, and involvement in water and natural resource issues and management. Implementation Strategies 4.8.1 S The City will provide support and assistance to MCWD with the District's educational programs in the form of information sharing and help with promotion materials. The City will identify target audiences and educational needs and collaborate with MCWD to create educational opportunities to meet these needs (workshops, seminars, K-12 programs, etc.), create education tools (website, newsletter, pamphlets, fairs, etc.), and support volunteer programs. The City will meet annually with MCWD's Education Coordinator to discuss goals and strategies each year and create short, specific annual education plans. Goals, policies and implementation strategies for education will be incorporated into the programs identified in the City's SWPPP. 4.8.25 The City will provide MCWD with the following information and update MCWD as changes occur; — City staff contact information and information on media/methods of communicating with the public. This includes city newsletter times and distribution numbers, city fairs and expos, and any other outreach methods to the public. — Information on major issues of concern (e.g. flooding, erosion, etc.). — Provide information on topic areas where the city would like to increase citizen awareness (e.g. stormwater ponds, wetlands, water conservation) City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 31 CITY OF ORONO - SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 5 WATER RESOURCES ASSESSMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 5.1 General Assessment Procedures The general procedure and scope of this SWMP includes the development of a planning document to identify 1) stream and shoreline restoration sites, 2) outlet control structure repair or replacement sites, 3) localized storage, volume reduction, and water quality improvement sites, 4) wetland restoration sites, and 5) natural upland restoration sites. The sites listed here should be used for planning purposes and are intended to highlight any potential large-scale issues. The following summarizes the major activities associated with plan development: 1. The existing City utility and storm sewer mapping was researched to determine existing drainage patterns and locations of catch basins, culverts, storm sewer, outlet structures, treatment basins, and other pertinent drainage features. Additionally, existing storm water models from recent developments and the District were analyzed. 2. Lidar topographic mapping was obtained and correlated with the existing storm drainage data to determine and model the existing drainage patterns. However, the elevation contours provided with lidar mapping is only approximate and should not be considered adequate for final design of storm drainage systems. A definite margin for error in the determination of the watershed limits exists and the parameters used in estimating stormwater flows would need to be revised with more detailed localized topographic information for specific improvements. 3. Key areas of concern were identified for field inspection using topographic mapping and storm sewer data. Field inspections and surveys were then performed to identify culvert sizes and invert elevations of critical culverts in the drainage system, as well as road top elevations. 4. Each minor drainage area flowing to a collection point was identified and mapped on a master drainage area drawing. Eighteen subwatershed collection areas were identified as part of this project. 5. Drainage area maps were plotted and used to review existing drainage patterns and determine reasonable alternatives for future storm drainage improvements. Many factors were considered in this planning/design process including, flooding potential, potential water quality benefits, operation and maintenance, and cost. Surface runoff and storm drainage design is primarily dependent upon the permeability of existing surfaces, travel time and rainfall intensity. The SCS Runoff Curve Number Method, as developed by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS), was used to estimate runoff. Curve Numbers were computed for each subwatershed to reasonably reflect the degree of existing industrial, commercial and residential development. The subwatershed delineations and node identifications are shown on the Subwatershed Maps provided in Appendix B. Based on the subwatershed and routing analysis, a potential future stormwater management system was developed. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 32 To estimate peak runoff rates, runoff volumes, and inundation, Sanitary and Storm Analysis (SSA) by Autodesk was used to create a watershed model capable of simulating various storm events and their impact on the City's drainage system. The flow and inundation estimates provided by the model assisted in locating and sizing potential localized stormwater management and treatment sites. (additional information on modeling methodology is provided in Appendix Q. Estimated costs were only determined for capital improvements with a High prioritization level. Improvements with a Low or Medium prioritization level are not to be implemented within the next five years, so estimated costs will not be determined for these until they are closer to implementation. As projects are completed and priorities are re-evaluated, this plan will be updated to provide estimated costs for remaining improvements listed. 5.2 Stream and Shoreline Restoration 5.2.1 Existing Streams, Creeks, and Rivers There are six streams identified in Orono's shoreland ordinance as protected waters in Orono. Five of these streams are identified on the protected waters inventory for Hennepin County: Long Lake Creek, "Wolsfeld" Creek, Tributary to "Wolsfeld" Creek, Stubbs Bay Creek and Painters Creek. Table 1.3 identifies these streams and their locations. 5.2.2 Existing Lakes and Wetlands There are 12 lakes identified in Orono's shoreland ordinance as protected waters in and around Orono. Table 1.2 identifies these lakes and their Public Classification, Ordinary High Water Level and Protected Waters Identification Number. 5.2.2 Proposed Stream and Shoreline Restoration Sites Restoration projects will be coordinated with and TMDL reduction managed through the City's SWPPP. The following are restoration sites identified to help manage stormwater runoff and improve water quality. S-1. Long Lake Creek Shoreline Stabilization Collaborate with MCWD to identify and implement strategies to restore, preserve and/or stabilize the shoreline of Long Lake Creek. This project would help meet the goal of improving the physical, chemical, biological, and aesthetic condition of surface water resources, as well as improve the quality of runoff to Lake Minnetonka and Minnehaha Creek. Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD, Private Landowners Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant Funding Timeframe: Unknown Should any additional stream restorations sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. 5.3 Outlet Control Structures Improvements 5.3.1 Proposed Outlet Control Structure Improvement Projects City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 33 Improvement projects will be coordinated with and TMDL reduction managed through the City's SWPPP. The following are outlet control structure improvement projects identified to help manage stormwater runoff and improve water quality. 0-1. Casco Point Park Outlet Casco Point Park is located in the Carman Bay (CB) Subwatershed. Runoff draining to Casco Point Park currently discharges through a 6" clay tile line that is located on the south side of the park and drains south to Lake Minnetonka. The tile is undersized for the drainage area and in poor condition. The stormwater drainage model predicts that even during smaller rain events, flooding occurs in the park with runoff overtopping the road, which agrees with local observation. In order to limit flooding potential and adequately convey runoff, an outlet control structure should be installed in the park and a new 12" pipe should be installed to Lake Minnetonka. In addition, water quality, volume reduction, and/or storage capacity improvements should be considered in this location to provide runoff rate and pollutant reduction, promote groundwater recharge, and meet TMDL goals. As such, this project should be coordinated with Section 5.4. Prioritization: High Estimated Cost: $58,066.25 Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD Timeframe: Unknown 0-2. Casco Cove Outlet Runoff draining down Casco Point Road in the neighborhood of 2900 Casco Point Road drains east to a low area in the backyards between Casco Point Road, Casco Avenue, and Casco Cove. Runoff then discharges through a 12" RCP across Casco Cove to Lake Minnetonka without any treatment. The area around the backyard depression is located in tree canopy and somewhat denuded of vegetation. The outlet is undersized for the drainage area and in poor condition. The stormwater drainage model predicts that even during smaller rain events, flooding occurs in the backyards with runoff overtopping the road, which agrees with local observation. In order to limit flooding potential and adequately convey runoff, an outlet control structure should be installed in the backyards, and a new 12" pipe should be installed to Lake Minnetonka. In addition, water quality, volume reduction, and/or storage capacity improvements should be considered in this location to provide runoff rate and pollutant reduction, promote groundwater recharge, and meet TMDL goals. As such, this project should be coordinated with Section 5.4. Prioritization: High Estimated Cost: $79,145.00 Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Private Landowners Timeframe: Unknown 0-3. McCulley Road Outlet Runoff from the east side of McCulley Road, from approximately Bayside Road to Watertown Road, currently drains to a submerged 24" pipe crossing just north of the Luce Line Trail crossing. Due to the submerged design and beaver activity, maintenance is difficult and flooding of the adjacent trail frequently occurs. In order to limit flooding potential and adequately convey runoff, an outlet control structure should be installed on the east side of McCulley Road. In addition, storm sewer improvements should be considered in this location to help limit flooding potential and City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 34 maintenance due to beaver activities. As such, this project should be coordinated with Section 5.4. Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD Timeframe: Unknown Should any additional outlet control structure improvement projects be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed projects. 5.4 Localized Stormwater Management Improvements 5.4.1 Existing Stormwater Management System The areas of Orono consisting of newer developments typically contain storm sewer in good condition, stormwater treatment ponds, and filtration/bioretention basins. The older areas of town typically do not contain any treatment ponds or filtration/ bioretention basins. However, the storm sewer in the areas without treatment measures does effectively convey runoff. Because of this, these areas are not a priority for the City to reconstruct. As funding becomes available and potential stormwater management improvements align with other necessary street and utility improvements, the City will consider installing retrofit stormwater treatment measures as feasible. 5.4.2 Proposed Localized Stormwater Management Improvement Projects The City will continue to maintain the existing storm drainage system and evaluate flooding issues on City property as necessary to protect public safety and minimize potential for property damage. Additionally, the City will be available to work with MCWD and private landowners to investigate potential localized stormwater management improvement sites. Improvement projects will be coordinated with and TMDL reduction managed through the City's SWPPP. The following are localized stormwater treatment improvement projects identified to help manage stormwater runoff and improve water quality. G-1. General Storm System Maintenance The existing storm drainage system is performing adequately to convey runoff, although, system maintenance will be required annually. Storm drainage system maintenance required includes pond assessment and cleaning, street sweeping, sewer televising, and GIS/mapping. Prioritization: High Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD, Private Landowners Funding Source(s): City, MC" Timeframe: Unknown G-2. Annual Street and Utility Improvement Projects As street, sanitary sewer, and water main improvement projects are scheduled annually, project areas will also be reviewed for potential stormwater management and treatment improvements that were not previously identified. Potential improvements include, but are not limited to, conveyance improvements, stormwater treatment devices, bioretention basins, wet retention ponds, slope stabilizations, and native vegetation City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 35 restoration. Prioritization: High Estimated Cost: $160,000/yr Project Partner(s): MCWD, Private Landowners Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant Funding Timeframe: Unknown G-3. Stormwater Runoff Management and Treatment Measures Correct flooding issues on City property as necessary to protect public safety and minimize potential for property damage. Also, as opportunities become available, install stormwater treatment measures (i.e. rain gardens, stormwater treatment devices, etc.) throughout the City to provide additional runoff storage capacity, reduce runoff rates and volumes, and/or reduce pollutant loads. The City will evaluate public properties and collaborate as necessary with MCWD and willing private landowners for viable locations not on City land to install measures. Measures will be coordinated to treat stormwater discharge from areas with inadequate or no treatment and improve the quality of runoff reaching area surface waters. Prioritization: Low Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD, Private Landowners Funding Source(s): Stormwater Utility Fee, MCWD, Grant Funding Timeframe: Unknown Browns Bay (BB) Subwatershed Improvements 1313-1. Hanlon Avenue Runoff draining to the low area north of Dickonson Street currently outlets through storm sewer along Hanlon Avenue to a wetland on the north side of Shoreline Drive, then through a submerged 30" pipe under the road to the wetland on the south side, then through 2 — 18" culverts under Ferndale Road, and finally a 12" culvert through the old road bed of Shoreline Drive to Browns Bay. In addition, no treatment is provided prior to any wetland outfalls. Due to lack of conveyance capacity and volume control, flooding is observed during larger rain events along Hanlon Avenue (and in the wetland adjacent to 1185 Ferndale Road). In order to provide water quality improvement and limit flood potential, rain gardens, sump manholes with flow baffles, new inlets, and storm sewer improvements should be considered for this area. The retrofit rain gardens and sump manholes would provide stormwater runoff treatment from a previously untreated area of Orono, improving the quality of runoff reaching Lake Minnetonka, and ultimately Minnehaha Creek. In addition, flooding potential would be minimized due to increased conveyance capacity and decreased runoff volume. Prioritization: Low Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD Timeframe: Unknown Carman Bay 6Q) Subwatershed Improvements C13-1. Casco Point Park Casco Point Park is located at the south end of Casco Point Road. Runoff draining to Casco Point Park currently discharges through a 6" clay tile line that is located on the City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 36 south side of the park and drains south to Lake Minnetonka without any treatment. The tile is undersized for the drainage area and in poor condition. The stormwater drainage model predicts that even during smaller rain events, flooding occurs in the park with runoff overtopping the road, which agrees with local observation. In order to provide water quality, volume reduction, and storage capacity improvement, a bioretention basin should be considered for this location. The retrofit basin would treat stormwater runoff from a previously untreated area of Orono, improving the quality of runoff reaching Lake Minnetonka, and ultimately Minnehaha Creek. In addition, flooding potential would be minimized due to increased storage capacity and volume reduction. Outlet control structure improvements should be considered in this location, as well, to provide adequate runoff rate control and limit flooding potential. As such, this project should be coordinated with Section 5.3. Prioritization: High Estimated Cost: $54,945.00 Project Partner(s): MC" Funding Source(s): City, MC", Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown CB -2. South Casco Point Road Runoff draining down the street in the neighborhood of 3040 Casco Point Road currently drains through a number of inlets to a 12" CMP to Lake Minnetonka without any treatment. Due to the lack of inlet and conveyance capacity, flooding is observed during larger rain events. In order to provide water quality improvement and limit flood potential, a sump manhole with flow baffle, new inlets, and storm sewer improvements should be considered for this location. The retrofit sump manhole would provide stormwater runoff treatment from a previously untreated area of Orono, improving the quality of runoff reaching Lake Minnetonka, and ultimately Minnehaha Creek. In addition, flooding potential would be minimized due to increased conveyance capacity. Prioritization: High Estimated Cost: $35,653.75 Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown CB -3. Casco Cove Runoff draining down Casco Point Road in the neighborhood of 2900 Casco Point Road drains east to a low area in the backyards between Casco Point Road, Casco Avenue, and Casco Cove. Runoff then discharges through a 12" RCP across Casco Cove to Lake Minnetonka without any treatment. The area around the backyard depression is located in tree canopy and somewhat denuded of vegetation. The outlet is undersized for the drainage area and in poor condition. The stormwater drainage model predicts that even during smaller rain events, flooding occurs in the backyards with runoff overtopping the road, which agrees with local observation. In order to provide water quality, volume reduction, and storage capacity improvement, a bioretention basin and storm sewer improvements should be considered for this location. The retrofit basin would treat stormwater runoff from a previously untreated area of Orono, improving the quality of runoff reaching Lake Minnetonka, and ultimately Minnehaha Creek. In addition, flooding potential would be minimized due to improved conveyance infrastructure, increased storage capacity, and volume reduction. Outlet control structure improvements should be considered in this location, as well, to provide adequate runoff rate control and limit flooding potential. As such, this project should City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 37 be coordinated with Section 5.3. Prioritization: High Estimated Cost: $56,320.00 Project Partner(s): MCWD, Private Landowners Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown CB -4. Caroline Avenue Runoff draining down the street in the neighborhood of 2691 Caroline Avenue currently drains through a couple of inlets to a 12" pipe to Lake Minnetonka without any treatment. Due to the lack of inlet and conveyance capacity, flooding is observed during larger rain events. In order to provide water quality improvement and limit flood potential, a sump manhole with flow baffle, new inlets, and storm sewer improvements should be considered for this location. The retrofit sump manhole would provide stormwater runoff treatment from a previously untreated area of Orono, improving the quality of runoff reaching Lake Minnetonka, and ultimately Minnehaha Creek. In addition, flooding potential would be minimized due to increased conveyance capacity. Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown CB -5. Carman Street Runoff draining down the street in the neighborhood of 2440 Carman Street currently drains through three inlets to a 12" pipe to Lake Minnetonka without any treatment. Due to the lack of inlet and conveyance capacity, flooding is observed during larger rain events. In order to provide water quality improvement and limit flood potential, a sump manhole with flow baffle, new inlets, and storm sewer improvements should be considered for this location. The retrofit sump manhole would provide stormwater runoff treatment from a previously untreated area of Orono, improving the quality of runoff reaching Lake Minnetonka, and ultimately Minnehaha Creek. In addition, flooding potential would be minimized due to increased conveyance capacity. Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown Crustal Bav (CY) Subwatershed Improvements Currently, no localized stormwater management improvement projects have been identified for the Crystal Bay (CI) subwatershed. Should any improvement sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. Forest Lake (FL) Subwatershed Imnrovements Currently, no localized stormwater management improvement projects have been identified for the Forest Lake (FL) subwatershed. Should any improvement sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 38 French Lake (FL) Subwatershed Imnrovements Currently, no localized stormwater management improvement projects have been identified for the French Lake (FR) subwatershed. Should any improvement sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. Hadley Lake (HA) Subwatershed Improvements HA -1. Chevy Chase Drive Runoff draining along the north loop of Chevy Chase Drive flows to a low area at 132 Chevy Chase Drive, then through a 12" RCP across the road without any treatment, ultimately flowing to Hadley Lake in Plymouth, MN. Due to lack of conveyance capacity along Chevy Chase Drive, surface flooding is observed in several yards during larger rain events. In order to provide water quality, volume reduction, and storage capacity improvement, rain gardens and storm sewer improvements should be considered for this area. Retrofit rain gardens would treat stormwater runoff from a previously untreated area of Orono, improving the quality of runoff reaching Hadley Lake, and ultimately Minnehaha Creek. In addition, flooding potential would be minimized due to improved conveyance infrastructure, increased storage capacity, and volume reduction. Prioritization: High Estimated Cost: $69,148.75 Project Partner(s): MCWD, Private Landowners Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown HA -2. Ferndale Green Runoff from Ferndale Green drains along the edge of the pavement to an inlet in the low area in the northwest corner of the intersection with North Ferndale Road without any treatment, then through the storm system on Ferndale Road, and ultimately to Hadley Lake in Plymouth, MN. Due to increased precipitation and lack of conveyance, surface flooding is observed on the road during even smaller rain events. In order to provide water quality, volume reduction, and storage capacity improvement, rain gardens and storm sewer improvements should be considered for this area. Retrofit rain gardens would treat stormwater runoff from a previously untreated area of Orono, improving the quality of runoff reaching Hadley Lake, and ultimately Minnehaha Creek. In addition, flooding potential would be minimized due to improved conveyance infrastructure, increased storage capacity, and volume reduction. Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD, Private Landowners Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown Laayette Bay (LF) Subwatershed Improvements Currently, no localized stormwater management improvement projects have been identified for the Lafayette Bay (LF) subwatershed. Should any improvement sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 39 Lake Classen (LC) Subwatershed Improvements Currently, no localized stormwater management improvement projects have been identified for the Lake Classen (LC) subwatershed. Should any improvement sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. Long Lake (LL) Subwatershed Improvements LL -1. East Long Lake Road Due to precipitation increases, more frequent flooding is being observed on East Long Lake Road just south of Spring Hill Road. The top of the road in this area is approximately just a couple feet above the normal water level of the wetland on the east side and lake on the west side. During larger events, runoff overtops the road creating unsafe driving conditions. Street and culvert improvements and stormwater treatment should be considered for this location. Removal of a portion of the street in conjunction with trail and stormwater treatment and conveyance improvements would limit flood potential and provide stormwater quality improvement. Prioritization: High Estimated Cost: $77,000 Project Partner(s): None Funding Source(s): City Timeframe: Unknown Maxwell Bay (MB) Subwatershed Improvements MB -1. Farview Lane Runoff draining from Stormwater Pond 4-3, located in the northeast corner of the intersection of Farview Lane and Fox Street, currently flows through a 15" culvert under Fox Street, then through a section of ravine before flowing through an 18" culvert under Farview Lane, and then through a final section of ravine before outletting to Maxwell Bay of Lake Minnetonka. The culvert under Farview Lane is in extremely poor condition, and the road slope is beginning to undercut due to culvert failure on the upstream end. In addition, the ravine has eroded to a depth of a few feet, resulting in the transport of eroded sediments. Due to imminent failure of the road crossing, storm sewer improvements should be considered for this area. Due to erosion, restoration of the ravine should also be considered for the open channel segments along this flow path. As such, this project should be coordinated with Section 5.6. Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD Timeframe: Unknown Mooney Lake(MO) Subwatershed Improvements Currently, no localized stormwater management improvement projects have been identified for the Mooney Lake (MO) subwatershed. Should any improvement sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 40 North Arm (NA) Subwatershed Improvements NA -1. Cherry Place Runoff draining in the neighborhood of 1330 Cherry Place currently drains through a ravine to Lake Minnetonka. The ravine was recently stabilized by the adjacent landowner with vegetation, erosion control blanket, and riprap. Additional improvements may have been added by local residents to improve pedestrian flow between Spruce Place and Cherry Place. The installed improvements have resulted in flooding of the adjacent sanitary lift station. Due to lack of conveyance capacity, storm sewer improvements should be considered for this location to limit flooding potential of the lift station Prioritization: High Estimated Cost: $23,100.00 Project Partner(s): None Funding Source(s): City Timeframe: Unknown Painters Creek (PC) Subwatershed Improvements PC -1. McCulley Road Runoff from the east side of McCulley Road, from approximately Bayside Road to Watertown Road, currently drains to a submerged 24" pipe crossing just north of the Luce Line Trail crossing. Due to the submerged design and beaver activity, maintenance is difficult and flooding of the adjacent trail frequently occurs. Due to maintenance difficulties and lack of conveyance capacity, storm sewer improvements should be considered for this location to limit flooding potential of the adjacent trail. In addition, beaver management should be included with improvements to limit maintenance required to maintain flow rates and normal water levels (i.e. pond leveler, culvert protector, etc.). Outlet control structure improvements should be considered in this location, as well, to provide adequate runoff rate control and limit flooding potential. As such, this project should be coordinated with Section 5.3. Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD Timeframe: Unknown Peavev Lake (PL) Subwatershed Improvements Currently, no localized stormwater management improvement projects have been identified for the Peavey Lake (PL) subwatershed. Should any improvement sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. Smith Bay (SM Subwatershed Improvements Currently, no localized stormwater management improvement projects have been identified for the Smith Bay (SM) subwatershed. Should any improvement sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. Stubbs Bay (SB) Subwatershed Improvements Currently, no localized stormwater management improvement projects have been City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 41 identified for the Stubbs Bay (SB) subwatershed. Should any improvement sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. Tanager Lake (TL) Subwatershed Improvements TL -1. Hackberry Park Hackberry Park is located on the west side of Willow Drive North, between Elm Lane and Maple Lane. Runoff draining to Hackberry Park currently discharges through an inlet on the north side of park into the storm sewer system and flows west to Tanager Lake without any treatment. Due to the lack of inlet and conveyance capacity, flooding is observed during larger rain events. In order to provide water quality improvement and limit flood potential, a sump manhole with flow baffle, new inlets, and storm sewer improvements should be considered for this location. The retrofit sump manhole would provide stormwater runoff treatment from a previously untreated area of Orono, improving the quality of runoff reaching Lake Minnetonka, and ultimately Minnehaha Creek. In addition, flooding potential would be minimized due to increased conveyance capacity. Prioritization: Low Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown TL -2. Orono Public Golf Course The Orono Public Golf Course is located on the west side of Orono Orchard Road South just south of the intersection with Luce Line Trail. Runoff from the east side of Orono Orchard Road drains under the road and through a wetland and pond on the east side of the Course, outletting through a 24" culvert under Luce Line Trail, and ultimately flowing to Tanager Lake. The west side of the Course drains west through wetlands and ultimately to Tanager Lake. Due to precipitation increases, more frequent flooding is being observed in a few areas of the Course. In order to limit flood potential, volume reduction, storage capacity, and storm conveyance improvements should be considered for this location. Bioretention areas and conveyance improvements would provide volume reduction, additional storage capacity, and improved flow characteristics, thus limiting flood potential. Also, these improvements would provide additional stormwater runoff treatment, improving the quality of runoff reaching Lake Minnetonka, and ultimately Minnehaha Creek Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown West Arm (WA) Subwatershed Improvements Currently, no localized stormwater management improvement projects have been identified for the West Arm (WA) subwatershed. Should any improvement sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. Should any additional localized stormwater treatment improvement projects be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed projects. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 42 5.5 Wetland Restorations 5.5.1 Proposed Wetland Restoration Sites Restoration projects will be coordinated with and TMDL reduction managed through the City's SWPPP. The following are wetland restoration projects identified to help manage stormwater runoff and improve water quality. W-1. Wetland Restoration Opportunities Collaborate with MCWD and private landowners to restore degraded or drained wetland areas as opportunities arise. Wetland areas will be evaluated on an individual basis for water quality treatment benefits, additional storage capacity, and educational and recreational value. In general, Orono will consider conservation, preservation, and wetland restoration when development proposals are submitted. More specifically, Orono will implement its buffer requirements per City code, and when development is proposed in key conservation areas, the City will promote low impact development techniques. These projects will help meet the goal of improving the quality and quantity of wetlands in Orono, increase flood storage, and improve the quality of runoff to Lake Minnetonka. Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD, Private Landowners Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown Should any additional wetland restoration sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. 5.6 Natural Area Preservation and Restoration 5.6.1 Proposed Natural Area Preservation and Restoration Sites The City will be available to work with MCWD and private landowners to investigate potential natural area preservation and restoration sites. The City will also require preserving natural upland areas and creating natural upland corridors during development planning per the requirements listed in the City code. Preservation and restoration projects will be coordinated with and TMDL reduction managed through the City's SWPPP. The following are localized stormwater treatment improvement projects identified to help manage stormwater runoff and improve water quality. N-1. North Arm Drive Ravine Stabilization Collaborate with MCWD to stabilize an existing ravine (approximately 100') in the neighborhood of 650 North Arm Drive that has eroded to a depth of several feet. Due to excessive sediment and organic material loads from erosion, Stubbs Bay of Lake Minnetonka is being prematurely filled in and additional load is being transported downstream. This contributes to increased sediment and phosphorus loads and reduced dissolved oxygen in runoff, and is extremely detrimental to water quality. In order to reduce detrimental impacts on downstream systems, this ravine needs to be stabilized. To repair the ravine, the City will design a stable cross-section, install limestone grade control weirs with plunge pools, and plant deep rooting native vegetation. Placement of boulder toe protection will stabilize side slopes and reduce erosion, installation of City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 43 limestone weirs will assist with dissolved phosphorus removal and reduce erosion by slowing runoff flow through the ravine, and planting of native vegetation will stabilize slopes, reduce erosion, and assist in phosphorus removal. Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown N-2. Tonkawa Road Ravine Stabilization Collaborate with MCWD to stabilize an existing ravine (approximately 400') in the neighborhood of 420 Tonkawa Road that has eroded to a depth of several feet. Due to excessive sediment and organic material loads from erosion, North Arm Bay of Lake Minnetonka is being prematurely filled in and additional load is being transported downstream. This contributes to increased sediment and phosphorus loads and reduced dissolved oxygen in runoff, and is extremely detrimental to water quality. In order to reduce detrimental impacts on downstream systems, this ravine needs to be stabilized. To repair the ravine, the City will design a stable cross-section, install limestone grade control weirs with plunge pools, and plant deep rooting native vegetation. Placement of boulder toe protection will stabilize side slopes and reduce erosion, installation of limestone weirs will assist with dissolved phosphorus removal and reduce erosion by slowing runoff flow through the ravine, and planting of native vegetation will stabilize slopes, reduce erosion, and assist in phosphorus removal. Prioritization: Medium Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown N-3. Farview Lane Ravine Stabilization Runoff draining from Stormwater Pond 4-3, located in the northeast corner of the intersection of Farview Lane and Fox Street, currently flows through a 15" culvert under Fox Street, then through a section of ravine before flowing through an 18" culvert under Farview Lane, and then through a final section of ravine before outletting to Maxwell Bay of Lake Minnetonka. The culvert under Farview Lane is in extremely poor condition, and the road slope is beginning to undercut due to culvert failure on the upstream end. In addition, the ravine has eroded to a depth of a few feet, resulting in the transport of eroded sediments. Due to excessive sediment and organic material loads from erosion, Maxwell Bay of Lake Minnetonka is being prematurely filled in and additional load is being transported downstream. This contributes to increased sediment and phosphorus loads and reduced dissolved oxygen in runoff, and is extremely detrimental to water quality. In order to reduce detrimental impacts on downstream systems, this ravine needs to be stabilized. To repair the ravine, the City will design a stable cross-section, install limestone grade control weirs with plunge pools, and plant deep rooting native vegetation. Placement of boulder toe protection will stabilize side slopes and reduce erosion, installation of limestone weirs will assist with dissolved phosphorus removal and reduce erosion by slowing runoff flow through the ravine, and planting of native vegetation will stabilize slopes, reduce erosion, and assist in phosphorus removal. Also, due to imminent failure of the road crossing, storm sewer improvements should be considered for this area. As such, this project should be coordinated with Section 5.4. Prioritization: Medium City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 44 Estimated Cost: Unknown Project Partner(s): MCWD Funding Source(s): City, MCWD, Grant funding Timeframe: Unknown Should any additional natural area preservation or restoration sites be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. 5.7 Education 5.7.1 Proposed Education Programs and Tools The City will continue to maintain the existing storm drainage system. Additionally, the City will be available to work with MCWD to investigate the implementation of education programs and tools to inform the public about water quality issues and solutions. Education programs and tools will be coordinated with and managed through the City's SWPPP. The following are education programs and tools identified to help inform the public regarding stormwater runoff management and methods to improve water quality. The following are only listed here as possible education strategies. The City will meet annually with MCWD's Education Coordinator to discuss goals and strategies each year and create short, specific annual education plans. As annual plans are assembled, the City's SWPPP will be updated to list the specific education strategies developed. 1. Education Programs and Tools for Home/Landowners • Provide sticker "Keep Grass Clippings on the Lawn!" with brochure explaining the detrimental effect of grass clippings on water quality when transported to water bodies. The sticker could be placed on lawnmowers as a reminder. Stickers may possibly be obtained from MCWD for distribution by the City. Method of distribution would have to be determined by the City. • Provide bookmarkers/brochures regarding a variety of water quality topics, including 1) common household pollutants, contaminants, and waste and proper disposal methods, 2) raingardens, 3) Total Maximum Daily Loads, 4) reducing water footprint, 5) stormwater ponds, and 6) phosphorus -free fertilizer. The City could collaborate with MCWD for development of bookmarkers/brochures for distribution by the City. Method of distribution would have to be determined by the City. • Promote reduction of water footprint. The City could collaborate with MCWD to promote and provide rain barrels at a reduced cost, a mulch/compost dump site at no cost during certain times of year, and tree whips at a reduced cost in the spring. Education Programs and Tools for Decision Makers • Collaborate with MCWD to hold District Stormwater Workshops. This workshop would be intended to educate developers, city staff, and elected officials regarding stormwater Best Management Practices and new developments in stormwater research. • Collaborate with MCWD to provide Non -point Source Education for Municipal Officials (MEMO) opportunities. NEMO is intended to educate decision makers about the relationship between land use and water quality. • Collaborate with MCWD to offer tours of current and upcoming stormwater City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 45 management projects. Tours would help provide education necessary for policy makers to make informed decisions. 3. Education Programs and Tools for K-12 Students • Collaborate with MCWD to participate in a variety of student education programs. The Metro Area Children's Water Festival (CWF) held at the state fairgrounds educates metro area 4th graders about the importance of water in the natural environment. Envirothon is an outdoor learning competition for high school students in grades 9 through 12. It is one of the state's largest environmental education initiatives. The program is coordinated by local Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs). World Water Monitoring Day (WWMD) is an event that provides teachers with a kit that students can use to test water quality of any waterbody. The results can then be entered in a large online database. In addition, MCWD offers numerous workshops and tours throughout the year. Should any additional education programs and tools be identified in the future, this plan should be updated to include proposed sites. 5.8 Surface Water Management Costs and Funding Considerations The cost and funding considerations contained in this plan are included for scoping purposes only. Prior to including projects into the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), further investigation is required into conditions meriting improvement and correction/mitigation strategies to be implemented. This plan recognizes the changing regulatory environment and evolving technologies necessary to understand prior to further developing a CIP or construction schedule. 5.8.1 Capital Improvement Plan The City manages capital expenditures for surface water management as part of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP provides long-term planning and management of infrastructure throughout the City. The CIP is a planning document that presents a 5+ year overview of scheduled capital projects to address the City's goals for public infrastructure. The CIP includes a long-term financing plan that allows the City to allocate funds for these projects based on assigned priorities. The 5+ year horizon of the CIP provides the City with an opportunity to evaluate project priorities annually and to adjust the timing, scope and cost of projects as new information becomes available. The information contained in this plan represents an estimate of improvement costs based on present knowledge and expected conditions. Changes in community priorities, infrastructure condition and inflation rates require that adjustments be made on a routine basis. The Surface Water Management Plan CIP includes budgeting for stream and shoreline restoration, outlet control structure improvements, localized storage, volume reduction, and water quality improvements, wetland restoration, natural area preservation and restoration, education, stormwater treatment system mapping, and maintenance. Refer to Appendix E for Orono's 5 -Year Surface Water Management Plan CIP. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 46 CITY OF ORONO - SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 6 Administration 6.1 REVIEW AND ADOPTION PROCESS Review and adoption of this Surface Water Management Plan will follow the procedure outlined in Minnesota Statutes 103B.235: • `After consideration but before adoption by the governing body, each local government unit shall submit its water management plan to the watershed management organization[s] for review for consistency with the watershed plan. The organization[s] shall have 60 days to complete its review.' • `Concurrently with its submission of its local water management plan to the watershed management organization, each local government unit shall submit its water management plan to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment. The council shall have 45 days to review and comment upon the local plan. The council's 45 -day review period shall run concurrently with the 60 -day review period by the watershed management organization. The Metropolitan Council shall submit its comments to the watershed management organization and shall send a copy of its comments to the local government unit.' • `After approval of the local plan by the watershed management organization[s], the local government unit shall adopt and implement its plan within 120 days, and shall amend its official controls accordingly within 180 days.' Thereafter, Orono must annually report to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District activities it has undertaken in the previous year in implementing its plan and in progress toward meeting water quantity, water quality, and ecological integrity goals. The watershed will develop guidelines for the content of this annual report. 6.2 COLLABORATION WITH OTHER ENTITIES Although the City coordinates with numerous agencies with respect to Surface water management, the city recognizes the benefits that arise from close coordination with the MCWD. Therefore, the City and MCWD have established a coordination plan that can be implemented at a staff level. Improving coordination at the concept level planning phase between land use planning at the City and watershed planning at the MCWD will result in better projects that meet both organizations' goals and are a more efficient use of public funds. Early coordination and collaboration between entities is the key to maximizing shared water resource goals and community goals for private redevelopment and public capital improvements. It is the intent of the City to leverage this coordination to efficiently manage water quality, natural resource threats and opportunities that arise through land use change, our shared interest in conservation, and overall maximize the asset value of the City's natural resources in the future. Coordination Plan The following coordination plan will be adjusted and expanded as deemed appropriate by the City and MCWD during implementation. The City Administrator is the primary City contact and the District Administrator will be the District contact for the coordination plan. Annual meeting — City and MCWD staff will meet during the first quarter of each year to review the following: a. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) reports and activity from the previous year b. Draft Capital Improvement Plans (CIP) for each organization for the upcoming year. The City will focus coordination of the Streets, Stormwater and Park CIPS with MCWD. c. Opportunities for early coordination and review of land use change applications d. Regulatory coordination to identify areas of collaboration e. Operation, maintenance, and management of Big Island Nature Park f. Areas for improved coordination and process improvement. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 47 g. Public Education plans, resources and opportunities. 2. Land Use Planning and Regulatory Coordination- The City of Orono staff will continue to route requests for land use approvals, including but not limited to, subdivisions, site plan approvals, WCA applications to the District in an effort to maximize water resource benefits and streamline regulatory processes. Specific areas of regulatory coordination include the following: a. The City will continue to rely on MCWD to maintain authority for reviewing and approving applications for compliance with MCWD's rules and enforcing those rules as necessary. The City will rely on the water resource management standards set forth by MCWD and their management of the Wetland Conservation Act in Orono. Since all wetlands within the City are within the MCWD boundaries, in an effort to avoid overlapping or conflicting regulations, the City defers jurisdiction for the regulation of wetlands to the MCWD. b. The City will require documentation of required MCWD permits in advance of issuing applicable City permits. Approved MCWD permits will be stored with other project documentation for future reference. c. Pre -application meetings and permit reviews will be coordinated with MCWD early in the planning process as necessary. d. The City will continue to collaborate with MCWD on construction site inspections and compliance. e. MCWD will keep the City appraised of water resource violations and expectations for compliance. f. Key Conservation areas- The City will assist MCWD in the preservation of those areas identified by MCWD by considering them in land use and zoning decisions. g. The primary person responsible for regulatory coordination at the City of Orono is Community Development Director and the Permitting Program Manager at MCWD h. The City and MCWD will include each other in the notification protocols for Illicit Discharges. i. The City and MCWD will partner on exploring opportunities to better understand and predict downstream stormwater impacts from infill development. Public Infrastructure Improvements. The City of Orono staff will continue to route significant infrastructure improvements (streets, stormwater and parks in particular) to the MCWD as early in the planning as possible in order to maximize resourcing opportunities, reduce any regulatory process delays and solicit any best practice expertise/ experience. a. Infrastructure and land improvements that require MCWD permits will be coordinated early in the planning and design process so that the regulatory process may be efficient and integrated water and natural resource improvements may be explored. b. The City will brief the MCWD on the Streets, Stormwater and Parks CIPS each year at the annual meeting. The City intends to coordinate applicable projects at the concept stage of project development partner, on competitive grant programs and leverage MCWD technical resources and planning assistance. c. Big Island Nature Park Management — The city will continue to coordinate with MCWD as agreed in the Park management Plan and Associated Easements. It is the intention of the agencies to jointly review the Management Plan on a regular basis to address new and ongoing Park management issues. The primary person responsible for Big Island Nature Park activities at the City of Orono is The Public Works Director and the Project and Land Manager at MCWD. i. Any significant changes to the level of maintenance practices at the park will be reviewed at the annual meeting prior to implementation. ii. Pursuant to Management Plan and Easement, any planned improvements will be coordinated through the city and watershed beginning at the concept level stage. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 48 d. The City will partner with the MCWD to identify a system wide approach for managing local drainage issues. The approach will include review of impacts upstream and downstream of any potential solutions and provide a better understanding of potential impacts. 4. MCWD on public communications and education coordination and partnership. The City will provide support and assistance to MCWD with the District's educational programs in the form of information sharing and help with promotion materials. The City will identify target audiences and educational needs and collaborate with MCWD to create educational opportunities to meet these needs. Long Lake Creek Subwatershed Partnership. The City will continue to join with its partners in the Long Lake Creek Subwatershed Partnership to implement shared water resource improvement efforts; align local plans and capital investment to identify opportunities where local investments intersect with natural resource goals. The City looks to MCWD, as the regional agency, to facilitate the coordination and provide technical expertise to the group. 6.3 PLAN AMENDMENTS Periodic amendments may be required to incorporate changes in local practices. In particular, changes in the MCWD Watershed Management Plan may require revisions to this plan. Plan amendments will be incorporated by following the review and adoption steps outlined above. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 49 CITY OF ORONO - SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 7 APPENDICES Appendix A: Figures StudyArea...................................................................................................Figure No. 1 Existing Land Use.......................................................................................Figure No. 2 Future Land Use...........................................................................................Figure No. 3 Soils.............................................................................................................Figure No. 4 Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) ...............................Figure No. 5 National Wetland Inventory and DNR Public Waters ....................................Figure No. 6 Impaired Waters...........................................................................................Figure No. 7 Storm Sewer Map.........................................................................................Figure No. 8 City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 50 2040 Comprehensive Plan `{ Orono, MN M CD coametf M_ Turner.Road -o 12 to do,� o Drake Dr = r d 3 C �c O U ;J V _ 3 Crystal Bay -Lake iO?interCreek! Minnetonka i Watershed — 0 c Moline Road A dq' 19 N IM W Branch Road Sunnyfield Road E ° z 0 a Game Farm Road E 3 1 r hVenninig's I Legend e •r . City Limits Lakes & Ponds 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams y 0 3,500 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT jstarF a • West I Arm 1 �.._.._.._. Qty ee� ' \tea [Fa'rk - F o Bay r u , o i.F.�;..� ..� ..�. tea• ■.tea• 7r.�.. L E 1, c o f z 6th Ave N 1 Dickey 0 wee - Carman's kbCasco Poirt 1 S . Y L lL oia< 0,9 taken )` Odp. �• 12 N Lake St Study Area � & E BOLTON K June 2018 Real People. Real Solutions. A1je • O Kelley o`p } tJ spy r �. �R 12 Daniels St or •� chard Lrn a m Ave N Ave Lower, o �iGrand Lake Minnetonn i Watershed Q >— 5 I M 4th Ave N J 3rd,Ave N v � H 12 �I Fox St wee - Carman's kbCasco Poirt 1 S . Y L lL oia< 0,9 taken )` Odp. �• 12 N Lake St Study Area � & E BOLTON K June 2018 Real People. Real Solutions. A1je • O I__1 } tJ z = r �. c1� S J a m Ave N N gtiaAve� � , Yr i e Q >— 5 I 4th Ave N 3rd,Ave N H 12 �I .D Watershed O wwaY2 StF ata Blvd E �. ma Boundary �o 1 _ dot* [ �. c1� S yw y 43�gvnd(A. ei o in `r4s sex Rutledge Road fJi0 Q Day PI Lake Ave rrT Watershed Districts H 12 Watershed O Boundary Figure 1 I 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN AA 110 Existing Land Use BOLTON June 2018 & M E N K Real People. Real Solutions. Go I MKatrina o p` Y./t ? eye 23rd Ave N Lake Turner Road 1 2 Stan Y ;; z o a �.. .. .. .�. �...�..., .�..,..�..., _ Dickeys Z cc Drake Dr zz :X e G 6thgvQ ti _ .� . .' t' View Dr o �.__ � m ° 3 .J Q v _ m 3 m 13 ake 7 Lake c Spring z l U _° �� A ' pve N Clasen �3 0� � �' Dick�,Y Labe � � D `Or Lon dmterC �° Inset 1 y ° g �• 0Kelley Pkwy Sugargooa �0 o Daniels St t I E: WaY�at Orchard��n a' Wayyz'Olp� LLI t� W Moline Road c m ® Grand Ave �'_ ��o, a, Ja �a O '� r e ��. .ake,Q�, Inset 1 3rdAve4 r . _ v) Watertown Road s : • , �. 1 ve B z '' _ L. e il �- 1. ;Northern A Crystal PI .. .. . • °'1's d S, r OIiVe eh, Pt c ' e m o .� ` t q� ROap 12 Livingston Ave e f` \ @ Lyric Ave m m 1 J Stubbs :° " _ Shoreline Dr koadT I 'Ir - Bay N MM . Painter(< �04 s�dq l\, OFox St .L..� 00°o w W Branch Road Ln as Lakyq,QO County Road 151 P' o2 Browns<c %�etonk: 9� y9 �dy tY y� North Tanager Ba �O u �O Arm Maxwell Lake y o 0 - Bay French Inset 2 -S�Ode Sunnyfield Road E -a Forest Marsh N o Q R Jennings 1 Lake Ot Land Use Classes Farm RBay E �\ , ° 1 °<� Rural Preserve High Density Gaffe v • • % �r Smith Bracketts I (1 unit/ 5 acres) Residential (7- y Point 20 units / acre) � I `• Nest �'•• �• Rural Dutch a 1 B Crystal ' y ons Lake Bay Point �• �.• I Residential (1 Commercial / is • • unit / 2 acres) Office � Harrison � �' � • , � 4*• � • Lake � m Bay I �.• _ • 1 • `, Island Industrial Lynwood Blvd 2 � • • — • • — .. _ : O� � � 1 Residential �1 E Shoreiine Dr°` : 1 3� Highland Av Park, ° \�a �� : ' 1 4 a Road Low Density Lafayette Rutledge Residential (0.5 g Recreational, Bay ♦' •� Lake Ave - 2 units / acre) and Open Inset 2 ��y �.� i'• •i• Q3rk-IV, 'I' Space Legend e ; 9` �.• �• Medium Density e : Residential (2-7 Undeveloped •• + City Limits Lakes &Ponds ; ! •• .', units / acre) =, •i • •, Carman'rP:/ �.•� .`. .�♦ Ad'�,o Right -of -Way Bay Wetlands Rivers & Streams • / 0 3,500�. �, �• � . _ .. _ .. _ .. _ .. _ ..� a. ° R Feet Cc '' �°mom a 0 Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, • �•. �• • _ Por _ so°°. c iw- Hennepin County, MnDOT • . eats !` r a Figure 2 1CrownVL Dr M CO Turner Road c r Drake Dr 3 0 U Painter µoad W Branch Road nyfield Road E Dutch Lake 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN 12 Star / x d z 6thq�o EI _ •I �° or� t?, c Sprin w _ Viff"e Pve N 3lassen z 9 Z. v _ P L o� v winter Cr e ��r a°, Inset 1 y L kc o Long �• O as z T m ' "r' • `• d. Kelley Pkw °c po o o Daniels St • 1 I �: Y Moline Road c !� _ m �� Grand AVeardkin Wa zai�/ Oly� Q..�T Q f, I e -� �O 9<akelol 1. Inset 1 Lyriwood Blvd ul i?"_ 'i E E U, Legend �• •r : City Limits 19 N' a • .� � Watertown Road ._�• • 7 HYSide �, � � l R ° / oaf w � Stubbs w I- N r Bay I ' r _ 0 Fox StLn 4 County Road 151 �� 9 ♦ North Browns f-�1 � Arm Tanager Bay i ---j� � c O,Maxweh lake � 0 Bay French f 1 - Forest Marsh Lake 1 Jenniny I O� e Bay 1••, y°° Smith Bracketts • Point Nest '• • �. ?rm Crystal Bohns •', •�.• 1 C9 Bay Point•� �•: Harrison i .. � .� • • • nn,�,r �; Bay 1 ihoreline Or Lafayette 1 Bay �• .1 . Inset 2 �, _ ♦.. .�.. .�. a \ I .•� .I Lakes &Ponds 1 r, Carman's�J 1 ! d Bav'i •�. I• A 12 �j Sp - Ch," a`a Lake �netonke F =Inset Wetlands Rivers & Streams / 0 3,500 •' i' Feet •' Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, • �•. �. • _ Z Hennepin Count MnDOT • • — • • — emits , M 0 M a Future Land Use June 2018 BOLTN /1 & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. 23rdAve N L Dickeys z 'a 0 View Dr tY z = 0 0 00 O` Dickey Lame o Sugar v000 3rd Ave tk z Northern pve Crystal PI Bad • a 011e �QIV q� Livingston Ave vjLyric Ave O �Q 4� 0 oat9 A Land Use Classes 0 sfOpe 0" Figure 3 Rural Preserve (1 unit/ 5 acres) Urban Medium Density Residential (3 - 7 units / acre) Rural Residential (1 High Density unit / 2 acres) Residential (10 - 20 units / acre) Island Residential Commercial / Urban Low Office Density Residential (0.5 Industrial - 2 units / acre) Park, Recreational, and Open Space Figure 3 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN Soils June 2018 I�1 BOLT MENK Real People. Real Solutions. Katrina C �� r, 12 I ake •Stam s Moon z 40, P, rn Turner Road ° o r t ° E _ % <� 19th Avea ` I� a t1 Drake Dr 3 Fd ���Z ����. Z.... Z��♦♦ _, ! y Y \._ fT V 0� a a o o ♦������� 6th Ave N j° o o o ♦ ad v • �� Lake r ° 3 ♦ • • .r`�� Ro z Creek pveN Clas: 1 m22D V o . ys <��°' fa m / p c ° Kelley P_k, a c oaa z v 412 '°�.°�\e" ^ �# Daniels St ~ i►�' = 1 �; " 8th Ave,N '- e* 9 i� -ILN 3 5 0'tea d R 1 � Orchard {n �. Wayzd� +O�a � �, 1 1 � �c> 4th Ave N Moline Road o m 1 + Grand Ave - .*+ �. 11 4 1 Pain{e, Road W Branch Road Sunnyfield Road E a o z � o Game Dutch a Lake > M Legend City Limits I�a,t 2040 MUSA i CL i IoW .� �o ,��9 Lai ,'V 19 N r \ // a 1 f r s ,t. '� •"�L �o r P -o,. w ��- fn a • O..i L„tr , ♦ IL1 `� r .. 2 .. ' tfl0`i W -A VSIC/e so 12 Q i♦1 %.q GY;9' > 1���1 ♦� 1 -1 1 m ► Ar Stubb:�� �� 1 • " r� a Bay 1 c:> �� 1 i FOX St / ♦ � � � � 0 O i V °'ry\e`ri Ln 1 ♦ 1 County Road 151 ! - ' = �► North_., _,ger 1 1► Arm Maxwell Lake i Bay . , French Forest Z Marsh Lake Jenning' Bay N Shore DrSmith i \ Bay Bracketts Point i *4 West Ir4"%* i a � 4 o , Crystal Bohn (� Bay Point `I ♦ �,, ` i Han eayiso�! 1 w � �iine Dr o 1 Lafayette e ♦�- L ���� Bay j It � ♦ I Lakes & Ponds a Spring Cayman's r ! �4 Pa QtJ q , Bay Rivers & Streamsea°i ;l ! �► In� U, MMMf�f��r� 0 3,500 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT Cay I Poi, i Ivd E Wayzata Bay Soils By Drainage Class C, I Unclassified B/D A C A/D C/D Figure 4 Game 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN rner Road Drake Dr Greer Q Painter W Branch Road Sunnyfield Road E Dutch a Lake > M 10 Moline Road a m0 19 N Minnesota Land Cover Classification n 12 StCD ar Y d ate,. .. ..-...-. .F.... _.,...,...,...... o < '�•• z z a ,��' rJ. a 'J.jo o ��������, ®' 6th Ave d 1 cti VLO2 AN Itz co Kelley Ploy.+. •� ly.1 aE' z U 1 •r 1 m. a 0 Daniels St ; 1 E: iY N. 1 1 Orchard�,n Wazd� Oi ♦ S / Grand Ave ♦ �� 40,I Ire 1 1 ok'h RG J '� 4 9 Lake " ♦ ♦ f odgi Ak N �.♦� ii i • OF �%♦ 1 d o -4+�. ��. •1 � 1 �P°a 1 ♦�y�i 12 cc 0 co Bay 1 1 1 + U ._ 0 „ Fox St 10 W Ln �`e ` � f 1 ♦ 1 ,unty Road 151' North 4 1 to 0 ,a e Browns i ' Arm ♦ g Bay Maxw {Ilk ke Bay � . Forest Z 1' Lake Jenning 1 p q, 0 Bay N Shore Dr Bracketts ` 1 Point i t �'♦ i '0P I�'♦ i a Crystal Bohn� - C7 Bay Point *a 1 Harrison 1 r ! �►� i Bay Legend e .r City Limits Lakes & Ponds 11 at 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams .i 0 3,500 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT Lafayette 1 1 ♦� _ i � Bay j `I 1 ♦ I P'- Carman's ¢ ♦ j� Bay ,I j•! ° ` `/r pd Po 1 <e MLCCS June 2018 19th1Ave 8th Ave N Ivd E BOLT MENK Real People. Real Solutions. N z c J Figure 5 11. 5-10% — 31. Forest Impervious 12. 11-25% 32. Wetland Impervious Forest 26-50% 51. Shrubland _13. Impervious 52. Wetland 14. 51-75% Shrubs Impervious - 61. Tall 15.% Grasses Imperrviousvious 62. Wetland 21. Short Emergent Veg. o �3 a. Grasses 63. Dry Tall Lak ar 22. Agricultural Grasses �z Land 90. Open 23. Maintained Water Tall Grass ° 92. Wetland 24. Tree Open Water Plantation Figure 5 "0. 0"1 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN /,gyp_ s etil� National Wetlands Inventory & DNR Public Waters BOLTON June 2018 & M E N K Real People. Real Solutions. `0 Katrina p` p� rn Turner Road j 2 Lake Star m �' ` I Moone o •v�o —,.•.y.. _ ..�...�...,.�_ ..�_....�...•..._....�k,.�....,....._�.�....�....�._ . " I c Lake Troy' w .moo E ' Drake Dr = °m z z / ►� S = • i fi v r J a o o 6th Ave hl o • c �Dickey U '�° Lake o Lake 3 .� i.��� Ro s leek v s ve N Classen m o z m Spo Lydiard row w Kell, ,P.,kY...,- ong Lake, ao' Y �. 19thlAve J\�e� –O 12 Daniels St 8th Ave N LL o e�`o d �a !� Orchards WaYia O� ,0 Moline Road W m 1 Grand Ave _n '%.' a� r '1�own Roaa .. .. '^ r 0,8 Lake 3rd,Av f 9 N r «F; t. !y f .p /Z• ,i PF � N .r■• t.Ie t a •' 4 ���� Ysjgr 'Q -_moo �• __ +.. w�� E.� 26 \! e W �+ r od cn CY9c T 12CD park St { J m ® �. Lake Rice s F� Stubbs H a rater Road a°. Bay Pay m� St F Vm c 0 Fox St t wqj W Branch Road 0 m=- °'N;e`N LnF 1 E =rca _q QJ 'County Road 151 j ' Browns s_ het Wayzata � Bay j t Bay _ �� Maxwell `'+-�� _ ' Bay. , French Sunnyfield Road E Z sh '. m z 3- 1 0,"a Jenning's 1 Bay l7• J ��c I m 1 v N Shore Dr o� Game Farm Road E a°. •'rq Bracketts - Point � I v v l ♦. Crysta S Lake keh > �� Bay Point • • • . m 1 ' Lake � ;' " � • • •• � • Minnetonka � E £ + ` , - Lynwood Blvd ' � • • � • . � . c+ - 1 0 U i the i 1 I �� Highland Ave Shoreline Dr . l • BayLafa ak Wetlands 0 r Z -L-1h Li11 f J Q1 7 N - 9<b Aver Y l.pve '> z J� J 4th Ave N 3 d r f , Ivd E Highw—ay 112 E % Legend �''� '• •� •• r �♦ boar Stormwater PWI - Basin e / •°e ,� j .�♦. Ponds .r City Limits Lakes &Ponds\a rl National PWI Carmns Wetlands Watercourse 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams a a 1 Bay •�••� Ad^'�pj Inventory r rn ix 1 0 3,500 < A� Feet ewe ♦'•♦ Casco: �•• Point 1 ' Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT - / emitsall VIII. k L "I Figure 6 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN slio Turner Road12 .0 0 0 T ♦d 0 1i • .•� Stag vim. . 'm..,............ .... ..•. I�rd z L Drake Or o c� ej` ° -T,M � a I Pye N m Geek F !a Oma` o"�g LaF-1 m Kelley p FM W Branch Road Sun 0 m ne. Farm Road E Legend &V Road E z 0 a m ■< Moline Road 1110 e 1 19 N i N Arm or 0 - f6 r 0 �r w� 0 01 County Road 151 L). r Lake Minnetonka- I. Jennings Bay I ne Or •r : City Limits Lakes & Ponds 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams 0 3,500 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT a/steds Bay N � LN -A Wolsfeld Lake G f/� ` Moo, • M = •I Z E 6th Ave N z { o �oaa' 1 �p'd Long L�ke� , . m Daniels St ! '160 C. 12 L A* WY 4 N Impaired Waters � BOLTON &MEN K June 2018 Real People. Real Solutions. Orchard4l ♦d 0 1i Grand Ave F !a Oma` o"�g LaF-1 -� ` 12 l Fox St m s� . • '1n = A Bey Ln 0 s;Qe -7, ez' 9 .. _ mom v • E � asd 1 P_eave Lake Creek �O Fo o� Tanager 1 � Lake I ay O� ro rjj Lake Minnetonka Lower Lake' o—' 19th Aver' 2 Y c D Z c J 0 8th Ave N e N` 9<b Av e > ake ���PJ I 5 .4th Ave N F9 Ivd E r �O6 d'Sa Creek •"`• col tY ) 0 Minnetonka@ 1 Highland Ave o V m S Rutledge Roada Rait`� p y Se* A--5day Azure Road '0 Day PI y AJ 0a or Surface Water Rod � . .,�. �a - � Impaired Lakes ��,,,� Impaired Rivers o & Streams 0: �. ♦ /•� Adm � I •' � i 7 �• gyp, 2 Roa , L Figure 7 0 0 0. 2040 Comprehensive Plan C*"' Orono, MN FM M 0 W Game `o Katrina '20 Turner Road c a! 12 Lake ak .. �w■.� W o Drake Dr 3 o U 3 " Gree Pye N Q o ± ora C ■ woad Painter W Branch Road Dutch Lake Legend E 0 Existing Storm Sewer System BOLTON June 2018 & M E N K Real People. Real Solutions. Lake > o Lake 3 0 �assen � � 3 m`, Sp�r°jLydiard Kelley. ong Lake Z V ■ •.++ v •�• •�• '� J 511 12 Daniels St • 1 o !ga .i Ochard41 Wayxa� N o- r Moline Road aA m Grand Ave �9N �OwnROad � s L Gi * °'s �o m �.. y N asCn 12 ` � J Stubbs N 0 Bay 3 Fox St o T lr Ln 1 aqntyRoad 151 North Brow; F' Arm Tanager Bay •j Maxwell Lake a Bay French • Z Marsh Jenning I p� _ Ot Bay ll �• N Shore or 0�0� •' ♦ �� Bracketts • Point t `•• West 1 p Crystal �,_ •��. Bay Pnint••## •�•.�• Harrison .. — �.� • �' Bay 1 I • , n 19th1Ave 8th Ave N Ivd E Wayzata Bay 1 X. I 1 1 =1 1�1 Storm Sewer System N ie Dr ���d i a �° i'• Lafayette I AitF Storm Pipe (By ► 15" ► 27' e • • Bay 'e. Lak Diameter) ♦ Mo. 21 " ► 32" y Cit Limits Lakes & Ponds Sprint; 1 • '.' —� $" —r . t • `tea Park Carman's Bay '° o J Bay ► Ba 1• a , ► 24" 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams i .� • •, ,; P —► 12 0 3,500 �� Feet e►v • `• • Casco Point 1 Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, 1 •. Hennepin County, MnDOT Figure 8 Z c J co 0 o! R s P L Q Q Moog ��,....r.r.�....�.. � �nw.b ....,wFr.« ... ....r,� i.�f.rrr a.r. aa�a •�. C f�.f�� a.r .a...a r7�aa�.a+. ''-e •1 E Z z Z `o m ~ a a f7 6th Ave N (% mo 3 Dickewo °ad F 1 Lake > o Lake 3 0 �assen � � 3 m`, Sp�r°jLydiard Kelley. ong Lake Z V ■ •.++ v •�• •�• '� J 511 12 Daniels St • 1 o !ga .i Ochard41 Wayxa� N o- r Moline Road aA m Grand Ave �9N �OwnROad � s L Gi * °'s �o m �.. y N asCn 12 ` � J Stubbs N 0 Bay 3 Fox St o T lr Ln 1 aqntyRoad 151 North Brow; F' Arm Tanager Bay •j Maxwell Lake a Bay French • Z Marsh Jenning I p� _ Ot Bay ll �• N Shore or 0�0� •' ♦ �� Bracketts • Point t `•• West 1 p Crystal �,_ •��. Bay Pnint••## •�•.�• Harrison .. — �.� • �' Bay 1 I • , n 19th1Ave 8th Ave N Ivd E Wayzata Bay 1 X. I 1 1 =1 1�1 Storm Sewer System N ie Dr ���d i a �° i'• Lafayette I AitF Storm Pipe (By ► 15" ► 27' e • • Bay 'e. Lak Diameter) ♦ Mo. 21 " ► 32" y Cit Limits Lakes & Ponds Sprint; 1 • '.' —� $" —r . t • `tea Park Carman's Bay '° o J Bay ► Ba 1• a , ► 24" 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams i .� • •, ,; P —► 12 0 3,500 �� Feet e►v • `• • Casco Point 1 Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, 1 •. Hennepin County, MnDOT Figure 8 Z c J co 0 o! R s Appendix B: Subwatershed Maps 10 -yr and 100 -yr Rainfall Events City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 51 l v II 1. i r I ArSURFACE WATER n \ [_O` Y / ` PLAN r"4 ti + v 2F - __y 10 YEAR EXISTING CONDITION Ir >✓x I� 1 r �' ' r ♦ ' RC1 t 1 t '.1 ,> / LOCATION MAP ', s `I ` -- ,`` y 'I • I r '� . .1 ��f'i \fir, 17 f +, -- f 1 5 . K j, t r i n a ` t +{I r r�i,, r 11\ w y 'f :. .- l _S r � I .,r �� SIJ •/ I . ti .Br4, B5 - 12 , G1 C2_ G3 C4 �C5 : y t = ^L D1 D2 D3 64 D5 1 22 �E3�)!E4 F1 F- I 2� 4 ` F F3 �. ,. , , � - - •. , • ,: r S ._ _ 71 ti • , PC 119 _. - • ., - i , ' •. i,'� I �a 524.2 Ac • G G .. � r G 1' G 3' ' ^I ..r .. ,.I I Al Legend Vi —_{ \ Orono City Limits Node Flooding 1= X 11 _ L / ..,I.. Mw '_■r _■ ■ �..^. �.�!•r■�.,,!• -..�■. .�. ■��P01 ■■ � ■� 4. ■ ' r•L El Parcels Depths Ilyi�rr i..,�•r' ■lti�■}!1 �pRUCEWAV ! _ t e: • N FI f o Flooding / Railroad f ' - /\ .-� 0 0 - 1 foot - . - ■ ,: �',,; ,._ 11,; - CJ Storm Manhole - \ 1 , - - •- - feet r. 0 Catch Basin ■ :; 4 • _ _ \ ® 2 feet :, ', ;; � :r • Inlet J '/, �� • Outlet Pie / Qca p �Q p) ■ . : \ Storm Control •� ` ti ,Z83� - ■ 1 Structure 1 -2 -_ _ , • - ► Storm 3 : 2 / Pipe St e qTq C3 Watershe41W 3 ds �W ff/y� O �. < ,_ r v Z. I , ....., _ I — L, � f^'-jr •�-fir/� "- �o- - .. - __ 0 Feet i' i � �' t,. J r C ` Ir• �' s - n� {� a Ir , i P C; J Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, OC -Oso _ _ _ PC -P07 n. 563'AC ._ ;.i. _ ;%'.,z _ �;,. \ t.. -.f ?'t r +i 63.8AC n �r \ BO r 7 _ I' q 1 - O & , 1 L . 6r \\sfls o` J o J �� - A � rr '�' �; }� \ MENK �'C�OtT 18- ,i ''y_-�� i f_ ? ��, J fl ��j`f /� } _ -- \ 1 Real People. Real Solutions. 2018 Page 1 of 32 A n 0, SURFACE WATER 0 PLAN Katrina < ---------- -YEAR P , 10 EXISTING CONDITION pV F) LOCATION MAP 220.9, I a,PC-4�' L 2269 5 Ac i V 10 k' kw" 'K, A3, 6 1. .,A2, 7i R2 B5 W,ir' C3 ill4C-Fio U2 j" 'j "K 11 02 .1 D3,1 64 ED-) Q".1 �i J �E-■J - _ E4 7 F3,. P F4 01 G1 G "x. 41 • ".Z 11 1.V, -g �AV -A3 A2 J, Legend _j It Lir; r.L ver Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths El Parcels 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - i foot Storm Manhole f. I l4q, 0 1-2 feet Basin AIR 2 feet "7" F Catch Ba Inlet Lij �PC-042 �A •Outlet Pipe (Q ca ----- --- --- 2N < Storm Control 0 Structure k" 1 -2 2-3 Storm Pipe PC -P02 168.0 Ac 4OW 3 C3 Watersheds 'Pa HG-HU2 • 201 12',9 A cI. 0 500 Feet j ....... Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, L A.IC43 0 40.1 A� j T-' LC -01 BOLTON '0 184.0 At f,rN'� _ O 46� to MENK 7*"** & 0 A2 Real People. Real Solutions. Irl P,-019 B2) L a k e a s B3 June 2018 Page 2 of 32 "A QBes 3 s e n .0 5 - SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 77 -v 10 YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP xs Wolsfeld 1 0 Irf ... A2, —A4— � , Nk\, B B5 BF 81)-,--C2 ZQ5V - C 711, "S 524.2 Ac j j A tl1 C'31' C 4 1 —Dll� \132 D3 D5 E2 E4 4 J* 071 222 11 GB U11 , ff 1 P J�) A ------ 901- L Irm, R 2 D� Am PC�03 J, AW� 4 AF A 3:0 T� Legend �7- Orono City Limits Node Flooding V, J 7 - Depths El Parcels No Flooding Railroad w. iR MEN" E 7" 0 0 - i foot -041 8 9 Ac LL Storm Manhole 01 -2 feet N Catch Basin PZ3/ 10, PC P I "k —6 J > 2 feet Inlet cts F C74 3 10 0 I�t Pipe (Q Qcap) 3Ac Storm Control < Structure 1 -2 - - - - - - Storm Pipe 2-3 8A C3 Watersheds 4OW 3 nadowood,o PC 11, -0 Aa Ac 0 500 1AL-? .5 A6 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, 7� '(0 -293 29 BOLT N 0 It'0 L) .5 Ac j _ Fi \^` br q ,. =:t23 rJ 1 (D ' �. F' ;" !a'r' 'r ti 19: LL -P19 .1 1 & MENK A3 iIclIl I r lr - ) r'_ ri,• .>_�o , ; I' ,z'I, ',s k e -®f A -, S. �Qr lx, Real People. Real Solutions. --- ;; 7 B2 'N V.- I Cr B-31 N3 Ci KI June 2018 Page 3 of 32 'Z. --- - ------- -- MANAGEMENT PLAN _Jl fl A 1 -YEAR 0 EXISTING CONDITION L' ej LOCATION MAP 7586.6A J 1i rn rxs 4a V. "'A ,J (D CI r1LI • 1 3 :t4 135 Q ,Iti II +I;, D4 D5] 22 1. -- ------- W 0 S f _5 "ti -k GCDE 11 3, E4 • F 01 Gi T3 2AC 'rJ xxsmi !_1Ii ---------- - J'l iuLGCDvE A4 - - --- -------- A5 • R Leg end Orono City Limits Node Flooding i �'Y Depths El Parcels j: LL 0 No Flooding Railroad O01 - i foot C - Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet N Catch Basin > 2 feet Inlet Outlet Pipe w (Q cap) 51' )j <1J' Storm Control Structure 1 -2 ttl Storm Pipe 2 -3 Watersheds 41W 3 � IQQ C3 'i Y�,� .: 0 500 '7(. Ti i Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, 22� 9 Yk MnDNR, MnDOT, o 0- LL I:17 BOLTON fs I & MENK A4 Real People. Real Solutions. C B3 i 3� age o -. _ r\.�, ":�'II 1 •, 1t'r r,I , t..\lr,�tJ1 ,' :`- r1•1�Ir.-it±',1� ' 1 I1 .l ;':/ I.tI r�I+,:l,'i,.li1 -.,: i' :: � t' '. IliI. •i``,r.,�,`�`t\1` 5 \ ,q.ntII ' :e;, $1L1.i,r ,-',-!�i:'j�J. ".�if7 1 ,` ,-�� t l_: %r1f+`-J1��',r-, I`�'1 . ''' :,• � r.i-'�s),:,,"''I,1L.: � ItJS11. 1�,t_ •:,:�'�-,.,1r I\,.,xf.t` y ,.' ��'�t.`:;.I � �-`,', �`JS � l'."J\i .. •:{♦ I1 ,`, '� .'r~.�.4; II i\:7 .+.`-'r•..J'_i.f .t1�i . '1 /�-\•/!1 .,', Ir �fi-/7•r ' r.!} a+, lr-r\,• I� ,- SJi :: f.,-- ',f..r':�`J..,Jl�. 1f.S,ti_y.1rl.f%' ;, l•`, i �� I,,%"`',�' - ,I'. , i;- -l =.!li \X.,1:,_ , ' am: <0 �L�• .ni,1.t! ,,� i i,�1!I _''_��,'..1 _'� �•_r-•.• -�r -.. 'r--_ - , - ;-- •r-,r�r _1J �l �r\a li ;l `:+ ,-- -�•=- - - 1•_�t..��.<r-.�.+• - ;_• i �.1I.� .I�_ lj. �,. . , '; --rr'.,�[.f- '�../i1':,.r1_` .. '\}l ' . 1 `,'1 '1 ._,J`.(1`_1..''tf. "`-1,� _l• t'\ .`. - • `��l- ` -`i^h�1•i'♦,:,t" . _l '-.l • i�It`l-1 '1�rI• , ' `I -7i'rJ\. •',I"i�`%(t.;J;.I •-, ''_` c I 1-?f-1Ir,•rl\ ir' • 5, yt 't ';.. -I . /,I 11%� ,. 1_ i_r.�l• -_'I_r_r-, l - i•'_! t �!IlI-•;ii•':_ LI -I--; %r�+ ;;'tr-.- ,J fj-f1I{�1 ,t: r "!'1f 1r-+Ar>,} l!r,1rr>,Ir 1+ r ,•;1 1�7r r'� r_' . r ,I�Jt�1nktliI , l'''•,'Ir'111 , tV I�1t J�I-�IIV,•rtP � II1 l 11 ;_-,rI ' r- � 4�' te._•1 ?'-`:+_.rr•y\;-r"-�- 1 - ' -/_ 1- -1~ 1 1.'1rr.�,%•-1 1 '.ar�j,.I•" `t•.; f1_f- S' r i_�r,iirIIIiirt�r :'y-�,'; I '11t,��.- ,'�'Il.'.Jr' 1` ; •r_ '_ ''Ir\�. r='r`•_' 'J - 1 r1 `�i_•';1-f r��I�'/ri- r',;1 -Ji _. ,' • }a rt•1 •' ,�/�',a ��1@'x;!'I?;-•1_'I Tt;' i1Iom .�l, % f.• 1y• r.''\fy',]31� I'�♦ 41,"-• i1f .1II+t.' t ! I , r, ",rI/tr,-�%l. _1_i,•1I_ .IRi �' �11 i \`1�``�'-+•i -I '-<- iL f r \ rI- _ I J l 1I i ,•rI;` '`� ~II%mf,;it•!,' r .r - I/ y - +Ijr - ,.- •.�- — 1r y �- F� ots;GBF1.�. SURFACE URFACE ... EsWm_., C-A S l T- Eii1�1 II- R MANAGEMENT PLAN liy f 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP r _ �lL - 1G 2 5 BB5 k'_GGC4 D1� D2 D3I 64 D5 3E4E1 EF44G3 -AC, Mooney Lake .. .i...\lt,�inr�,i;1 y`,l,l 7 1�;���`ti`�'t.. ,S'a%•'.:rI'7,� 1t� ., 1 lj+ ry�, :1'QiI -. r ,y'".,aI.iy, I•��rv -_,Nwt : - -•r r,•._ _y!n ■ �.�.;';. `{•.., � \.� \I�`-h'\ -.„1�L1 `,� l ,.\•,1`��` ,"t:,r;1\ f'!�Lfi �•ti'�•! ;I '-t •, ;'1, _ l -`'H'ri4I5 �• � ',1+l`:t,, ,;Y. 1� A i4s r; ''1 '�, - ::•'� . .t1 •\_■J-Y�-I C''/i1,;.�I"' rt'1,.`f,-1 , �;,ti"lt-:•t•*�i;,�v/',i1.Y.:.', r1�,�I,. ":�,-�,'+-1F. `_ ��� i/%-.�,_' /1r1_- ' ;I • �.'� r:r•ir,,fI',■ri'�,g,�r?.�r�<r1 - -yy- ;' p;` f1' 1-- J,�^_\ 'l•t1 'r,if,r,1j r9v..._.2 ;; L,1i' fGr' '1 �l'r,I' ., rtr 1J,rI +",r;Ifi`''ri',„i�I''I.r�' r'' _ f_ ■J11, •1 1�r.`8�r7.. 1�A I; ■l ` ; r ,~1 ,7:�1r .-i;,.I'\1' _ ,1I ■j l'iv.'\f-ir■ l'J r%rrUr :r'�,.r�■�!,�' • \ f _ Jf �r •-'r�;;1'`�-'1 , '-/'�Io. ,1 • ,',t �}i •,}`. j f `�,',l�`,. I ,-ti,Y1•. 1,•, ■�■■�■■' Legend j l Orono City L imi ts Node Flooding Depths El Parcels No Flood i n g Railroad 0 0 1 foot -C Storm ManholeO 1-2 feet �} ' , -0.ll.�syfYI\1, I'I;; I';',L`;-`G'�•N"' 4'\1p g- '��r •_�� i i'o3'ff. "1 j},_ ' l} . i �G\ti�'.� _)� 1.'`-,`_!'_,`l°o,,LrsY+' lr ti ` . 40p , - !o. l�1rv�1e}- r-orI: ' -._, 8` '�I .' i1 Ic',l fs-_` si ;,/3:��' �„�- j: • � •,tJI\ . t` '` :fv' .''7 J y \1 '.�_,-,,•jb-`ljiR ; s{. , i1 . \.1t•- J I•�J:Ir?�I �31 •~r� � r'(,I,[f- ��u, r >ti ^ Hr,s±I'ti;,/.�.y,�1 . rr�;..r,•"o�•r�>� {5_ �- +\;-�, (Ai�/-t '-• , aF }_o.i�-'tiJ I ;-:_ti`f ! �yr7lQ f;i,'r+1o.'_ f1 h a-'3tr't-0 <l �I#cz`%fHgIss-•.�•,=AO 1.D•VdeEc,',N�-,ea/ f>r -:--_ .C ' l=�t'-t _��c�-t•sa�- n 4�n,�yfe` r- l��teal -t srs -�`.•;_--�\._--111'=j- - ;'�'-4,DJ \o'3\ v. - ,r ,, Q, �` -si-3_fJ.c:-f, s-.�,'tI�.\rr,r- ��l . 1p•1�``_\,"I `O�',,_,_r. `' -p,'\,/`so.A�"'�1�r,0 8- '•, f.s9i•,_1! C•_,% ' � y!-� ,- 1 r'.•1' i ': `"'`�_�,•`1'�!d!r� `�1: . <� ,• t/rl i;5`. t�l�\ _ • �I ;1" - C-Jj.4'-a+' ,r 1 � I.''i: -- oC";�. *---1 '67 LL 1`46 , 0.ynl._`• ;t r•\l x\_;• l-ir•'•I�. �.- s _- -=�'■■ ■I■■■■ 1. l . ��' �• - • Inlet 0 Catch Bas in > 12 f e e t MO P07 Outlet Pipe (Q Qca p) Storm Control < Structure 1 -2 �".' 44 Storm Pipe 2-3 Weds 4OW3(3 Watersh M0 500Feet Orono, HennepinCounty,Source: Cit of MnDNR MnDOT, 'i it r, •(+ _ r 44 - - _ - I •3' -i _ -- .f �``� r• °s• -fir=3' � ',y(� •OS-1�(JPTT�' I'. `;� i - t..•1 :\ ,!. :Irr ,j; r ',r r5- �q 'i {r•3,1 "1- Dor rte. '}-. I 1 i L I t 11 s.- �'- _f • e b 1 Y ^Ir ,1• r t, {.} i,,, l _O `O, I e�$ I . � - BOLTON • r. '/yid, `2- _� • 1 �: c3' rl L i •.v V' t'-& MENK r - :r y,,i f ,til 'I" /�-. . I I I .. ',G ''� J � 5:•- � 1 a `I _, t , { i - ..i r ,r t , l ,r. i j. f + ,\.• ,� ,\_ N >� LL-� Qt h - . �!� ;.; Real People. Real Solutions. A5 >; - - ..7`� - y��' r _ '.,r � ::1Nr/._� _ . J , i,.d. . ! =��, �, , l � �4'.�i' .,Jr•'/.. / n: - - p. B4• • r iJ l ; /B5` ' I _ � r A June 2018 Page 5 of 32LL_ 02 112CL601 4 T! 0 P K - 638A,' C- 0 r Q r SA 6 n o P 14.3 .1 4; - :q_0 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP , 3 .13 135: PC P14 4�;12 xo C3 C4 6 C5 C PC -P11 no ------ 2 D5 NY. 40 OA J, E4 % F 11 F$ F3 X F4 G1 mw ic C ------ % j Of Ar L 44 op' . ....... 13 B2 Legend 79Orono City Limits Node Flooding X E Parcels Depths cr 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - i foot QLVIIn Manhole -2 feet 0 Catch Basin �S -P02O o 0 > 2 feet UAC, 36.6 Ac * Inlet 1-1 - - ---- a Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) Vjkoi < V Storm Control Structure 1 -2 2-3 C� Storm Pipe 7z-- I -M C:3 Watersheds 41W 3 fv r 2 I POEWA" LA,e. 3A 78 p N, 0500 Feet 813-P03 Source. City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, P -P22 PC mmm��--l!JISEV'INEJR-- 7o. 070.11cfs, P _p9a BOLTON 8B --P 4 & MENK -PZ Real People. Real Solutions. ffi�o L B1 S 20' 7 -,0 June 2018 -2 Ac A, r Page 6 of 32 D �,77711711'2 -7 PC FIT JIJAC 0 Li pcblg SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT Lake DlassRfil' . . . . . . . . . . PLAN 184.0 Ac -003 Ac 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION „, >:`- ;;,III - LOCATION MAP -7-7 .1 2Ac 9 B5 'V, � 112 `01 C3 C4 6 t�C-115 2 77 P -V77 D1 D2 133 D4 D5 C y. 40-OAc *%,��3 E4 'T F3 F4 " __ - I I ' 2 j ".2 �-♦ �.:. _ CA 31' G2 G3 if "YZATA'@BL r Yr s. F:: a�o N 6 I -U4 I V, z 't-9Aq 71 1131 �1133 Legend LC-VT7 2, Orono . City Limits Node Flooding Pf Depths El Parcels V j --j No Flooding 3): Railroad 19 (e) Storm Manhole 0 0 - i foot 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin Inlet > 2 feet L •U4 OqO- Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) 11 -P09 C 12 <1 ,22 Storm Control 4 f f 091 J 0 --a 16.7, A. "YKFI� . . . Structure 1 -2 co Q Storm Pipe zo a 2-3 C:3 Water 41W 3 Dl sheds v'. x % LC -03-4 -012 206.6 AC 23 A". C 0 500 Ac . . ..... ....... 'Sjj-P21 Feet 21.3 Ac Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, 2 MnDNR, MnDOT, �j r � Toa - BOLTON ENK rdy 1. 4.. A .0 5 A, & M Real People. Real Solutions. Wiwi B2 �x Z D C11- "N - " 1w, C Lake DlassRfil' LC -011 184.0 Ac -7-7 .1 2Ac 9 B5 'V, � 112 `01 C3 C4 6 t�C-115 2 77 P -V77 D1 D2 133 D4 D5 C y. 40-OAc *%,��3 E4 'T F3 F4 " __ - I I ' 2 j ".2 �-♦ �.:. _ CA 31' G2 G3 if "YZATA'@BL r Yr s. F:: a�o N 6 I -U4 I V, z 't-9Aq 71 1131 �1133 Legend LC-VT7 2, Orono . City Limits Node Flooding Pf Depths El Parcels V j --j No Flooding 3): Railroad 19 (e) Storm Manhole 0 0 - i foot 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin Inlet > 2 feet L •U4 OqO- Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) 11 -P09 C 12 <1 ,22 Storm Control 4 f f 091 J 0 --a 16.7, A. "YKFI� . . . Structure 1 -2 co Q Storm Pipe zo a 2-3 C:3 Water 41W 3 Dl sheds v'. x % LC -03-4 -012 206.6 AC 23 A". C 0 500 Ac . . ..... ....... 'Sjj-P21 Feet 21.3 Ac Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, 2 MnDNR, MnDOT, �j r � Toa - BOLTON ENK rdy 1. 4.. A .0 5 A, & M Real People. Real Solutions. Wiwi B2 �x Z D C11- "N - " 1w, C 7`7 L_e� A1 A2 19 % , i5l a J. Ac V jL -P21 L si . , v i –r L� j�rF, I � _ -j A -231 —Qlo=�7_ 'J73.kiAi: 0 JLL-04,5 3.7Ac 1,L LL -2 1 C LL 04 3,6:A6 m.',,,i4 9;6 k Pill 24.614c 20 -in U-474 2.QAC AL -P06 I kT obs t ------ r. --4.6 A 4. as C L. - C, c(s-v _ -F_ wooff1wirs :q_0'V SURFACE WATER 0 MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP 73 .5Ac _j17V 132 YAc', --- – --- LL -082'--\ kc -wr, 17.i4C-, 7 of 'Legend -190 -078 16.9 Ac 11.5Ac 06 J Orono City Limits Node Flooding 17 2(= L -296-- Depths Is El Farce Ac 0 No Flooding Railroad Y -'2"A.c 0 0- i foot U Inba I;" q-178 (e) Storm Manhole Basin 2 Ad N Catch Ba -2 feet L I L97FI in '30! 01 9., LL296 r- _ iI % r ®> 2 feet 14",n L 10.4 C oto' c 3 3.2 A cis Inlet 60 A - ------- %Zill ••Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) Q10=1p.1 6,A c ---- ----- Storm Control < ......... Structure 1 -2 2-3 -Q-16-fo6W,----- Storm Pipe LL P27 C:3 Watersheds3 I MAI I,j 20B.6A j, , 0 -08 0 Elf 6 -0d VVIP -------- 'A 500 '44 -Ac. ; - ------ Feet 4Acc) k; -199 -j --- '-,"5 aveno /4 o -r % I W4 C Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, GLENDAL•E%DR MnDNR, MnDOT, yy U-183 I P -4 QA 2/-fA C BOLTON ` � '-/' LL -08i ; ' :•'•- I i _ / a - 24.8, AC - .,'• r i � O Lillian Ln 5.1 s IIENK J, 5 Real People. Real Solutions. 4 AB 3 7 7),' � J., C2 I , --- - I I June 2018 Page 8 of 32 .V i , , ., - ­ . - 2_%q C Acr' '9-6A. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT -118, PLAN 10 -YEAR e4z EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP p2q) 48 A&- L 2 7BT%eq,2_= :)E W ,B4 B5 12 �Q2-4-1 AGVV37 C-4 C5 II + —Di �-T D2 D3 D4 1 E2 �3L E4 1 F3 v, G -A R B LongL -k- eL r.x! t i % SM Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding *00 000 V El Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - i foot ClStorm Manhole 0 1-2 feet Z. N Catch Basin * Inlet > 2 feet -------- Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) N, Storm Control < 1 OLD CONE, Structure 1 -2 7■Storm Pipe 2-3 4OW 3 C3 Watersheds . .... .. ...... 41 C c:, j V, % 500 0 _j A F T,eet Q� 45 3'Ae Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, L MnDNR, MnDOT, &JALCk N -N, . ...... .. 7'Ac w V y. -T N ---- -- BOLTO O 1. & MENK L-21 ..T -Pla 11"M5. Real People. Real Solutions. B4 Jel V, age of 32 J 4P Ic SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT -118, PLAN 10 -YEAR e4z EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP p2q) 48 A&- L 2 7BT%eq,2_= :)E W ,B4 B5 12 �Q2-4-1 AGVV37 C-4 C5 II + —Di �-T D2 D3 D4 1 E2 �3L E4 1 F3 v, G -A R B LongL -k- eL r.x! t i % SM Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding *00 000 V El Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - i foot ClStorm Manhole 0 1-2 feet Z. N Catch Basin * Inlet > 2 feet -------- Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) N, Storm Control < 1 OLD CONE, Structure 1 -2 7■Storm Pipe 2-3 4OW 3 C3 Watersheds . .... .. ...... 41 C c:, j V, % 500 0 _j A F T,eet Q� 45 3'Ae Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, L MnDNR, MnDOT, &JALCk N -N, . ...... .. 7'Ac w V y. -T N ---- -- BOLTO O 1. & MENK L-21 ..T -Pla 11"M5. Real People. Real Solutions. B4 Jel V, age of 32 J "JA Ij 45 :q-0 SURFACE WATER I.", All J:L&J MANAGEMENT itA PLAN 11 1 0 -YEAR 'j EXISTING CONDITION A F s LOCATION MAP ' rxssnn Hollander Rd J 'A jr - • L 3 48 ;5, M d i a r d a P4 ongl N 3, E4 L f Q -K e or L P, L G3' "—d4 'LJ 1. J. • 16JA4 A y. I i -egend LU fox,Z Z7--. k. V.: 0iono City Limits Node Flooding LL -P52 Depths j Parcels No Flooding LL P52 Railroad 26.5 A c 0 0 - i foot C-, Storm Manhole 65 0 1-2 feet H LL -P50 sin 1-4 0 Catch Ba 7 * Inlet > 2 feet w Uutle Storm Control < c. t Pipe (Q Qca p) j J '10 -2 Structure P 2-3 1�11q'R-13'11'1i�' f Storm Pipe C3 J. 3 Watersheds J A A 09 iO.9Ac 0 500 -o)6 PL Feet -N, - ------------------- A Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, O MnDNR, MnDOT, 0, V., f 9 eL vieif z BOLTON it • N ffi -A 777, 'A O&MENK 4 PL -PO Real People. Real Solutions. p Z-� B5 -A C4 C5- June 2018 Page 10 of 32 V , l. > .I.• . ,\,, l'. .•. ,. ,!•I - h 1, �:�„- rr ^ �� -3•, , `• r �- 1,. - 1v4 '- 2 Y{\ �f �r-•� SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 YEAR _f : -2..r 0•i,c, f �, %_•. _: — r - ' i 'M1 -- , - y EXISTING CONDITION DITION LOCATION MAP 70 cfst y/cc S6-0 2 13, _- _ti�f �i'I1I.•.',.. r.•. • i:,'\t l-F>,; 5•rL'i�-rGl= -'3,D„� I: 1 D\�O.d G1 - AIii_ • , i.„,�I B\.- . ' ; i' i's 'I°ZpvoIIII1I 'vii ,,�aeS. i s',ir ,1 .-',` zroaIrct.,�to_ I _I•/.,YJrg5.. /. I- .4io-.i�: 5 ;,.,=- ,r•,``r-I :t Ai, �� RA_r—Mi -' �+'lD-�R-1-”N.•�gy-Am.,_ �W tQ ` � ''A \ r.�ki ,: t t %� J •.,,.'\--f'�, r.s •;t, , ., \r_l 1 �i ',��',• ',�11 . .,-'�t - i r, 1=r0r�- . �°,I-o r:IImsif�'s . � �s:•,/'. J_,— F`� �__ - _/ ,-''_ �•ira1'o' +`. .;',•.`. \tisti'nr\\ �r� H.t . J I,•`1.:r\rr-';'- :rrt:'` . !f,r 'rr - 'i•- t , :s• .}J . ,, .: —� 4I 11o1r}".1ai lrzOcAor�o c 51 s- ': •► � F-• •ICBE CBDE22 _ • • l mi - EB-3 w.B 4 .B:. 5 CC4 I CS SB -020 D4 D5 157.3 AC ■3 E4 77FF3 F4 C. 2.2GlIts/+ ' • Legend Ac %X. Node FloodingoOrono City LimitsDepths� Parcels 0 No Flood i�i1f n Railroad 0 0foot Storm Manhole P0i; 6�0 1-2 feet A Catch Basin AC • Inlet Outlet Pipe(Q Qcap) 1 Storm Contro Structure 1 -2 SS -0 2 feet • 2- 2 �ri �.I 11 t t -i .`�y- istr`t Le /1�r M1 NI,,�SIyyt.�l' i. l x���r,..,1l'`ti:tia� Q _ o.si , vr., l J.1i1 i II•i;'+�I fs i ``tp'I ovp1er _iZ1g2� �:Yc- fvss L, -=PNa_-F_L '-,J,PO�;`rocd,OQ>, r \7•0,_->�50j",I'�c-!f:,`s 0,� ,r'''F' 4 ' " ��w�S�It-t.,.,-, A1nFdr`:er�'!-wf.. 6frs'r;�',- Sr`' �, /fb' �o + �`'=p•ly_ti \ i . ^:�_-`s,_•``'�_° ,` t,I �, ,'4r c7t1.s J���11 ` '1•-';'r�ci;rt�''-s � ' �r , \' 2-'� -��' I'tPI ,�1t �".'s`;.• 4;,,4,� , �I ,1r1/ , '" 7 � i'4�4 `Ci.`;' , `•r.r" r ,•`=i.; , ;,t'_ra ,I nQI. Q. a` \ �a-�, `,•\�\(•�. � � � _ � � 'f`i1• 1 t, i ��1 tt� `.1,)�-r\•'t',n , +o 2; ''-,clfJs�'lYr /rd-�.cA��'f_-v r`.Xo 1�.>�I. ,¢4 sI� Y py<5Iy + N.'�'1� 6S.- A.I'c_ ,t. _'_-,-l1o'o'B�ld` 7. 9. A� _ M1 3Storm Pipe �:3 AF41W 3C3 Watersheds 77�SR-075 0 500Feet Source: City of Orono Hennepin Count MnDNR, MnDOT, North A/M oy . I + .,r ;•� j,Q '�; Lre tl r vl, '1 _ f•r r �� \ ' :�7 , .,y � �, p \•l i r ,rlr f: [yA t\i 1. \ l i \- `t t } �. 'i,;: :�1 - BOLTON �46 & MENK A-065.1 A ELM ST (8= ,9 C Q oro, =. %. AC ``:' g�z` %rOAC. `11�ts ,-1 I . .\• r ejs re : , Real People. Real Solutions. v. t I,i'lt \` 1 ,5t' r- 17,`• t`�'��`O i1 �'�?a� 101'' I+'', r, / \ tl - !_^� �\� _�D2 June 2018 Page of 32i % 61.' an _7 -P2, V,/ SURFACE WATER _0 C: PLAN 0. --P61• 0 10 -YEAR �06AAJ� �'c 0,15 A EXISTING CONDITION SB 06 L LOCATION MAP 39. Ac cd� �VAM A "s 6A t= U 6D,cfs '-LC PO LC4.1 cc, 17 2 4;j co 13 E35 SB -022 16.7 A C a C.3 C4 Q-9 S80 7"7 V1 L Ac, z_ D -_3j P4 D5 L • '4C -------• E4 j ♦ F3 ♦9 F4 J37 ­ L Jt A" EI - SB, 039, P Somers9,3 2 i dki' Legend _d C -Pi Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths L El Parcels 0 No Flooding Railroad F13,05P�_ E.;go CJ Storm Manhole 0 0 - i foot A 0 1-2 feet A' Basin Inlet ......... .. > 2 feet iAc 0 Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) < 1 q Storm Control -2 ke St I1is Structure 1 3.1 At Storm Pipe 2-3 41W 3 fS C3 Watersheds rr s3 pl� U Stubbs \,.BAy- - '0' 2 S L 0 ASus0 500 115. sac 'FA Feet �S 3 Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, r MnDNR, MnDOT, 7- - BOLTN Vb nn X01 SB -0.75 A 9. At— OIk M ENOK 7,9:81{c sJa - -------- se o Real People. Real Solutions. C2 D1 Lv' b2 Page 12 of 32 Lillian L 2, 1 1132 f5 B L626i 1,12.7 P f I - - ,-■ / -"z —,- , 84. 4A. I SURFACE WATER y`0 % o Zr J C-' 98 Li 67ACD Ic ZU. PLAN 10 YEAR 11 44 EXISTING CONDITION Ji -- _IX T LOCATION MAP 'd '10 '2� TL-176'� J 0( OAc 5- j '7� 2 3.6 6 0- '." 2, sl FR -'P 'a , 1 -1 : I " I �'� ". - " - 10 T 3.0 F* 2.6A6 -- R-04 D3 UD Tho E4 AA"., F1 - -3 1 F4 'Ijevin La ....... G11' G2V'f�"�G3- -d4 "10 149 Q </ U 4 Legend "C L .—N 2 -7� Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths r El Parcels 'FR -P07 '7' i 0 No Flooding 1.8 _j Railroad 0 0 - i foot 6e FR -1 r Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet K, Catch Basin �.j FR -P3 If IV > 2 feet Inlet Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) % < 1 Storm Control Structure 1 -2 P Q10=48,f, Storm Pipe 2-3 41W 3 C3 Watersheds Q/ 129.2Ac N 'C;\j F J �--Tl--P02 1h; NA, 0 500 2-A&. P06 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, J� LL 20", 0" ��f-�\ -P06 C TL 4 4 % BOLTON %A' AQ *44 & MENK '' F�r Real People. Real Solutions. 2 C3 J, I J; ge 0 -�i A .D Z- 1135� JE-7 TL -P17 64 V --)k-P18 TL -P'17 z' TL -2 C 00 J 407 P13 V� 28.OAc 16L Ac AQ 7. 9 115.6Ac :51ft T. 41"', 77 BB -P01 13.5 A 101 1313-'' IL 0 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP C. I TNh3 r4 -Ob2 GS - o 6, z 'V (J A�-n TL P38 '22.5 Ac '.4Luis TL i2 IT Legend n "K. TL_ 5 A� Orono City Limits Node Flooding D Depths Ac' mN El Parcels 0 TL -2501• l 0 No Flooding 41,5 A c Sd" Railroad Rv. 114 0 0 - i foot IN j C Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin 3B-PO3 3 _P0 r Inlet > 2 feet 0 Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) g". < 1 Storm Control SB -P06 Structure 1 -2 Storm Pip B -016e 2-3 7 4OW 3 C3 Watersheds * vv• or)l or), 24. 1 A % -P07, 0 500 l%c 21.2Ae. _71 Feet -P07 -7:k Q. �C- BB A_ Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, ",Y)l 8.2 6.4 MnDNR, MnDOT, B 'N T 0 7 _7 i pl_16ccfs BOLTON AC & MENK a 3110..- �W Real People. Real Solutions. C4 -P13 1313D5 June 2018 Page 14 of 32 c ern a a _r D 3� A �A Itip PL- 7' SURFACE WATER - ----- Ai -.'B4 'q_0 7 r 77 �—x MANAGEMENT tl - PLAN 77 I. 10 YEAR EX r ISTING CONDITION �P6�' LOCATION MAP '%a X: .0 • ;4 f PL -P01 Ac QBW- fo�x i01 nn M-C3 C4 C5 D2 -Wiimai ------ - V-12 E 3T E4 FY - ------ 74� F4 C) 5P, ...... ME --V ------- 4 G SL. 0, k Y % Art r I- P 'i lfi �5 Legend rI q. OD 61 Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths A El Parcels 1�7-0 d No Flooding Railroad 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet I.. vy' 0 Catch Basin - --------- - Inlet •Outlet Pipe (Q Qca p) i t5 j VIVA], >2 feet 'T' < Storm Control Q5 Structure 1 -2 j 4- -s storm Pipe 0- 2-3 �4 c 41W 3 s C3 Watershed 1!!Zlr6-- A - ---- --- -77, 0 500 Feet y Source: Cit of Orono, Hennepin County, Ij MnDNR, MnDOT, I % N w k e BO LTO "'2 & MENK o. - C5 0 Real People. Real Solutions. __Z Px j nld a) L7 FL PO N/ sdao 0", SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT 10. PLAN 28.7 ac K�A 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION FL -P03° 0 LOCATION MAP 9.:O A q' L F CZ)B B5 --TH -3 C C4 CS 12 1- 7 Mofs WES 2 D3 4 y D5 7 E4 Z�• F1 - 9 F4 .9 G1' �4 N o r t -pog h A'F m 3 1 )rq 010�52 ds 0 WE -7 D2 Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths vv.k El Parcels 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - i foot Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin yd LINDEN LA® > 2 feet Inlet Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) II i A Storm Control < 1 --y Structure 1 -2 Storm Pipe 2-3 C:3 Watersheds 41W 3 o 072 Al IM 0 500 --I Feet Forbst Lake Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, ea BOLTON & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. D1 Fq June 2018 Page 16 of 32 Weit Arm x, -2 ? -PI SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT �\ W-4 PLAN FS 10-YEAR V. 7,2 EXISTING CONDITION Stubby ,"B a y LOCATION MAP Of A "A%.: I V 1. A2, —12 A4— In" B5 112 7C1 --%q2 C3 C4�GS A -,P2 D3 64 1 D5 'n p6t — E4 -,NA-( F71 F '3 9 F4 6.OAC' ro G 1'* I —ra MA —T. D2 D1 Legend .. .. ...... . Orono City Limits Node Flooding "A El Parcels Depths Railroad 0 No Flooding 0 0 i foot . . . . . . Storm Manhole . —.1, IK 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin > 2 feet Maxwell Baj�\ 463JA6, (j 0 Inlet 0 Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) Storm Control Structure 1 -2 Storm Pipe 2-3 G=r> 3 C3 Watersheds North Arm /Z 0 500 1111111011E�� Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR,MnDOT YA % 7 Q \ BOLTON & MENK D2 Real People. Real Solutions. I k E2 " M E June 2018 Page 17 of 32 C3 '0 0 L- t4 0 SURFACE WATER 19Pa �`A Ic 7 Mp 7 -�;T A '129�2 AC 10.3 Ac. 3.9 PLAN 4: y.,ao 03 10 -YEAR P '0�1 'Y' . . . . . . EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP 7P15 cis -7- 1�;4 Ac -'FR �0- x.1 q ?TIC % [=A�J L.. --- -- ----- a 4B B5 —=R -P25 .� 23 121.5 Ac C4 I rC V U2 'TL -P TL -071 1 D5 146 114.oAr- 06 Q10 Lr. TL�.P -3 L y I E2 4 E VI F4 F1 F 21 F3 F R -P J1 W r Gllt% G)7 J�' 2.OAc% Zi FR- 156 20.4 Ac w Y r%tiZ D 2 L -P27,'-' "'�dp fN Legend - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ■ Allra Orono City Limits Node Floodin -5 -S, Depths El Parcels j No Flooding z Railroad CD -------/ t°y 18 J' Y t s' �j L 0 0 - i foot Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet - ----- TL -P Catch Basin 'V > 2 feet Inlet M a x4 -e, Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) �,rench Lake B a y —k� < 1 Storm Control Q 10 14 d� Y 6.3 Structure 1 -2 FR -P24 186.4 A c 2-3 Storm Pipe 41W 3 C3 Watersheds /,23.7 A� JE FF • 500 0 s.2 AC Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, ETONKA—) -�007 CY-PO4 *on CbULTO 1 & MENK f17 12- C FR, 38 Real People. Real Solutions. cf, -6 D3 ov C-1 F FR -P22 e a �)E Page 18 of 32 2018 44 I/Mld D5 Legend * Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths 1313-P13- 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - i foot * Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet '0Y * Catch Basin Smith' 0 > 2 feet * Inlet 0 Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 E3z E4 BB-P14,O. 15 23.3.Ac. 46Ac Q Sp V06 -8,9A6 'a rC- rO c-, fC' 2f "-1Y D Tanager Lake j1h GO o 2 G) 8 Browns Bay C5 SURFACE WATER ;?° PLAN F :..n a e 10 -YEAR I � JL EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP D5 Legend * Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - i foot * Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet '0Y * Catch Basin Smith' 0 > 2 feet * Inlet 0 Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 E3z E4 Browns Bay C5 SURFACE WATER ;?° PLAN F :..n a e 10 -YEAR I � JL EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP L a k e - Storm Pipe 2-3 M i n n e t o n k a C:3 Watersheds 41W 3 0 500 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, N &BOLTMENOK Real People. Real Solutions. D4 June 2018 Page 19 of 32 D5 Legend * Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - i foot * Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet * Catch Basin 0 > 2 feet * Inlet 0 Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 L a k e - Storm Pipe 2-3 M i n n e t o n k a C:3 Watersheds 41W 3 0 500 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, N &BOLTMENOK Real People. Real Solutions. D4 June 2018 Page 19 of 32 C4 Legend P w * Orono City Limits Node Flooding El Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding rj f 0 0 - i foot o SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Legend * Orono City Limits Node Flooding El Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding 1 Railroad 0 0 - i foot (e) Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin * Inlet 0 > 2 feet * Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2-3 C:3 Watersheds 3 0 500 ---1 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, Al ` QBOLTON & MENK D5 Real People. Real Solutions. June 2018 Page 20 of 32 D2 :q_ 0% SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT fort IPLAN A r m 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP ti j GL Legend LU Orono City Limits Node Flooding El Parcels Depths No Flooding c-- Railroad 0 0 i foot iR Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin * Inlet > 2 feet LL * Outlet )2' 0 ti j GL Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding El Parcels Depths No Flooding c-- Railroad 0 0 i foot Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin * Inlet > 2 feet * Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) 0 Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2-3 Watersheds 3 0 500 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, N &BOLT MENK Real People. Real Solutions. E 1 ions. F2 June 2018 Page 21 of 32 I N— �41 North `Arm A I's M-0 Ij j est Arm k 00 WA- 0 j -j r E2 Crystal Bay F2 Y-0 I 5.OA Lake Minnetonka 0 0% SURFACE WATER 0 ", MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP E3 Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding Parcels Depths El 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - i foot Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet Catch Basin > 2 feet Inlet Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 Storm Pipe 2-3 C:3 Watersheds 4OW 3 0 500 _71 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, # BOLTON r = f, /Q &MENK V ­ Real People. Real Solutions. E2 I June 2018 Page 22 of 32 ,04 Z- -&ove -9 j -�7 —g' 12 -in FRIP48 FR -P22 4 44. v, . . . . . . . . . . . . . f 0 FR U) r< ------ ------ % K N —R X C' B_2 6. c.. _7 ;v Lake: ' Smith Bay :q_0 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN v 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP WA, *.,.Minn e tonka E4 —j Legend M 0�0• -0 Ac Orono City Limits Node Flooding 4v F Depths A2 3, 5 17 2=B3 .13 B5 1 'C' SB-, C 4 0 kziv12 131� ""D2 D3 1 64 [135] Storm Manhole E2 E� E4 F-4 Catch Basin F3 F4 0: * Inlet > 2 feet •4P G1' G3ef-'O- 0 Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) -Wft" Srm Control <1 Amsow a bF Structure WA, *.,.Minn e tonka E4 —j Legend M 0�0• -0 Ac Orono City Limits Node Flooding 4v Depths El Parcels Railroad 0 No Flooding SB-, 0 0 - i foot Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet F-4 Catch Basin * Inlet > 2 feet •4P 0 Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) -Wft" Srm Control <1 Amsow a Structure 1 -2 slow a Storm Pipe 2-3 • C3 Watersheds 41W 3 a At `••` llowaa 4, a slow, a a a• 0 500 A I Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, V MnDNR, MnDOT, ft'A'aaft *alaa V., BOLTON j & MENK -- Real People. Real Solutions. E3 F2F4 June Page 23 of 32 ,� A , ��♦ D J V O • v � n � F3 F4 Lake Minnetonk D5 o)V6 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT � PLAN f+F 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Legend a Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths • No Flooding +Railroad O 0 - 1 foot (e) Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet Catch Basin • > 2 feet • Inlet • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control —< 1 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 C3 Watersheds GEW 3 0 500 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, Q& MLENK Real People. Real Solutions. E4 June 2018 Page 24 of 3 Ell We s t A r m Wt Black Lake Black Lake I --- -' r. NL &_ E2 0 SURFACE WATER rMANAGEMENT PLAN 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP I. Legend rxswr. rr 12 El Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding K__ JM3,,,B5 (e) Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet C3 C4 I t�C----5V U2 Catch Basin Inlet 0 > 2 feet Dl- �',D2al D3 D4 �ID:51 1 1 E- �Q E4 Structure 1 -2 F3.. F4." Storm Pipe 2-3 B aly C3 Watersheds 41W 3 ■ ■ ■ ti ,ti Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding • • El Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding • Railroad 0 0 - i foot (e) Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet ♦ Catch Basin Inlet 0 > 2 feet Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Sprltrg Storm Control P Ak Structure 1 -2 a ■► Storm Pipe 2-3 B aly C3 Watersheds 41W 3 ■ ■ ■ ■ 0 500 ■ Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, ■ MnDNR, MnDOT, ■ QBOLTON & MENK F 1 ■ ;r Real People. Real Solutions. -2- June 2018 Page 25 of 32 d1 N 4 _ El `1 „ E2 - v 3 ".o,y� SURFACE WATER VA PLAN T ■ 't ;111x, zs.aac I i r ,'� .,`1 s, 10 -YEAR =• r , ;1111 �`"'e'~ Crystal Bay _ ■ `I ' ,� EXISTING CONDITION 1 rOOJ/ T000,+RD _ 36 r it ,N J e - o i .. r J� - % "rl a c,. • M1 I. f1 NpRTHER __ - CRYSTAL�PL w O l , i LIMN ,Lu fry, LYR'ICA °7 1:3 ,qC o,ro s _ Shor Poz - i- = 6 0 Ac < J -- I (Pto_8 7 t T - A l J � ,.I I. ti 15 Sprir ? p _ Park Q,o Bay Carman Bay i ` '•�' = LOCATION MAP r �vP01 S O - - a• r} ! '-.. ■ `s ~' C1 C2_ =C3C4 CS 12 F Q ■ fj+d' D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 'IE1 , E2., ■E3,: E4 : �O�/VAS 9 '9 / ■ j Lafayette B a y F1•; F21• F3 F4 12.q Ac ■.::_ ,_.. LF- 6/is `.., ., G1� G2�' G3' ' G4 ALF --P012 Owl- MEMN F.014 ' r I s ''t , ✓', ' i. -7' 43. -'''— Legend - t. � Orono City Limits Node Flooding the El Parcels Depths ll /o• No Flooding Railroad • a C 0 0 - 1 foot \' C Storm Manhole �s-Poi '� 01-2 feet 0 Catch Basin of o o� Sh' • Inlet > 2 feet e N i u • Outlet Pipe Q/ Qca LF -Y< 1 Storm Control " k B Structure 1 -2 z C �l. r t i /. �` ► Storm Pipe 2-3 C3 Watersheds 4OW 3 4:0 =ffb9 3172 J CB g 7 r 19 �{ f y A E A73` ci3 a• 0 500 Feet Cr _ C Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, o = a°1 ` ��o W , ` MnDNR, MnDOT, -- ' I O BOLTON l & MENK F 2 '�' ,�''Ae 11 ` Real People. Real Solutions. G2 UG3i June 2018 Page 26 of 32i 7 k e (1, N 00# # # Xk e M i!n n e t o n k a G3 Z Lake Minnetonka e netonka E4 SURFACE WATER 4*1 MANAGEMENT PLAN 4� 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP F4 �Leaend V0 * Orono City Limits Node Flooding 0 El Parcels Depths # Railroad 0 No Flooding 0 0 - i foot Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet BOLTON Catch Basin Inlet > 2 feet ........ . . . . . Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control <1 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2-3 C3 Watersheds 4OW 3 V0 500 Feet J Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, BOLTON & MENK F3 ........ . . . . . Real People. Real Solutions. Lake Minnetonka c: A f 't.4 ._. i fir. 45�7 _ G4 a SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Leaend yL Orono City Limits f4 E] Parcels ♦� - - �♦ Railroad -`rte ♦ Storm Manhole Catch Basin Inlet Ali ;� � ♦ �> Outlet Storm Control ' Structure ` ► Storm Pipe ♦� C3 Watersheds /r� ♦' Node Flooding Depths • No Flooding O 0 - 1 foot O 1-2 feet ® > 2 feet Pipe (Q / Qcap) <1 1-2 2-3 4OW 3 ♦ 0 500 ♦�� Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, '♦♦ MnDNR, MnDOT, ♦ /°1 BOLTON ♦�♦ & MENK ♦ Real People. Real Solutions. F� ♦♦ June 2018 Page 28 of I .. . ...... -7 3 6, 1; F -g� Z G1 rr Lake Minnetonkak a Y V SP ring • Park Bay ■ ■ • ■ 4F# 41* 4V# 4f* *4 4F# 4V# 4* ♦ G21 :q_0 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Legend a Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels V,3'LJM3 0 No Flooding 1 Railroad Bi ,1,1 �.B5 I, j 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin Cl'-- -,Q2 C3 C4 6 kciiv 12 0 > 2 feet bt, "P2 D3 P'4 y D5 * Outlet --F, -,"'E2 'I%E3 E4 < 1 F1'4 ---r'21 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe Gl'- .22�**,,G3—"—d4 C3 Watersheds GEW 3 Legend a Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding 1 Railroad 0 0 - i foot (e) Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin 0 > 2 feet * Inlet * Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2-3 C3 Watersheds GEW 3 0 500 111001111�� Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR,MnDOT 0 BOLTON & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. June 2018 G1 Page 29 of I F2 D hBE�o Carman Bay t� I Spring 6:{ .,r # Park Bays, #,� L Qo� ro Q � t �:a o T ok a B a y ''1 � Maple ' !_• vO ; � / .•' '� , / - # Jill 4, 1 M .# ♦ I ♦♦ ♦�♦ Lake ` 411 Minnetonka G3 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Leaend i - _ r - 0 500 - Feet $, Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, O& MLENK Real People. Real Solutions. G2 June 2018 Page 30 of Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths • No Flooding � Railroad O 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole Q 1-2 feet Catch Basin ® > 2 feet Inlet � Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) p< Storm Control 1 �i^•- Structure 1 -2 ;_ ► Storm Pipe 2-3 -; Watersheds 4OW 3 i - _ r - 0 500 - Feet $, Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, O& MLENK Real People. Real Solutions. G2 June 2018 Page 30 of t Lafayette Bay VIn 2 I I - - - t C F • — � r IAGI � � 1 + Pi, f • P J 0 b.l ''� ' "-�� � ;`� •sem' y ' ' l I ' '� ` . t �. Lake n+k Minnetonka) M1 f Co SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN cr. 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP G4 Leaend Orono City Limits Node Flooding L a k eDepths [� Parcels A • No Flooding Minnetonka Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot C Storm Manhole O 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin ®> 2 feet • Inlet • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 C3 Watersheds 4OW 3 0 500 Feet ` \ Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, i MnDNR, MnDOT, 1r 1 ' BOLTON & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. G 3 June Page 31 of 32 rinj Lake �A 'o/ :q_0 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN \' �" W" 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Leaend Orono City Limits F4 E Parcels Railroad 40 Storm Manhole 0 Catch Basin * Inlet * Outlet Storm Control Structure ► Storm Pipe C3 Watersheds r rinj Lake �A 'o/ :q_0 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN \' �" W" 10 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Leaend Node Flooding Depths 0 No Flooding 0 0 - i foot 0 1-2 feet 0 > 2 feet Pipe (Q / Qcap) <1 1 -2 2-3 4OW 3 0 500 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, OBOLTON & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. G ;.1 June 2018 Page 32 0f Orono City Limits E Parcels Railroad Storm Manhole 0 Catch Basin * Inlet * Outlet Storm Control Structure ► Storm Pipe C3 Watersheds Node Flooding Depths 0 No Flooding 0 0 - i foot 0 1-2 feet 0 > 2 feet Pipe (Q / Qcap) <1 1 -2 2-3 4OW 3 0 500 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, OBOLTON & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. G ;.1 June 2018 Page 32 0f A:pLo SURFACE WATER PLAN �jl 100 -YEAR j --- ----- EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP -7 T" t r n a 'J B Z&5I c '2� -j4 ";KZ5 3 - j12 L�, ----------- 4 ) 7n 1 D5 —D I j E2 E4 220 220 F3 9 F4 I - i'-,% G2i'*' 3- PC119---- ------- 12 524.2 Ac V, IT", d _- _ . ge, C, -A Q-A2� k Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding Elm �mu�um� E E Depths M nwim. III ■A jilIi 0 mom Ii 1i 0 E] Parcels "'K CE WAY 0 No Flooding Railroad aze V 7 0 1 foot 0 J. D Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet N Catch Basin Inlet > 2 feet 0 Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) < 1 Storm Control Structure 1 -2 -3 Z-- 2 Storm Pipe > 3 C3 Watersheds PC -PO2 168 0 Ac C' Feet 7�7� Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT A N6 -t:�f C, - in 0 500 IR - N. 'P Q7 PC -P07 C- . —5_.6l .3- c !1 618 A 6 A 70�3-4 {,• � i. ;' 61� e /boC- �,��, t ' ,4' ' - �I • • 'ver =4;6'cfis�°° h' r, - ,� '� �a _L7�.�;�es� _ % ] o u � \�G -��,� or {������..,, I,��.� ' ti I`i T � 1- _ J1 J _ 0 � OM' BOLTON V & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. 7.4 A 1 U , R-ow�y SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT Kafirrir a _— PLAN 100-YEAR a%I ? EXISTING CONDITION lr 1 L Pc , r ii `, ;- y 1 J LOCATION MAP `I TC - - _ - r_ • I 2249EEI ' , I 5 4 r r* 1' r L :I __ 1 , 1r _ l PC -P01 I I '• -,2209.5 AC , ., } 1 ! L a` _ 1 �'•i rrI I 7 I:. - - � - ':'r , ;! I-y.l - J fli ' Nd:'• I 1 f + f r 11 - _ - • ,ti -. 1 .7' , l J. 7��' — C• I I 7• 7 _ t' I 1 �. y, �r S I i l I I t I,n I — I I n i 2 .�' 4 B- B' 63 B B5 I . \ I S r I ,! f r „ f 'I� I '1'• 1, {1, r , - - `;, f / 1 w - 2 �►E�5 :...:, x �., , r � I . I _,.l .-,' , .. -- - -- 1� ;;" •� , ;.•.. r , rr _ I ..- : . , •. � ` _ x,. ,•. , ;,,, .:., - - - I,l, _ � _ ' r,,, r'• _ f ', _- .1 � v l ~ , w I q 'I ,'I C.1 C2_ C3 C4 514 D2" D3 D D5 y 1 J / l' if r- •l _ - � l - - I I. If - I E1 E2' ■E3 E4 - �.,, 1 + ( - :'� �, - ./, - • r.. '� -- L. ,g-, J. `r I%� — _ .;: ; r' i - r l�:., 1 tl fl, r- ` ♦ � F1� �F'�1: F3 F4 : 1 q r i i _ G1G3G4 , _ , , _ - r — .. . mss'; , 1 x. 1,.; ._ ,.. •� •--. ' - , iy r l!-! f , t' -- r ! , 'T 1 r ! \ r / L f _ , \t r r ' l , I 'I - , - t - If tuvxEso.. Yt tuwx o r,l T:d riF I• - -I I 1 , +) Al r 1.1='° , :\ \ ` ,'- L ` rte` t _ , - n 1 ' l..f I '•, r 1 , ;1 - ■■ A3. - i" Legend ' r , f L -.. ,I\ �� - — I'1 •�. ' 1 I. � t j1r .: '';r; _ '', 1ti" 5 fs STARKEY �. ■�� - �■ Orono City Limits Node Flooding epths Parcels .,w�i■■�■�. ��■■�■■�■� ■■�w■� ■ 77 -�.. L • No Flooding Railroad -J , O 0 - 1 foot ., • `�� ,;., �' StormManhole 2 feet : 09 o' •, ` ., '. : , '._. :. ..: r L _ -.. "., • , -,� „tel - s , . .V,',• -y / - d. .'�'. � w-042 �� .r •'! � 1�, , W i' \ —F I - Catch Basin 2 feet • Inlet Outlet Pie / ca _ _ , - ` 1 � I I : L` Storm Control 1 .\ 1 I I _—i'V' 'I. Structure 1 -2 ;- �...-I ': ,... , .' lil r"•.. .`��:. r. ., y I , - l I r I _ -_� t. I 2-3 r Y ' 168.OAcC3 Watersheds 3 : r 03 ` • • rr ,. 1 � Irrlr �; ,1 �, f I ,r-� , '� �^ -%:PC rPQ2' _ - 11 - I I •')112 ,: ' 1 1 l) !.'!"• SAX.. - _-_ - - - ._ 0 500 n, �amestown`Rd - --- Feet - - , - °i i, I Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, _ o o = LGA 001 i LC- Q3 40.1 AE .� B0 BOLTON - - L 184.0A ' I .r. �' _ f `I � 'r%i a[ 11ENK A2 .I r i •I' Real People. Real Solutions. N, B, 11 \- v. p' =� 3 OAS, rB2 Lake 1 a s s e n Qo 83 May 2018 Page 2 of 3 L5. 211 c& pLo SURFACE WATER PLAN f. 100 YEAR VIM V I'" "N EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP 01" Ti r -,rAr pLo SURFACE WATER PLAN U - - - - - - 0. IJ j 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION % LOCATION MAP LL JS 1586. 'v- ---------- li _A,4 -3, L j —A. 25— • ij! 4i Bf BLZ- E C1' -r. ----C2 C C4 Ik 2 D3 4 D —51" \D 5 J.3 -E�2 bE�l E4 -2 0 11a F4 G1 4 I j. 73 2 A c j rv. j", --A3 A4 v f Legend N rY IP Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths El Parcels No Flooding LL - Railroad 0 0 1 foot Storm Manhole V O1 2 feet .6 J, N Catch Ba sin Inlet > 2 feet 72�7 Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) < 1 110 Storm Control Structure 1 -2 Storm Pipe 2-3 > 3 C3 Watersheds 0 500 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT -1 % -,-. BOLTON IIENK Ailrr L •A4 /,11�1 Real People. Real Solutions. ACO� B3 3 SURFACE WATER pLo 04, � MANAGEMENT PLAN 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION S", "VO LOCATION MAP .0; -5 W 8 /v, j j N b J j:' - 611 l,i 1 IVY q,; A rj Mooney Lake 7 nd4 J �ij V Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths L-1 Parcels 0 No Flooding �4 Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole ----------- -2 feet 01 N Catch Basin > 2 feet * Inlet ILL 1`4U LL PE * Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) < 1 Storm Control 43 Structure 1 -2 2-3 Storm Pipe A 3 C3 Watersheds -4,LJ irrl�v 4 oaa KA, 500 0 Rove H Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, LL F�1 O ■ MnDNR, MnDOT �j i�Jv (j ",,M. BOLTON IENK --P ti yJ 26. . . . . . . R al People. Real Solutions. A5 M J) I; 1 1, LL-• j4 Aic ;j, i 1. �p 1010 C -f 1 .4 . e -S 0 0 N . . ... PC -P l t, Rd63.8 A C C r r r - -- - ---------- .. .... .. SC 0 0 74.j A)C, 5 4L pLo4, SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT 0 PLAN 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP w�_AA _&4_ A B5 Q C3 C4 I PC-pl4,,' �j n no PC_P11 V —M� D2 Dai D4 D5 PG_15116 40.0 Ac • E�3L E4 J_ 16)J!Wit' r VA Ke ?CIP 4 9 F4 01 -7 V1 S % 7 r C k P -M t F, �c SB. , 130.0 3 'f, 132 J, Q700- Legend O 03 Cur Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths El Parcels No Flooding V Railroad 0 1 foot 0 Storm Manhole op" I �j■ly _F Catch Basin 0 1-2 feet SB -P02 : s", -P02 > 2 feet nIle 22. JJ Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) j < 1 Storm Control 1 -2 Structure 2-3 Storm Pipe B-Pol, 3 C3 Watersheds S -10 4&8A( HIPPEWA'-L FF 5A �%C, J 0 500 Feet ti SB -P03, j Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT _P2? X CS -- 0 q zT111 ... o O & MENK 6 -P2 09.'0 0 4 Real People. Real Solutions. B1 i S 6 j j 0- 157.3 Ad J 0 oAArr SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT -9 11i 02 CAI -z PLAN II"o L 0 c 100 -YEAR lA -ill"IlKiniTit"NKI IQTIKII- I LOCATION MAP cfs Lake CilassR-h T16; LC -011 184.OAC f PC -P03 2Ac If 46,13_4q I B5 i J, V- 4 E�5 12 g D4 D5 -OAC `*hE - 3 E4 F3.., 9 F4..;or P6 i *4 Wb l--. -j, �VVAY-ZATAIIBLODAVV!T j 2� TB3 1131 B Legend V! Y Orono City Limits Node Flooding j - --------- Depths L-1 Parcels 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 U_H09 X 1 foot ", --- ------- ------- r- Storm Manhole f -- ---- ---- 0 1-2 feet F--] Catch Basin V > 2 feet z Inlet PC_P09 Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) 2i �'-4 Ac < Storm Control ntr 0 -A� 15 8 Ac --- --- Structure 1 -2 2-3 T t X Storm Pipe C 101- > 3 A C3 Watersheds 71 -10 cts LC 034 1 '6A. 6 tr-23' 1 206.6 A c G -7. Ac ,Ir r__0 500 Feet f Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT l'11L `1\' A� X �j 2 BOLTON F y ; o OC IENK Real People. Real Solutions. B2 T g� C i W I V (A2PQ 4", %) � pLo SURFACE WATER 6 ':'.MA G_x E:b'3 3.. .Ac —.. /r N�- GwAA ••-444�[ G u 1. •Esio�.y-E..T, ._. ; _ �2 - C.M_— .. : 55 tlE NF • T ♦rfIr aktkr•c1 222 3 .D i G PLAN L--23 1 910Q'36 a 100-YEAR EXISTING CONDITION '; W, J Ad LOCATION MAP h % Q100�1 CfScfsC Z fs CfS -7 r 0 -7- Ad L LJ -3-4 2-A > 113 .134 B5 '0 C z L C3 C4 D5 1, ,D2 D3 DLL-AC 1 r-2 .-E.3 4 E 24.6 4'c 2,i-'- F3 1 01 74 4-0 ------- C �j -'I-- 2.0 19 LL— U L 0 jo�63 L Qjjo�63 Q 29' -- - --- - ------ - - — -:� — - 0130=67 - —f 7�_:_ ': - - — - i : f- - , I - 4 Air U-07! CZ, Y 177 85Ac 132 �2' A�4, LL 17. ��A Legend -078 4-L-191 % 7 -k 16.9 Ad I Ap <: El! z L Orono City Limits Node Flooding ,AQ j Depths 3 3,Ad,._ -295- Ad, El Parcels ­1 f 0 No Flooding ",L472 /-,J Railroad 7 -AbY 0 0- 1 foot (w) Storm Manhole yAc 0 1-2 feet 178 kin LL-194;) 1 J v, 2 9.2 Ad, N Catch Basin 5, L --- ■- --- 39-in 10.4A Inlet --24 `in > 2 feet tq ZC L Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) —.4-&,Ac dA� -- - --- Storm Control < -- ----- --- --12 --- --- ruc ure Storm Pipe >3 89 C3 Watersheds 2.0.6.6 A J/1 4 -089 0 0 500 AD1 0 Ad 101,- 4_ VJ 111111111119�� Feet vV00 a Iv, e n, _vV00 Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT C� 0, L Ad L.1 0 Qhy '12,fAc,% A ils C J12 O1 BOLTON 6 ak 11ENK Real People. Real Solutions. $A& 4� H -7 21�C8 A c 5. T B 3 a -08 C -.,!? Ac 7,C4' May 2018 Page 8 of 3 17. 47 -P - ti C21� V-7 9.6 7 -R. SURFACE WATER *A)10 MANAGEMENT 61 PLAN v"' 100 YEAR j-" Q100-225 �f� EXISTING CONDITION 7 \J LOCATION MAP e-BlVd 7: t -a -k -e - Long i, $ - j. ri 6. ...... ....... 61.4, r. —9, 8y3 'Pit" k Ilkti/ —3N TL -2 Ac/ow lb -7 OFV. 77-7 ""j i? C3' 01 w 000 Legend J "000 Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths • �eu El Parcels Railroad • No Flooding 0 1f 0 % 0 Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet 0 Catch Basin > 2 feet Inlet Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) Storm Control < 1 A Structure 1 -2 Storm Pipe 2-3 C3 Watersheds > 3 0 500 -4— Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, 1 t- 1 L MnDNR, MnDOT ti 'y J Ax -3 IN i16 O BOLTON ♦ .r' O clik 11ENK Real People. Real Solutions. B4 kc ,A4 q?�o A' SURFACE WATER pLo MANAGEMENT 1n 4 PLAN o 1i gg . . . . . . . - 100 YEAR 222: EXISTING CONDITION I 1'"A LOCATION MAP i i44 'lV SPY !IN —77 LLP20,-- 488 QI 0 0 f5 7h� Long -L ca -w e 47.7,40 C- 5 JrJ fr 4,bR53_ - ♦ 24.7 & -1 V". LL -R LL r T _k3, A& A�4 �B4 T C2_ - C4 dia rd C 3 CI D3 D2 6,4 y D5 2 E4 "00 7,� F-7 77T!7"' j 3 3 1A. r. P, i. 11 Legend "KIP, Orono City Limits Node Floodt. ing 152 Depths Parcels No Flooding �a I, +r;'�/•J / HA -60 P50 N Catch Basin _7 > LJ 2 feet Inlet Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) < Ad Storm Control r M Structure 1 -2 0�LJ 2-3 Storm Pipe V_ > 3 A - C3 Watersheds J PL -PO a -l0 500 31 7 MM Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT BOLTON Lu ak 11ENK 7�, — OM 4 L Real People. Real Solutions. B5 0,; f ----------- j, ; 8 �iAi��' 1 '.1 4 1 0 Z4 •May 2018 Page 10 of 3 5- 7 7 7 ' - kfl'� %�C 4 V, �s-700 -B-i 4, SURFACE WATER 0 PLAN `�X 100 YEAR -P20 EXISTING CONDITION 4Ac P, "Y.Um LOCATION MAP .IIi 3 Q10()-736 cfs V v .IjC1 Br PC •25 PC 0 '5 1A Jl SB -020 157.3 AC -7� j!T (�100 '20 V.S,Aic f �q V\ .2141 -ciii - 41 C2" J 'Legend Z Orono City Limits Node Floo tPoo o0 ■ 00 4-7 dipng Depths �z El Parcels 0 No Flooding � 1' On r ' ' i ). 00000 Railroad NA 0 0 - 1 foot V., 4, Storm Manhole 6 X o. 0 1-2 feet E Catch Basin * Inlet > 2 feet Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) A Storm Cont rol < 1 Structure 1 -2 32 oroo az _ NORTH ARM DRAW -Z— Storm Pipe 2-3 > 3 C3 Watersheds q 0 9 c" Q ov N 0 0 500 Feet - - - ---------- - - - Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT A M 2 BOLTON kA -065 &MENK 6 469.1 Ac Real People. Real Solutions. 7. zi ✓A-C�, i 1; i, dR b1liii 1t D1'- l 41 D2 ay 2018 Page 11 of 32 Acl'i I'll ", 71) 17, --N\ .1 1 2 ,JEI3- 0 B4k B5 C2 C3 C4 I 12 D1, -,,D2 D3 -D4 y D5 E 21 E4 —117 ..i Ft-,TF2ii-F3 F4 G1• G ' "G '-G4 'Legend Z Orono City Limits Node Floo tPoo o0 ■ 00 4-7 dipng Depths �z El Parcels 0 No Flooding � 1' On r ' ' i ). 00000 Railroad NA 0 0 - 1 foot V., 4, Storm Manhole 6 X o. 0 1-2 feet E Catch Basin * Inlet > 2 feet Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) A Storm Cont rol < 1 Structure 1 -2 32 oroo az _ NORTH ARM DRAW -Z— Storm Pipe 2-3 > 3 C3 Watersheds q 0 9 c" Q ov N 0 0 500 Feet - - - ---------- - - - Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT A M 2 BOLTON kA -065 &MENK 6 469.1 Ac Real People. Real Solutions. 7. zi ✓A-C�, i 1; i, dR b1liii 1t D1'- l 41 D2 ay 2018 Page 11 of 32 Acl'i I'll ", 71) 17, --N\ A S8- 06 39' Ac Qove �C_ Wo 1. i i57_ 57_ i57_ B2,) - SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT i4 PLANMI ,LIU 34 0 100 -YEAR 206.6 A c O EXISTING CONDITION O 9 /gyp LOCATION MAP Lu T �-_ Cie� tl 'A I Q1 efe 66, A: -AC 2 _A4 Lk "H B5 A"( .C1 C3 Cz 2 C 9�11,0_ 131, -,P2 D3 D4D5 L A" ti 3j hE J�.' E4 F471 100!7x I'' A i�LCE S& 33 7 3 Ac' 313 13 -64 0 2 -in Af M, Ql� Legend sa2c 1_ 14 07 17. R -P14 C Orono City Limits Node Flooding O El Parcels Depths JI:' L 64 ji. 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot r -D Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet Catch Basin > 2 feet P34 Inlet 141 P20` Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) _J Y'. t:aStla Ke z>f f i Storm Control < T Structure 1 -2 -3 1 A4 X Storm 2-3 122 �f� 3 Pipe "Q100 fs _77� 0100 ,403 C3 Watersheds S t U\b b s B:a- y- - y. ✓roo 7 "IP 2 -4 6Ac Sussex S 0 500 C Y AC Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT L Cf, MB -P 1 0 BOLTON SB<075 J1 8.9. -c wq� 01 I .8.9 At BA & MENK 1 00 1 1 1 __Q SB f 2 f Real People. Real Solutions. Ac C2 17:_ May 2018 MB -P02 Page 12 of 32 C6 66 7an 1�n, "L, '132 L L B, 'T! N. El 2,- LL�265-- SURFACE WATER 04 A, LC, 20. PLAN 77 C� 100 -YEAR -P5 EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP 0 'IV 176 - TL -P .LC rl"� 5- 16 1.6 d 25& 3,9A- WATERTOWN RD...... . . AC; so B �FRn L.v C I C2 C3 C12 RC D D 4 D5 I. P 1=4 A F4 0 olin 0- Devin [a 6 G 1'*,% G --G4 h I Ir /A V. Fl., C -Aj L Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths ?; i' Parcels :?07 ?07 0 No Flooding 04 A Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot •Storm Manhole 0 0 1-2 feet • Catch Basin FR P3i!t > 2 feet • Inlet Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) A :4 M, Storm Control < :z A� ----4V-- Structure 1-2 P Storm Pipe 2-3 7'1 3 24-' C"- C3 I C, Watersheds 29. c V -wlt- -ba�(' f 5 J5. _P "I ILI, 0 500 P06 Jn:Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin C ounty, MnDNR, MnDOT --k-1 ji, '-P0 Y �: -;';, � � �� r Real People. Real Solutions. -FR--P�29 5 68 • Ac' Aq' A BOLTON IIENK C 3 F Ir P-11 77. OA9 4 1135, 1, Fn I, SURFACE WATER n4n PLAN +1 � n1 1 I - . 1 -- � O t ' O _ •�i '1, l J9 , ! 1,.r�r-,t`• � `�3. `1. 100 YEAR --- EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Z.it IC 28.0 A >; r fs TL01 - TT IM j'J t Ysj z 'L. A W BB-POI B P01 D2D3 D5 E4 11 —F2 F3 F4 B-P02 1- G A % r-\ 1 t -W6 -P rL 38 N 11B- h. 122.5 A c N—� L • Legend BP.04 '6.5 AC, X-- Orono City Limits Node Flooding 0100ZI0ffs V Depths T4,20 0 L-1 Parcels TL-25 0 No Flooding 47.0 AC Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet 136-1003 E Catch Basin BB-P03 * Inlet .4 A c(2) • B-vu& S% 9A < Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) > 2 feet Storm Control B rl Structure 1 -2 67.0 Ac Storm Pipe 2-3 v---------- ov 1; > 3 C3 Watersheds 7. B P11 a TL --- 7 -'M A*P09 C G(g 0 )500 Feet A 1, O ✓ i '�JtI'' rn�`�__�� __BB-P07 v Source: City of Orono, HeCounty, 8E ...... r 8 MnDNR, MnDOT EN P �ko > BOLTON i kk A4 1ENK C 4 Real People. Real Solutions. 11)3 g P z A c j", PA 49 LOA SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP PL r -:Y -P06 OT f3 2AC• -P -P10 0 A4 Ac�� M1 is 413 B5 rl r. 12 C,3 C4 Q < —51" \D2 D3 Q'4 d ' E1 E2 bE� E4 It lL 3 F4 41 G 2 -*01 '1 G 14 A Cl. M 0 E 4. L-A A v r.P 4 'W Legend J. Orono City Limits Node Floo ji I, din 0 "fill 0 7-.'.0 A c Depths El Parcels - ', I $No Flooding Railroad 1; gfFc 1 foot 0 0 . ...... Storm Manhole A" 0 1-2 feet sin N Catch Ba M > 2 feet Inlet Outlet Pipe (Q QcaJ. •`:`' �'� •'� .. /' r, •f,. _ p) < 1 Storm Control e. Structure 1 -2 . ....... Storm Pipe -3 2 > 3 C3 Watersheds -J •0 500 Feet _ It -► eline OS�— Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT - - -------- K V t 'J - is' - -- ---- M1' V ■ O BOLTON jr & MENK 10 Real People. Real Solutions. =z 1 :ii ni k e C5 D4 I T-nd a 1 e 0.b 11! r VP M-2 SURFACE WATER PLAN 3 100 -YEAR M, EXISTING CONDITION FL -P03 LOCATION MAP Q l FLidii rs yS., 7�\ I. 12 Z -.�._A,3, _A. tl c B5 II 3 C 2 D3 4 D5 fDl "�'D E4 J1 2 N 141_[ North A�fm -S -pog .,3 1 Rq,' lop,-223cfs'- D -A" ca D2 N� Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths E] Parcels 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole Catch Basin F-- 0 1-2 feet > 2 feet Inlet A� ,I rV­ Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 1Storm Pipe 2-3 3 C3 Watersheds Forilbst Lake 0 500 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT nffi BOLTON Li I Real People. Real Solutions. .......... w2 t Ar m ay Page 16 of 3 E2 C1 _P 3. QC$: \ SURFACE WATER iz, = MANAGEMENT i Q,00_ry PLAN SB -P1 _ 1 x ' 2.9 �6 ` ' s.sAG.. .; J.. - i,, r rn 100 -YEAR A EXISTING CONDITION Stub", +t Ub 6.OAc J / t j LOCATION MAP `I 1 ` r : \ f / /. ). - � it r - i� - I\ .._ r • 7 l 1 - 1 - i F w F 'r 4 M -- 62 B3 5tl l • I ;: " . "- r - • 'ra`A � /; � . -__ , i oroa sa orsr, �_ -_ C1 RC2 � _{-C3 C4 �►C:5 12 1.._.._ \ I 3) 24 y D5 11-0-34 •-E1E2' ■E3 E4 )Y�B-PQ6 I -% _ • isr' er'' NA Oa. /,\\\1 \ 173 aff F1� F2' ! F3 F4 lot OAc, , •. G 1 `kG3— ' G4 F 4. \ , " , D1 1 \ D3: —FL - 0 Parcels • No Flooding t + Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot - ; \ Storm Manhole O 1-2 feet Catch Basin \ MB -o- > 2 feet M a x w e// B a �/\ 463 $ Inlet Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) I Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 4100=56 cf I t � Storm Pipe 2 - 3 - > 3 C3 Watersheds G \ 0 500 Feet - Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, I MnDNR, MnDOT, CYPQ'k _ 9:6Ac 1 \ — — .:ay r O BOLTON &MTO D2 t� it ��_ Real People. Real Solutions. E2 May 2018 Page 17 of 3 °i� r 1 ' •• t t t��in I I I , ,I North Arm I � y E1 \ '� —FL - 0 Parcels • No Flooding t + Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot - ; \ Storm Manhole O 1-2 feet Catch Basin \ MB -o- > 2 feet M a x w e// B a �/\ 463 $ Inlet Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) I Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 4100=56 cf I t � Storm Pipe 2 - 3 - > 3 C3 Watersheds G \ 0 500 Feet - Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, I MnDNR, MnDOT, CYPQ'k _ 9:6Ac 1 \ — — .:ay r O BOLTON &MTO D2 t� it ��_ Real People. Real Solutions. E2 May 2018 Page 17 of 3 s. v j C SURFACE WATER 'k 0 -P30 MANAGEMENT -129�2 A �'X Ayy 10,3 Ac 3.0• PLAN N. 100 -YEAR 4, A,,� - ;,- 4.1� J, i - I - Tk,-P03 EXISTING CONDITION 0 AZ P,�: P" ZIAF. r LOCATION MAP -P1 5 -P C NO 0100�10,, Ip - "A IF j Aig f HE 12 3, WARV C .4 J R �� 133 tl y B5 =R -P25 % 3 21.5 Ac TL -U7 4-J) 4 f D5 1 1.,� E2�- E4 C�- Y �0' F3 -�01 �V �P Of 0 0 j 'b J; .446 Y1,0 G1, A / FR -156 IDA, 20.4 Ac Q C) 4u < - j 4 tl�4 3 Q- T �4 Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths El Parcels 'k. \ _ f -� r "f, ° 9� ��F,fo s i `,' � +' , i t ~p>s 0 No Flooding q, Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot _7A L P Storm Manhole J7 0 1-2 feet TL;p Catch Basin M a x 0 Inlet > 2 feet w -e , 0 Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) B a Y �0-rench Lake aloo< 1 Q700=28 c7� Storm Control 1! 11V k� 1 -2 Structure FR -P24 Q1 077,' --- ------ fS -3 Storm Pipe 186.4 Ac 2 V. >3 Watersheds Q 0 500 9 2 Ac J 111111111E�� Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, �MnDNRy , MnDOT •6 , T1 ApONKAAVE o, 9 aA'�'- BOLTON - ----------- C?; IIENK 2 0 -,17 Real People. Real Solutions. D 3 Q1 Y E4 May 2018 Page 18 of 3 C3 �:. C4 s - , BB -P1 ti 3 9 TL 60Ac ti � � "... �' �'i 1' ''�` �..:.-.. ._.. • _ ._, �� � .,- � �• , ,,;��, 0-279 c/s - - ' , , , , N s ti oo -OZI''JJ , �@K, � o . • � � . ,,2 F - SJ r`� ,::n -- s O '•may t. � - r po P� 1 R , I ix 5 ry- G ,� �- ^ -� ,i, a,'� ,♦ li lit' !f _ �10r• r f1. _ p 0100> VOID . ' 8,9A6 , PRO No A -- - r,rn� � � r.� I old• - - 5 48P - ! c5 �� SURFACE WATER ■ 'o MANAGEMENT -`: F ndaPLAN 100 -YEAR a EXISTING CONDITION 7 LOCATION MAP Browns Bay Lake Minnetonka 1 00 r% �8o\v B I B'3 B3 G � B5 I G1 C2 C3 C4 �►C�5 6-1, 02 D3 D4 4 t , + Railroad O 0 - 1 foot `E1 'E2 . ■E3 E4 r�� F1 �F2 • F3 _ F4 l z�; Y D3,si� Pipe (Q / Qcap) Tangy er Lake Storm Control < 1 b Smith Bay Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 f G3 Watersheds -' 3 V \ Real People. Real Solutions. - E3 `'i V+ May 2018 Page 19 of 3 G) 38.4/a,0 38-4A,0,--, m a Lake Minnetonka 1 Z .: 4.i �A„4 q5 B I B'3 B3 ,Bi4: B5 I G1 C2 C3 C4 �►C�5 6-1, 02 D3 D4 D5 t , + Railroad O 0 - 1 foot `E1 'E2 . ■E3 E4 r�� F1 �F2 • F3 _ F4 t, I D5 c Legend () Orono City Limits Node Flooding Parcels Depths J . •. _ • No Flooding •- � + Railroad O 0 - 1 foot SourceHennepinCity of Orono, County, O Storm Manhole O 1-2 feet Catch Basin ® > 2 feet • Inlet Y • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 b Smith Bay Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 G3 Watersheds -' 3 za c 0 500 Feet J . •. _ •- � SourceHennepinCity of Orono, County, L 58 s' MnDNR, MnDOT, S O Y b Smith Bay �1 BOLTON & MENK D4 Real People. Real Solutions. - E3 `'i V+ May 2018 Page 19 of 3 T R -ow SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP r * Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding T- 7 • (D- Storm Manhole Bf B3 613- B4 B 5: * Inlet C)", C3 C4 15�*' U2 * Outlet -15-11, '' ID2YD 3 D4,j Structure kEl . E 3, E4 0-71 4OW 3 Q -2V ---F3 F F4 G1' G2-,01 •"00 ........ Legend * Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot (D- Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet N Catch Basin * Inlet is > 2 feet * Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2-3 C3 Watersheds 4OW 3 0 500 111111111111111E�� Feet N" Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, ( D BOLTON & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. D5 'i May 2018 Page 20 of 3 510. 7; Lu D2 SURFACE WATER D MANAGEMENT PLAN ,f 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP e E2 Legend o r e s t Orth k Orono City Limits Node Flooding r I, E1 Parcels • No Flooding Ac + Railroad O 0 - 1 foot ,e itis O Storm Manhole h r s qfs C ° } . 1-2 feet s > 2 feet oo� „ F7 41 • Inlet p • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) rJ��� sotq 1•-' < 1 Storm Control Structure 1 -2 ff wErsB-sT � I 7; Lu D2 SURFACE WATER D MANAGEMENT PLAN ,f 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP e E2 Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding r I, E1 Parcels • No Flooding Ac + Railroad O 0 - 1 foot 7; Lu D2 SURFACE WATER D MANAGEMENT PLAN ,f 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP B3 I �,Bi4 B5tl C3 : C4 C:5 D3j. D,4 y D5 E3, E4 F3 F4 133H—d4 7 e E2 Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding B3 I �,Bi4 B5tl C3 : C4 C:5 D3j. D,4 y D5 E3, E4 F3 F4 133H—d4 7 FP - 0 500 Feet i Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, l .. MnDNR, MnDOT, 40 BOLTON M & MENK 1 Real People. Real Solutions. E 1 F1 F2 May 2018 Page 21 of 3 �fJ -- E2 Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depths I, E1 Parcels • No Flooding Ac + Railroad O 0 - 1 foot ,e itis O Storm Manhole O O �Q. N Catch Basin 1-2 feet s > 2 feet oo� „ F7 41 • Inlet p • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) rJ��� sotq 1•-' < 1 Storm Control Structure 1 -2 ff wErsB-sT I ',I ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 C3 Watersheds t ' 3 FP - 0 500 Feet i Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, l .. MnDNR, MnDOT, 40 BOLTON M & MENK 1 Real People. Real Solutions. E 1 F1 F2 May 2018 Page 21 of 3 �fJ D1 3, North \Ar m / 6 apf5 ori :E11 I � • � r gg_POINT'RD we ae i 4 0.1 li• i A�- .. v 7= 1 Q 3 est Arm > 4 S 1 26 4 LC s y F1 i / rl <p�R p P c to\fit D2 Maxwell -Bay coos 1.8Ac �=' c. - a�Je 2 f5. , CY v -ops ' •�� �i=J N a •° Op 037 r f oaooLta 3O�G..` 0 BoHNs',P v C X62 N f ,- I,e % •� cy n 0700 35 cfs ''! Lake Minnetonka SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP • 11 �1 .:i43 �A„4 q5 B -1c B B3,B4 B5tl Zd r Depths C1 - C2 C3 : �"" 12 C4 CS D1. -,D2 D1 D4 [ID5] 0 0 - 1 foot ♦� „ t `E1 A E2 ■E3 ' E4 Catch Basin ♦ F1 FL r ! F3 F4 ' ♦♦ Outlet ,G11! ♦♦ Storm Control < 1 ♦� Structure 1 -2 E3 t Legend 10 ♦♦ ♦♦ Aw Orono City Limits Node Flooding L-1 Parcels Depths ♦♦� • No Flooding ♦♦ + Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot ♦� Storm Manhole O 1-2 feet Crystal Ba ♦�♦ Catch Basin ♦ _> Inlet > 2 feet ♦♦ Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) ♦♦ Storm Control < 1 ♦� Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 ♦� �♦> C:3 Watersheds 3 ' Y 1♦ 0 500 .♦ Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, ♦♦�'�',. ' MnDNR, MnDOT, r` 1'♦ _ r BOLTON O&MENK E2 hn' r Real People. Real Solutions. ` F2 ■ - _•^ -- = F3- May 2018 Page 22 of 3 0 12 FR F —A.4— • 'MIT C41 _,C 4 3 4 C4 12 bl, `'CD2 D3J - 4 L a k e _FRP 2 t- 12-j, FRE�Pfg rp, P24 F T. 18,4-A6 F U) 0 V. BI 2 6 c 96-259 01 SURFACE WATER ���� MANAGEMENT PLAN 100 -YEAR j EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Smith Bay n n e t o n k a E4 1000, 41%* • Legend *4% Orono City Limits Node Flooding •4w Parcels Depths L--]Parcels 4*4 0 No Flooding Y. Railroad SBI 0 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole -2 feet •41** F- Catch Basin > 2 feet * Inlet * Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) Storm Control < Structure 1 -2 Storm Pipe --- 2-3 >3 C3 Watersheds soft 7.1 fta ell Ism k"t; fi♦0 500 Feet -3 •Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, 'J MnDNR, MnDOT -111� �k BOLTON v. J E3 & 11ENK " X N ------ Real People. Real Solutions. 'J 1172 8 Page 23 of 3 - 12 ..:A3 F —A.4— • 'MIT C41 _,C 4 3 4 C4 12 bl, `'CD2 D3J - 4 11 �D5 hE E2 E4 Abb -4 Ti J— n n e t o n k a E4 1000, 41%* • Legend *4% Orono City Limits Node Flooding •4w Parcels Depths L--]Parcels 4*4 0 No Flooding Y. Railroad SBI 0 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole -2 feet •41** F- Catch Basin > 2 feet * Inlet * Outlet Pipe (Q Qcap) Storm Control < Structure 1 -2 Storm Pipe --- 2-3 >3 C3 Watersheds soft 7.1 fta ell Ism k"t; fi♦0 500 Feet -3 •Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, 'J MnDNR, MnDOT -111� �k BOLTON v. J E3 & 11ENK " X N ------ Real People. Real Solutions. 'J 1172 8 Page 23 of 3 - E a 0 0 6 •* �"" 2 `oft D4 rr- r `r•-_ - o + �a `, n � y F3 D ■ RLoM SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT t PLAN t�'h! SHiIFe'. 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Legend �2 1 .Lal° .143 A4 5 �B5tl 81 82' -J6-3- . Bi4. C1' — C2 C3 s C4 6 0►G5 12 D1 D2 D3 D4 y D5 �`E1 ' E2 ■E�� 1 E4 , is > 2 feet - Pipe (Q / Qcap) F1; Fly• ! F3� F4 G1` ► Storm Pipe C3 Watersheds 4OW 3 0 500 Feet 0 Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, �x Q& MLENK Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding + Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet N Catch Basin • Inlet is > 2 feet • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control — ` 1 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 C3 Watersheds 4OW 3 0 500 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, Q& MLENK E4 Real People. Real Solutions. May 2018 Page 24 of 3 Black Lake ■ ` ` E1 `---9�H-- `' ---------------i cl y _ ,`.i y I.I .'I.' . '! y �� _'r'• r _ -- - - I � p llli•5 I t � 1 � - _.__ i� !� f`., r �'� ..- �] l�.i -_ -.,r � I� {If ' ���'- r��' )� � •?- '1 L,, r i -_- —, I _- - r'7. � --- -r .H �`.. :t�� _- � , ,_ - ���'•. , .:ice'' � ' I � {' F R.o SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT I PLAN 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP g12 A45tl �BS' B B B31��4 West Arm C1 C2_ C3 ♦w C4 C5 12 D 51 132 D3 `---9�H-- `' ---------------i cl y _ ,`.i y I.I .'I.' . '! y �� _'r'• r _ -- - - I � p llli•5 I t � 1 � - _.__ i� !� f`., r �'� ..- �] l�.i -_ -.,r � I� {If ' ���'- r��' )� � •?- '1 L,, r i -_- —, I _- - r'7. � --- -r .H �`.. :t�� _- � , ,_ - ���'•. , .:ice'' � ' I � {' F R.o SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT I PLAN 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP 1 - ♦ Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding El Parcels Depths 1 No Flooding 1 + Railroad ++ O 0 - 1 foot ' D Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet _-' ♦ N Catch Basin • Inlet is > 2 feet • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) II _<1 S p r I tr g Storm Control P a rk Structure 1 -2 Black Lake T. ■ ►Storm Pipe 2- 3 B E 41W a Watersheds 3 ■ 0 500 ■ - Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, 0z BOLTON r`'L &MENK F 1 1-_: ' 1 f ` Real People. Real Solutions. May 2018 Page 25 of 3 g12 A45tl �BS' B B B31��4 C1 C2_ C3 ♦w C4 C5 12 D 51 132 D3 y D5 yE-1 E2 . ■E3 E4 ® r. - • F3�� � F4 �� ! �' G1' G2"' °93— ' G4 rt� k x i 7 1 - ♦ Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding El Parcels Depths 1 No Flooding 1 + Railroad ++ O 0 - 1 foot ' D Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet _-' ♦ N Catch Basin • Inlet is > 2 feet • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) II _<1 S p r I tr g Storm Control P a rk Structure 1 -2 Black Lake T. ■ ►Storm Pipe 2- 3 B E 41W a Watersheds 3 ■ 0 500 ■ - Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, 0z BOLTON r`'L &MENK F 1 1-_: ' 1 f ` Real People. Real Solutions. May 2018 Page 25 of 3 E E2 N= ` �� SURFACE WATER r : - wag L , - t - I %- MANAGEMENT a L — PLAN ,, 1K44I.i1.;e:t , t-,- . sI--�t ,•�l- II t i i [iI j■r. ._%':��-,'iI-ri..- r,',',�_ _- ,.- ..f;.,.-� ,,,!.._.^. - r�=l _I },? .i O'_Y.:_:teGr, .2'ir= a,,.�4.I'-."'`'o-,�:,.",,,T'I .Z �,� '�:ti 9�' + L�_1 _oh9f., .mo_i_ !,o• l s.� .1D. _r� -•.. ::",<rors.�.�.�e�i.-�'N\�rIOor • �.-J-_.c4.;-,.�, v `_ ,, .Ab. :v'-ce,1 '.r•'.;-• --w>¢¢ �2--•I': -_� ' _'; 3 I .. __.-cP,,, o.¢�¢�"o. ' l:y,=`�%..i.i::_r. ' 's. �_'o;. ,. _ ._-_ -0�' ,A� _c_ I.. :,�.:�:S', ,h- B0,•1-V,, -'' fs5-2p Fs pFosP V-b- �P•:c�Ii�vtr. s .}� `}' ,_;�1, /O. 2O2r;1 :8'_t e ^l I:Trf■=-_6��:\ '`1a �•0.A;0�_u `_' �4�C-'i7p • _'• f _ S`\ .� LIV / ;■lr`� mo.� ,r;t�." {-i' 1ff■"+/'� 'I ; Af ./ I° ��•. _•. ' J r 1•,��t -,-;F /\ ' �ii■ - - -=y i, — _-- - • f_- ��1■- • rII _ . i .� • I .GCEF~,22222Y.�I _ � ■ I�EGC" F - EF+1t�i4 4 00-YEAR 0 YEA� R 26.Ac Crystal Bay EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Pol ORD Ly B B5 24 D1 D5CRSALLIVINGSTON AVELafayette Bay CB4B z LF-P PICAVE 1114 orelineD116o=25 ,s F1 F3stLegend 7 -19 Orono City Limits Node Flooding Depthsp8 -1 Parcels No Flooding CK ST Railroad O0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole 1- , I j J UoQ p ' _; 7;F II [e ot[ oo4 iNs <-1..o\rsa00 . `2yi- .'-. .1 ri/e'• , ��,�:` - ' • ' _- ��`. � e � 1-\-I_�. + t , . � -_ - _•• 2 f ee t A� ®CatchBassn Inlet ' 2 feet CB-,Pr Outlet Pipe (Q Qca p) Storm Control 1 ` Structure 1 -2 2-3S p r r7 Storm Pipe P a r k Watersheds '3 Bay Carman Bay 0 500Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT4 t ti b G ,� l >BOLTON ENK F2 Real People. Real Solutions. r �r G1 G2 UG3. May 2018 Page 26 of 3 ] 1 � -- _ A•._ • fsf.:-_ . . ,. A: ..; __ _ _ _-- `\- - -fes\ ,��. � --. E p e -70) 0 C� f 'J "j, h! La e Minnetonka L a f a e t t k e ,I IIhnetonka k e M AM n e t o n k a \'J G3 E4 F4 �:4-0SURFACE WATER 1!�0 MANAGEMENT PLAN 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Legend Orono City Limits L-1 Parcels Railroad Storm Manhole Catch Basin Inlet Outlet Storm Control Structure ► Storm Pipe C3 Watersheds Node Flooding Depths 0 No Flooding 0 0 - 1 foot 0 1-2 feet 0 > 2 feet Pipe (Q / Qcap) <1 1 -2 2-3 ?3 WI 0 500 Feet 6 Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT BOLTON T" ak MEN F ,_,.,.,._ Real People. Real Solutions. ff G4 May 2018 Page 27 of T" 12 B3 I %*,Bi4 B5 C2 -G, 3 C 4 6 i-vii12 —0-$- D2 D3i,' j D5 1 ♦E4 F4 J ei Legend Orono City Limits L-1 Parcels Railroad Storm Manhole Catch Basin Inlet Outlet Storm Control Structure ► Storm Pipe C3 Watersheds Node Flooding Depths 0 No Flooding 0 0 - 1 foot 0 1-2 feet 0 > 2 feet Pipe (Q / Qcap) <1 1 -2 2-3 ?3 WI 0 500 Feet 6 Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT BOLTON T" ak MEN F ,_,.,.,._ Real People. Real Solutions. ff G4 May 2018 Page 27 of FA, Lake Minnetonka 1, J1 - 1 F` 12 i + � g c B' B3 B4 1 - l� i r '^ I+ III s r 4} Q ❑ ±: s 1 Iii J 'G3 ' d \ Q -0M SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN "i Fie 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding J , ' Depths Parcels nl " sf J♦♦ • No Flooding + Railroad _- O 0 - 1 foot ';0'♦♦ Storm Manhole 1-2 feet Catch Basin O > 2 feet Inlet r +i ♦� Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) ` t J ♦ Storm Control < 1 ` d° i F :i r ♦' Structure 1- 2 ° ,' I:, ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 a ' C3 Watersheds ' 3 i � itl l� 7 ♦ I;�' ,' t � ' �' ♦♦' 0 500 ♦♦� Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, '♦♦ MnDNR, MnDOT, 1♦ ,•� M BOLTON ♦� Q & MENK ♦ Real People. Real Solutions. F 4 � P G4 May 2018 Page 28 of J1 lr' 12 ,..._65' g c B' B3 B4 C1 .,, L4 144, —C2 C3 : 0"12 C4 �p D1,.- t\D2D3 D4 y D5 El Y E2 ■E3 "`• E4 —=V € Ai Fe3• iN F3. F4 ' O1%G2,i'.�. GJ G�4 0 m Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding J , ' Depths Parcels nl " sf J♦♦ • No Flooding + Railroad _- O 0 - 1 foot ';0'♦♦ Storm Manhole 1-2 feet Catch Basin O > 2 feet Inlet r +i ♦� Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) ` t J ♦ Storm Control < 1 ` d° i F :i r ♦' Structure 1- 2 ° ,' I:, ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 a ' C3 Watersheds ' 3 i � itl l� 7 ♦ I;�' ,' t � ' �' ♦♦' 0 500 ♦♦� Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, '♦♦ MnDNR, MnDOT, 1♦ ,•� M BOLTON ♦� Q & MENK ♦ Real People. Real Solutions. F 4 � P G4 May 2018 Page 28 of T % I A, F1' 11110-017m� G1 L a k e Minnetonka C. liF• C) A, 'YL0 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP G2 Legend Orono * Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths r 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot (D- Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet N Catch Basin * Inlet is > 2 feet * Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) 12 Z 'i—A,3, Structure 1 -2 13� ► Storm Pipe 2-3 !" B zoiw C2 V6,4 -C3 0*0 ki-ii12 f D-1,- \D2 R3j D4 y D5 `E1 E! %,*.3, E4 F1 G1- G21* °G3— 4 -tA G2 Legend 0 500 1111111119�� Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, N &BOLTMENOK Real People. Real Solutions. G1 May 2018 Page 29 of 3 Orono * Orono City Limits Node Flooding E'l Parcels Depths 0 No Flooding Railroad 0 0 - 1 foot (D- Storm Manhole 0 1-2 feet N Catch Basin * Inlet is > 2 feet * Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2-3 C3 Watersheds 4OW 3 0 500 1111111119�� Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, N &BOLTMENOK Real People. Real Solutions. G1 May 2018 Page 29 of 3 1 i `. , 4 J1 2 ..A1. �Z ",3, A4 k5 A e zoF2 ;. - • �Bj Ee3 ,Bid B5tl -- G1 A D1, - D2D3 D y D5 t_ .. -. '`E1 " E2 ■E3 E4 • ! o + Railroad t O 0.2 G1- �0 �' (�3— ":C4 • tuuxcsor. feet ♦♦` ' ® Catch Basin ♦ ♦�♦♦ ■ ■ i?°,_�. -- `� ;'' • Inlet > 2 feet �♦ ♦�♦ L a k e rQo e�Si:3�Q� cfs -_ � ifs Carman Bay ♦' � 4 '♦♦ S p r i n g ,�, , .;n ♦�♦. Park Bay JE ♦1 o ♦♦ T o/k a B a y I 0 r;. �G r: � ♦1 ♦� 1 ♦ / O IO -p, G1 ° \ �♦♦ G3 '♦♦IF p SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN "F 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP `I {=u 4 J1 2 ..A1. �Z ",3, A4 k5 A • �Bj Ee3 ,Bid B5tl Parcels G1 C2 C3 C4 G5 12 D1, - D2D3 D y D5 t_ .. '`E1 " E2 ■E3 E4 • ! Fu•• F21 lF3�� F4 + Railroad t O 0.2 G1- �0 �' (�3— ":C4 • tuuxcsor. feet ♦♦` ' ® Catch Basin ♦ ♦�♦♦ Legend - ' Feet l'( Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, - nl� BOLTON & MENK G2 Real People. Real Solutions. May 2018 Page 30 of 3 Orono City Limits Node Flooding Parcels Depths • No Flooding ♦`♦♦� ! 4 + Railroad t O 0.2 .Storm Manhole feet ♦♦` ' ® Catch Basin ♦ ♦�♦♦ ■ ■ i?°,_�. -- `� ;'' • Inlet > 2 feet �♦ ♦�♦ L a k e ' j '; i ; s'J • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) �•• Minnetonka ; I',`I`. Storm Control Structure < 1 1 - 2 ` ♦♦� '.. -_ _ ' ► Storm Pipe 2 -3 ♦ ' a Watersheds ' 3 I - 71 0 500 - ' Feet l'( Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, - nl� BOLTON & MENK G2 Real People. Real Solutions. May 2018 Page 30 of 3 F2 ♦''t LafaY et e Ba Y F3 -y ke r F4 L:` : C 013 a ♦r w� -. — _ o n Y I`Y'v --� �' i' l,. _l�- fir•, f J `., ♦ 7� r♦> t .I', 1, `f. r 'r, ♦ _ - 1 dr` l• � - ;\ ` _. yr I I r ♦ I I `.• � , \ -' ' ' -�1'y i rJ �` � I,'1 r , ' III 1 � [r ' ti • , `r yl ,ll �1 , `r rJ 1 _ J` ( I ♦ J:. t,P- n. M1,\ .♦ �` y r •S � Yr J a,� ,! f i _ , � ` �-_ r r -J r r ; ' ,, } 'r,r ,�.11 ' 1 C O r +1 r Jr �'• r /l• \ _ � 1 RSls�r .1 ! f h 1• / Hyl . Y [ �� '1' 1 li:'V ' '• .fes L ' ',I [7 7 i. � � rr 'J. \ `0". `l Sly y rf t l: r ![J�yne11WIII L a k e Minnetonka M. � I •I7 r \ \ y � r _� 1. ,LX. 00F7 J / 1 4 S + r } - L \ - rel LY 1 �• 1�(/' t b 11 f •O —_ �r y' I, 1 / r _ ! S;, fyS' �'. y o- ,r _ ',f� r i' J� .�.r _ ti •� r r/l ri .it .r;, •r i I �'r. _ ,•'J Ij i.'�I i A�� v` �� .�,,II,J 13�-' �•. 2 r:_. 'i,:i 9 �. C _ !l _ -1� 'J ! - I. ,yf �•+ - '�(, r+ -�' .\ I• 1. jj 1. I 1 • � 4�.r ' �l .- - \:L i �> 1. J I 1 , - 1 � �•� �=11 y - Lake =a, 1Il: '`Minnetonka pLo SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION LOCATION MAP .I Legend u r Orono City Limits Node Flooding Parcels Depths 2 + Railroad F - A1. O 1-2 feet Catch Basin 0 > 2 feet • Inlet Cl' —C2 C3 C4 C5 12 Pipe (Q / Qcap) D1 D2 D3 D y D5 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe �`E1 E2 . ■E3 E4 i 107" , - • F23• ! F3�� � F4 G1', d4 G4 Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding Parcels Depths • No Flooding + Railroad O 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole O 1-2 feet Catch Basin 0 > 2 feet • Inlet • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 G3 Watersheds ' 3 0 500 Feet Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR, MnDOT, M BOLTN & 111ENK Real People. Real Solutions. G3 May 2018 Page 31 of 3 F3gf F4 10n /. I yr s. r �' 1 ♦♦ ♦♦I Minnetonka pLo SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN ,f + "•i F. 100 -YEAR EXISTING CONDITION [An LOCATION MAP Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding 'l Depths E1 Parcels • No Flooding ` + Railroad " O 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole O 1-2 feet ® Catch Basin '.r > 2 feet r;', ,' • Inlet r ( _ �\? ` ti • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) ' Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 ir, f h ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 U �I C3 Watersheds -' i<< `u 0 500 r' 4 1 `ii ` ' II}•,. , �� Feet ------------- a, Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR MnDOT t. :1 rl ly ! �.~ ,rte \ rNii BOLTON M& MEN K G 4 Real People. Real Solutions. Page 32 of 3 1 May 2018 � 4 F f i o i� Legend Orono City Limits Node Flooding 'l Depths E1 Parcels • No Flooding ` + Railroad " O 0 - 1 foot Storm Manhole O 1-2 feet ® Catch Basin '.r > 2 feet r;', ,' • Inlet r ( _ �\? ` ti • Outlet Pipe (Q / Qcap) ' Storm Control < 1 Structure 1 -2 ir, f h ► Storm Pipe 2 - 3 U �I C3 Watersheds -' i<< `u 0 500 r' 4 1 `ii ` ' II}•,. , �� Feet ------------- a, Source: City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDNR MnDOT t. :1 rl ly ! �.~ ,rte \ rNii BOLTON M& MEN K G 4 Real People. Real Solutions. Page 32 of 3 1 May 2018 Appendix C: Modeling Methodology City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 52 MODELING METHODOLOGY AND MAPPING The general procedure used in the runoff modeling aspects of this analysis has been performed using the Sanitary and Storm Analysis (SSA) by Autodesk modeling software. The typical analysis is based on Soil Conservation Service, Technical Release No. 20 (SCS TR -20). The SCS procedure is based on a standard synthetic rainfall hydrograph, which is modified by local parameters (i.e., rainfall, soil type, time to peak flow, etc.) and is widely accepted among drainage engineers across the United States. 2. For purposes of this report, typical 24-hour rainfall events of 2.87", 4.26" and 7.29" have been chosen to analyze runoff/development interaction. These events are best described as those having probabilities of occurring once every 2, 10 and 100 years, respectively. The probabilities of occurrence do not imply that a 2.87", 4.26" or 7.29" rainfall cannot occur multiple times within the same year; they simply say that a 2.87" rainfall will occur on the average once every 2 years, a 4.26" rainfall will occur on the average once every 10 years and a 7.29" rainfall will occur on the average once every 100 years. In other words, the 2 -year rainfall has a 50 percent chance of occurring in any given year. Similarly, the 10 -year rainfall has a 10 percent chance of occurring in any given year and the 100 -year rainfall has a 1 percent chance of occurring in any given year. City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 53 Appendix D: Modeleling Results SSA Modeling Results — Available Upon Request City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 54 Appendix E: Capital Improvement Plan City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 55 As of: l Jun 18 Public Works - Storm Sewer CIP 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 Storm Watershed Deliniation and Pond Assessr 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Forest Arms Lane (w/road reconstruct) $ 59,720 Windjammer, Garden Lane Stormawater (w/road reconstruct) $ 17,000 West Lafeyete Stormwater(w/road reconstrucl $ 25,800 Tonka Ave (W/ road reconstruct E.Lake St. (w/road reconstruct) Lyric Avenue (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 5,000 Wildhurst Trail (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 89,000 Minnetonka Highlands(w/Road reconstruct) $ 28,000 Old Crystal Bay (6-112) (W/Rd Reconstruction) $ 225,000 Vine place (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 1,000 East Long Lake S (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 77,000 Windjamer (North Arm to End) (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 7,200 Lyman Avenue (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 4,600 Tonkaview Lane (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 9,000 Chevy Chase Drive (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 17,500 Casco Circle (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 12,000 East Navarre Roads (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 20,300 Kelley Parkway - OCB Rd to StoneBay (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 7,200 Dickenson Street(w/ Road reconstruct) $ 5,700 Glendale Drive (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 3,400 Orchard Park Road (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 14,200 Rest Point Lane (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 2,800 Park Lane (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 2,900 North Arm Drive (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 29,900 Willow Dr (Fox -Brown) (w/ Road reconstruct) $ 24,200 Long Lake Ravine Stabalization (SWMP 7) $ 100,000 Casco Point Park Outlet (SWMP 0-1) $ 58,000 Casco cove Outlet (SWMP 0-2) $ 80,000 Casco Point Park Bioretension Basin (SWMP CB -1) $ 55,000 South Casco Point Road Sump (SWMP CB -2) $ 36,000 Casco cove Bioretatnion Basin (CB -3) $ 57,000 Chevy Chase Stormwater Improvements (HA -1) $ 69,200 East Long Lake Road N Improvements (SWMP LL -1) $ 82,000 Cherry Place Ravine Improvement (SWMP NA -1) $ 23,000 As of: l Jun 18 Public Works - Storm Sewer CIP 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 Surface Water Management Projects $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Misc Storm Sewer Improvements $ 157,080 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 167,000 $ 170,340 $ 173,747 $ 177,222 $ 180,766 $ 184,381 $ 188,069 $ 191,831 $ 195,667 $ 199,580 $205,568 $211,735 $218,087 $224,630 $231,368 $238,310 $245,459 $252,823 Pond Cleaning/Maintenance (1/year) $ 50,000 $ 51,500 $ 53,045 $ 54,636 $ 56,275 $ 57,964 $ 59,703 $ 61,494 $ 63,339 $ 65,239 $67,196 1 $69,212 $71,288 $73,427 $75,629 1 $77,898 $80,235 $82,642 TMDL Updates $ 50,000 $ 51,000 $ 52,020 $ 53,060 $ 54,122 $ 55,204 $ 56,308 $ 57,434 $ 58,583 $ 59,755 $ 60,950 $ 62,169 $ 63,412 $65,314 $67,274 $69,292 $71,371 $73,512 $75,717 $77,989 $80,329 Kelly Avenue Drainage Improvements $ 52,909 Totals $ 743,789 $ 449,620 $ 434,920 $ 329,260 $ 480,062 $ 431,996 $ 438,166 $ 444,476 $ 450,928 $ 457,526 $ 464,274 $ 471,174 $ 478,231 $ 488,078 $ 498,220 $ 508,667 $ 519,427 $ 530,510 $ 541,925 $ 553,683 $ 565,793 Appendix F: Water Resources Agreements City of Orono Surface Water Management Plan February 2019 56 CITY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL No. 66 10 A RESOLUTION TO PARTNER WITH OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES TO PURSUE AND SHOW SUPPORT IN THE PURSUIT OF GRANTS TO UgPROVE WATER QUALITY IN THE LONG LAKE CREEK SUBWATERSHED WHEREAS, The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) completed the Upper Minnehaha Creek Watershed Nutrient and Bacterial TMDL Study in March 2014; and WHEREAS, The Upper Minnehaha Creek Watershed Nutrient and Bacterial TMDL Study addresses nutrient impairments and nutrient budgets in the distinct hydraulic basin referred as the "Upper Watershed" of the Minnehaha Creek including; and WHEREAS, The Tanager Lake Subwatershed, also known as the Long Lake Creek Subwatershed, is located in the Upper Minnehaha Creek Watershed and includes Long Lake Creek and 6 impaired lakes within the City of Long Lake, City of Medina, and City of Orono; and WHEREAS, Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) allocations have been established for City of Long Lake, City of Medina, City of Orono, Hennepin County, and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT); and WHEREAS, The City of Orono is required to show progress towards meeting the established TMDL allocation; and WHEREAS, Grants are available to support municipality and partnership projects to improve surface water quality in the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Partnering with other intergovernmental agencies in pursuing these grants for the Long Lake Subwatershed may result in a more organized and effective effort to improve water quality in the Long Lake Subwatershed. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota that the City Council does hereby partner with other intergovernmental agencies to pursue and show support in the pursuit of grants to improve water quality in the Long Lake Subwatershed. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held April 25, 2016. ATTEST: Di a Tiegs, Ci y Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor MEMORANDUM of UNDERSTANDING Between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City of Orono for Local Water Planning and Regulation This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is made by and between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, a watershed district with purposes and powers as set forth at Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D ("MCWD"), and the City of Orono, a body corporate and politic and a statutory city in the State of Minnesota ("City"). Recitals and Statement of Purpose WHEREAS in 2007, the MCWD revised its comprehensive watershed management plan under Minnesota Statutes § 103B.231, which details the existing physical environment, land use and development in the watershed and establishes a plan to regulate water resource use and management to protect water resources, improve water quality, prevent flooding and otherwise achieve the goals of Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D; WHEREAS the MCWD's comprehensive watershed management plan incorporates the Rules adopted by the MCWD to protect water resources, improve water quality, prevent flooding and otherwise achieve the goals of Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D; WHEREAS the City has developed a local water management plan under Minnesota Statutes § 103B.235 that describes the existing and proposed physical environment and land use within the City and sets forth an implementation plan for bringing local water management into conformance with the MCWD's comprehensive watershed management plan; WHEREAS on October 14, 2010, the MCWD Board of Managers conditionally approved the City's local water management plan by adoption of Resolution 10-092, which resolution is attached and incorporated herein; WHEREAS the City wishes to continue to authorize MCWD permitting authority with respect to all areas regulated by the MCWD including the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act at the present time, but intends to consider assumption of sole regulatory authority for Erosion Control, Floodplain Alteration, Wetland Protection including WCA responsibilities, and Stonnwater Management, within the next 12 months. This MOU will be amended to reflect the City's determination to exercise sole regulatory authority after the District makes the necessary findings; WHEREAS MCWD approval of a local plan requires a finding that the official controls of the local government are at least as protective of water resources as the MCWD Rules; WHEREAS the finding by the MCWD Board of Managers in this regard rests on the City's authorization of the MCWD's continued exercise of regulatory authority within the City in accordance with Minnesota Statutes §103B.211, subdivision 1(a)(3); WHEREAS the MCWD and City desire to memorialize their respective roles in implementing water resource protection and management within the City; Page 1 of 3 NOW THEREFORE it is mutually agreed by and between the parties that they enter into this MOU in order to document the understanding of the parties as to the roles and responsibilities of each party. 1.0 Responsibilities of the Cit 1.1 The City may exercise all present and future authority it otherwise may possess to issue permits for and regulate activities affecting water resources within the City. 1.2 The City will meet at least annually with the MCWD to review the implementation of the City's local water management plan. 1.3 Annually, by the date specified for the City's submittal of its annual report under its NPDES municipal stormwater permit, the City will submit to the MCWD a concise but specific report describing: a. Progress on the local water management plan implementation program. b. Progress on meeting phosphorus load reduction requirements of the MCWD's comprehensive watershed management plan. c. Any adjustments to the implementation and/or capital improvement program in the local water management plan. d. A listing, with further specific information as the MCWD may request, of grading and structural alterations approved or occurring within city boundaries since the last annual report (both private and public alterations) that could measurably affect hydraulic and hydrologic model outcomes. The City may incorporate its annual report into its NPDES MS4 annual report, provided it addresses the above items with specificity. 1.4 If the City determines that it wishes to exercise sole regulatory authority with respect to certain activities now regulated by the MCWD, the City will request that the MCWD determine whether the City's ordinances are at least as protective of water resources as the District Rules and the City has the necessary regulatory capacity to establish the basis for the City's exercise of sole regulatory authority and the MCWD's withdrawal from permitting these activities. Upon completion of the review, the City and the MCWD may amend this MOU. 2.0 Responsibilities of the MCWD 2.1 The MCWD will continue to apply and enforce its Rules, as they may be amended from time to time, within the City. 2.2 The MCWD will meet with the City at least annually to review the implementation of the City's local water management plan, addressing at a minimum the following topics: 1. Maintenance of up-to-date water quality measures, such as concentrations of Phosphorus, in the City's local water management plan; 2. The City's progress toward Implementation Program/CIP items; and 3. Progress toward meeting MCWD Phosphorus Loading Reduction goals. 2.3 The MCWD retains all authority that it may possess under Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D or any other provision of law, except as explicitly reposed in the City under this MOU, including but not limited to authority set forth at Minnesota Statutes § § 10313.211, subdivision 1(a); 103D.335 and 103D.341. Page 2 of 3 2.4 If the City determines that it wishes to exercise sole regulatory authority with respect to certain activities now regulated by the MCWD, the MCWD determine whether the City's ordinances are at least as protective of water resources as the District Rules and the City has the necessary regulatory capacity to establish the basis for the City's exercise of sole regulatory authority and the MCWD's withdrawal from permitting these activities. Upon completion of the review, the City and the MCWD may amend this MOU. 3.0 General 3.1 The MOU is effective on the date that it has been executed by both parties, and will remain in effect until two years after the MCWD revises its watershed management plan pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 103B.231, subdivision 4(a), unless terminated or otherwise modified by agreement of the parties. Notwithstanding, the City will continue to be subject to applicable statutes and rules requiring that it revise its local water management plan in response to MCWD revisions of the watershed management plan. 3.2 This MOU may be amended only by a writing signed by both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Memorandum of Understanding. CITY OF ORONO By i7Go .fPcsetl a,y6r Bya2 City Clerk Date: /a APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION By Its Attorney MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT By 2.rvvvu.e7 "-S-, �vo resident, Board of Managers APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION l.. By Its Attorney Page 3 of 3 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS CMP PART 3B GENERAL LAND USE PLAN Introduction 3B-2 Scope 3B-3 Basic Land Use Concepts and Principles 3B-3 Table 3B-1: Orono Population and Households 1970-2040 3B-4 Table 3B -la: Orono Populations and HH adjusted 3B-5 Land Use Goals and Policies 313-6 2040 Regional Development Framework 3B-12 Existing and Future Land Use Summary 3B-13 Table 3B-2: Orono Existing Land Use Summary 3B-13 Table 3B-3: Orono 2040 Planned Land Use 3B-14 Navarre Area Plan 3B-18 What Changed 3B-21 Future Development/ Staged Plan 3B-21 Table 3B-4: Planned Development Sites 3B-22 Table 3B-5: Net Density 313-24 Table 3B-6: Planned Development by Decade 3B-24 Employment 3B-25 Figure 3B-1 Employment 3B-25 Figure 3B-2 Employment by Industry 3B-25 Historic Site Preservation Plan 313-26 3B -A Navarre Area Plan City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 313, Page 1 Appendices Map 3B-1 Urban and Rural Areas Map 3B-2 Existing Land Use Map 3B -2B Existing Land Use -Navarre Area Map 3B-3 Proposed Land Use Map 3B -3B Proposed Land Use Navarre Area Map 3B-4 Planned Development Sites 3B -A Navarre Area Plan City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 313, Page 1 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan CMP PART 3B LAND USE PLAN INTRODUCTION This Land Use Plan is a refinement and restatement of the ongoing planning practices of Orono citizens. It respects and maintains the historic development patterns of the City. It continues the basic land use concepts developed by Orono Township in 1950 and it conforms to the goals established by the first organized comprehensive planning attempts in the mid 1960's. This Plan is prepared and presented for the following purposes: L The Land Use Plan is intended to be a management tool for City officials, City staff, and other parties involved in land development and growth management in Orono. Orono's land use plan indicates the basic location, density and types of land uses in the City that are considered to be compatible with environmental conditions and beneficial to the long term health, safety and welfare of the City and its citizens alike. Z The Land Use Plan is intended to be a guide for future development so as to reinforce our environmental protection commitment and to ensure such development will be consistent with existing land use. This Plan is compatible with the plans of nearby cities for land use of abutting neighborhoods and for overall levels of services and facilities. 3. The Land Use Plan is intended to advise the Metropolitan Council and our municipal neighbors of Orono's planning and growth management programs. The Land Use Plan illustrates and coordinates the various goals and policies of all the elements of the Community Management Plan. 4, The Land Use Plan is intended to be used as a basis for public facilities planning. The Land Use Plan plays an important role in determining each neighborhood's ultimate population, the required capacity of public facilities, and an appropriate capital improvements program. 5. The Land Use Plan is intended to be used as the basis for developing responsible ordinances for land use management. Zoning and subdivision controls have been established and will continue to be refined to implement the intent of this Land Use Plan. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 2 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan MOM The time framework of the Land Use Plan is intended to be consistent with the regional planning period of 2020 through 2040 and with the City's permanent planning policy for rural Orono. Orono's long range land use plans call for permanent maintenance of the existing low density rural residential areas. There is to be no staged growth plan and no expansion of the existing urban service area. This commitment is particularly important to the many Orono citizens who are making private investments based upon this concept. BASIC LAND USE CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES Orono's planning programs have long recognized the development paradox, or urbanization spiral, which often results from arbitrary planning assumptions or from incomplete analysis of planning alternatives. The most striking example in Orono's situation is the documented evidence that over- extension of sanitary sewers, ostensibly to solve a pollution problem, can easily in itself cause irretrievable water quality degradation of Lake Minnetonka. Chapter 1 of this Plan outlines the "urbanization spiral". Nutrient management technologies such as NURP ponds, alum treatments, and a wide variety of Best Management Practices provide added tools to manage runoff from rural densities. However, Orono cannot and will not rely solely on man- made systems for preserving water quality, and will not increase density to pay for stormwater management infrastructure. A principal goal of Orono's planning program is the protection of natural resources and environmental amenities, particularly the water quality of Lake Minnetonka. The Environmental Protection Plan emphasizes Orono's unique environmental position in relation to the long-term health of Lake Minnetonka. Retention of natural vegetation, light, air, and open space will be promoted. Shorelines will be protected from erosion and alteration. Water quality preservation is dependent upon effective sewage treatment programs. Urbanized areas, shoreland areas and remaining existing higher -density housing clusters within the Rural area have been or will be provided with municipal sanitary sewer to prevent discharge of untreated or insufficiently treated sewage effluent into the Lake. In the rural areas, low density land use can be safely served long- term by individual on-site sewage treatment systems. Historic development patterns have resulted in a city which is partially urban and partially rural. These two development patterns offer a variety of housing to meet residents' lifestyle and service desires. The citizens of Orono have determined that a long range planning objective of the City is the permanent retention of the rural community. This objective is in line with the existing developed density of the area, and with the similar plans of other cities abutting the rural area. Orono is partly in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and partly outside the current MUSA. The MUSA was established by Metropolitan Council to define the extent of areas where urban services will be provided and urban scale development will occur. Urban and rural neighborhoods require differing levels of public services and facilities. The urban areas of Orono have sufficient density to require, and to financially support, municipal sewer and water City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 3 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan services, increased police and fire protection, public works projects and public recreational facilities. These areas have such facilities in place and in sufficient capacity to accommodate all projected urban development. The rural areas have limited density and have environmental restraints prohibiting urban density encroachments. Orono expects future development in both the urban and the rural portions of the city. The urban area is expected to have new residential infill development on the existing vacant lots and undeveloped parcels at densities consistent with the Community Management Plan. Additional of higher density housing is anticipated in the planning term to accommodate a wider range of affordability and lifecycle housing needs, overall urban density will remain relatively low. The rural area is expected to have continued infill residential development. Non-residential development will likely be limited to open space recreation. Over time, changes in national priorities, population trends, metropolitan plans and metropolitan facilities have continued to reinforce the planning and development objectives of Orono. Community leaders have consistently held firm to the quality over quantity in approving development proposals, and will continue to do so. The projected population is a direct result of Orono's environmental protection policies and is consistent with the proposed public facilities plans of Orono, the Hennepin County Public Works Department, the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). Table 3B-1 illustrates Orono Population and Household growth, from 1970, projected through 2040. The most recent data supplied by the Met Council, in 2016, shows 7,691 people in 3,037 households. Table 313-1: Orono Population, Households, and Employment 1970 - 2040 (Sewered and Unsewered Forecasts) Population Year 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 2020 2030 2040 Sewered -- -- -- -- 4,429 -- 51150 6,170 6,740 Unsewered -- -- -- -- 3,008 -- 2,950 2,630 2,760 Total City 6,787 6,845 7,285 7,538 7,437 7,691 8,100 8,800 9,500 Household Year 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 2020 2030 2040 Sewered -- -- -- -- 1,780 2,105 2,455 2,785 2,253 Unsewered -- -- -- -- 1046 784 1,095 1,105 1,115 Total City 21146 2,291 2,613 2,766 2,826 3,037 3,200 3,560 3,900 Persons/HH 3.16 2.99 2.79 2.73 2.63 2.53 2.53 2.47 2.44 Employment 500 809 980 951 1562 1579 1700 1780 1800 Source: Metropolitan Council System Statement City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 4 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan Table 3B -la illustrates the number of households need to be created based on the 2016 updated numbers. In summary, the city will need to add 523 sewered households to meet 2030 projections, and 340 households in the 2030s to meet 2040 forecasts. Table 3B -la: Orono Households 2010 - 2040 (Sewered and Unsewered adjusted Forecasts) Household Change Change Change Year 2010 2016 2020 Est. from 2030 Est. 2040 from from 2016 2016 Est 2030 Sewered Unsewered Total City 1780 1046 L2,826 2253 784 3037 2105 -148 2,455 1095 ]L 311 1105 3,200 163 3,560 202 2,785 321 1,115 523 L3,900 330 10 340 Source: Metropolitan Council System Statement, City Utility Accounts Regional transportation plans have been revised since the 1970's to accommodate the increased traffic levels on Highway 12 through Orono and Long Lake. Environmental and social pressures have eliminated any plans for expansion of County Road 15 along the lakeshore. Orono will continue to promote and implement strategies to reroute traffic away from the lakeshore areas. Regional sewer service facilities plans were revised three decades ago in response to Orono's plans for low-density development. The final Orono -Long Lake Interceptor is in place with a design capacity for less than 8,400 Orono residents and a limited service area. In the early 1980's, the Maple Plain Interceptor was similarly designed to provide only limited capacity for Orono. These capacity limitations are consistent with Orono's goals for the rural area. Orono's commercial and economic development has always been centered in the historic town centers. The shopping, employment, education and social needs of Orono residents have been met by commercial facilities and shopping centers located in Navarre and in surrounding communities. Promotion of duplicate facilities in Orono would tend to be uneconomic and counterproductive. Orono's housing plan is intended to accommodate all planned population growth in a wide variety of housing opportunities. New urban housing will be in a variety of forms including single family homes on scattered vacant lots throughout the sewered area; planned residential developments including mixed single family, attached townhome, and apartment dwelling units on vacant sewered parcels along Wayzata Boulevard and in the Navarre Area. Most new rural housing will be on new lots of two to five acres net dry -buildable area, all with prior approved site evaluation and proof of adequate septic system operation. In Shoreland areas previously brought into the MUSA, new low- density rural development may be provided with municipal sewers to afford the maximum level of protection for Lake Minnetonka and other Orono lakes. Orono's comprehensive sewer policy plan is designed to provide an adequate, safe level of sewage treatment and waste water disposal for all urban and rural properties. Sewage treatment policies respect the limited regional capacity and the differing levels of service required by urban and rural City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 5 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan neighborhoods. Municipal sewer capacity is available for projected urban development within the existing urban service area. Orono's transportation plan is tailored to the different needs of urban and rural neighborhoods. Near the lakeshore and in some rural areas, the collector roads are relatively slow speed with circuitous alignment dictated by the hills and bays rather than by commuter preference. The urban areas are provided with a typical network of city streets connecting residential and shopping areas with each other. The rural area is gridded-off with a core system of publicly maintained collector and minor arterial streets running at regular intervals. Orono's parks and open space facilities reflect different urban and rural characteristics. In the urban area, the City provides numerous small neighborhood parks and playgrounds offering centers for neighborhood activities such as swimming, skating, softball, and soccer. In addition, three larger preserves (Casco Circle, Saga Hill, and Highwood) offer substantial "natural" areas. In the rural area, a variety of City -owned parks and preserves offer a range of active and passive recreation opportunities. Large public and quasi -public recreational facilities include Three Rivers Park District lands, several golf courses, a gun club, the Luce Line state Trail, the Dakota Rail Trail, as well as two 'big woods' Scientific and Natural Areas. LAND USE GOALS AND POLICIES Orono's Land Use Plan is based upon the following goals and policies which in turn have been actively developed and fostered by Orono residents over the last 45 years. Land Use Goals 1. To reinforce Orono's environmental protection commitment, with special emphasis on the protection of Lake Minnetonka and Orono's other lakes. 2. To maintain the historic identity and character of the separate urban and rural neighborhoods. 3. To provide appropriate places for a variety of local residential, educational, recreational, industrial and neighborhood commercial activities. 4. To protect neighborhoods from encroachment of incompatible land uses. 5. To coordinate Orono's land uses with that of neighboring communities. 6. To coordinate land uses and developed density with the financial and physical capabilities of the City. General Land Use Policies 1. The boundary between Orono's Urban and Rural Areas is fixed. Orono's Urban Area will not be strictly defined by the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary or future expansions of the MUSA boundary but will be fixed by this and the other elements of the Community Management Plan. Orono's defined Urban and Rural Areas are best described by City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 6 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan the planned development types and densities. Orono's Urban and Rural areas are depicted and fixed by Map 313-1. 2. The Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) will define the areas of Orono where municipal sewers may be extended. The MUSA will include all parts of Orono's Urban Area and may include parts of Orono's Rural Area where appropriate. The MUSA boundary in Orono will define areas where sewer exists or where it may be extended to serve existing or new development, but will not define the areas where general urban services will be provided, and it will not strictly define the boundary between higher density and low-density development. 3. Orono's land use plans will be based upon environmental protection policies. Land use and development must assure the conservation, protection and preservation of sensitive environmental resources in accordance with the goals and policies of the Environmental Protection Plan. 4. Development density will be limited throughout the city to a level which will not overload the natural surface water drainage and filtration system. Urbanization increases the rate and quantity of surface runoff while decreasing the water quality. To the extent that it is practical and feasible, the City will supplement existing natural assimilation capacities with man- made ponding areas, but will not allow increases in development density beyond the defined density as a result of such supplementation. 5. The wetlands, floodplains, and marshlands of the city will be protected and preserved as wildlife habitats, as unique open spaces, and as an economically practical and effective method of flood protection and storm water runoff filtration. Wherever possible, the City will acquire open space and flowage easements for conservation of these lands. The city will not support the filling of a wetland to provide a buildable lot. 6. Protection of lake resources will allow reasonable access, use and enjoyment while preventing overcrowding and excessive encroachment. In conformance with Orono's Shoreland Management regulations, Orono will prohibit overly dense development within 1,000 feet of Lake Minnetonka. Lake use regulations will be promoted to limit excessive boat density and overuse of sensitive bays. 7. Lake shorelines will be protected from alteration. Shoreland areas, whether bluff, beach or floodplain, are sensitive environmental features with significant impact on lake water quality, aesthetic values and land use function. These same factors act to draw development which can be destructive if not properly regulated. Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to limit surface runoff and soil erosion, and to utilize excess nutrients. Clearcutting will be prohibited. In areas of soil or wave action erosion, material stone rip rap shoreline protection will be encouraged. Where determined to be feasible and practical, alternative natural methods of shoreline protection other than rip -rap will be promoted. Excavation, filling and other grade changes at or near the shoreline for the sole purpose of accommodating development will be discouraged. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 7 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan 8. The City will work to encourage and facilitate slope stabilization measures prior to slope failures. 9. Development or alteration of floodplains will be restricted. The City will observe and administer Flood Plain regulations as required by the DNR. 10. Orono's land use plan will promote the preservation of open space, light and air. Sufficient open spaces will be provided in each neighborhood and on each lot to prevent overcrowding and to ensure adequate light, air and recreation for all residents. 11. Private ownership, maintenance and stewardship of the land, including open space and many types of improvements, is favored over public ownership as being in the best and most beneficial interests of the property owner and the public, providing for more intimate, responsive and economical land management. 12. No land owner should be denied the right to develop his land by any staged growth, land banking or no -growth policy, provided the development can be accomplished within the performance standards, policies and requirements of the Community Management Plan. 13. Future development must enhance the community. Land development should respect preserve the value of the land and the integrity, stability and beauty of the community. 14. Physical improvements required to accommodate new development must be provided by the developer. It is the policy of the City that development pays for itself, physical improvements such as roads, drainage and utilities required to accommodate new subdivisions or development should be designed, financed and installed directly by the benefited developer as a precondition to development In addition, this philosophy includes developer responsibility for special fire protection equipment or devices in the case of unusual land uses or building configurations, and/or special security services in the case of unusual public safety situations. 15. All physical improvements must conform to city standards. Physical improvements related to health, safety or community systems such as roads, pathways, drainage or utility systems will be designed, located and constructed to uniform, City -established standards to ensure proper functioning and compatibility with overall City plans. 16. Developers must dedicate lands required for public use. Land subdivision or any development that results in increased land use density, and hence increased demand for municipal services, will be expected to include public dedication of lands necessary for additional road rights of way, parks, playgrounds, trails, open space, ponds or storm water holding areas whenever such facilities are directly used by the subdivided land or required by such density increase. If the individual development's property is not conducive to public land dedication, then in lieu of lands the developer may be required to contribute funds for the municipal purchase of such City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 8 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan lands or the improvement of such facilities proportionate to the cumulative effect of such density increase from multiple small developments. 17. No land will be permitted to be subdivided or built upon which is held unsuitable by the City for the proposed use because of flood hazards, inadequate drainage, soil formations with severe limitations for development, severe erosion potential, unfavorable topography, inadequate water supply or sewage disposal capabilities, or any other feature likely to be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the future residents of the proposed subdivision or of the community. Urban Land Use Policies 1. The majority of Orono's urban area will be reserved for residential land use. Many urban residences will be intimately associated with the lake shoreline and will be subject to density restrictions because of sensitive environmental conditions. Medium and High Density multi- family residential uses will be limited to locations near existing shopping and transportation services, but will not be appropriate within 1,000 feet of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka except when in close proximity to the Navarre commercial area abutting CR 15 or CR 19. 2. Commercial areas will be provided for neighborhood service businesses. The primary function of Orono's commercial areas will be to provide those retail, commercial and service businesses which are directly necessary to serve Orono's urban and rural residents. Commercial development will be limited to areas where full urban services, including municipal sanitary sewer and adequate transportation are available. Commercial development of a regional nature (i.e. "big box" retail) which would increase traffic, particularly on collector streets serving low density residential development, will be discouraged. Mixed Use Residential and Commercial Development is targeted for select traditionally commercial areas to provide a healthy base of customers for these limited commercial areas. 3. Lakeshore commercial areas will be provided for public access and limited lake -user services. Orono's residents and other lake users require lake access, fishing supplies, boat service and boat repair facilities which are unique to our location on a recreational development lake. Orono's Land Use Plan will provide locations for such special-purpose businesses where appropriate from both the land use and the lakeside environmental standpoint. No use or location will be permitted to adversely affect the lake quality or the public's general usage of the lake. All lakeshore commercial is to be limited to areas where full urban services, including municipal sanitary sewer and adequate transportation are available. 4. The City will encourage private unification and coordination of the existing commercial areas. Unplanned strip commercial developments will be discouraged. Coordinated projects designed to aesthetically enhance, unify and identify the business areas will be encouraged. 5. Future industrial development will be limited to the area of the existing Orono industrial park. No other location in Orono combines the availability of transportation and public utilities with remoteness from sensitive environmental features. In addition, this land use is consistent City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 9 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan with Long Lake's neighboring industrial development. 6. Commercial and industrial development will not be permitted to adversely affect neighboring residential property. The location, scale and types of commercial and industrial development will be controlled so as not to encroach upon or adversely impact the primary residential land uses in Orono. Wherever possible, natural land forms or buffers will be required between different land uses. 7. Public urban services must be available for all future commercial, industrial and urban - residential development. Commercial, industrial and urban -density residential uses will be permitted only where municipal sanitary sewer, water, adequate transportation, police and fire protection services are available. 8. Urban development will utilize the capacity of existing public facilities. New land uses and development will be allowed to infill existing vacant properties within the urban service area consistent with environmental limitations and with the existing or planned capacities of water, sewer, drainage transportation and recreational facilities. New development will not be permitted to overburden these services at the expense of the existing users. 9. Land use standards will limit the impact of urban encroachment on Lake Minnetonka. Minimum lot width will space out docks and structural encroachments while increasing areas of natural vegetation. Lake use regulations promulgated by the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and supplemented with City regulations if necessary will limit the number of boats per property and the amount of public waters available for private docking and boat storage. 10. Retention of natural vegetation will limit the impact of urbanization as visible from the lake. Building heights will be limited to less than the typical tree height. Minimum green belts will be provided with prohibitions against clearcutting or excessive thinning of vegetation. Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes and retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion, in which case they will be screened with natural vegetation. Rural Land Use Policies Orono's rural area will be reserved for permanent low-density residential land use. Orono's rolling rural area is not suitable for commercial agriculture. Likewise, the delicate balance of storm water nutrient loading vs. marshland assimilative capacity precludes expansion of the urban service area without major environmental problems for Lake Minnetonka. Therefore, the ideal land use for that portion of Orono located outside of the Urban Service Area is the planned low- density rural residential land use. Commercial and industrial uses will not be permitted in the rural area. Orono's rural area provides the opportunity for quasi- agricultural land uses. Greenhouses, orchards, small hobby farms, riding stables, and recreation areas such as large golf courses and park reserves are not possible in more crowded urban areas but they are compatible with rural residential properties. Thus, the total commercial activity of Orono is broader and more varied than if the City were all urban or all rural. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 311, Page 10 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan Rural density is limited by natural conditions. Development of rural Orono is naturally limited by a number of conditions including wetlands, steep slopes and areas of high water table, factors which influence building locations and transportation options as well as the location and spacing of on-site sewage treatment systems which rely on soil treatment of sewage effluent. The existing rural area will not be urbanized. Orono's Community Management Plan is not a staged growth plan. Municipal urban services will not be extended into the rural area or across open, rural lands. Rural land uses and densities do not require urban services. Urban services are not compatible with rural land use. Extension of certain urban services, such as extensive public road maintenance or municipal sewer or water cannot be economically justified or easily provided to developments in rural areas or at rural densities. Rural development will be subject to proven on-site sewage treatment capability. Future development in the rural area will be contingent upon the developer providing prior technical evidence that the site contains sufficient suitable land for all development, an acceptable primary drainfield area, and reserved space for at least one alternate drainfield area. The zoning area requirements for rural Orono will therefore be based upon minimum areas of dry, buildable, contiguous land exclusive of roadways, wetlands, streams or areas of high water table. Rural land use densities will allow maximum retention of private woods and open space. Low rural densities will accommodate home -sites without affecting the traditional vistas of open fields and woods. The retention of these woodlands and marshlands will then assure permanent habitat for our wildlife. Public open space will be provided on a large-scale or Park Reserve basis, but neighborhood or mini -parks are unnecessary because of the large amount of available privately owned and maintained open space. Rural lakeshore areas within the Shoreland and within the MUSA will be provided with municipal sewer service upon request. Municipal sewer service connections will be available to new or existing residences within the designated Shoreland Overlay District and within the MUSA when requested, costs to connect will be the responsibility of the property owner. However, this policy will not preclude development of such areas using fully conforming Individual Sewage Treatment Systems. Lakeshore Residential Land Use Policies Although Orono's lakeshore has a wide range of diversity in lot size and home size, the predominant character of Orono's lakeshore is natural. Natural is defined in part by much of the lakeshore being historically developed as large estate lots with homes set back a substantial distance from the lakeshore, or being developed as moderate homes on moderate lots leaving substantial open space. Natural includes remnants of native forests and vegetation, protection of the lakeshore from hardcover and impervious surface encroachments. The exception to the natural lakeshore is the areas where historically small cottages were built on small lots close to the lakeshore. These cottages in many cases have been updated, remodeled or expanded into year- round homes. The key goal of the City's Comprehensive Plan is to protect Lake Minnetonka, and other Orono City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 11 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan lakes and waterways which includes the preservation of the natural character of the lakeshore and the water quality of the lakes. As the demand for, and value of, lakeshore property has dramatically increased, so has the pressure to expand or replace older homes with much larger homes. This pressure has the potential to substantially alter the natural character of the lakeshore, and the more open and natural environment enjoyed by property owners along much of the lakeshore in Orono. The following policies will guide the City in addressing development on the lakeshore. 1. Lake Minnetonka shall be protected as a natural and recreational resource. 2. The natural character of the lakeshore shall be preserved, and when possible, enhanced. 3. The views and open space currently enjoyed by lakeshore property owners shall be reasonably protected. 4. The size of a house to be allowed on a lot shall be determined, in part, based on the size of the lot, as well as on the shape and topography of the lot. 5. The increase in massing of structures on the lakeshore shall be limited. 2040 REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK Accommodating future growth of the Metro Area is a concern that will require wide-ranging resources. The Metropolitan Council in 2015 adopted "Thrive MSP 2040" to provide a plan for addressing the challenges that will be faced by the Twin Cities area over the next two decades in accommodating expected growth in the region. Forecasts indicate the metro area will grow by 820,000 people between 2010 and 2040, and as the average household size continues to shrink (from 2.55 in 2010 to 2.43 by 2040) an additional 389,000 households must be accommodated. In addressing the challenges of growth, Metropolitan Council has acknowledged that a "one size fits all" approach to implementing the Regional Development Framework is not appropriate, and has designated Geographic Planning Areas to identify communities with similar types of growth. In general, Orono's area within the MUSA boundary is designated as "Emerging Suburban Edge" and the areas outside the MUSA boundary are "Rural Residential". Metropolitan Council has identified a set of implementation strategies for each of these categories, as well as an umbrella of strategies that will apply to all communities. Map 3C-1 outlines the Community Designations and the community responsibilities. Each local community is required to address how it will plan for its share of regional affordable housing needs for the decade 2021-2030. Metropolitan Council has apportioned the forecasted need among each of the municipalities in the 7 -county metro area. Minnesota Statutes require that comprehensive plans include an implementation program that describes public programs, fiscal devices and other specific actions to be undertaken in stated sequence to implement the comprehensive plan and ensure conformity with metropolitan system plans. One required element is a housing implementation program, "...including City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 12 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan official controls to implement the housing element of the land use plan, which will provide sufficient existing and new housing to meet the local unit's share of the metropolitan area need for low and moderate income housing." Orono's share is forecasted at 154 new affordable housing units for the decade 2021- 2030. EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USE SUMMARY Map 3B-2 depicts the existing land uses in Orono as of 2016. Table 3B-2: Orono Existing Land Use Summary, shows just over 1/3 of Orono's total area is in open water; of the remaining 2/3 that is land area, 92% is devoted to residential, parks & open space uses, or underdeveloped. Table 3B-2: Orono Existing Land Use Summar 2016 Land Use Category Acreage % of City Rural Rural Preserve 302 1.97% Rural Residential 2,098 13.66% Island Residential 76 0.49% Urban Low Density Residential 2,441 15.90% Urban Medium Density 32 0.21% Residential Urban High DensitX Residential 21 0.14% Commercial/ Office 86 0.56% Industrial 35 0.23% Park, Recreational and 1,529 9.96% Oren Space Undeveloped 3367 21.93% Right -of -Way 137 _ TOTAL 15 3;' 65% Source: Existing Land Use Map Table 39 21 Orono Existing Land Use Summary (2016) Land Use Category Acreage 1140 of Cit� Rural 4-214 7.89 ,046 D„r.,l Residential 0r/o P.380 T e Resi en4i 1 Urban 11 ��n ��� Urban TiTv.]ium Density Residential -52 n TTrba Mo.i;..m HighDefisity Rest enti.,l/ Mixed Use City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 13 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan Urban High Density Residentia4 island Residential 6-5 0.4290 dial 42 0.' n.,.aE Ope Spaeo i, 11.17%o Open Wa 5,241 34.03-% Major- Highway and Railroad 7-7-3 5$29% Undevelope 321 2.149% c,.,,. -,.o. rrc Existing r a d Use clap Note: Open Water is a dominant natural feature of Orono and represents 34.03 percent of the "land" area of Orono. However, because it is not a land use, it is not included in Table 3B-2 above or on Map 313-2a. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 14 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan Map 3B-3 indicates the proposed land use plan of the city, identifying appropriate land uses and densities for each individual neighborhood. This land use map will form the basis for land use and zoning decisions over the next 20 years. Table 313-3 is a summary of Orono's Planned Land Use. Note that the Summary reflects that the planned uses are to be allowed to take effect immediately rather than being staged over a period of years, thus the 2030 and 2040 predicted acreages are the same as 2020 levels. Source: Proposed Land Use Map The Plan does not suggest a change in land use over the next 20 years, after the adoption of this Update. The land uses identified in Map3B-3a and Map 313-3b are outlined in greater detail below. 1. Lakes and Open Water Areas within the city boundary of open water. The Lakes and associated watersheds are a significant influence on the quality of life and character of the City. However, since they are not a land use, they are not included in the land use calculations for the city. Open water constitutes approximately 334% City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 15 Table 3B 32 Or-nann- Planne Land IT- Q.1 Land Use Categor 2029 reae "Zo 9€ 2M °moo 0 2040 A er-eag- 0% 9€ Rural v',e 1L14 .44-Y 8. 4 4-% 1l��^1l4 .44�% 8.4 01l4 9. 4 4 -% .4-�-% Rural Residential 2q9-3 l o� 2295 l o� 2295 19.43% island Rest to«tial 635 0.450% 6-5 0. 4 5 -% 67 0.45-% Urban Tow Density Residential 2440 4-5-.4 24-99 15.16% 2189 15.16% Urban >`4edi,,ri. Density Residential 4-5-2 1.069% 4-5 607 -1-52 1.00% TTr1,.,„ AiTo.l 77:..7./Mixed Use Tlon s: t.. Residential 0.570%82 0.579%92 n Urban High Density Reside t 1 64 9:45% 64 0. 4 59% 64 0:450% l fidustFiall 4/2 42 UnrL Uon,-ontionnl and !l. en C...,..o 1472 4-7N �0.29-�pB� �Y�tl75 7 YY2e �tl���90% 11:967% 7 1720 �.�90% 11:767% Lake and Open Lx/..ty. 524 36..-44°/% 524 36.440% 524- 36..440% T iTajof- L7:..hwa and Rail , a 7-73 5.3791v 7-7-3 5.37-� 7-7-3 5 TOTAL 44-3j ^�3 U"- 44,-M 4 -AA e 189 0 Setif .( e! Pfo ed Land Use Map Table 313-3: Orono Planned Land Use Summary Land Use Category 2020 Acreage % of City 2030 Acreage % of City 2040 Acreage % of City Rural Preserve (1 unit / 5 acres) 1214 8.44% 1214 8.44% 1214 8.44% Rural Residential (1 unit / 2 acres) 2808 19.52% 2808 19.52% 2808 19.52% Island Residential 65 0.45% 65 0.45% 65 0.45% Urban Low Density Residential (0.5 - 2 units /acre) 2180 15.16% 2180 15.16% 2180 15.16% Urban Medium Density Residential (3 -10 units/ acre 152 1.06% 152 1.06% 152 1.06% Urban Med-High Residential/ Mixed Use (10 - 20 units / acre 82 0.57% 82 0.57% 82 0.57% Urban High Density Residential (20 -25 units per acre 64 0.45% 64 0.45% 64 0.45% Commercial/ Office 54 0.38% 1 54 0.38% 54 0.38% Industrial 42 0.29% 42 0.29% 42 0.29% Park, Recreational and Open Space TOTAL$1 1720 11.96% 1720 11.96% 1720 11.96% 58% Source: Proposed Land Use Map The Plan does not suggest a change in land use over the next 20 years, after the adoption of this Update. The land uses identified in Map3B-3a and Map 313-3b are outlined in greater detail below. 1. Lakes and Open Water Areas within the city boundary of open water. The Lakes and associated watersheds are a significant influence on the quality of life and character of the City. However, since they are not a land use, they are not included in the land use calculations for the city. Open water constitutes approximately 334% City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 15 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan of the surface area of the Ci 2. Rural Preserve (1 unit per 5 acres) The northwest corner of the City is planned for a lower density of one unit per five acres. This area has been developed to provide large lot and quasi agricultural home sites. The extension of municipal water or sewer is not intended for these areas. Residential dwelling units will be provided as single family detached structures. 3. Rural Residential (1 unit per 2 acres) This is the typical rural residential density developed and planned to be permanently self-supporting. No rural density will be allowed greater than one unit per two acres except for those residences in existing rural housing clusters that were originally developed many decades ago and in most cases have been provided with municipal sewer within the past 3 decades. New rural developments may include housing clustering when environmental and site conditions allow, provided the overall density within the development conforms to these requirements, and provided that all sewage treatment needs can be adequately met within. Residential dwelling units will be provided as single family detached structures. 4. Urban Low Residential (0.5-2 units per acre) This is intended for areas that have developed in a land use pattern of lots developed many decades ago smaller than 1 acre, and have access to sanitary sewer services. These lots have a particular impact on lake water quality, and lake character and storm water management, massing, and hardcover controls are critical to the retention of this character. Residential dwelling units will be provided as single family detached structures. Urban Medium Residential (3-10 units per acre) This higher density will be reserved for properties deemed by the City Council to be so uniquely situated that residential development at the prescribed density will not negatively impact surrounding land uses. Such properties must have municipal sewer and water available. Other factors that will be taken into consideration in determining the appropriate locations for this density will include proximity to and the need for other urban utilities and services in relation to the proposed use; transportation system impacts and site access; and the ability of the proposed use to meet City housing goals. Residential dwelling units will be provided as single and two family structures. 6. Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Residential (10-20 units per acre) This land use designation is reserved for specific sites, which based on their proximity to services and transportation corridors are deemed appropriate for higher density projects. The Mixed Use Residential designation is intended for established commercial areas on higher classification transportation routes to introduce an element of higher density residential. This residential component will serve to augment the commercial uses with a near -by customer base and to provide an efficient use of land. The properties targeted for Mixed Use classification are in the Navarre area, including a number of commercially zoned properties abutting Shadywood Road, and additional commercial and residential properties abutting Shoreline Drive. This Mixed Use designation is intended to allow for the possibility of higher density multi -family residential development such as senior and assisted living, townhomes, condominiums or apartment buildings. Under the Mixed Use designation, properties currently zoned for residential use are not intended to be converted to commercial property, but existing commercial property could be converted to higher -density City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 16 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan residential use or mixed residential -commercial uses in the same buildings. The City may also consider new zoning standards to regulate potential mixed-use projects. The Metropolitan Council requires that communities provide a measurement of forecasted employment. Acceptable measures include floor area ratios, buildingprint percentages impervious surface percentages.The City anticipates mixed use within the context of the neighborhood, and not necessarily specific to a particular parcel. Where employed, the City can envision ground level commercial services, with 2nd and 3rd level residential, though that is not the expected universal development pattern. The employment and service centers in Orono are verX suburban in nature, equating to low Floor Area Ratios (FAR). The City anticipates development and redevelopment of its employment and service centers to continue that development pattern, given the City's goals toward open space, stormwater management, and relatively modest building scale. The Cit, anticipates its commercial and mixed use areas to be driven by retail and service industries, with a corresponding FAR between 0.2 and 0.35. Properties in Area E of Table 3B-4 and Map 3B-4 are the primary candidates for mixed use development, ..,hieh ear be both vett e a' or her-izonta . The City has identified 48 net acres of properties that could be developed or redeveloped in the next 20 years. Based on the height limit (30 feet) and the desire for commercial services to mix with residential, the City anticipates no more than 70% of Area E to convert to residential uses, the remaining 30% to Commercial—. AssumingaFAR ratio of 0.25 to 0.45, there is the potential of 418,000 and 731,000 sq ft of building area. Assuming Lap to a third of that being used for Commercial purposes, that nets between 125,400 and 219,500 sq ft of commercial space, in Area E. Total Sq Ft (Total 1/3 of area for Jobs, Assuming SF * FAR) Commercial 1000 sqft per worker FAR 522,720 172,498 172 0.25 FAR 940,896 310,496 310 0.45 Applying the Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey findings*, in particular the median square feet per worker, we can extrapolate a conservative estimate of 1000 sq ft per worker, based on likely retail, office or service employment, census region, climate, and number of floors. This ,yields a range of potential employment of between 172 and 310 workers in Area E alone. * Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey completed by the US Energy Information Administration, updated December, 2016 7. Urban High Density Residential (20-25 units per acre) This land use designation is reserved for specific sites, which based on their proximity to services and transportation corridors, are deemed appropriate for higher density projects. Other factors that will be taken into consideration in determining the appropriate locations for this density will include proximity to and the need for other urban utilities and services in relation to the proposed use; transportation system impacts and site access; and the ability of the proposed use to meet City housing goals. Residential dwelling units are anticipated to be provided as 4 unit townhomes, apartments, City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 17 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan condominiums, and senior housing structures, no higher than 30 feet in defined height. Island Residential (1 unit per 5 acres) The Island residential is characterized by limited access, utilities, and municipal services for properties originally developed as seasonal cabins. The Land use category is intended to preserve this land use without encouraging additional subdivision. This area is envisioned for seasonal occupancy in single family detached structures. 9. Commercial/ Office Commercial/ Office is the general land use describing 3 sub land use categories: Lakeshore Commercial, Navarre Commercial District, and Orono/ Long Lake Business District. Urban commercial development is limited to two areas which are provided with all the necessary urban services and facilities. LAKESHORE COMMERCIAL Lakeshore Commercial, restricted to lake access and lake user service businesses, including marinas, are appropriate for a lakeside community and require a lakeshore location. Special performance standards are necessary to assure protection of the lake environment. Parking, utilities, lake/ Highway access, and pedestrian circulation must be considered in siting new Lake Shore Commercial Uses. NAVARRE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. See also Urban Medium High Density Residential/ Mixed Use. The major commercial center of Orono will continue to be Navarre. This area will provide opportunity for neighborhood retail and service businesses, plus professional offices. Accessory functions such as offices and living units or limited multi -family developments will be considered appropriate in or near the Navarre commercial area. The scale and type of retail uses in a pedestrian -friendly environment is the most important development parameter for the Navarre commercial area. The City will encourage redevelopment of individual commercial sites in Navarre to allow for an expanded range of neighborhood services and local small business opportunities. The Navarre Commercial District extends along either side of Shoreline Drive from the intersection of County Roads 15 and 19 westward to the Orono -Spring Park border, and along both sides of Shadywood Road from Lyric Avenue to Lydiard Avenue. The commercial uses along these intersecting corridors are typically only one tier deep, with virtually all commercial properties abutting either Shoreline Drive or Shadywood Road. Additionally, the commercial properties are not continuous, with residential properties scattered among them, making for a somewhat fragmented business district that is spread out over a mile in length from end to end. Along these two corridors the second tier of development is typically residential. Past City planning efforts for the Navarre area have identified a number of challenges to be addressed as Navarre redevelops in the years to come: 1. High traffic volumes and the existing traffic management infrastructure result in poor pedestrian accessibility. Pedestrians have limited options for crossing CR 15 or CR 19. The Park and Ride facility location and inflexibility of bus routes (partially due to the location and configuration of the P&R lot) requires that bus patrons cross CR 15 on at least one leg of their commute. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 311, Page 18 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan 2. Parking availability is a limiting factor for expansion or redevelopment of existing businesses. 3. Beautification efforts are hindered by road width and right-of-way constraints as well as financial constraints. 4. Aging buildings are ripe for redevelopment yet provide low rental rates that allow local businesses to survive and thrive, reducing the incentive to redevelop. 5. There is little architectural cohesiveness among the existing buildings. 6. Compatibility of certain business uses with the closely adjacent residential neighborhood can become an issue. 7. Desire to expand pedestrian connectivity to adjoining neighborhoods and to Dakota Rail Trail. 8. Introduction of higher density mixed use (residential and commercial) development to select sites identified in the Land Use Plan. ORONO/LONG LAKE BUSINESS AREA An additional commercial area is designated along Wayzata Boulevard where the availability of transportation and utilities as well as proximity to similar commercial developments in Orono and Long Lake, make commercial use appropriate. Orono will coordinate its commercial development planning related to Wayzata Boulevard area with the City of Long Lake to ensure the Long Lake downtown area remains vital and viable, to focus retail development in a compact downtown retail area, and to prevent the extension of retail development west of Willow Drive in Orono. The retail development in the Wayzata Boulevard area will be community or neighborhood scale rather than "big box" regional scale development. The types of retail uses will be those that focus on providing services to the residents and businesses of Long Lake and Orono, while also drawing from the reduced traffic stream on Wayzata Boulevard resulting from opening of the new Highway 12 corridor. However, the retail development is not to draw substantial traffic from beyond Orono. The development plans for the Highway 12 area will encourage locally -owned and operated businesses that provide services to Orono and Long Lake residents. Additionally, the Highway 12 retail area will be a pedestrian -friendly area. This involves providing trails/sidewalks along the roadways providing access to the retail uses. It also involves providing public amenities that provide a sense of place and provide a gathering place for the public. Parameters for commercial use of this area are as follows: 1. The area affected is property lying between Kelley Parkway and Wayzata Boulevard, west of Willow Drive and east of Old Crystal Bay Road. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 311, Page 19 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan 2. Allowed uses in this area include professional offices, limited service uses, retail uses accessory to the office use, and senior and assisted living uses. 3. Access to all uses will be via Kelley Parkway. Direct access to Willow Drive, if allowed, are intended to be right-in/right-out only. There shall be no direct access points onto Wayzata Boulevard. 4. "Big box" retail uses will not be allowed within this area. 9. Park/ Recreation/ Open Space Park, Recreation, and Open Space Land Use includes public and private parks and natural areas throughout the community. The recreational facilities identified on the Land Use Plan are principally large natural or open space areas which are compatible with their Rural Area location. 10. Industrial This district provides space for industrial activities for companies that are able and willing to achieve superior standards of design and environmental protection. Industrial land uses should be restricted to areas abutting major transportation corridors and individually cited so as to minimum negative impacts on residential areas. Based on their heavy hardcover needs, industrial areas should be located further than 1,000 feet from lakes. The Metropolitan Council requires that communities provide a measurement of forecasted employment. Acceptable measures include floor area ratios, building foo�print percentages or impervious surface percentages. Orono anticipates that new development in the Industrial land use will tend to result in FAR of 0.32 to 0.4. There is about 10 acres of vacant or underdeveloped industrially_guided property. Applying the same methodology as outlined in the Mixed Use section: Total Sa Ft (Total SF * Jobs. Assumin£ 1500 saft per FAR warehouse worker FAR 0.32 139,392 93 FAR 0.40 174,240 116 The City can anticipate an additional 93-116 jobs upon the full buildout of the Industrial areas. These two areas, using the conservative estimates outlines, demonstrate Orono can accommodate employment growth projections. 11. Major Highway and Railway Uses Identifies land occupied by federal or state highways and railway improvements. NAVARRE AREA PLAN In 2018, the City completed the Navarre Area Plan (NAP) with the aid of a Planning Consultant, WSB and Associates. This planning process focused on the land range vision and land use goals for the Navarre area, and to inform the Comprehensive Plan, for this update. The proposed land uses shown on Map 3B- 3 include the findings from the Navarre Area Plan. Map 313-3a shows the Navarre area specifically. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 311, Page 20 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan The Navarre Planning Process employed a Planning Advisory Committee (PAC), consisting of 13 members of the Navarre area community, including business owners and operators and residents. The Planning Process included three PAC meetings, an open house in January, and a Joint Work session in April. Public comment was collected via the open house, work session, on-line surveys, and the use of a social media tool, Social Pinpoint. The full report, including the appendices detailing the comments received, and the market study, are attached in Appendix 3B -A of this chapter. The NAP evaluated several factors influencing the changes in the Navarre neighborhood over the next 20 years, including the market, traffic and transportation. The goal of the PAC was to influence and guide this change toward a Navarre area that can serve as a pseudo "downtown" of Orono, while still respecting the core Orono values as a small, rural community. A market study was completed by Maxfield and Associates, tested the land use assumptions made by the land use plan. The market study was used to adjust the planned land use map from the 2030 to the 2040 Plan. Traffic and transportation issues are a major influence on the character and change in Navarre. In 2019, Hennepin County is expected to improve the intersection of County Roads 15 and 19 (Shoreline and Shadywood Road), though these improvements are not expected to increase capacity. Capacity challenges of this section of the community are discussed in the Transportation Chapter. The findings of the Navarre Area Plan are highlighted below. Interaction with Lake Minnetonka ■ As part of any redevelopment proposals involving parcels on the south side of Shoreline Drive between Carman Street and Kelly Avenue, the City should work with developers to identify opportunity areas that allow for viewing, sitting, and walking near the lakeshore. Fishing or boating connections to Lake Minnetonka are not anticipated. Future Development ■ Cautiously consider allowing increased building heights and residential density in areas along Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road (where appropriate) to increase pedestrian traffic and encourage additional retail development. ■ Consider incorporating incentives into the zoning ordinance that allow for higher density in exchange for enhanced architectural features, underground parking, public amenities, plazas, open spaces, and recreation areas. ■ Adopt architectural and design regulations where appropriate to require pedestrian scale design. Consider regulations for maximum building setbacks, minimum window coverage, location of parking facilities, architectural materials, facade articulation, and entryways. ■ Review all permitted and conditional commercial uses within zoning districts along Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road to ensure that the types of desired businesses are allowed in Navarre. Types of allowable uses should focus on small scale neighborhood goods and services and avoid those that do not have a large customer draw. ■ Consider reduced parking requirements for businesses that provide bicycle parking. ■ Explore acquiring additional property for providing shared parking and periodic public gatherings for Navarre businesses. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 21 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan Host a developer round table to discuss obstacles to development in Navarre. Be prepared to address those obstacles. Consider developing a fagade improvement program to encourage the revitalization of neglected commercial buildings. Revolving loan funds may keep the money working within Navarre. Transportation Improvements ■ Work with Hennepin County on a plan for future improvements to Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road that improves safety and mobility for pedestrians and cyclists. Consider eliminating some of the free right turns at the northwest, southwest, and southeast corners to help narrow the intersection, reduce speeds, and improve vehicle predictability. Check in with Hennepin County staff bimonthly and use the Navarre Small Area Plan PAC as the review committee for potential improvements. ■ Explore options for adding pedestrian and streetscaping amenities with any roadway improvements such as wider sidewalks, decorative pavement, landscaping, benches, and other ornamental features. ■ Meet with Hennepin County transportation staff to discuss potential improvements to alternate arterials that would relieve traffic pressure on Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road through Navarre. Discuss options to reduce traffic volumes on Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road. ■ Consider plans for access and the impact of expected traffic volume on Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road with any redevelopment along these roads. Work with Hennepin County on developing an access management plan for properties that may redevelop along these roadways. Shadywood Trail Connection ■ Continue to have discussions with Hennepin County and Three Rivers Park District regarding the trail connection along Shadywood Road to keep the process moving forward. ■ Engage with impacted property owners early to identify necessary mitigation required. ■ Conduct additional public engagement regarding the trail as part of the community engagement surrounding the intersection improvements. Community Events ■ Encourage the development of a community festival. ■ Consider collaboration with nearby communities on an event that incorporates multiple destinations along the trail. ■ Utilize the city -owned parking lot on the north side of Shoreline Drive and west of Shadywood Road as a possible location for hosting tents, bands, and vendors associated with an event. ■ Should the block northwest of Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Lane (Maxfield Study Block 4) redevelop, that redevelop should include a space available for public gatherings such as an annual festival. ■ Leverage an annual festival as an opportunity to do enhanced branding for Navarre. ■ Explore opportunities for collaboration with the Mound farmers' market to organize a farmers' market along the Dakota Rail Trail in Navarre. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 311, Page 22 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan ■ Consider the formation of a Navarre Business Association. Tear Downs ■ Review development standards applicable to single-family homes in Navarre. Review to ensure that adequate controls are in place to ensure that new development is compatible with the existing character and scale of the neighborhood, while still encouraging the redevelopment of blighted properties. Such standards could include requirements for floor area ratio, height, hardcover, architectural materials, landscaping, and accessory structures. ■ Proactively address blighted properties through the City's code enforcement process so that existing homes are well maintained. Consider revisions to the City's code enforcement process or adopting fines if non-compliance is an issue. ■ Review its demolition and construction regulations. If the regulation updates require addition administration and monitoring by City staff, consideration should be given to increasing the demolition permit fee commensurate with the addition staffing demand. WHA TS CHANGED This update of the Comprehensive Plan introduces higher residential density along Kelley Parkway and Wayzata Boulevard, lowers density for the properties adjacent to the fire station on Willow, removes residential mixed use density along Shadywood, and introduces additional properties to potential mixed use development/ redevelopment along Shoreline in Navarre. These changes are all reflected on maps 313-3a and 313-3b. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT/STAGED DEVELOPMENT The City does not intend to establish a staged growth plan, limiting a property owner from the use of their land, provided the development can be accomplished within the performance standards, policies and requirements of the Community Management Plan. The City anticipates its growth to occur in the same manner has been employed over the last three decades. The majority of subdivision based growth will occur via the splitting of larger lots into subdivisions of less than 6 new building sites. Small areas of the community are conducive to higher density. These projects have served to accommodate our aging community, and provide additional housing and neighborhood options not prevalent in Orono. The City's new residential growth within the MUSA area is expected in one of 5 primary areas, depicted on Map 3134 Planned Development areas, and summarized in Table 3134, Predicted Growth in Sewered Areas. The table predicts growth over the next 2 decades and identifies the MUSA part and the Traffic Analysis Zone impacted. Assuming development at the minimum range, the city will meet its household growth projection for 2030 and 2040. The city also maintains opportunity for property owners to provide housing to meet affordability goals. The Net Density for the sewered areas of Orono identified in Table 3134, is summarized for clarity on Table 3B-5. The 891 units planned to be served by sanitary sewer services over the next 20 plus years yields a net density of 4.16 units per acre. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 311, Page 23 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan Predicted Growth in Sewered Areas, Net Density Table 313-4 (Continued) A B C D E F G H I Name Land Use Category Net Residential Acres (NRA) Lowest Guided Density Predicted # of units (C x D) 2021-2030 Growth (Households) 2031-2040 Growth (Households) MUSA Part TAZ Zone Area A Dumas Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Residential 10-20 u/a 25.1 10 251 251 32 921 Eisinger Flats Urban High (20-25 u/a) 10 20 200 200 50 921 Area A Total 35.1 451 451 0 Area B St. Thomas Prop Urban High (20-25 u/a) 3.69 20 73.8 73.8 10 922 2060 Wayzata Urban High (20-25 u/a) 2.51 20 50.2 50.2 10 923 Area B Total 6.2 1 124 50.2 1 73.8 Area C, North Fire Station Area Hwy 12 frontage Urban Medium 1.71 3 5.13 5.13 34 929 Garden Prop. Urban Medium 3.41 3 10.23 10.23 34 929 Glendale Drive Urban Medium 3.82 3 11.46 11.46 34 929 Area C Total 8.94 26.82 0 26.82 Area D (Sewer extension into large lot areas/ Lake protection) Urban Low Density 690 Brown Rd Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 18 0.5 9 9 40 927 740 Brown Rd Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 3.18 0.5 1.59 1.59 40 927 3400 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 5.26 0.5 2 2 31 954 3295 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 4.23 0.5 2 2 31 931 3345 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 4.69 0.5 2 2 31 931 3350 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 7.12 0.5 3 3 31 954 3320 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 3.06 0.5 1 1 31 954 3300 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 4.55 0.5 2 2 31 954 3280 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 4.95 0.5 2 2 31 954 3250 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 5.31 0.5 2 2 31 954 3200 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 4.12 0.5 2 2 31 954 3175 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 7.49 0.5 3 3 31 954 3125 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 7.44 0.5 3 1 3 31 954 825 Old Crystal Bay I Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 17.61 0.5 8 8 31 954 1700 Shoreline Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 20.14 0.5 10 10 37 955 1100 Millston Rd Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 12.7 0.5 6 6 37 955 1003 Wildhurst Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 10 0.5 4 4 1 953 Area D Total 1 139.85 1 62.59 0 62.59 City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 311, Page 24 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan Predicted Growth in Sewered Areas, Net Density Table 3134 A B C D E F G H I Name Land Use Category Net Residential Acres (NRA) Lowest Guided Density Predicted # ofunits (C xD) 2021-2030 Growth (Households) 2031-2040 Growth (Households) MUSA Part TAZ Zone Area A Dumas Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Residential 10-20 u/a 25.1 10 251 251 XXXII 921 Eisinger Flats Urban High (20-25 u/a) 10 20 200 200 L 921 Area A Total 35.1 451 451 0 Area B St. Thomas Prop Urban High (20-25 u/a) 3.69 20 73.8 73.8 X 922 2060 Wayzata Urban High (20-25 u/a) 2.51 20 50.2 50.2 X 923 Area B Total 6.2 124 50.2 73.8 Area C, North Fire Station Area Hwy 12 frontage Urban Medium 1.71 3 5.13 5.13 XXXIV 929 Garden Prop. Urban Medium 3.41 3 10.23 10.23 XXXIV 929 Glendale Drive Urban Medium 3.82 3 11.46 11.46 XXXIV 929 Area D (Sewer extension into large lot areas/ Lake protection) Urban Low Density 690 Brown Rd Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 18 0.5 9 9 XL 927 740 Brown Rd Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 3.18 0.5 1.59 1.59 XL 927 3400 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 5.26 0.5 2 2 XXXI 954 3295 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 4.23 0.5 2 2 XXXI 931 3345 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 4.69 0.5 2 2 XXXI 931 3350 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 7.12 0.5 3 3 XXXI 954 3320 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 3.06 0.5 1 1 XXXI 954 3300 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 4.55 0.5 2 2 XXXI 954 3280 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 4.95 0.5 2 2 XXXI 954 3250 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 5.31 0.5 2 2 XXXI 954 3200 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 4.12 0.5 2 2 XXXI 954 3175 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 7.49 0.5 3 3 XXXI 954 3125 Fox Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 7.44 0.5 3 3 XXXI 954 825 Old Crystal Bay R Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 17.61 0.5 8 8 XXXI 954 1700 Shoreline Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 20.14 0.5 10 10 XXXXVII 955 1100 Millston Rd Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 12.7 0.5 6 6 XXXXVII 955 1003 Wildhurst Urban Low (0.5-2 Units /Acre) 10 0.5 4 4 I 953 Area D Total 139.85 62.59 0 62.59 City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 25 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan Predicted Growth in Sewered Areas, Net Density Table 313-4 (Continued) A B C D E F G H I Net Lowest Predicted # of 2021-2030 2031-2040 Name Land Use Category Residential Guided units (C x Growth Growth MUSA Part TAZ Acres (NRA) Density D) (Households) (Households) Zone Area E Navarre Area 3880 Shoreline Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 9.37 10 93.7 93.7 1 958 (Hennepin Count Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3890 Shoreline 0.68 10 6.8 6.8 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3860 Shoreline 0.64 10 6.4 6.4 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3850 Shoreline 0.78 10 7.8 7.8 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3800 Shoreline 0.7 10 7 7 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3596 Shoreline 0.62 10 6.2 6.2 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 2389 Blaine 1.11 10 11.1 11.1 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3574 Shoreline 0.47 10 4.7 4.7 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3572 Shoreline 0.31 10 3.1 3.1 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3542 Shoreline 0.46 10 4.6 4.6 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3502 Shoreline 0.31 10 3.1 3.1 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3496 Shoreline 0.31 10 3.1 3.1 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3480 Shoreline 0.15 10 1.5 1.5 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a) Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3472 Shoreline 0.15 10 1.5 1.5 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3468 Shoreline 0.15 10 1.5 1.5 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3465 Lyric 0.62 10 6.2 6.2 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3440 Shoreline 0.15 10 1.5 0.9 1 958 Residential (10-20 u/a) Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Forfiet Land 0.15 10 1.5 1.5 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Forfiet Land 0.1 10 1 1 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Parking Lot 0.86 10 8.6 8.6 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a 2520 Shadywood Urban Medium Density (3-10 u/a) 2.02 3 6.06 6.06 1 1 956 3770 Shoreline Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 4 10 40 40 1 958 Firestation Residential 10-20 u/a Area E Total 24.11 226.96 46.06 180.3 Planned Totals 891 547 l i City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 311, Page 26 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan Predicted Growth in Sewered Areas, Net Density Table 313-4 (Continued) A B C D E F G H I Net Lowest Predicted # of 2021-2030 2031-2040 Name Land Use Category Residential Guided units (C x Growth Growth MUSA Part TAZ Acres (NRA) Density D) (Households) (Households) Zone Area E Navarre Area 3880 Shoreline Urban Medium High/ Mined Use (Hennepin Count Residential 10-20 u/a 9.37 10 93.7 93.7 I 958 Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3890 Shoreline 0.68 10 6.8 6.8 I 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3860 Shoreline 0.64 10 6.4 6.4 I 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3850 Shoreline Residential 10-20 u/a 0.78 10 7.8 7.8 1 958 Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3800 Shoreline 0.7 10 7 7 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3596 Shoreline 0.62 10 6.2 6.2 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 2389 Blaine Residential 10-20 u/a 1.11 10 11.1 11.1 I 958 Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3574 Shoreline Residential 10-20 u/a 0.47 10 4.7 4.7 I 958 Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3572 Shoreline 0.31 10 3.1 3.1 I 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medimn]`Ii�h/ Mixed Ike Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3502 Shoreline Residential 10-20 u/a 0.31 10 3.1 3.1 T 958 Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3496 Shoreline 0.31 10 3.1 3.1 I 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3480 Shoreline 0.15 10 1.5 1.5 I 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3472 Shoreline Residential 10-20 u/a 0.15 10 1.5 1.5 T 958 3468 Shoreline Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 0.15 10 1.5 1.5 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3465 Lyric 0.62 10 6.2 6.2 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 3440 Shoreline Residential 10-20 u/a 0.15 10 1.5 0.9 1 958 Forfiet Land Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use 0.15 10 1.5 1.5 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Forfiet Land 01 10 1 1 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Parking Lot 0.86 10 8.6 8.6 1 958 Residential 10-20 u/a 2520 Shadywood Urban Medium Density (3-10 u/a) 2.02 3 6.06 6.06 l 956 3770 Shoreline Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Iffirestation)Residential 10-20u/a 4 10 40 40 1 958 Area E Total 24.11 1 226.96 46.06 180.3 Planned Totaism 214.2 891 547 344 City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 27 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan Table 313-5 Net Density by Land Use Households Planned Development Area Net Residential Acres (NRA) # of units (NRA x lowest guided density) Urban Low Residential (0.5-2 u/a) 139.9 62.5 Urban Medium Residential (3-10 u/a) Year 11.0 32.9 Urban Medium High/ Mixed Use Residential (10-20 u/a) 2030 Est. 47.2 471.9 Urban High Density Residential (20- 25 u/a) 16.2 324.0 Totals 214.2 891 Net Density of Sewered Growth Households (all 4.16 This Net Density of Sewered Growth is consistent with the Emerging Suburban Edge designation requiring 3-5 units per acre. 63% of the land (and 6% of the number of households) identified for future sewered growth falls within Orono's Urban Low Density areas. Development of these areas typically follows a piecemeal pattern as individual properties split into 1-3 units, where lots can accommodate subdivision. 20% of the land (and 40% of the identified for future growth) is in the Navarre area; Due to the costs associated with redevelopment, including acquisition of multiple parcels, and the city's conservative view of public financial aid to private sector development, it is anticipated that this growth will be slow. The balance of the predicted sewered growth will occur on the remaining larger parcels where municipal services are available currently. Table 3B-6 below illustrates that based on predicted development patterns, the City can meet its projected growth in the sewered areas. Table 3B-6 Planned Development in MUSA areas by Decade Households Change Change Year 2010 2016 2020 Est. 2030 Est. from 2040 Est from 2016 2030 Households (all city) 2826 3037 3200 3,560 523 3,900 340 Growth predicted (MUSA areas only) 547 343 Surplus (Deficit) 24 3 Source: Metropolitan Council System Statement, City Utility Accounts, Table 313-4 Based on the planned growth identified in Table 3B-4, there are no negative impacts to wastewater or transportation systems. At build out, additional water storage and/or conservation measures may be necessary in the Navarre area, as described in Chapter 4C of this Plan. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 311, Page 28 CMP Part 3B. General Land Use Plan EMPLOYMENT Employment levels in the City have grown slowly, and are expected to remain static over the next two decades, as shown in Figure 313-1 below and Table 313-1. 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Employment 1970 - 2040 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2020 2030 2040 Figure 3B-1 Employment As illustrated in Figure 313-2, Education services are highest employer by industry at 32% of all jobs in Orono. Retail trade is the third highest employer at 15% of jobs. The City anticipates employment growth to occur as existing businesses evolve and grow. With the exception of new commercial areas along the west side of Shadywood, the City does not anticipate the expansion of commercial areas in the city. Employment by Industry in Orono Real Estate and Rental and Leasing, Professional and Technical Seances. S%— RetaiI Trade. 15:k - All Other Industries, Gare and Social ,Assistance. s% }ublic .Administration, 4% / -Finance and Insurance. 4% ,—Other Ser0c es, Ex. Public Admin. d% ,3% ng, 2% ve and 'haste Services. 1% Services, 32:6 I Source; Quarterly Census; of Employment and Wages, Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, 2nd quarter data: Metr000litan CouncH staff have estimated some data points. Figure 313-2 Employment by Industry City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 3B, Page 29 CMP Part 313. General Land Use Plan HISTORIC SITE PRESERVATIONPLAN Orono began to develop in the mid 19th Century, and many of the vestiges of early development are still present, in the form of standing buildings and structures, foundations, fence lines, roadway corridors, place names and other more subtle reminders of the past. Additionally, due to Orono's unique location on the shores of Lake Minnetonka, prehistoric native burial mound sites are known to have existed in various locations throughout the City. Orono has long encouraged the preservation of historic sites and structures, but has never adopted a formal preservation plan. Because no formal plan has been in place, many historic properties have been lost or significantly changed as development and redevelopment progressed. The subdividing of many of the old lakeshore estate properties has typically left a stately mansion surrounded by modern high-end homes rather than formal grounds. The City is fortunate that the West Hennepin Pioneer's Association Museum is located in neighboring Long Lake, with its members serving as an invaluable resource for helping to preserve the past. Historic Preservation Policies 1. In order to ensure that Orono's heritage is preserved, the City will consider development of a Historic Preservation Plan. The intent of such a plan would be to establish goals, policies and local regulations resulting in preservation of historic sites, buildings, place names, corridors, etc. 2. Orono will work with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in determining whether properties proposed for development contain historically significant resources which should be preserved. City of Orono Community Management Plan 2020-2040 Part 311, Page 30 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN a, Turner Road 0O a°. Drake Or 26wA Painter boa W Branch Road Sunnyfield Road E v 0 is m Game Farm R°ad E Dutch Lake Legend Moline Road 0 CL M 19N County Road 151 z c Jenning Bay Harrison Bay :w .r : City Limits Lakes & Ponds 11 +t 2040 MUSA Rivers & Streams .i 0 3,500 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT Defined Urban and Rural Areas February 2019 • w w r r w r? w w w w 1 •1 \< • p 6t 1` o ,�swrrwwe, goad hgVeAt 1 r 3 w 1 S Z pr/ng 3 w rl w•z -a O 0 m r 10 Kelley Ploy • � :w z \� 12 Z, / 7.1 ► ^ iw r ILL r 1 m . 1 A �OrcFiarq��Ci n �< 4� Grand ° ' O 1 1 �G ` w ;o 9g La w 1 v+� e ♦ w ° 81 .� r'' • ii •.w 1 'Ao�� r �9 % •1 Wayzata Blvd • W, 1 _.. W/ii i Ai <yricAve Bay t1 ♦� e ' y �L Sprin, j p, G` Ca, ~1 `♦. 0 ,.� �♦ 00 II t,♦ �o Wayzata Bay Ave J Minnetonka Blvd Highland Ave Urbanand Rural Areas Defined Rural Areas Defined Urban Areas I�1 BOLT MENK Real People. Real Solutions. Map 313-1 Ave N PI Recreational Trail Railroad Right - of -Way 12 Fox Std m Pw ° �'� 1.1 • • � / R w w w w r .► �► 1 o� l U 1 0 Shore or / 1 1 / 1 r I �. r`' 1 shoreline Or 1 � 1 1 Lafayette Ai <yricAve Bay t1 ♦� e ' y �L Sprin, j p, G` Ca, ~1 `♦. 0 ,.� �♦ 00 II t,♦ �o Wayzata Bay Ave J Minnetonka Blvd Highland Ave Urbanand Rural Areas Defined Rural Areas Defined Urban Areas I�1 BOLT MENK Real People. Real Solutions. Map 313-1 Ave N PI Recreational Trail Railroad Right - of -Way 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN M — Turner Road 000 M. o: Drake Dr 3 O 01 Q Moline Road r 12 Sta„ r o � � Q i W v eN Cr_ as z 0 r GG T Q + r 19N Existing Land Use L L Y � PrP - IL, I co • cC Lat / w Sprin > v // 1 z "19 I M U 5. -0 �, 4 0 Inset 1 Y, ,_ Long r �Osoil.Kelle ♦� LaKee� Y m`40 Daniels StMM �1 � Grand A OrcFiard��n!. • as it o ! OWhR O 1 �^ * <><.y �— � r.+°g Lake r '� Inset 1 1 rsaA co �.i ` - '-�:,.,� Lr��' . -.-i . ♦� l �.may► i. ,� .. . • �i � °�11 0010 . wl 'd ' 1 .,.�'' ` l Wayzata Bill N_ mi .. d W._ .� ♦ �� ♦ _.. _ 12,_ �.. ♦ cn 1 r 1 o Dutch Lake Legend �' •r : City Limits I�+t 2040 MUSA Harrison Bay Lakes & Ponds Rivers & Streams 0 3,500 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT Urban High (1 unit/ 5 acres) Stubbs it 1 Density 'Poa 1 ;� PW Rural Residential (1 N ♦ r i - 1 Office Island ♦ # - Browns Road Residential ge) Bay Urban Low Painters Maxwell ake Recreational, Bay French `o- �s Marsh W Branch Road 1 Shore r Density Undeveloped 'County Road 151: 1 Nor Right -of -Way 1 rV y w Arrr Smith Bracketts r %1 Bay Point Sunnyfield Road Er 1 Foie 1 i" Crystal Boh0 Bay ♦r•�r. __. Lake E.a Lake 1 � Jenninc �.� Bay 1 1 Dutch Lake Legend �' •r : City Limits I�+t 2040 MUSA Harrison Bay Lakes & Ponds Rivers & Streams 0 3,500 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT .i <yric Ave Inset 21 C Pc 1 A IN��'.. e Inset 2 H 4 Rutlr rl rr A; Lake v 0 W° February 2019 Land Use Classes BOLTN /1 & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. DICk UY6 Lake 23rd Ave N Rural Preserve Urban High (1 unit/ 5 acres) Stubbs it 1 Density Bay RI ,1 I 1 Fox Sty m ;� PW Rural Residential (1 N ♦ i - i i' Office Island ♦ # - Browns 1 Residential ge) Bay Urban Low Maxwell ake Recreational, Bay French and Open Marsh Space 1 Shore r Density Undeveloped Residential (3 - 10 units / acre) Right -of -Way 1 — Smith Bracketts Bay Point 1 I .oma, `♦`� 1 Crystal Boh0 Bay ♦r•�r. __. Poi �1 Lake 1 � �.� ..a 1 1 i A .i <yric Ave Inset 21 C Pc 1 A IN��'.. e Inset 2 H 4 Rutlr rl rr A; Lake v 0 W° February 2019 Land Use Classes BOLTN /1 & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. DICk UY6 Lake 23rd Ave N Rural Preserve Urban High (1 unit/ 5 acres) Density Residential (20 Rural Residential (1 - 25 units / acre) unit / 2 acres) Commercial / Office Island Residential Industrial Urban Low Park, Density Residential (0.5 Recreational, - 2 units / acre) and Open Space Urban Medium Density Undeveloped Residential (3 - 10 units / acre) Right -of -Way Map 313-2a 1� 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN 1 c To RoR IT 1 ~�Ln Vi� L Road Warren WArm Dr Legend Northern dQ, y� 00, j od Crysta ISP I, a' Livingston Ave Lyri" 097—, T-7-7-1 I- , I 1 1V—O iew N° a oto old County Ro,, Westwoo Existing Land Use - Navarre BOLTON February 2019 & M E N K Real People. Real Solutions. iia Vl Lafayette ie Dr. 1 .._.._ ar...�.._.._.._.._.._..,• Bay ,7\N• 0 ".,✓ �- e/y > 96�/� / /o a ;.\ �.A / Land Use Classes rm1. man's • dd ♦ ♦ I• casco ;♦ Po in t :_ •r : City Limits Lakes & Ponds Wetlands Rivers & Streams 0 1,000 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT D01 4h Rural Preserve High Density (1 unit/ 5 acres) Residential (7- 20 units / acre) Rural Residential (1 unit / 2 acres) Commercial / Office Island Residential Industrial Low Density Park, Residential (0.5 - 2 units / acre) Recreational, and Open Medium Density Space Residential (2-7 units / acre) Undeveloped Right -of -Way Map 3B -2b 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN M — Turner Road coo O d' Drake Dr 3 0 01 z' o� A t- d%nter CreeK a M o 0 Q Moline Road c W CL 19N Painter W Branch Road Road Dutch Lake Legend �' •r : City Limits I�+t 2040 MUSA Future Land Use February 2019 Katrina,r.� 12 Lake s o rq . _ .. �� �..�-.�-.-.-_,.,.�-•--� •-•, f� �i� = 0 O\ �-wwwwwwwwwwwww es, _. •1 � WV% ♦ Z e Iwo r ,. - t6 IC al ���J 6 i� o oad ��e I m 3 0 - � N 8 Lake ° Lak c %� ♦ SpS!n ���� a j 9 w • Pve N Clas o w w 18 1� v Inset Y.`•w Long s�i � � Lie i O Kelley_Pkwy a. z �. Il�r�� M co 40 0 w ,76 w Daniels $t • X11 dm c� w r Orchardi� W lzata ;'Blvd 11. 10/q `4` 1 e Grand Ave n �oh9 Lakes w-� —�`� Inset 3r Ave N /; _ �ad• 1 rw •'^�•� ♦��a'. ,��,v►a. �. 00 1.1 _..�f0 Northerrr,A�e � •r00 J, Z w �w r w a. C � r� Cy`�� 12r is w wt ■ •w1 o t ��► 1 1 Stubbs 1 1 1 °� y a rr m " ■ r ��' 0 Ba C .. /L♦ r r wL■ — a r♦7O , .� %I > �► �� e� Lake .�16 � 11J era cca pT,, 9 ity Road 151 c rU Ir r l; 4Fo JennincBay L_ Harrison Bay Lakes & Ponds Rivers & Streams 0 3,500 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT 1 �0Browns 1 .ye Bay ke a 1 1 1 Smith Bracketts Bay Point 1 i ■'��.� Lake r'� i 1 �j A i BOLTN /1 & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. 23rd Ave N Dlck UYS Lake - yric Ave Shoreline D Inset 2 Land Use Classes Rural Preserve Urban Medium Density (1 unit/ 5 acres) High Density Residential / Urban Low Rural Mixed Use (10 - - 25 units / acre) Residential (1 20 units / acre) unit / 2 acres) H 4 Rutlr rl rr A; Lake v 0 W Map 313-3a Urban High Island Density Residential Residential (20 Urban Low - 25 units / acre) Density Commercial / Residential (0.5 Office - 2 units / acre) Urban Medium + Industrial Density Residential (3 - Park, 10 units / acre) Recreational, and Open Space Map 313-3a Legend 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN ------------ Togo Road Ln Crystal PI Road ortt ern Av r: - > "--� Warren w WArm Dr Livingston Ave �n8 St Ly�i� Shoreline Dr a del Otero Ave ��_ .. moi' : , .. �, TT 1 / O�Ja 1 Sp rin 0 I 1 Park Bay 1 c ; 1 •r City Limits Lakes & Ponds Wetlands Rivers & Streams 0 1,000 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT D01 Future Land Use - Navarre BOLTON February 2019 I & M E N K Real People. Real Solutions. oroview Road Itkd Westwood Road m 6roo� l n o i 0 a fl. a� \ \ �a��''° iOld County Rollo, Cry4La' o eIli-11, 1 v h%mai L afaYoe. tte ie Ur I gay 0 . -- a ,�• f 0 :a a Land Use Classes Rural Preserve (1 unit/ 5 acres) � - �— 1 � f /� � Rural manm �+ — _� I, Residential (1 t7 r I I ! r•'C%' o unit / 2 acres) dd ' ♦' Island ♦�Residential 'e Urban Low �► Density ♦' Residential (0.5 ♦•� - 2 units / acre) ♦�♦ Urban Medium ♦�♦ Density ♦'� Residential (3 - ♦' 10 units / acre) I• I/aSCo ;♦ Map 3B -3b Po in t <h c A ,$ Oma. Urban Medium High Density Residential / Mixed Use (10 - 20 units / acre) Urban High Density Residential (20 - 25 units / acre) Commercial / Office Industrial Park, Recreational, and Open Space 2040 Comprehensive Plan Orono, MN coM Turner Road R }O I� Drake Dr V / � G�eev, et Q 0 0 C 7 Moline Road 0 _ ya 19N 26 J Planned Development Sites February 2019 Z i Sta d <o Y R d Moon Tr e 0 N o Ile ♦wmrmwftw�� �a 6u - ° d q 1. r _ c w `Spring Pye N a C 1 Z o 6S` a M m Lyd Z. - i� o Lon e i m c� Daniels St 40 8th Ave N H 12 .. Grand Ave � .�Qa�°;��le 1 t / _� r a g LakQ 1 w i 3rd R ...rte ♦ 1 i �a ; ♦ 1 Wayzata Blv Ysigre o' / 1 ♦ 1 .. d W R°dd ��_ .. 1 2 Pak High r �IcvA� �ainterRoad 1� v�� r 4% W Branch Road County Road 1.51 0,� Sunnyfield Road E # a OZ 3 � c Jennings j Bay 1 m m Game Farm. Road E w� w , U Dutch Lake in Harrison Bay Lyriwood Blvd E O Shoreline or Legend _' •� : City Limits a. 1� ,r 2040 MUSA r�� LNJ Lakes & Ponds Rivers & Streams 0 3,500 Feet Source: Met. Council, City of Orono, Hennepin County, MnDOT 1 Nest 1 1 Spring; j Pa 1 j North Arm Stubbs Bay c? Maxwel�,.'"� Bay \� Shore D r French Marsh �• Crystal Bohn- ori Bay Point ♦ 1 1 Lafavette 1 404* Browns 1 Pe Fo�� y, ,,:,_,ge Bay ake 1 1 1 Smith Bracketts Point 1 1 1 Rice St R WaY2a Lake St P � 1 Nayzata Bay Ave Blvd E ! IDevelopment Areas w, A - Orchard BOLTN /1 & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. B - Kelley Pkwy. / Wayzata Blvd. High Density / Mixed Use Sites Ave N Z c J C - Fire Station R 0 D - 2 Acre Sewered t L E - Navarre 9 Map 313-4 Introduction................................................................................................................................ Overviewof Process.............................................................................................................. Previous Planning Studies..................................................................................................... Navarre Moratorium / DSU Study — 2006........................................................................... Comprehensive Plan Discussion — 2010............................................................................ Navarre Community Initiative — 2011.................................................................................. Hennepin County / Community Design Group — Hennepin County Pedestrian Plan 2012 City of Orono / Hennepin County — Street Light and Sidewalk Improvements — 2013....... Blue Cross Blue Shield Minnesota — Navarre Demonstration Project 2014-2015 ............. Interaction with Lake Minnetonka.............................................................................................. Lake Interaction Opportunities............................................................................................... FutureDevelopment................................................................................................................... Market Study Considerations................................................................................................. CommercialMarket............................................................................................................. ResidentialMarket.............................................................................................................. OtherUses Considered...................................................................................................... TransportationImprovements.................................................................................................... Improvements to County Road Intersection........................................................................... ArterialCapacity..................................................................................................................... Trail to Businesses Connection................................................................................................. Shadywood Trail Connection................................................................................................. CommunityEvents..................................................................................................................... Existing Single -Family Housing................................................................................................. Implementation........................................................................................................................... Interaction with Lake Minnetonka.......................................................................................... FutureDevelopment............................................................................................................... Transportation Improvements................................................................................................ Shadywood Trail Connection................................................................................................. CommunityEvents................................................................................................................. TearDowns............................................................................................................................ LIST OF APPENDICES Market Study Public Engagement Traffic Information Page 1 Introduction Overview of Process The Navarre Small Area Plan process began in the Fall of 2017. The Navarre area is generally located at the intersection of County Roads 19 (Shoreline Drive) and 15 (Shadywood Road). The study area (Figure 1) includes the residential area north of Shoreline Drive, south of Crystal Place, west of Bayview Place, east of the city limits, and the commercial areas along Shoreline and Shadywood Road. The Navarre area represents Orono's historic town center. A number of planning initiatives have been done for the area over the last twenty years, however, have not been fully acted on. The intent of this plan is to develop a vision for the area to guide policy and investment decisions. The process began with a consultation with the City Council on Monday, September 11, 2017, to discuss the issues that would be evaluated as part of the plan, including: • Explore expanding the Navarre neighborhood to touch and interact with Lake Minnetonka • Develop strategies that can build on the success of the Dakota Rail Trail. • Encourage trail users to be customers of the Navarre businesses. • Examine and determine the commercial and multi -family markets for Navarre and the surrounding area to determine the appropriate development opportunities. • Design guidelines, zoning tools, and/or regulations for the remodels and tear -downs of the existing single-family homes. • Engage the residents, business owners, and elected officials to determine the feasibility of any redevelopment strategies. • Create clear redevelopment strategies for implementation. A Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) made up of fourteen Navarre area stakeholders was selected by the City Council to help guide the planning process around these topics. The first meeting of the PAC took place on Thursday, October 19, 2017 and included an overview of past planning studies and included a SWOT analysis discussion about the Navarre area. A community open house was held on Thursday, November 16, 2017 at the Long Lake Fire Station #2. The open house included several interactive activities aimed at getting feedback about what people want to see in Navarre and what they would like to change. An online engagement tool, Social Pinpoint, was also utilized to gather feedback. Social Pinpoint allowed participants to identify areas in the neighborhood where there are issues and to identify things they would like to see. Several survey questions were also collected using Social Pinpoint. Following the community open house and gathering responses from Social Pinpoint, a PAC meeting was held on Thursday, January 11, 2018 to present the findings from the community engagement. The discussion focused on the seven key issues presented to the City Council and a direction forward on each issue was determined. The draft report of this small area plan was presented to the PAC on Thursday, March 8 and to the City Council and the Planning Commission during a joint Work Session on April 9, 2018. The Navarre Small Area Plan was incorporated as part of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan update, which was adopted on December 10, 2018. Previous Planning Studies Several planning initiatives have been undertaken for the Navarre area in recent history. The following information provides an overview of those studies since 2006 to provide context for this small area plan process. Page 2 Navarre Moratorium / DSU Studv — 2006 In July of 2005, the City Council imposed a moratorium on development applications for the Navarre commercial area with the intent to study the area and develop a framework to guide future investment. The City enlisted the services of Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban (DSU) to provide an analysis of the existing conditions and to conduct a workshop with business and property owners and surrounding neighbors to present an analysis of existing conditions, explain the City Council's objectives, and facilitate a discussion about the future of the area. The discussion included a SWOT analysis of the Navarre area. Approximately 75 members of the public were in attendance. A narrative summarizing the outcomes of the workshop identified three objectives for the area: 1. Preserve the small-town atmosphere of Navarre 2. Creation of community area around the lakeshore 3. Encourage a functional, thriving business district DSU also conducted a joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting to present the workshop findings and assist the City in determining next steps for planning to support reinvestment in the Navarre area. This included a presentation of concept renderings depicting various improvements within the public right-of-way, including pedestrian amenities such as decorative sidewalk, seating areas, public art, enhanced landscaping, and signage. One concept explored the possibility of a roundabout at the intersection of Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road. Comprehensive Plan Discussion — 2010 In 2010, following the completion of the City's comprehensive plan, City staff and the City Council discussed options for updating the City's zoning map and ordinances for properties guided for higher density or mixed use. In the case of Navarre, the discussion included the possibility of developing a Mixed -Use Overlay District; however, this was never implemented. Navarre Community Initiative — 2011 The Navarre Community Initiative (NCI) is a group formed in late 2011 made up of residents and business owners of the Navarre area intended to provide input to the City Council regarding potential improvements for the area. In addition, the intent of the group is to enhance Navarre's quality of life with special emphasis on public safety, beautification, and preservation. The group's work includes defining short-term and long-term projects and enlisting the support of a variety of community partners to assist in their implementation. A City staff member serves as a liaison to the committee for communication purposes between the committee and City Council. In early 2012, NCI and the City sent a letter and questionnaire to Navarre businesses soliciting their thoughts and ideas for the area. Out of 58 questionnaires, only six responses were received. In the spring of 2012, NCI presented a petition to Navarre residents, which read "Agreeing with concerns that current traffic conditions in Navarre are a clear and present danger, I support safety improvements that affect pedestrians, bikers and autos as the number one priority in our Navarre community." The petition received approximately 200 signatures On July 16, 2012, members of NCI, city staff, and the Mayor conducted a walking tour of Navarre to identify issues and opportunities for the neighborhood. Hennepin County / Community Design Group — Hennepin County Pedestrian Plan 2012 On August 28, 2012, a group meeting was held at the Freshwater Institute as part of a series of meetings conducted by Hennepin County and Community Design Group to gather local input regarding the Hennepin County pedestrian plan and to identify issues with safe walking along county roads. Approximately 50 participants attended the meeting. The outcome of this process Page 3 was a final plan that seeks to improve conditions for walking in Hennepin County so that it can become a safer, more convenient, and more enjoyable transportation choice. City of Orono / Hennepin County — Street Light and Sidewalk Improvements — 2013 The City of Orono held a series of meetings to gather input from residents and businesses regarding future planning for Navarre. Meetings took place on February 11, April 8 and June 10, 2013 at Orono City Hall. Meetings included updates on recent activities regarding Navarre as well as review of street lighting options under consideration and discussion of sidewalk issues. Hennepin County Transportation Department staff were also involved in the process to discuss potential pedestrian and traffic safety improvements currently being studied. A survey was developed that allowed residents to comment on proposed street light alternatives. Following the public participation process, the City completed a streetlight and sidewalk improvement project in the summer of 2014. In addition, Hennepin County revised their striping plan for the crosswalks in response to recommendations from the City and residents at the June 10 meeting. There were approximately 40 attendees at the February 11 meeting, 35 attendees at the April 8 meeting, and 20 attendees at the June 10 meeting. Blue Cross Blue Shield Minnesota — Navarre Demonstration Project 2014-2015 In collaboration with Blue Cross Blue Shield Minnesota, the City held two open house meetings with Navarre residents and businesses to develop ideas for a potential Active Living Demonstration project. Demonstration projects are short-term projects or pop-up events intended to show what potential permanent improvements could look like. The City held the meetings to gather feedback on what issues could be addressed as part of the demonstration project. Objectives identified as part of the meetings included traffic calming and making the area more pedestrian friendly. Ideas for projects included bringing in temporary boulevard trees, improving trail connections to businesses, and providing community gathering spaces. The City had planned to seek grant funds from Blue Cross Blue Shield Minnesota for the demonstration project; however, due to the timing of the resignation of the City's Community Development Director, a grant application was not completed by the City. The NCI agreed to go forward with a scaled back version of some of the projects. Page 4 Navarre Study Area Map —Figure 1 Interaction with Lake Minnetonka Lake Interaction Opportunities One of the key issues identified for this study was whether the Navarre neighborhood can be expanded to touch and interact with Lake Minnetonka. Few opportunities exist to physically connect with the lake based on the Navarre boundaries shown in Figure 1. The most logical location to provide any sort of connection would be along the south side of Shoreline Drive between Carman Street and Kelly Avenue. The PAC identified this area as possible opportunity to connect with Lake Minnetonka. Should any of these properties redevelop in the future, it is possible that development could occur in a way that provides views of the lake. Through the community engagement process, feedback was received that was overwhelmingly opposed to any active lake access, such as a public launch, in this location. Environmental concerns were cited as the primary reasons. Therefore, connections with the lake in this area should be passive and limited to views and opportunities to walk or sit near the lakeshore. If development is proposed in the future, the city should work with developers to create a public space near the lakeshore, where appropriate. When redevelopment opportunities along the Lake present themselves, the City should consider if those redevelopment could provide a possible connection for the Navarre neighborhood with Lake during the redevelopment. Future Development Market Study Considerations Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC was hired to conduct a market study to evaluate potential development opportunities in the Navarre area. The entire market study is attached to this report as Appendix A. The scope included a review of key demographic trends, assessment of current market conditions for housing, and analysis of the current commercial market in the Lake Minnetonka area. The study identifies seven potential redevelopment areas and describes the potential land uses that could result. These land uses are an indication of what the market would support but do not Page 5 necessarily represent the desires of the neighborhood. The seven redevelopment areas are identified in Figure 2. The study finds that many of the properties could accommodate a variety of different land uses given their location, access, and surrounding land uses. Recommended uses based on market demand include retail, for -sale townhomes, for -sale condominiums, senior housing, and rental housing. Market Study Map — Figure 2 Commercial Market The market study finds that Navarre and the greater Lake Minnetonka area is under -retailed. An opportunity exists to attract additional retail businesses to the Navarre area along Shoreline Drive or Shadywood Road. The market study identifies Sites #4 and #5 (see Table 29 above) as being the most attractive to retail tenants. Attracting additional retail businesses to Navarre would also Page 6 TABLE 29 SUMMARY OF REDEVELOPMENT SITE POTENTIAL USES M �� � �� �� �g 1 3.66 x x 2 4.58 x x 3 1.86 x x 4 2.60 x x x x 5 6.78 x x x x 6 2.22 x x 7 2.63 x x x Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC Commercial Market The market study finds that Navarre and the greater Lake Minnetonka area is under -retailed. An opportunity exists to attract additional retail businesses to the Navarre area along Shoreline Drive or Shadywood Road. The market study identifies Sites #4 and #5 (see Table 29 above) as being the most attractive to retail tenants. Attracting additional retail businesses to Navarre would also Page 6 be consistent with feedback received through the community engagement process, as the neighborhood desires a more robust commercial district with places to go. There is currently no market for speculative office development. Build -to -suit office development may occur for specific businesses but those decisions on site attractiveness would consider different factors than considered in this market study. Residential Market In looking at the market -supported residential uses, for -sale townhomes would likely only be supported on Site #2, due to higher land costs on the other sites. Mid -rise for -sale condominiums and rental housing could likely be supported on all of the sites. Residential densities for multi- family housing in third -tier suburbs, such as Orono, are generally in the 25 to 40 units an acre range. Increasing the number of residential units near the intersection of Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road would likely increase the potential for greater pedestrian traffic and provide support for additional retail businesses. Higher residential densities also help to justify public investment in pedestrian infrastructure such as enhanced pavement, lighting, benches, decorations and landscaping. Mixed responses were received regarding the desire for higher residential density in Navarre; however, there was overwhelming support for pedestrian improvements and additional retail businesses and places to go. Generally, higher residential densities are required to justify spending on pedestrian improvements and to attract additional retail businesses. Navarre will need to consider these tradeoffs carefully when reviewing future proposals for higher density residential housing. Other Uses Considered The market for hospitality has been oversaturated and therefore a hotel is not likely to be supported at any of the identified locations. If lake access were available, a small boutique hotel could be a possibility in Navarre. Additionally, office uses will be very difficult to attract in Navarre as the office market cannot generate the rents needed to support new construction; however, an office building with a built -to -suit tenant would be an ideal use for several of the identified sites. Transportation Improvements Improvements to County Road Intersection Overwhelmingly, residents of the Navarre area find the intersection of Shoreline Drive (County Rd 15) and Shadywood Road (County Rd 19) to be dangerous and unwelcoming to pedestrians and cyclists. Traffic volumes, speeds, and the orientation of the intersection all contribute to unfavorable pedestrian conditions. Based on feedback received through the citizen engagement process, a priority for the neighborhood is to make the area more pedestrian friendly. With both of these roadways under the jurisdiction of Hennepin County, the City will need to work closely with the County to ensure that future improvements meet the needs of the neighborhood. As part of any road improvement, an objective should be to reduce speeds of motor vehicles and consider all modes of transportation. This may be achieved with lane narrowing or other optical illusions to get drivers to respond accordingly. However, since the roadway is already at capacity in terms of traffic volumes, it is unlikely that improvements will aim to drastically reduce speeds. Another objective should be to tighten up the intersection and make traffic movements for all modes of traffic more predictable. Eliminating some of the free -right turns at the northwest, southwest, and southeast corners of 15/19 intersection should be options that are considered, which would help narrow the intersection, reduce speeds, and improve vehicle predictability. Hennepin County has obtained federal funding to make safety improvements to the intersection. The project is scheduled in the County's capital improvement plan for 2019. Hennepin County Page 7 may begin community outreach in 2018. In addition to broader community engagement, utilizing the PAC from this small area plan as a focus group could provide the County a good opportunity for enhanced local input. Traffic Volumes Map — Figure 3 Navarre Small Area Plan - Traffic Volumes Nanne�onka Beam S' ®ea. HENNEPIN M.nd 7mka Sayti — NovemberX 2017 1:16,000 a,s Arterial Capacity The segments of Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road within the Navarre area would be classified as three lane undivided roadways with a capacity of 15,000 to 17,000 vehicles per day. Current and projected traffic volumes are consistent with that of a four -lane undivided roadway, as shown in Figure 4. The objective of the neighborhood to enhance pedestrian and bicycle mobility is not consistent with a common transportation goal to move as many vehicles through the area as quickly as possible. This plan supports improvements to the intersection that improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists while still reasonably accommodating vehicle traffic. The City should continue to work with Hennepin County on a plan that achieves safety improvements for pedestrians and cyclists, while also exploring improvements to other arterials in the area that could relieve some of the traffic pressure through Navarre. Page 8 Navarre Small Area Plan Figure 4 - Planning Level Urban Roadway Capacities Trail to Businesses Connection Shadywood Trail Connection The Dakota Rail Trail is a valuable recreation and transportation asset to the Navarre Community, spanning 13 miles through the communities of St. Bonifacius, Minnetrista, Mound, Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach, Orono, and Wayzata. As a highly -used bike and walking trail, an opportunity exists to connect trail users to the Navarre area. Presently, there is not an ideal physical connection to draw people from the trail towards the businesses and the park. At the time of this report, Hennepin County, Three Rivers Park District, and the City of Orono have discussed an unformalized agreement to fund a trail connection south of the trail along Shadywood Road to the park. This connection was also well supported throughout the community engagement process. The implementation of this trail connection should be a priority for Navarre. Additional analysis will need to be done to identify the necessary mitigation required to impacted property owners. Additional community engagement should also be done regarding the trail connection and could be done concurrently with the engagement surrounding the intersection improvements. The City of Orono should continue to have discussions with Hennepin County and Three Rivers Park District regarding the trail connection to keep the process moving forward. Community Events Through the community engagement process, it was found that there is a desire to create a sense of place and enhanced sense of community. One of the ways this could be achieved is through community events. Through the community engagement process, people responded favorably to the idea of an annual festival in Navarre. An annual festival would bring people to the area and create an awareness of what Navarre is. The community engagement process also revealed a desire to see enhanced branding for Navarre. The city -owned parking lot on the north side of Shoreline Drive and west of Shadywood Road provides a centralized location and public open space for an event. The enhancement of this public space to accommodate uses in addition to parking should be explored. An event could be centered around the Dakota Rail Trail and include some kind of race or walkathon. An event could be coordinated in collaboration with nearby communities and feature different attractions along the trail. In addition to an annual event, Navarre could host a regular farmers' market in collaboration with Mound, which currently hosts a farmers' market along the trail. Page 9 Daily Two-way Volume Shoreline Drive (vehicles) (County Road 15) Facility Type Lower Threshold Higher Threshold Current Traffic Level 2030 Traffic Forecast Two lane undivided 10,000 12,000 N/A N/A Arterials Two lane divided or Three lane undivided 15,000 17,000 17,800 N/A Four lane undivided 18,000 22,000 18,100 Trail to Businesses Connection Shadywood Trail Connection The Dakota Rail Trail is a valuable recreation and transportation asset to the Navarre Community, spanning 13 miles through the communities of St. Bonifacius, Minnetrista, Mound, Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach, Orono, and Wayzata. As a highly -used bike and walking trail, an opportunity exists to connect trail users to the Navarre area. Presently, there is not an ideal physical connection to draw people from the trail towards the businesses and the park. At the time of this report, Hennepin County, Three Rivers Park District, and the City of Orono have discussed an unformalized agreement to fund a trail connection south of the trail along Shadywood Road to the park. This connection was also well supported throughout the community engagement process. The implementation of this trail connection should be a priority for Navarre. Additional analysis will need to be done to identify the necessary mitigation required to impacted property owners. Additional community engagement should also be done regarding the trail connection and could be done concurrently with the engagement surrounding the intersection improvements. The City of Orono should continue to have discussions with Hennepin County and Three Rivers Park District regarding the trail connection to keep the process moving forward. Community Events Through the community engagement process, it was found that there is a desire to create a sense of place and enhanced sense of community. One of the ways this could be achieved is through community events. Through the community engagement process, people responded favorably to the idea of an annual festival in Navarre. An annual festival would bring people to the area and create an awareness of what Navarre is. The community engagement process also revealed a desire to see enhanced branding for Navarre. The city -owned parking lot on the north side of Shoreline Drive and west of Shadywood Road provides a centralized location and public open space for an event. The enhancement of this public space to accommodate uses in addition to parking should be explored. An event could be centered around the Dakota Rail Trail and include some kind of race or walkathon. An event could be coordinated in collaboration with nearby communities and feature different attractions along the trail. In addition to an annual event, Navarre could host a regular farmers' market in collaboration with Mound, which currently hosts a farmers' market along the trail. Page 9 The Navarre Community Initiative had developed a community event as late at 2016 which was well received. Any community event will require continued leadership from those within the community, most likely in the form of volunteer residents and area stakeholders. Community partners should consider the formation of a 501(c)3 organization should be explored for the purpose of managing an annual festival. Partnerships with the City of Orono, Hennepin County, and Three Rivers Park District could be beneficial in carrying on a successful ongoing festival. With a 501(c)3 organization, the public or agencies may donate resources or in-kind services to assist in the cost of any event, such as police or public works assistance. Existing Single -Family Housing In highly desirable areas, including the Navarre community, existing single-family homes are more frequently torn down to reconstruct newer single-family homes. In some cases, this is beneficial, as blighted properties are removed and larger homes bring in increased property value and young families. In other cases, there may be issues, such as new development being inconsistent with the existing neighborhood character and disruption during the construction. Navarre has already experienced some signs of this development pressure. As such, outreach was done regarding this topic as part of the small area plan process. Generally, people responded that their concern surrounding the tear down and rebuild of single family homes in the area is low to moderate. The top two issues identified for which there is a moderate level of concern include preservation of existing neighborhood character and the height of new development. The City should review development standards applicable to single family homes in Navarre and make sure that adequate controls are in place to ensure that new development is compatible with the existing character and scale of the neighborhood, while still encouraging redevelopment of blighted properties to occur. A proactive approach to code enforcement and property maintenance should also be taken to address properties that are deteriorating and detracting from the neighborhood. Implementation Interaction with Lake Minnetonka • As part of any redevelopment proposals involving parcels on the south side of Shoreline Drive between Carman Street and Kelly Avenue, work with developers to identify opportunity areas that allow for viewing, sitting, and walking near the lakeshore. Fishing or boating connections to Lake Minnetonka are not anticipated. Future Development • Consider allowing increased building heights and residential density in areas along Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road (where appropriate) to increase pedestrian traffic and encourage additional retail development. • Consider incorporating incentives into the zoning ordinance that allow for higher density in exchange for enhanced architectural features, underground parking, public amenities, plazas, open spaces, and recreation areas. • Adopt architectural and design regulations where appropriate to require pedestrian scale design. Consider regulations for maximum building setbacks, minimum window coverage, location of parking facilities, architectural materials, fagade articulation, and entryways. • Review all permitted and conditional commercial uses within zoning districts along Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road to ensure that the types of desired businesses are allowed in Navarre. Types of allowable uses should focus on small scale neighborhood goods and services and avoid those that do not have a large customer draw. • Consider reduced parking requirements for businesses that provide bicycle parking. Page 10 Explore acquiring additional property for providing shared parking and periodic public gatherings for Navarre businesses. Host a developer round table to discuss obstacles to development in Navarre. Be prepared to address those obstacles. Consider developing a fagade improvement program to encourage the revitalization of neglected commercial buildings. Revolving loan funds may keep the money working within Navarre. Transportation Improvements • Work with Hennepin County on a plan for future improvements to Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road that improves safety and mobility for pedestrians and cyclists. Consider eliminating some of the free right turns at the northwest, southwest, and southeast corners to help narrow the intersection, reduce speeds, and improve vehicle predictability. Check in with Hennepin County staff bimonthly and use the Navarre Small Area Plan PAC as the review committee for potential improvements. • Explore options for adding pedestrian and streetscaping amenities with any roadway improvements such as wider sidewalks, decorative pavement, landscaping, benches, and other ornamental features. • Meet with Hennepin County transportation staff to discuss potential improvements to alternate arterials that would relieve traffic pressure on Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road through Navarre. Discuss options to reduce traffic volumes on Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road. • Consider plans for access and the impact of expected traffic volume on Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road with any redevelopment along these roads. Work with Hennepin County on developing an access management plan for properties that may redevelop along these roadways. Shadywood Trail Connection • Continue to have discussions with Hennepin County and Three Rivers Park District regarding the trail connection along Shadywood Road to keep the process moving forward. • Engage with impacted property owners early to identify necessary mitigation required. • Conduct additional public engagement regarding the trail as part of the community engagement surrounding the intersection improvements. Community Events • Encourage the development of a community festival. Community partners should consider forming a 501(c)3 organization to assist in fundraising and administration of a community festival. • Consider collaboration with nearby communities on an event that incorporates multiple destinations along the trail. • Utilize the city -owned parking lot on the north side of Shoreline Drive and west of Shadywood Road as a possible location for hosting tents, bands, and vendors associated with an event. • Should the block northwest of Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Lane (Maxfield Study Block 4) redevelop, that redevelop should include a space available for public gatherings such as an annual festival. • Leverage an annual festival as an opportunity to do enhanced branding for Navarre. • Explore opportunities for collaboration with the Mound farmers' market to organize a farmers' market along the Dakota Rail Trail in Navarre. • Consider the formation of a Navarre Business Association. Page 11 Tear Downs Review development standards applicable to single-family homes in Navarre. Review to ensure that adequate controls are in place to ensure that new development is compatible with the existing character and scale of the neighborhood, while still encouraging the redevelopment of blighted properties. Such standards could include requirements for floor area ratio, height, hardcover, architectural materials, landscaping, and accessory structures. Proactively address blighted properties through the City's code enforcement process so that existing homes are well maintained. Consider revisions to the City's code enforcement process or adopting fines if non-compliance is an issue. Review its demolition and construction regulations. If the regulation updates require addition administration and monitoring by City staff, consideration should be given to increasing the demolition permit fee commensurate with the addition staffing demand. Page 12 LIST OF APPENDICES Market Study Public Engagement Traffic Information Appendix Maxfield Research & Consulting December 19, 2017 MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates FROM: Mr. Matt Mullins & Ms. Hannah Bonestroo Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC. RE: Initial Market Assessment for the Navarre Small Area Plan in Orono, Minnesota Introduction/Purpose and Scope of Research This memorandum contains an initial market assessment to evaluate the potential develop- ment opportunities in Navarre neighborhood located in Orono, Minnesota. The scope of the study includes a review of key demographic trends, an assessment of current market conditions for housing, and analysis of the current commercial market in the Lake Minnetonka area. The methodology used to calculate demand in this memorandum is proprietary to Maxfield Re- search but is consistent with methodologies used by analysts throughout the housing industry. This report includes primary and secondary research. Primary research includes interviews with rental property and self -storage managers gathering data on existing and proposed rental and self -storage properties. Secondary research is credited to the source when used, and is usually data from the U.S. Census or regional planning agencies. Secondary research is always used as a basis for analysis, and is carefully reviewed in light of other factors that may impact projec- tions such as residential building permit data or migration trends. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 2 Navarre Trade Area Navarre is located within the City of Orono. While Orono only has a population of just over 8,000 people (Esri 2017), approximately 56,000 other people (Esri 2017) live within a 5 -mile ra- dius of the site set from the intersection of Shadywood Road and Shoreline Drive. Notable communities within a five -mile radius of Navarre include: Wayzata, Mound, Shorewood, Spring Park, Long Lake, Maple Plain, Medina, Excelsior, Minnetrista, and Chanhassen. Downtown Minneapolis is only a 20 -30 -minute drive from Navarre via Highway 12/394. The neighborhood is located along Shoreline Drive which is utilized by around 17,600 vehicles each day (MnDOT). Navarre 1 -Mile, 3 -Mile, & 5 -Mile Radius a pie Plain _ 8r, d,r?N Parlor ra N'arw in- Rei - Lala - Orono z Parti x Long Lake _ z BIYd, _ _ . Bu, i +lake db.0 tl Gill Club W ayZata m o,� 4`'ia y to Ba'; 3 ' ,.'3l -'•. rf17 _ Le ken ,M1 c .Il, r-linnetanka Parti. Minndi.ka s �I ak Nlooda r....n ' " Sp ny Park ��• Farm Mound q.. R t y a Minn trista g.arn«w*'v rBk" Bayy Beep -haven 3 Gideon St Bonifacius Bay celslor `ct ±phwagS ev�h Shorewood sa J, L ': ]a rver g v F'ar6. Re eru_• - a w '4a91ey Vi r6Cr@iilA' tilyR Chanhassen. ,78tlr5t 151 - ,----_ Victoria lin, ., i'a21''- ___ Eden Pralri, . n hlllkr MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber December 19, 2017 WSB & Associates, Inc. Page 3 Neighborhood Analysis Navarre is a community of 342 people (Esri 2017) that covers just over 100 acres in southern Orono, MN. Orono, located in Hennepin County, has a population of 8,179 (Esri 2017). Situated on Shoreline Drive, the subject area is almost completely surrounded by Lake Minnetonka, the ninth largest lake in Minnesota and a popular attraction for boaters, sailors, and fishermen. The site is bordered to its West by Spring Park, to its South by Tonka Beach, and is about 18.5 miles away from Downtown Minneapolis. The site area consists of 230 parcels comprising of a variety of uses. Residential land uses are by far the most common type of use present representing roughly 60% of parcels and 38% of acres. There are 24 vacant parcels in Navarre of various land uses. Of special interest are 27 parcels, mostly along Shoreline Drive, which are particularly suited for redevelopment. The fol- lowing table, maps, and photos depict the site location and the surrounding land uses. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 1 PARCEL SUMMARY NAVARRE Estimated Market Values Apartments 1 Land 0.96 $285,000 Building $510,000 Total $795,000 Commerical 26 33.60 $5,654,000 $7,441,000 $13,095,000 Common Area 6 10.39 $0 $0 $0 Residential 137 38.80 $12,703,000 $16,571,000 $29,274,000 Seasonal- Residential 8 2.50 $554,000 $801,000 $1,355,000 Townhouse 28 1.04 $672,000 $4,143,000 $4,815,000 Vacant 24 14.01 $663,000 $0 $663,000 Subtotal 230 101.3 $20,531,000 $29,466,000 $49,997,000 Source: Realist Tax, Maxfield Research & Consulting LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Navarre Site Parcels December 19, 2017 Page 4 Navarre Land Use by Parcel s� i8-csr.drrrr Togo Rd Id County Rd northern M Crystal l°I _,_ — II■■■1■ ■11111111 � ■1■■■1■ ■■illl��\ t �� ■II■111 1 ■11■1111■ e� M■■■I 1■1■11■1111 o{e� MINE in111MMI � �r Land Use��- Apartment o �L Commercial L9 Common Area L l_'ar�rrar� 1iaE' � Residential Seasonal Residential Townhouse Vacant 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 Ntiles MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Navarre Site Location December 19, 2017 Page 5 0 0 325 0.25 0.5 Miles. d eye o �bast,4arra �� � Togo Rd `��q Old County Rd Northern Ave Crystal PI ote S� ¢a Qo. �y 1.al�e kfinnet �rrk�:i L y� Carman Bcw Lon,,- Lakh _ I ORONO Site Area 4 0 0.5 4 2 Miles 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Navarre Zoning, 2017 Togo }fid 1, December 19, 2017 Page 6 Id County Rd 14or4Lhef0 \,je Cr stal Pi ramir� ■1■ ■Inll111 ® Ra �■■1■ ■■IIII�1► 4{ ■■■I■I ■I■111ff 1■j' �■■■11■1■11■111 0KE� I1■II ■111 ■ Sr Zoning Districts " I Ny Business _ B-1 - Retail Sales �Lto B-3 - Shopping Center _ B-4-Office/Professional B-5 - Limited Neighborhood Lakeshore Residential LR -1C - One Family Lakeshore Residential - 1/2 Acre LR -1C-1 - One Family Lakeshore Residential Subdistrict - 1/2 Acre Planned Unit Development PRD - Planned Residential Development 10075 0.15 0.3 Miles I i s i I i i I Traffic Counts Traffic counts are provided by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). Traffic counts are reported as the number of vehicles expected to pass a given location on an average day of the year. This value is called the "annual average daily traffic" and are represented on traffic count or traffic volume maps. The AADT is based on a short-term traffic count, usually 48 hours, taken at the location. This count is then adjusted for the variation in traffic volume throughout the year and the average number of axles per vehicle. Short-term counts are col- lected over a three-year cycle. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 7 According to MnDOT 17,600 vehicles utilize Shoreline Drive on the southern border of Navarre daily. Shadywood Road, which runs through the eastern half of Navarre, has an annual average daily traffic count of 4,900, while Sunset Drive, just west of the site, has and AADT of 2,490. The maps on the following page illustrate the drive times from the subject property and traffic counts. This information is helpful in determining a draw area for various services in the area. It is also useful to determine access to workforce as potential business operations would likely give strong consideration to commuting patterns when making location decisions. As shown, the Site can be reached within a 20 to 30 -minute drive of Downtown Minneapolis. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Navarre Drive Time Roc.kfxd Fridley _I Pak. f.Y 6a rr 12' x �"fry, a `-- IGen0et w rnt_ Ii Faro: %.r.. !p-, -_ 4t fJ 49tl k dl Defari: N •:Hope � Crystal diva E -.J ;.r ono aF`i 'Jr41. Gaa Mlnoeapo `s - - � I xY ' St Louis Pari[ N".-°i4a St �u ELak Si_1 Mars Minnetonka I. ,:t; - Minnetrista Edina ;N 5Mh st Mayerkr c n I -, J • L.•L� ... u. Sahcr-• ,.. rm.B lYe{�:`"h�nha5spn 'r_�-Eden Wthat V+ 7Eth S Richfihhl.tllnl'I'r rl•�n. J_ fon - ictoria _ - Prairie, s- e s'`4h��---- a. nsDa�t— -<it�lin -:LEF Waconia .. _ Pi.,... lig ` LL 'JJ 96 t1t S "'--xfyrng G4aud� -; Bloomington E; fl 'V.Fr W Old Shak.ap "6 ,� .. Shakopee rl"rI a Id f- 5..:u d - - ChaFka I /Jyyy 4n.le —Farlr �IiC ffR lung America Food --__ — f 7th Ada Ea fa9Je 1— Itur - Coi6 ne 'seri n... __ Savacfe Hurns�iffe,, fP MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Navarre Traffic Counts December 19, 2017 Page 8 Togo Rd �9pp Id County R t4.oern qve C stal PI P �r O� ? 7, 600.UD �a Qo��ti L® ay Lake Minnet nka Carman 13ur P 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 Miles Population & Household Growth Trends Population and household growth trends and projections are analyzed in this section because these are key indicators of the potential demand for new housing units and additional commer- cial space in a community. We also analyze data on population age distribution, household in- come, household tenure, and household type to determine the housing and shopping needs of the local household base. Table 2 presents population and household growth trends in the Market Area from 2000 to 2022. The 2000 and 2010 population and household figures were obtained from the U.S. Cen- sus Bureau. The 2017 estimate and projection for 2022 are based on data provided by ESRI with adjustments made by Maxfield Research to reflect current year data. The following are key points from Table 2. • As of 2017, Orono is estimated to have 8,179 people. Between 2000 and 2010, the pop- ulation decreased 1.3% (-101) while the number of households increased 2.1% (+58). • In 2017, the population of Navarre is estimated to make up 4.2% of the total population of Orono. While Hennepin County experienced growth between 2000 and 2010, Orono decreased in population. However, both the city and county are expected to grow from 2017 to 2022. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 9 • Although the population of Navarre was only 342 persons in 2017; the population in- creases to over 2,100 persons within a one -mile radius, nearly 21,000 within three miles, and over 56,000 within five -miles. Household growth outpaced population growth during the 2000s and is forecast to do so through 2022. The aging of the baby -boom generation, declining birth rates, and many couples choosing to postpone having children until later in life are all factors con- tributing to a declining average household size. These trends will continue to generate demand for more diverse housing products such as townhomes, and condominiums. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 2 POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD GROWTH TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS MARKET AREA 2000 to 2022 157111111 . I • • 2000 2010 2017 2022 No. Pct. No. Pct. Navarre N/A N/A 342 357 N/A N/A 15 4.4% Navarre 1 -mile radius N/A N/A 2,102 2,195 N/A N/A 93 4.4% Navarre 3 -mile radius N/A N/A 20,890 21,826 N/A N/A 936 4.5% Navarre 5 -mile radius N/A N/A 56,133 58,823 N/A N/A 2,690 4.8% Orono City 7,538 7,437 8,179 8,678 -101 -1.3% 499 6.1% Hennepin County 1,116,200 1,152,425 1,248,638 1,312,919 36,225 3.2% 64,281 5.1% HOUSEHOLDS Navarre N/A N/A 175 181 N/A N/A 6 3.4% Navarre 1 -mile radius N/A N/A 932 968 N/A N/A 36 3.9% Navarre 3 -mile radius N/A N/A 8,723 9,090 N/A N/A 367 4.2% Navarre 5 -mile radius N/A N/A 21,685 22,670 N/A N/A 985 4.5% Orono City 2,763 2,821 3,080 3,253 58 2.1% 173 5.6% Hennepin County 456,129 473,856 511,605 536,306 17,727 3.9% 24,701 4.8% PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD Navarre N/A N/A 1.95 1.97 Orono City 2.73 2.64 2.66 2.67 Hennepin County 2.45 2.43 2.44 2.45 Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; ESRI; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Age Distribution December 19, 2017 Page 10 The age distribution of a community's population helps in assessing the type of housing and commercial services needed. For example, younger and older people are more attracted to higher density housing located near urban services and entertainment while middle-aged peo- ple (particularly those with children) traditionally prefer lower -density single-family homes. In terms of retail, younger people typically seek services such as entertainment, electronics, and specialty apparel. Child stores increase in popularity for the 25 to 34 and 35 to 44 age cohorts while home furnishings are more frequently sought by the 45 to 54 and 55 to 64 age groups. Table 3 presents the age distribution of the Market Area population from 2000 to 2022. Infor- mation from 2000 and 2010 is sourced from the U.S. Census. The 2017 estimates and projec- tions for 2022 were calculated by Maxfield Research based on information from local building permits and economic conditions. The following are key trends about the age distribution of the Market Area's population. • In 2017, we estimate that the largest adult cohort by age in Navarre is 45 to 54 totaling 63 people (19.4% of the total population), followed by the 55 to 64 age group with 56 people (17.3%). The same trend was found in Orono where the two largest age cohorts are also 45 to 54 (21.0%) and 55 to 64 (17.8%). • The greatest growth is projected to occur among older adults. Aging of baby boomers led to a 51.4% increase (+1,537 people) in the 55 to 64 population between 2000 and 2010 in Orono. As this group ages, the 65 to 74 and 75 plus age groups are projected to experience rapid growth from 2017 to 2022, expanding 28.0% and 32.8%, respectively. • A decline in the middle age cohorts is projected between 2017 and 2022 in Orono. The 45 to 54 age cohort is expected to decline 5.8%. • The weak growth projected for the middle age population is a result of the compara- tively small number of people who will move into those age cohorts between 2017 and 2022, a phenomenon known as the "baby bust." The "baby bust" is often referred to the generation of children born between 1965 and 1980, an era when the United States birthrate dropped sharply. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Population Age Distribution Orono 2017 2.500 December 19, 2017 Page 11 35.0°/0 30.0% 25.0% t,0 20,0% s 15.0010 U 10.0010 U �, 5.0% 0.0% 5.0010 -10,0% Percent Change in Age Distribution From 2017-2022 ■ Navarre ■ arono ■ Hennepin ■ 2017 ■ X722 o 2,000 IH L .. 1.111 111 4-- 1,500 .1. L Un?er 18 E 1,000 35 to 44 Ilk 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 plus Z 500 1 1 1 1 0 Under 18 18 to 24 25 to 34 3.5 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 plus Age Cohort 35.0°/0 30.0% 25.0% t,0 20,0% s 15.0010 U 10.0010 U �, 5.0% 0.0% 5.0010 -10,0% Percent Change in Age Distribution From 2017-2022 ■ Navarre ■ arono ■ Hennepin Age Cohort MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC IH III .. 1.111 111 .1. Un?er 18 V24 25 to 34 35 to 44 Ilk 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 plus Age Cohort MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 12 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 3 POPULATION AGE DISTRIBUTION PRIMARY MARKET AREA 2000-2022 U.S. Census I ESRI Change 2000-2010 Change 2017-2022 2000 2010 2017 2022 No. Pct. No. Pct. Under 18 N/A 66 63 65 N/A N/A 2 3.2% 18 to 24 N/A 16 18 17 N/A N/A -1 -5.6% 25 to 34 N/A 36 41 43 N/A N/A 2 4.9% 35 to 44 N/A 49 48 51 N/A N/A 3 6.3% 45 to 54 N/A 63 58 55 N/A N/A -3 -5.2% 55 to 64 N/A 56 61 63 N/A N/A 2 3.3% 65 to 74 N/A 26 40 47 N/A N/A 7 17.5% 75 plus N/A 12 15 18 N/A N/A 3 20.0% Total N/A 324 344 359 N/A N/A 15 44.4% Under 18 2,062 1,976 1,968 1,920 -86 -4.2% -48 -2.4% 18 to 24 337 325 439 468 -12 -3.6% 29 6.6% 25 to 34 597 400 493 549 -197 -33.0% 56 11.4% 35 to 44 1,414 914 872 927 -500 -35.4% 55 6.3% 45 to 54 1,578 1,559 1,454 1,369 -19 -1.2% -85 -5.8% 55 to 64 874 1,323 1,537 1,607 449 51.4% 70 4.6% 65 to 74 420 587 956 1,224 167 39.8% 268 28.0% 75 plus 256 353 457 607 97 37.9% 150 32.8% Total 7,538 7,437 8,176 8,671 -101 51.7% 495 81.4% Hennepin County Under 18 267,502 261,345 268,719 274,768 -6,157 -2.3% 6,049 2.3% 18 to 24 108,767 113,551 124,686 125,843 4,784 4.4% 1,157 0.9% 25 to 34 183,860 187,523 191,588 198,828 3,663 2.0% 7,240 3.8% 35 to 44 191,872 154,304 164,543 178,271 -37,568 -19.6% 13,728 8.3% 45 to 54 156,068 171,130 161,675 156,373 15,062 9.7% -5,302 -3.3% 55 to 64 85,773 133,758 160,972 163,600 47,985 55.9% 2,628 1.6% 65 to 74 59,737 66,516 101,312 125,133 6,779 11.3% 23,821 23.5% 75 plus 62,621 64,298 75,143 90,103 1,677 2.7% 14,960 19.9% Total 1,116,200 1,152,425 1,248,638 1,312,919 36,225 64.1% 64,281 57.1% Sources: U.S. Census; ESRI; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber December 19, 2017 WSB & Associates, Inc. Page 13 Household Income Distribution Income data is useful in that it can reflect wage trends and helps assess living conditions and reveal demand for different types of services. This data also helps determine demand for differ- ent types of owned and rented housing based on the size of the market at specific cost levels. In general, housing costs of up to 30 percent of income are considered affordable by the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Household income data also helps ascertain demand for different types of retail services. People with lower incomes are likely to seek out discount retailers and spend a higher proportion of their income on necessities like grocery items. Retail services and goods such as dining and home furnishings will experience higher spending from more moderate -income households while upper income households will also shop for specialty apparel, recreation and sporting goods, and luxury items. The next three tables present data on household income by age of householder in 2017 and 2022 for Navarre, Orono, and Hennepin County. The data is estimated by ESRI and adjusted by Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC to reflect the most current local household estimates and projections. The following are key points. • In 2017, the median household income for Navarre is estimated to be $91,744. This value is lower than the estimate for Orono ($136,259), but significantly higher than that of Hennepin County ($68,497). However, the median income for Navarre is expected to increase by 15.5% to $105,955 by 2022. • As households age through the lifecycle, their household income tends to peak in their late 40s and early 50s. This trend is evident in the Market Area as the age 45 to 54 co- hort has the highest estimated income at $189,487 in Orono. • Rental housing often targets younger renter households. The median household income in Orono is $63,804 for the under -25 age group and $102,544 for the 25 to 34 age group. Households earning the median income for these age groups could afford monthly housing costs estimated at $1,595 and $2,564, respectively. • Households in the 35 to 44 age group that may delay buying a home could afford a $3,879 monthly rent, based on the median household income of $155,158. • The median sale price for new construction multifamily housing units (twinhomes and detached townhomes) in Orono is approximately $677,00 (based on recently sold and active listings). Assuming that a potential home buyer has good credit and makes a 20% down payment, a household would need to have a minimum annual income of roughly $166,000 to be income -qualified for a new construction multifamily unit purchased at the median price in Orono. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. $200,000 $180,000 $160,000 $140;000 $120,000 $100,000 $8©,000 $60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $0 <25 ■ Navarre ■ 0rono Income Trends by Age of Householder (2017) December 19, 2017 Page 14 45-5475+ 55-64 65-74 ■ Navarre 1 -Mile Radius ■ Navarre 3 -Mile Radius ■ Navarre 5 -Mile Radius 0 Hennepin ■ Twin Cities Metro Area ■ Minnesota MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 15 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 4 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER NAVARRE 2017 & 2022 Total <25 25-34 Age 35-44 of Householder 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Less than $15,000 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 $15,000 to $24,999 8 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 $25,000 to $34,999 6 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 $35,000 to $49,999 29 1 5 5 4 5 6 3 $50,000 to $74,999 28 1 5 5 5 6 4 2 $75,000 to $99,999 18 1 3 4 3 3 3 1 $100,000 to $149,999 31 1 4 6 7 8 4 1 $150,000 to $199,999 14 0 2 3 4 4 1 0 $200,000+ 38 0 2 7 11 13 4 1 Total 175 4 23 32 36 42 27 11 Median Income $91,744 $75,000 $71,478 $100,000 $123,670 $120,118 $63,528 $46,511 Less than $15,000 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 $15,000 to $24,999 9 0 1 1 1 1 3 2 $25,000 to $34,999 6 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 $35,000 to $49,999 25 1 4 4 3 4 6 3 $50,000 to $74,999 27 1 5 5 4 5 5 2 $75,000 to $99,999 17 1 3 4 2 3 3 1 $100,000 to $149,999 36 1 5 7 7 9 6 1 $150,000 to $199,999 17 0 2 4 4 5 1 1 $200,000+ 43 0 3 8 12 14 5 1 Total 181 4 24 34 33 43 31 14 Median Income $105,955 $75,000 $81,880 $110,312 $144,931 $131,812 $71,613 $43,660 Change 2017 - 2022 Less than $15,000 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 -0 -0 $15,000 to $24,999 1 0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 1 $25,000 to $34,999 -0 0 -0 -0 -1 -0 -0 1 $35,000 to $49,999 -4 -0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -0 -0 $50,000 to $74,999 -1 -0 -0 -0 -1 -1 1 -0 $75,000 to $99,999 -1 -0 -0 -0 -1 -0 -0 -0 $100,000 to $149,999 5 -0 1 1 -0 1 2 -0 $150,000 to $199,999 3 0 -0 1 -0 1 -0 1 $200,000+ 5 0 1 1 1 1 1 -0 Total -1 -0 -0 -0 -4 -1 3 2 Median Income $14,211 $0 $10,402 $10,312 $21,261 $11,694 $8,085 -$2,851 Sources: ESRI; US Census Bureau; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 16 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 5 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER NAVARRE 1 -MILE RADIUS 2017 & 2022 Total <25 25-34 Age 35-44 of Householder 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Less than $15,000 24 2 2 2 2 6 4 6 $15,000 to $24,999 44 2 4 4 3 4 18 9 $25,000 to $34,999 36 2 5 5 4 6 7 7 $35,000 to $49,999 126 S 21 19 17 23 25 16 $50,000 to $74,999 148 5 27 21 23 32 26 14 $75,000 to $99,999 97 4 17 18 16 20 17 5 $100,000 to $149,999 155 3 20 26 31 39 30 6 $150,000 to $199,999 69 1 9 14 19 19 5 2 $200,000+ 237 2 15 38 64 79 32 6 Total 938 26 120 147 180 229 165 71 Median Income $97,619 $57,692 $76,100 $106,122 $136,225 $124,911 $77,335 $46,812 1 Less than $15,000 24 2 2 2 1 6 5 6 $15,000 to $24,999 43 2 4 3 3 3 17 11 $25,000 to $34,999 33 2 5 5 2 4 7 8 $35,000 to $49,999 114 4 18 17 14 18 26 17 $50,000 to $74,999 133 4 25 19 17 26 27 15 $75,000 to $99,999 99 4 18 18 14 19 19 7 $100,000 to $149,999 174 3 22 31 31 43 37 8 $150,000 to $199,999 81 1 11 17 20 21 7 4 $200,000+ 268 2 19 43 66 87 43 9 Total 968 24 124 155 167 226 187 85 Median Income $108,471 $60,207 $84,347 $116,920 $153,886 $141,252 $89,341 $50,556 Change 2017 - 2022 Less than $15,000 -0 -0 -0 -0 -1 -0 1 -0 $15,000 to $24,999 -1 -0 -0 -1 -0 -1 -1 2 $25,000 to $34,999 -3 -0 -0 -0 -2 -2 -0 1 $35,000 to $49,999 -13 -1 -3 -2 -3 -5 1 1 $50,000 to $74,999 -16 -1 -2 -2 -6 -6 1 1 $75,000 to $99,999 1 -0 1 -0 -2 -1 2 2 $100,000 to $149,999 19 -0 2 5 -0 4 7 2 $150,000 to $199,999 12 -0 2 3 1 2 2 2 $200,000+ 31 -0 4 5 2 7 11 3 Total -13 -2 -3 -1 -15 -12 10 9 Median Income $10,852 $2,515 $8,247 $10,798 $17,661 $16,341 $12,006 $3,744 Sources: ESRI; US Census Bureau; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 17 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 6 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER NAVARRE 3 -MILE RADIUS 2017 & 2022 Total <25 25-34 Age 35-44 of Householder 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Less than $15,000 438 15 30 37 53 114 92 97 $15,000 to $24,999 472 19 35 45 44 80 113 136 $25,000 to $34,999 432 16 51 48 57 80 77 103 $35,000 to $49,999 907 32 111 117 134 175 180 158 $50,000 to $74,999 1,349 34 174 171 230 303 252 185 $75,000 to $99,999 1,048 19 138 165 209 261 192 64 $100,000 to $149,999 1,572 11 160 244 386 435 264 72 $150,000 to $199,999 789 5 65 143 238 217 98 23 $200,000+ 1,716 5 74 255 540 573 216 53 Total 8,723 156 838 1,225 1,891 2,238 1,484 891 Median Income $91,867 $47,455 $77,430 $104,070 $123,273 $108,725 $77,839 $44,226 1 Less than $15,000 460 16 28 40 40 103 109 124 $15,000 to $24,999 468 18 33 41 31 63 124 158 $25,000 to $34,999 407 13 44 45 35 66 83 121 $35,000 to $49,999 847 31 98 102 99 139 195 183 $50,000 to $74,999 1,233 29 153 155 165 245 271 215 $75,000 to $99,999 1,062 22 141 165 169 248 230 87 $100,000 to $149,999 1,783 13 184 289 364 473 348 112 $150,000 to $199,999 908 5 81 173 223 244 142 40 $200,000+ 1,922 5 90 299 498 636 307 87 Total 9,090 152 852 1,309 1,624 2,217 1,809 1,127 Median Income $101,249 $48,659 $85,486 $113,653 $133,315 $120,668 $86,626 $47,567 Change 2017 - 2022 Less than $15,000 22 1 -2 3 -13 -11 17 27 $15,000 to $24,999 -4 -1 -2 -4 -13 -17 11 22 $25,000 to $34,999 -25 -3 -7 -3 -22 -14 6 18 $35,000 to $49,999 -60 -1 -13 -15 -35 -36 15 25 $50,000 to $74,999 -116 -5 -21 -16 -65 -58 19 30 $75,000 to $99,999 14 3 3 0 -40 -13 38 23 $100,000 to $149,999 211 2 24 45 -22 38 84 40 $150,000 to $199,999 119 0 16 30 -15 27 44 17 $200,000+ 206 0 16 44 -42 63 91 34 Total 42 -4 -18 10 -210 -111 190 185 Median Income $9,382 $1,204 $8,056 $9,583 $10,042 $11,943 $8,787 $3,341 Sources: ESRI; US Census Bureau; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 18 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 7 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER NAVARRE 5 -MILE RADIUS 2017 & 2022 Total <25 25-34 Age 35-44 of Householder 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Less than $15,000 908 34 64 72 108 238 182 210 $15,000 to $24,999 953 34 70 80 91 173 251 254 $25,000 to $34,999 1,012 30 110 104 134 190 179 265 $35,000 to $49,999 1,861 61 227 218 267 361 346 381 $50,000 to $74,999 2,852 73 363 338 478 599 525 476 $75,000 to $99,999 2,412 43 301 367 484 613 466 138 $100,000 to $149,999 4,128 29 403 615 1,064 1,161 657 199 $150,000 to $199,999 2,411 14 213 452 723 654 275 80 $200,000+ 5,093 20 243 824 1,635 1,609 584 178 Total 21,632 338 1,994 3,070 4,984 5,599 3,465 2,181 Median Income $106,948 $52,275 $86,704 $123,984 $141,240 $121,815 $86,651 $48,954 1 Less than $15,000 964 36 65 78 81 218 215 271 $15,000 to $24,999 943 33 66 70 59 133 274 308 $25,000 to $34,999 954 25 99 97 85 155 190 303 $35,000 to $49,999 1,743 60 205 185 197 289 369 438 $50,000 to $74,999 2,613 64 328 300 328 483 561 549 $75,000 to $99,999 2,433 43 314 363 383 580 563 187 $100,000 to $149,999 4,575 31 470 701 964 1,238 868 304 $150,000 to $199,999 2,708 14 259 532 660 727 389 127 $200,000+ 5,686 19 300 964 1,533 1,759 831 281 Total 22,618 325 2,106 3,290 4,289 5,581 4,259 2,768 Median Income $113,617 $52,254 $97,540 $135,702 $152,691 $133,557 $97,629 $51,960 Change 2017 - 2022 Less than $15,000 56 2 1 6 -27 -20 33 61 $15,000 to $24,999 -10 -1 -4 -10 -32 -40 23 54 $25,000 to $34,999 -58 -5 -11 -7 -49 -35 11 38 $35,000 to $49,999 -118 -1 -22 -33 -70 -72 23 57 $50,000 to $74,999 -240 -9 -35 -38 -150 -116 36 73 $75,000 to $99,999 20 -0 13 -4 -101 -33 97 49 $100,000 to $149,999 447 2 67 86 -100 77 211 105 $150,000 to $199,999 296 -0 46 80 -63 73 114 47 $200,000+ 593 -1 57 140 -102 150 247 103 Total 97 -12 9 -0 -530 -240 433 437 Median Income $6,669 -$21 $10,836 $11,718 $11,451 $11,742 $10,978 $3,006 Sources: ESRI; US Census Bureau; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 19 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 8 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER ORONO CITY 2017 & 2022 Total <25 25-34 Age 35-44 of Householder 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Less than $15,000 56 2 2 4 5 17 9 17 $15,000 to $24,999 87 2 4 6 8 15 32 20 $25,000 to $34,999 78 1 5 7 10 15 19 21 $35,000 to $49,999 180 4 19 21 26 34 35 41 $50,000 to $74,999 377 9 34 39 59 71 75 90 $75,000 to $99,999 322 6 32 49 60 77 69 29 $100,000 to $149,999 555 2 39 72 131 152 125 34 $150,000 to $199,999 333 1 25 56 97 88 48 18 $200,000+ 1,092 3 38 157 363 348 144 39 Total 3,080 30 198 411 759 817 556 309 Median Income $136,259 $63,804 $102,544 $155,158 $189,487 $163,004 $111,200 $62,452 1 Less than $15,000 62 2 2 4 6 14 12 22 $15,000 to $24,999 87 2 5 6 3 12 33 26 $25,000 to $34,999 74 1 5 7 6 13 20 22 $35,000 to $49,999 171 4 17 18 20 29 36 47 $50,000 to $74,999 353 7 32 33 41 57 79 104 $75,000 to $99,999 331 6 36 46 50 74 81 38 $100,000 to $149,999 622 2 44 79 125 161 160 51 $150,000 to $199,999 366 1 29 61 92 92 64 27 $200,000+ 1,186 3 45 169 346 371 195 57 Total 3,253 28 215 423 689 823 680 394 Median Income $141,731 $65,462 $108,435 $162,213 $200,001 $174,822 $119,256 $67,060 Change 2017 - 2022 Less than $15,000 6 0 0 0 1 -3 3 5 $15,000 to $24,999 0 0 1 0 -5 -3 1 6 $25,000 to $34,999 -4 0 0 0 -4 -2 1 1 $35,000 to $49,999 -9 0 -2 -3 -6 -5 1 6 $50,000 to $74,999 -24 -2 -2 -6 -18 -14 4 14 $75,000 to $99,999 9 0 4 -3 -10 -3 12 9 $100,000 to $149,999 67 0 5 7 -6 9 35 17 $150,000 to $199,999 33 0 4 5 -s 4 16 9 $200,000+ 94 0 7 12 -17 23 51 18 Total 46 -2 6 -5 -48 -21 57 58 Median Income $5,472 $1,658 $5,891 $7,055 $10,514 $11,818 $8,056 $4,608 Sources: ESRI; US Census Bureau; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 20 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 9 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER HENNEPIN COUNTY 2017 & 2022 Total <25 25-34 Age 35-44 of Householder 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Less than $15,000 44,258 5,988 7,575 5,589 5,278 7,799 5,294 6,735 $15,000 to $24,999 42,732 4,274 7,349 5,400 4,341 5,867 6,290 9,211 $25,000 to $34,999 40,300 3,349 8,681 5,917 4,874 5,646 5,229 6,604 $35,000 to $49,999 59,869 3,731 12,622 9,333 8,414 8,907 8,261 8,601 $50,000 to $74,999 85,577 3,925 18,235 14,698 14,278 14,539 11,084 8,818 $75,000 to $99,999 65,409 1,996 13,762 12,898 11,960 12,396 8,335 4,062 $100,000 to $149,999 85,199 1,230 15,432 18,274 18,676 18,690 9,352 3,545 $150,000 to $199,999 40,399 590 5,686 8,865 11,237 8,852 3,999 1,170 $200,000+ 47,862 353 4,452 9,802 13,383 13,151 5,085 1,636 Total 511,605 25,436 93,794 90,776 92,441 95,847 62,929 50,382 Median Income $68,497 $31,725 $62,192 $82,052 $92,581 $83,783 $62,080 $38,534 1 Less than $15,000 45,953 6,145 7,586 6,027 4,898 7,410 6,102 7,785 $15,000 to $24,999 41,982 4,105 6,729 4,805 3,720 5,253 6,933 10,437 $25,000 to $34,999 37,952 3,108 7,731 5,405 3,922 4,879 5,760 7,147 $35,000 to $49,999 56,015 3,556 11,215 8,320 7,071 7,554 8,957 9,342 $50,000 to $74,999 80,045 3,732 16,650 13,595 11,774 12,606 11,981 9,707 $75,000 to $99,999 67,819 2,343 14,146 13,323 11,019 11,943 10,018 5,027 $100,000 to $149,999 101,536 1,546 18,805 22,176 19,881 20,840 12,917 5,371 $150,000 to $199,999 48,706 759 7,297 11,004 11,875 10,169 5,769 1,833 $200,000+ 56,298 416 5,701 11,940 13,770 14,554 7,428 2,489 Total 536,306 25,710 95,860 96,595 87,930 95,208 75,865 59,138 Median Income $76,759 $32,967 $70,962 $92,712 $102,495 $94,729 $70,010 $40,513 Change 2017 - 2022 Less than $15,000 1,695 157 11 438 -380 -389 808 1,050 $15,000 to $24,999 -750 -169 -620 -595 -621 -614 643 1,226 $25,000 to $34,999 -2,348 -241 -950 -512 -952 -767 531 543 $35,000 to $49,999 -3,854 -175 -1,407 -1,013 -1,343 -1,353 696 741 $50,000 to $74,999 -5,532 -193 -1,585 -1,103 -2,504 -1,933 897 889 $75,000 to $99,999 2,410 347 384 425 -941 -453 1,683 965 $100,000 to $149,999 16,337 316 3,373 3,902 1,205 2,150 3,565 1,826 $150,000 to $199,999 8,307 169 1,611 2,139 638 1,317 1,770 663 $200,000+ 8,436 63 1,249 2,138 387 1,403 2,343 853 Total 7,958 42 -794 1,542 -5,536 -3,359 8,823 7,240 Median Income $8,262 $1,242 $8,770 $10,660 $9,914 $10,946 $7,930 $1,979 Sources: ESRI; US Census Bureau; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Household Type December 19, 2017 Page 21 As with age distribution, the trends in types of households impact demand for different types of housing. Table 10 presents data on the types of households in the Market Area in 2010 and 2015. Family households include married -couple families with children (so-called "traditional" families), married couples without children (mostly empty nesters, but also young married cou- ples without children), and other -family households (single parents and unmarried couples with children). Non -family households include persons living alone and roommates (unrelated indi- viduals living together, including unmarried couples without children). • In 2015, there were a total of 3,184 family households in Orono including 766 married couples with children, 1,130 married couples without children, and 182 other families. Married couples without children include empty nesters, who are increasingly a market for for -sale multifamily housing and younger couples without children, who are also a primary market for rental housing. • From 2010 to 2015, the greatest growth among family households in Orono was among "other" families, which grew by 81 households (80.2%). This is in contrast with the de- crease by 119 households (-13.4%) in the number of married couples with children in Orono. Conversely, from 2010 to 2015 in Hennepin County, the number of families categorized as "other" decreased by 269 households (-0.6%) and the number of married couples with children increased by 65 households (0.1%). • There were 1,106 non -family households in Orono in 2015. This includes 126 persons living alone and 980 roommate households. Persons living alone added 28 households (28.6%) to Orono from 2010 to 2015, while the number of roommate households in- creased by 339 (52.9%). Roommate households consist of unrelated persons living with each other to share housing costs and unmarried couples without children, among oth- ers. These persons also tend to be younger and often prefer to live in locations that are closer to entertainment, activities, and other nightlife. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. 1,2001 REMO; 0 n 800 al a 600 al E 400 z 200 December 19, 2017 Household Type, Orono (2010-2.015) Married with Married w/o Other Family Living Alone Roommates Child Child Household Type Page 22 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 10 HOUSEHOLD TYPE PRIMARY MARKET AREA 2010 & 2015 Households 2010 2015 Married w/ 2010 Child 2015 Family Households Married w/o Child 2010 2015 Other 2010 2015 Non -Family Households Living Alone Roommates 2010 2015 2010 2015 Orono City Hennepin County 2,821 472,586 3,184 488,941 885 94,635 766 94,700 1,096 1,130 112,311 120,473 101 45,268 182 44,999 98 22,026 126 23,774 641 198,346 980 204,995 State of Minnesota 1,895,127 2,087,227 477,615 443,212 540,630 617,297 1 236,896 288,506 509,468 584,008 1 130,518 154,204 Percent Orono City Hennepin County 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 31.4% 20.0% 24.1% 19.4% 38.9% 35.5% 23.8% 24.6% 3.6% 9.6% 5.7% 9.2% 3.5% 4.7% 4.0% 4.9% 22.7% 42.0% 30.8% 41.9% State of Minnesota 100.0 100.0 1 25.2% 21.2% 1 28.5% 29.6% 12.5% 13.8% 1 26.9% 28.0% 6.9% 7A% No. Pct. No. Pct. Change 2010-2015 No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. Orono City Hennepin County 363 16,355 12.9% 3.5% -119 65 -13.4% 0.1% 34 3.1% 8,162 7.3% 81 -269 80.2% -0.6% 28 1,748 28.6% 7.9% 339 6,649 52.9% 3.4% State of Minnesota 192,100 10.1% -34,403 -7.2% 76,667 14.2% 51,610 21.8% 74,540 14.6% 23,686 18.1% *Single -parents with children ** Includes unmarried couples without children and group quarters Sources: U. S. Census; ESRI, Inc.; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Summary of Demographic Trends December 19, 2017 Page 23 The following points summarize key demographic trends that will impact development in Na- va rre. • The population in Orono is forecast to grow by 499 people (+6.1%) and 173 households (+5.6%) between 2017 and 2022. • The population over age 65 is expected to experience a substantial increase in Orono, as a result of the aging of the baby boom generation. • Median incomes are rising in Orono, with a 4.0% increase forecast between 2017 and 2022 as incomes rise from $136,259 to $141,731. • Only 15% of residential units in Orono are renter -occupied. Out of renter -occupied units, 66.7% are single-family homes, the rest are in structures with 50 or more units. • Between 2010 and 2015, married couple households with children decreased in Orono, while married couple households without children, other family households and household- ers living alone increased. Orono Building Permit Data Based on building permit data obtained from Metropolitan Council, Table 11 presents the num- ber of housing units added in Orono since 2007. • A total of 360 new housing units were delivered in Orono between 2007 and 2016. Approxi- mately 83% of the permitted units were for single-family homes (298), while 17.2% were for multifamily units (62 units). • The number of new permits generally increased each year since 2007. The number of per- mitted single-family housing units added from 2012 to 2016 (205 units) was over double of those added from 2007 to 2011 (93 units). MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 24 TABLE 11 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION BUILDING PERMITTED UNITS ISSUED ORONO, MN 2007 to 2017 Units Permitted Year Family Multifamily Total Units 2007 23 0 23 2008 23 0 23 2009 20 0 20 2010 10 0 10 2011 17 62 79 2012 25 0 25 2013 39 0 39 2014 42 0 42 2015 62 0 62 2016 37 0 37 Total 298 62 360 Sources: Met Council; Maxfield Research & Consulting LLC Housing Units by Structure Type Based on Census data, Table 12 presents the number of housing units by housing type as com- pared with housing tenure. Housing types compared include single-family detached units, townhouse units, and multifamily units. Multifamily includes duplex, triplex, and four-plex units as well as buildings with five or more units. • Out of all residential housing units in Orono about 94% were single-family homes, while only 6% of units were multifamily. However, when considering housing tenure, out of owner -occupied units, 99% were single family homes, while out of renter -occupied units 66.7% of units were single family homes. • For Hennepin County in 2015, single detached homes accounted for 90.4% of owner - occupied housing units. The largest portion of renter -occupied units in Hennepin County were those in structures containing 50 or more units accounting for 32.2% of all units. This compares with just in Orono, where structures containing 50 or more units were the only type of multifamily structure. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 25 Housing Units by Structure, Orono City (2015) ■ 1 ■ 2 to 9 ■ 10to 19 20 to 49 ■ 50+ ■ Other Housing Units by Structure, Hennepin County (2015) 0% 79 I j ■ 1 ■ 2 to 9 ■ 10 to 19 20 to 49 ■ 50+ ■ Other MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 26 Housing Resale Values Table 13 presents recently sold single family homes, condos/townhomes, and multi -family homes in Navarre and Orono from January 2017 to mid-November 2017. • A total of 186 properties were identified as recently sold in Orono with 153 single family homes listed and 33 condo or multi -family homes • The largest percentage (30%) of single family homes in Orono were sold for over $1,000,000. Only 5% of single family homes were sold for less than $200,000. • Only 16 homes have sold through mid-November 2017 in Navarre. Compared to Orono proper the housing market in Navarre is much more affordable as the average and me- dian sales price was $215,305 and $206,500, respectively. The housing stock is also older and smaller as the average home size was 1,476 finished square feet. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 12 HOUSING UNITS BY STRUCTURE & TENURE PRIMARY MARKET AREA 2015 ORONO CITY HENNEPIN COUNTY Owner- Renter- Owner- Renter - Units in Structure Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. Occupied Pct. 1, detached 2,615 96.6% 239 50.0% 247,800 80.6% 23,400 12.8% 1, attached 66 2.4% 80 16.7% 30,109 9.8% 12,592 6.9% 2 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4,012 1.3% 12,829 7.0% 3 to 4 10 0.4% 0 0.0% 2,669 0.9% 8,885 4.9% 5 to 9 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2,588 0.8% 10,911 6.0% 10 to 19 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2,076 0.7% 22,573 12.3% 20 to 49 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4,620 1.5% 32,276 17.7% 50 or more 15 0.6% 159 33.3% 12,573 4.1% 58,794 32.2% Mobile home 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 910 0.3% 446 0.2% Boat, RV, van, etc. 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 38 0.0% 95 0.1% Total 2,706 100% 478 100% 307,395 100% 182,801 100% Sources: U.S. Census Bureau -American Community Survey; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC Housing Resale Values Table 13 presents recently sold single family homes, condos/townhomes, and multi -family homes in Navarre and Orono from January 2017 to mid-November 2017. • A total of 186 properties were identified as recently sold in Orono with 153 single family homes listed and 33 condo or multi -family homes • The largest percentage (30%) of single family homes in Orono were sold for over $1,000,000. Only 5% of single family homes were sold for less than $200,000. • Only 16 homes have sold through mid-November 2017 in Navarre. Compared to Orono proper the housing market in Navarre is much more affordable as the average and me- dian sales price was $215,305 and $206,500, respectively. The housing stock is also older and smaller as the average home size was 1,476 finished square feet. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 27 Recently Sold Residential Properties, Orono (2017) $1,000,000 and over $900,0100 to $999,999 $800,000 to $899,000 $700,000 to $799,000 $600,000 to $699,000 d U $500,000 to $599,000 $4010,000 to $499,999 $300,0100 to $399,999 $200,000 to $299,999 $100,000to $199,999 < $99,999 0 10 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 20 30 40 50 Count TABLE 13 RECENTLY SOLD (JANUARY 2017- NOVEMBER 2017) MARKET AREA Condo/ Townhomes/ Multi -Family Single Family Homes Homes Total Navarre Orono Navarre Orono Navarre Orono Cost Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent <$99,999 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 3 9% 0 0% 3 2% $100, 000 to $199,999 3 33% 8 5% 3 43% 0 0% 6 38% 8 4% $200, 000 to $299,999 5 56% 13 8% 4 57% 9 27% 9 56% 22 12% $300, 000 to $399,999 1 11% 12 8% 0 0% 14 42% 1 6% 26 14% $400, 000 to $499,999 0 0% 14 9% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 14 8% $500, 000 to $599, 000 0 0% 13 8% 0 0% 1 3% 0 0% 14 8% $600, 000 to $699, 000 0 0% 12 8% 0 0% 5 15% 0 0% 17 9% $700, 000 to $799, 000 0 0% 11 7% 0 0% 1 3% 0 0% 12 6% $800,000 to $899,000 0 0% 15 10% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 15 8% $900, 000 to $999,999 0 0% 9 6% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 9 5% $1,000,000 and over 0 0% 46 30% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 46 25% Total 9 100% 153 100% 7 100% 33 100% 16 100% 186 100% Sources: Trulia; Realtor.com; RE/MAX; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC Recently Sold Residential Properties, Orono (2017) $1,000,000 and over $900,0100 to $999,999 $800,000 to $899,000 $700,000 to $799,000 $600,000 to $699,000 d U $500,000 to $599,000 $4010,000 to $499,999 $300,0100 to $399,999 $200,000 to $299,999 $100,000to $199,999 < $99,999 0 10 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 20 30 40 50 Count Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Active Listings December 19, 2017 Page 28 Table 14 presents currently listed, for -sale single family homes, condos, and multi -family homes in Navarre and Orono as of mid-November 2017. • A total of 115 properties were identified as actively listed for -sale in Orono with 101 sin- gle family homes listed and 14 condo or multi -family homes. • The largest percentage (50%) of single family homes in Orono were listed for over $1,000,000 with only 5% listed for under $300,000. • Only seven homes were listed for sale in the Navarre area. The median list price of these listings was $288,450. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 14 ACTIVE LISTINGS NOVEMBER 2017 Condo/Townhomes/ Multi -Family Single Family Homes Homes Total Navarre Orono Navarre Orono Navarre Orono Cost Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent <$99,999 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% $ 100, 000 to $199,999 3 50% 4 4% 0 0% 0 0% 3 43% 4 3% $200,000 to $299,999 0 0% 1 1% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 1% $300, 000 to $399,999 1 17% 7 7% 0 0% 3 21% 1 14% 10 9% $400, 000 to $499,999 1 17% 4 4% 0 0% 1 7% 1 14% 5 4% $500, 000 to $599, 000 0 0% 4 4% 1 100% 3 21% 1 14% 7 6% $600,000 to $699,000 0 0% 6 6% 0 0% 4 29% 0 0% 10 9% $700, 000 to $799, 000 0 0% 6 6% 0 0% 2 14% 0 0% 8 7% $800,000 to $899, 000 1 17% 3 3% 0 0% 1 7% 1 14% 4 3% $900, 000 to $999,999 0 0% 8 8% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 8 7% $1,000,000 and over 0 0% 58 57% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 58 50% Total 6 100% 101 100% 1 100% 14 100% 7 100% 115 100% Sources: Zillow; Realtor.com; RE/MAX; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Active Listings (Residential Properties) Orono, November 2017. $1,000,000 and over $900,000 to $999,999 t $800,000 to $899,000 $700,000 to $799,000 o $600,000 to $699,000 u $500,000 to $599,000 $400,000 to $499,999 $300,000 to $399,999 $200,000 to $299,999 ■ $100,000 to $199,999 $99,999 0 10 20 3 COU [It New For -Sale Housing Projects December 19, 2017 Page 29 Table 15 presents active and pending for -sale new construction single family homes in Orono as of mid-November 2017. • A total of 39 new construction projects were identified as actively listed for -sale in Orono. • The largest percentage (54%) of single family homes in Orono were listed for over $1,000,000 with no active or pending new construction homes listed for under $400,000. • The median price per square foot (PSF) of a new single-family home in Orono is $253 PSF; compared to $210 PSF for a for -sale multifamily home (twinhome or detached townhome). MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. TABLE 15 NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS (ACTIVE ORONO AND PENDING) Cost Count Percent $400,000- $499,999 1 3% $500,000-$599,999 3 8% $600,000- $699,999 6 15% $700,000- $799,999 6 15% $800,000- $899,999 2 5% $900,000- $999,999 0 0% $1,000,000- $1,199,999 1 3% $1,200,000- $1,299,999 9 23% $1,300,000- $1,399,999 2 5% $1,400,000- $1,499,999 2 5% $1,500,000 + 7 18% Total 39 100% New Construction (Active and Pending) $1,50a 040 + I $1,400,000- $1,499,999 $1,300,000- $1,399,999 i $1,200,000- $1,299,999 $1,000,000- $1,199,999 o $900,004- $999,999 U $800,000- $899,999 $700,000- $799,999 $600,000- $699,999 $500,000-$599,999 $400,000- $499,999 0 2 4 Count MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC December 19, 2017 Page 30 Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Selected Multifamily Housing Developments December 19, 2017 Page 31 Table 16 lists selected multifamily housing developments in Navarre and from other Lake Min- netonka area communities. Data comprises of both for sale and rental properties and includes the number of units and bedrooms and pricing. The following points summarize the current market for multifamily residential units in Navarre. • The for -sale units range in size from 850 square feet to 4,600 square feet, while the for - rent units range in size from 450 to 2,049 square feet. • Pricing for the for -sale condominium units is at the luxury end as prices range from $273,917 to over $3,500,000. Most of new condominium product is being developed in Downtown Wayzata with prices starting at $500,000 with most product selling for over $1,000,000. • Pricing for the for -rent units ranges from $750 per month for a studio to $3,575 per month for a two-bedroom unit. • Besides The Mist on Lake Minnetonka which was built in 2007, all the other for -rent pro- jects predate 2000. The for -sale units were all built after 2000. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 16 SELECTED MULTIFAMILY UNITS NAVARRE SURROUNDING AREA Yr. No. of 111111M �- Name Type Open Units Bedrooms Min - Max Min - Max Avg. The Landing Condos 2017 31 2-3 BR 1,220 - 4,600 $825,000 - $3,500,000 $719 815 Wayzata Blvd E; Wayzata Meyer Place at Ferndale Condos 2017 21 2-413R 2,000 - 4,000 $1,290,000 - $2,399,000 $622 105 Lake St E; Wayzata The Regatta Condos 2015 59 1-2BR 850 - 4,000 $500,000 - $2,000,000 $544 801 Lake St E; Wayzata Lakeview Lofts Condos 2005 32 1-2BR 1,297 - 1,534 $273,917 - $380,202 $230 4100 Spring St; Spring Park The Mist on Lake Minnetonka Apartments 2007 121 1-2BR 1,260 2,049 N/A $3,575 N/A 4201 Sunset Dr; Spring Park Minnetonka Edgewater Apartments 1967 82 0-2BR 450 - 1,078 $875 $1,450 $1.64 4177 Shoreline Dr; Spring Park Bayview Apartments Apartments 1969 107 0-3BR 500 1,200 $750 - $1,500 $1.33 24001nterlachen Rd; Spring Park Parkshore Apartments Apartments 1984 92 1-213R 643- 1,050 N/A N/A N/A 4601 Shoreline Dr; Spring Park Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Selected Multifami December 19, 2017 & Commercial Development The Mist on Lake Minnetonka The Regatta Senior Housing Page 32 Lakeview Lofts The Landing - Hotel The term "senior housing" refers to any housing development that is restricted to persons age 55 or older. Today, senior housing includes a spectrum of housing alternatives, which occasion- ally overlap, thus making the differences somewhat ambiguous. However, the level of support services offered best distinguishes them. The following figure classifies senior housing projects into five categories based on the level of support services that are offered. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber December 19, 2017 WSB & Associates, Inc. Page 33 Table 17 shows the inventory of existing market rate senior housing products in Navarre and the surrounding Lake Minnetonka communities that would be competitive with a new market rate senior housing development on the subject property. As displayed in Table 17, five properties with a total of over 300 units were identified near the Orono area. • Four out of five projects offered assisted living care and only one out of the five projects offered solely adult/few services units. • Although there are no senior housing developments in Navarre, a large senior housing campus is located to the west in Spring Park (Lake Minnetonka Shores). MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Continuum of Housing and Services for Seniors Single -Family Townhome or Congregate Apartments w/ Assisted Luing Nursing Facilities Age -Restricted Independent Single- Congregate Apartments Memory Care Family, Townhomes, Apartments, w/ Intensive Services (Alzheimer's and Condominiums, Cooperatives Dementia Units) Fully Fully or Highly Independent Dependent on Care Lifestyle Senior Housing Product Type Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC Table 17 shows the inventory of existing market rate senior housing products in Navarre and the surrounding Lake Minnetonka communities that would be competitive with a new market rate senior housing development on the subject property. As displayed in Table 17, five properties with a total of over 300 units were identified near the Orono area. • Four out of five projects offered assisted living care and only one out of the five projects offered solely adult/few services units. • Although there are no senior housing developments in Navarre, a large senior housing campus is located to the west in Spring Park (Lake Minnetonka Shores). MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Home Apartment Optional Services Age -Restricted Independent Single- Congregate Apartments Memory Care Family, Townhomes, Apartments, w/ Intensive Services (Alzheimer's and Condominiums, Cooperatives Dementia Units) Table 17 shows the inventory of existing market rate senior housing products in Navarre and the surrounding Lake Minnetonka communities that would be competitive with a new market rate senior housing development on the subject property. As displayed in Table 17, five properties with a total of over 300 units were identified near the Orono area. • Four out of five projects offered assisted living care and only one out of the five projects offered solely adult/few services units. • Although there are no senior housing developments in Navarre, a large senior housing campus is located to the west in Spring Park (Lake Minnetonka Shores). MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. TABLE 17 SELECTED SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS NAVARRE SURROUNDING AREA NOVEMBER 2017 Number December 19, 2017 Page 34 Project/ Address Year Built of Units Services Presbyterian Homes and Services 2013 254 Adult/ (Folkestone) Few Services/ 100 Promenade Ave; Wayzata Assisted Living/ Memory Care Trails of Orono 2012 76 Assisted Living/ 875 Wayzata Blvd; Wayzata Memory Care Orono Woods Senior Apartments 2002 62 Adult/ 2040 Wayzata Blvd; Long Lake Few Services Long Lake Assisted Living LLC 2005 N/A Assisted Living/ 345 North Brown Rd; Long Lake Housing With Services Sojourn Suites LLC 1984 2-7 per Assisted Living/ 3645 Lyric Ave; Navarre location Housing With (8 locations total) Services/ Memory Care Presbyterian Homes and Services 1978 131 Adult/ (Lake Minnetonka Shores) Few Services/ 4527 Shoreline Dr; Spring Park Assisted Living/ Memory Care Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC Selected Senior Housing Developments Folkestone MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Presbyterian Homes- Lake Minnetonka Shores Mr. Eric Zweber December 19, 2017 WSB & Associates, Inc. Page 35 Trails of Orono Consumer Expenditure Patterns Long Lake Assisted Living Table 18 shows estimated consumer expenditures and average expenditures per households for retail goods and services in Navarre and Orono compared to all of Hennepin County in 2017. Data was obtained from ESRI based on Consumer Expenditure Surveys from the Bureau of La- bor Statistics. The table shows the average expenditures per household in the Market Area by product or ser- vice. The average expenditure reflects the average amount spent per household, while the total expenditure reflects the aggregate amount spent by all households. In addition, a Spending Po- tential Index (SPI) is illustrated for comparison purposes. The SPI is based on households and represents the annual expenditures for a product or service relative to the national average which is given a benchmark index of 100. An SPI of 115 indicates that the average annual ex- penditure by local consumers is 15% above the national average. Two-thirds of the national economy is driven by consumer spending. Consumer spending is in- fluenced by market conditions and trends. In times of economic troubles, market conditions drive spending patterns toward convenience and necessities, whereas in times of a booming economy consumer trends feature opportunity and luxury items. During the most recent reces- sion, when the housing market began its decline in late 2006 into 2007, consumer spending and consumer confidence followed. Households decreased spending, increased savings, and re- duced credit card debt as many households were faced with job losses. As the nation exited the recession, consumers gained confidence and spending gradually recov- ered. Consumer confidence continues to grow suggesting economic growth with higher con- sumption. The following are key points from the household expenditures table. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 36 • Overall, Navarre residents will spend an estimated $6.9 million on retail goods and ser- vices in 2017, excluding housing, finance/insurance, and travel expenditures, as well as vehicle purchases. • Average annual expenditures (excluding the categories mentioned above) are estimated to be $38,538 per household in Navarre. This compares to an average of $27,506 per household for Hennepin County. • As reflected in the SPI, expenditures by Navarre and Orono households are higher than the Hennepin County average in every product and service category. • Among the retail categories, Market Area spending was greatest for Food at Home (i.e. groceries) at an average of $8,353 per household in Navarre compared to $6,052 per household in Hennepin County. • Spending was also high for Food Away from Home ($5,693 per Navarre household) and Entertainment and Recreation goods and services ($5,375 per household in Navarre). MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 37 Goods & Services TABLE 19 ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURES BY SELECTED PRODUCT TYPE PRIMARY MARKET AREA Index Apparel & Services 2017 $3,715 Navarre Annual Expenditures Orono City Expenditures Hennepin Spending Potential Index to USA County Expenditures Total Average Average Average $941 $5,375 Hennepin Category ($000's) Per HH Per HH Per HH Navarre Orono City County Goods & Services IIndex Index Index Index Apparel & Services $650 $3,715 $5,299 $2,674 172 245 124 Entertainment and Recreation $941 $5,375 $7,662 $3,749 172 246 120 Nonprescription Drugs $38 $215 $292 $148 168 229 116 Prescription Drugs $113 $646 $869 $434 166 224 112 Eye Glasses & Contact Lenses $29 $163 $229 $111 173 243 117 Personal Care Products $141 $804 $1,097 $574 171 233 122 Child Care $145 $826 $1,235 $609 172 258 127 School Books & Supplies $46 $263 $369 $195 170 239 126 Smoking Products $110 $631 $706 $472 152 170 113 Computer Hardware $53 $304 $429 $220 176 248 127 Computer Software $4 $20 $29 $15 176 251 132 Pets $178 $1,017 $1,408 $682 171 236 114 Food Index Index Index Food at Home $1,462 $8,354 $11,114 $6,052 166 221 120 Food Away from Home $996 $5,693 $7,818 $4,121 171 235 124 Alcoholic Beverages $173 $990 $1,423 $705 178 256 127 Home IIndex Index Index Index Home Mortgage Payment/Rent $2,726 $15,574 $24,766 $9,967 181 287 116 Maintenance& Remodeling Services $622 $3,557 $5,845 $2,218 183 301 114 Maintenance& Remodeling Material $121 $689 $1,138 $433 170 281 107 Utilities $1,456 $8,317 $11,246 $5,898 165 223 117 Household Furnishings, Equipment, & Operations Index F Index Household Textiles $29 $167 $240 $118 175 252 124 Furniture $174 $995 $1,400 $711 174 245 124 Rugs $8 $43 $69 $29 185 299 125 Major Appliances $96 $549 $772 $363 171 241 113 Small Appliances $15 $83 $113 $60 172 233 124 Housewares $29 $163 $222 $114 172 234 120 Luggage $4 $22 $35 $15 181 292 128 Telephone & Accessories $21 $118 $151 $86 171 218 125 Lawn & Garden $129 $739 $1,113 $469 176 265 112 Moving/Storage/Freight Express $19 $111 $143 $86 174 223 134 Hous ekeepingSupplies $209 $1,195 $1,610 $842 168 226 118 Financial & Insurance Index Index Index Investments $2,069 $11,825 $20,817 $7,512 191 336 121 Vehicle Loans $775 $4,430 $5,684 $3,156 163 209 116 Owners & Renters Insurance $156 $889 $1,298 $569 172 251 110 Vehicle Insurance $345 $1,973 $2,671 $1,408 168 227 120 Life/Other Insurance $134 $764 $1,232 $495 179 288 116 Health Insurance $1,089 $6,225 $8,733 $4,237 170 239 116 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 38 Retail Demand Potential and Leakage Tables 20 through 24 on the following pages present current retail sales and consumer expendi- ture data for Block Groups 27053072031 and 27053072032; Orono; Hennepin County; and a 5 - mile radius around Navarre. Due to ESRI data limitations, information could not be provided for the Navarre site area and instead the two block groups closest to the site were analyzed (see map on the following page). The sales information is from ESRI based on household counts. This information lists retail demand (potential sales), retail supply to consumers (retail sales) and provides a picture of the gap between the area's retail supply and demand. A positive value represents "leakage" of retail opportunity to stores outside of the Market Area. A negative value represents a "surplus," where more customers are coming into the area for retail goods and services than there are households in the area. • As depicted in the tables and illustrated in the following graphs, leakages exist in most retail industry segments in both Navarre and Orono. For the Navarre area block groups, MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 19 CONTINUED ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURES BY SELECTED PRODUCT TYPE PRIMARY MARKET AREA 2017 Navarre Annual Orono City Hennepin Spending Potential Index to USA County Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Total Average Average Average Hennepin Category ($000-s) Per HH Per HH Per HH Navarre Orono City County Transportation Index Index Index Cars and Trucks (Net Outlay) $656 $3,746 $4,893 $2,635 167 218 117 Gasoline and Motor Oil $794 $4,535 $5,917 $3,257 164 213 117 Vehicle Maintenance/Repair $318 $1,818 $2,515 $1,276 170 235 119 Travel IIndex Index Index Airline Fares $163 $933 $1,501 $645 183 295 127 Lodging $167 $951 $1,500 $634 182 286 121 Vehicle Rental $8 $48 $75 $32 182 282 123 Food &Drink on Trips $155 $888 $1,358 $600 180 275 122 Average Annual Household Expenditures Summary Goods & Services $2,446 $12,962 $18,217 $9,202 Food $2,631 $15,036 $20,354 $10,878 Home $4,924 $28,138 $42,995 $18,517 Household $733 $4,186 $5,868 $2,893 Financial and Insurance $4,569 $26,106 $40,436 $17,376 Transportation $1,767 $10,099 $13,325 $7,168 Travel $494 $2,821 $4,434 $1,910 Total $17,564 $99,349 $145,627 $67,944 Note: The Spending Potential Index is based on households and represents the amount spent for a product or service relative to the national average of 100. Sources: ESRI; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC Retail Demand Potential and Leakage Tables 20 through 24 on the following pages present current retail sales and consumer expendi- ture data for Block Groups 27053072031 and 27053072032; Orono; Hennepin County; and a 5 - mile radius around Navarre. Due to ESRI data limitations, information could not be provided for the Navarre site area and instead the two block groups closest to the site were analyzed (see map on the following page). The sales information is from ESRI based on household counts. This information lists retail demand (potential sales), retail supply to consumers (retail sales) and provides a picture of the gap between the area's retail supply and demand. A positive value represents "leakage" of retail opportunity to stores outside of the Market Area. A negative value represents a "surplus," where more customers are coming into the area for retail goods and services than there are households in the area. • As depicted in the tables and illustrated in the following graphs, leakages exist in most retail industry segments in both Navarre and Orono. For the Navarre area block groups, MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 39 the total Retail Trade industry (including Food and Drink) experienced a $46.5 million sales leakage in 2017, while Orono experienced a $209.8 million sales leakage. • There is high leakage in Orono and from within the three- and five -mile radius of Na- varre. This suggests the Navarre area is under retailed and could support new commer- cial development. Navarre Site Block Groups MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Surplus/Leakage by Retail Category (Block Groups) Total (Retail + Food & Drink) Food Services & Drinking Places Nonstore Retailers Miscellaneous Retailers General Merchandise Sporting Goods, Hobby... Clothing and Accessories... Gasoline Stations Health & Personal Care Food & Beverage Bldg Materials, Garden Equip... Electronics & Appliance Furniture & Furnishings Motor Vehicle & Parts... December 19, 2017 Page 40 -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 —surplus— leakage Surplus/Leaks Total (Retail + Food & Drink) Food Services & Drinking Places hlonstore Retailers Miscellaneous Retailers General Merchandise Sporting Goods, Hobby... Clothing and Accessories... Gasoline Stations Health & Personal Care Food & Beverage Bldg Materials, Garden Equip... Electronics & Appliance Furniture & Furnishings Motor Vehicle & Parts... -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 ----surplus---- ------leakage------ MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 41 Surplus/Leakage by Retail Category (Navarre 3 -Mole Radius) Total (Retail + Food & Drink) Food Services & Drinking Places Nonstore Retailers Miscellaneous Retailers General Merchandise Sporting Goods, Hobby... Clothing and Accessories... Gasoline Stations Health & Personal Care Food & Beverage Bldg Materials, Garden Equip... Electronics & Appliance Furniture & Furnishings Motor Vehicle & Parts... -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 —surplus— ------leakage------ Surplus/Leakage by Retail Category (Navarre 5 -Mile Radius) Total (Retail + Food & Drink) Food Services & Drinking Places Nonstore Retailers Miscellaneous Retailers General Merchandise Sporting Goods, Hobby... Clothing and Accessories... Gasoline Stations Health & Personal Care Food & Beverage Bldg Materials, Garden Equip... Electronics & Appliance Furniture & Furnishings Motor Vehicle & Parts... -100 -75 -50 -25 0 ----surplus--- MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC 25 50 75 100 -----leakage----- Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Surplus/Leakage by Retail Category (Hennepin County) Total (Retail + Food & Drink) Food Services & Drinking Places Nonstore Retailers Miscellaneous Retailers General Merchandise Sporting Goods, Hobby... Clothing and Accessories... Gasoline Stations Health & Personal Care Food & Beverage Bldg Materials, Garden Equip... Electronics & Appliance Furniture & Furnishings Motor Vehicle & Parts... December 19, 2017 Page 42 -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100 ---- surplus---- MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC ------ leakage ------ Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 43 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 20 RETAIL DEMAND POTENTIAL AND LEAKAGE BLOCK GROUPS 27053072031 AND 27053072032 2017 Demand Supply Retail Gap Surplus/leakage Number of Industry Group (NAICS Code) (Retail Potential) (Retail Sales) (Demand - Supply) Factor Businesses Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink (NAICS 44-45, 722) $83,246,161 $36,712,858 $46,533,303 38.8 24 Total Retail Trade (NAICS 4445) $74,923,922 $31,455,599 $43,468,323 40.9 18 Total Food & Drink (NAICS 722) $8,322,239 EXPENDITURE $5,257,259 TYPE $3,064,980 22.6 6 Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers $15,332,266 $4,274,957 $11,057,309 56.4 5 AutomobileDeaIers $12,220,953 $0 $12,220,953 100.0 0 Other Motor Vehicle Dealers $1,736,499 $0 $1,736,499 100.0 0 Auto Parts, Accessories &Tire Stores $1,374,814 $4,274,957 ($2,900,143) (51.3) 5 Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores $2,433,512 $938,640 $1,494,872 44.3 1 Furniture Stores $1,446,739 $0 $1,446,739 100.0 0 Home Furnishings Stores $986,773 $938,640 $48,133 2.5 1 Electronics & Appliance Stores $2,864,604 $0 $2,864,604 100.0 0 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores $5,412,792 $3,223,242 $2,189,550 25.4 3 Bldg Material&Supplies Dealers $4,894,588 $3,223,242 $1,671,346 20.6 3 Lawn & Garden Equip & Supply Stores $518,204 $0 $518,204 100.0 0 Food & Beverage Stores $11,791,677 $13,854,475 ($2,062,798) (8.0) 2 Grocery Stores $9,646,239 $13,368,035 ($3,721,796) (16.2) 1 Specialty Food Stores $596,215 $0 $596,215 100.0 0 Beer, Wine & Liquor Stores $1,549,223 $486,440 $1,062,783 52.2 1 Health & Personal Care Stores $5,225,483 $0 $5,225,483 100.0 0 Gasoline Stations $7,998,282 $7,625,612 $372,670 2.4 2 Clothing & Clothing Accessories Stores $4,167,426 $0 $4,167,426 100.0 0 Clothi ng Stores $2,807,837 $0 $2,807,837 100.0 0 Shoe Stores $576,622 $0 $576,622 100.0 0 Jewelry, Luggage & Leather Goods Stores $782,967 $0 $782,967 100.0 0 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores $2,352,042 $354,365 $1,997,677 73.8 1 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Musical InstrStores $2,043,401 $354,365 $1,689,036 70.4 1 Book, Periodical & Music Stores $308,641 $0 $308,641 100.0 0 General Merchandise Stores $13,233,944 $708,161 $12,525,783 89.8 1 Department Stores Excluding Leased Depts. $9,975,419 $0 $9,975,419 100.0 0 Other General Merchandise Stores $3,258,525 $708,161 $2,550,364 64.3 1 Miscellaneous Store Retailers $2,875,558 $228,135 $2,647,423 85.3 2 Florists $168,075 $95,461 $72,614 27.6 1 Office Supplies, Stationary & Gift Stores $605,024 $0 $605,024 100.0 0 Used Merchandise Stores $375,089 $0 $375,089 100.0 0 Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers $1,727,370 $132,674 $1,594,696 85.7 1 Nonstore Retailers $1,236,336 $248,012 $988,324 66.6 1 Electronic Shopping & Mail -Order Houses $960,637 $0 $960,637 100.0 0 Vending Machine Operators $54,560 $0 $54,560 100.0 0 Direct Selling Establishments $221,139 $248,012 ($26,873) (5.7) 1 Food Services & Drinking Places $8,322,239 $5,257,259 $3,064,980 22.6 6 Special Food Services $200,835 $227,460 ($26,625) (6.2) 1 Drinking Places- Alcoholic Beverages $508,937 $1,048,301 ($539,364) (34.6) 1 Restaurants/Other Eating Places $7,612,467 $3,981,498 $3,630,969 31.3 4 Note: All figures quoted in 2016 dollars. Supply (retail sales) estimates sales to consumers by establishments, sales to businesses are excluded. Demand (retail potential) estimates the expected amout spent by consumers ata retail establishment. Leakage/Surplus factor measures the relationship between supply and demand at ranges from+100 (total leakage) to -100 (total surplus). A positivevalue represents "leakage" of retail opportunity outside the trade area. A negative value represents a surplus of retail sales, a market where customers are drawn in from outside the trade area. Sources: ESRI; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 44 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 21 RETAIL DEMAND POTENTIAL AND LEAKAGE NAVARRE 3 -MILE RADIUS 2017 Demand Supply Retail Gap Surplus/Leakage Number of Industry Group (NAICS Code) (Retail Potential) (Retail Sales) (Demand - Supply) Factor Businesses Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink (NAICS 44-45, 722) $535,612,858 $172,168,743 $363,444,115 51.3 120 Total Retai I Trade (NAICS 44-45) $482,523,379 $133,891,510 $348,631,869 56.6 89 Total Food & Drink (NAICS 722) $53,089,479 EXPENDITURE $38,277,232 TYPE $14,812,247 16.2 31 Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers $99,423,043 $23,897,095 $75,525,948 61.2 15 Automobi le Dealers $79,182,070 $2,050,214 $77,131,856 95.0 3 Other Motor Vehicle Dealers $11,338,855 $16,703,910 ($5,365,055) (19.1) 6 Auto Parts, Accessories & Tire Stores $8,902,118 $5,142,971 $3,759,147 26.8 6 Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores $15,746,253 $4,068,157 $11,678,096 58.9 6 Furniture Stores $9,240,709 $705,683 $8,535,026 85.8 1 Home Furnishings Stores $6,505,543 $3,362,474 $3,143,069 31.9 5 Electronics & Appliance Stores $18,233,322 $7,727,957 $10,SOS,36S 40.5 6 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores $36,688,185 $10,731,333 $25,956,852 54.7 9 Bldg Material&Supplies Dealers $33,012,711 $9,129,145 $23,883,566 56.7 8 Lawn & Garden Equip & Supply Stores $3,675,474 $1,602,187 $2,073,287 39.3 1 Food & Beverage Stores $75,096,200 $36,591,107 $38,505,093 34.5 9 Grocery Stores $61,451,947 $29,157,128 $32,294,819 35.6 3 Specialty Food Stores $3,792,310 $445,514 $3,346,796 79.0 1 Beer, Wine & Liquor Stores $9,851,942 $6,988,465 $2,863,477 17.0 5 Health & Personal Care Stores $33,767,842 $7,834,775 $25,933,067 62.3 5 Gasoline Stations $50,957,027 $18,086,810 $32,870,217 47.6 5 Clothing & Clothing Accessories Stores $26,545,442 $14,016,785 $12,528,657 30.9 10 ClothingStores $17,836,647 $5,358,116 $12,478,531 53.8 7 Shoe Stores $3,687,554 $0 $3,687,554 100.0 0 Jewelry, Luggage & Leather Goods Stores $5,021,241 $8,658,669 ($3,637,428) (26.6) 3 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores $14,934,881 $1,638,205 $13,296,676 80.2 3 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Musical Instr Stores $12,986,768 $1,638,205 $11,348,563 77.6 3 Book, Periodical & Music Stores $1,948,113 $0 $1,948,113 100.0 0 General Merchandise Stores $84,610,381 $1,448,666 $83,161,715 96.6 3 Department Stores Excluding Leased Depts. $63,775,567 $0 $63,775,567 100.0 0 Other General Merchandise Stores $20,834,815 $1,340,482 $19,494,333 87.9 2 Miscellaneous Store Retailers $18,422,426 $7,523,946 $10,898,480 42.0 17 Florists $1,228,539 $606,436 $622,103 33.9 2 Office Supplies, Stationary& Gift Stores $3,891,558 $3,026,738 $864,820 12.5 3 Used Merchandise Stores $2,366,857 $714,706 $1,652,151 53.6 3 Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers $10,935,473 $3,176,066 $7,759,407 55.0 8 Nonstore Retailers $8,098,379 $326,676 $7,771,703 92.2 1 Electronic Shopping & Mail -Order Houses $6,149,255 $0 $6,149,255 100.0 0 Vending Machine Operators $346,660 $0 $346,660 100.0 0 Direct Selling Establishments $1,602,464 $248,012 $1,354,452 73.2 1 Food Services & Drinking Places $53,089,479 $38,277,232 $14,812,247 16.2 31 Special Food Services $1,337,609 $414,454 $923,155 52.7 2 Drinking Places -Alcoholic Beverages $3,310,413 $1,935,735 $1,374,678 26.2 2 Restaurants/Other Eating Places $48,441,457 $35,927,043 $12,514,414 14.8 27 Note: All figures quoted in 2016 dollars. Supply (retail sales ) estimates sales to consumers by establishments, sales to businesses are excluded. Demand (retail potential) estimates theexpected amoutspent by consumers ata retail establishment. Leakage/Surplus factor measures the relationship between supply and demand at ranges from+100 (total leakage) to -100 (total surplus). A positivevalue represents "leakage" of retai I opportunity outside the trade area. A negative value represents a surplus of retail sales, a market where customers are drawn in from outside the trade area. Sources: ESRI; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 45 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 22 RETAIL DEMAND POTENTIAL AND LEAKAGE NAVARRE 5 -MILE RADIUS 2017 Demand Supply Retail Gap Surplus/Leakage Number of Industry Group (NAICS Code) (Retail Potential) (Retail Sales) (Demand - Supply) Factor Businesses Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink (NAICS 44-45, 722) $1,465,161,877 $420,595,936 $1,044,565,941 55.4 309 Tota I Reta i I Trade (NAI CS 44-45) $1,319,383,170 $334,264,186 $985,118,984 59.6 233 Total Food & Drink (NAICS 722) $145,778,708 EXPENDITURE $86,331,750 TYPE $59,446,958 25.6 76 Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers $273,031,317 $48,007,748 $225,023,569 70.1 25 AutomobileDeaIers $217,457,583 $7,977,305 $209,480,278 92.9 4 Other Motor Vehicle Dealers $31,302,300 $33,208,460 ($1,906,160) (3.0) 12 Auto Parts, Accessories & Tire Stores $24,271,434 $6,821,983 $17,449,451 56.1 9 Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores $43,421,622 $11,715,267 $31,706,355 57.5 15 Furniture Stores $25,407,690 $996,344 $24,411,346 92.5 2 Home Furnishings Stores $18,013,933 $10,718,923 $7,295,010 25.4 13 Electronics & Appliance Stores $49,869,939 $17,626,389 $32,243,550 47.8 15 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores $101,657,303 $31,946,126 $69,711,177 52.2 28 Bldg Material&Supplies Dealers $91,455,405 $24,836,604 $66,618,801 57.3 22 Lawn & Garden Equip & Supply Stores $10,201,898 $7,109,522 $3,092,376 17.9 6 Food & Beverage Stores $203,992,841 $71,428,021 $132,564,820 48.1 23 Grocery Stores $166,772,659 $51,905,277 $114,867,382 52.5 8 Specialty Food Stores $10,286,259 $2,154,202 $8,132,057 65.4 4 Beer, Wine & Liquor Stores $26,933,923 $17,368,543 $9,565,380 21.6 11 Health & Personal Care Stores $91,628,133 $22,411,233 $69,216,900 60.7 12 Gasoline Stations $138,114,753 $48,440,917 $89,673,836 48.1 12 Clothing & Clothing Accessories Stores $72,910,482 $28,807,127 $44,103,355 43.4 31 Cl othi ng Stores $48,930,743 $15,583,803 $33,346,940 51.7 22 Shoe Stores $10,193,797 $0 $10,193,797 100.0 0 Jewelry, Luggage & Leather Goods Stores $13,785,942 $13,191,567 $594,375 2.2 9 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores $41,017,804 $10,807,870 $30,209,934 58.3 12 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Musical Instr Stores $35,693,853 $9,021,925 $26,671,928 59.6 10 Book, Periodical & Music Stores $5,323,950 $1,785,946 $3,538,004 49.8 1 General Merchandise Stores $231,338,399 $15,872,083 $215,466,316 87.2 10 Department Stores Excluding Leased Depts. $174,570,783 $9,654,682 $164,916,101 89.5 1 Other General Merchandise Stores $56,767,617 $6,217,401 $50,550,216 80.3 8 Miscellaneous Store Retailers $50,280,409 $25,083,031 $25,197,378 33.4 47 Florists $3,459,149 $914,561 $2,544,588 58.2 4 Office Supplies, Stationary& Gift Stores $10,669,342 $9,460,044 $1,209,298 6.0 12 Used Merchandise Stores $6,484,743 $1,967,103 $4,517,640 53.5 7 Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers $29,667,175 $12,741,323 $16,925,852 39.9 23 Nonstore Retailers $22,120,166 $2,118,375 $20,001,791 82.5 4 Electronic Shopping & Mail -Order Houses $16,870,797 $1,246,433 $15,624,364 86.2 1 Vending Machine Operators $942,008 $230,841 $711,167 60.6 1 Direct Selling Establishments $4,307,361 $641,100 $3,666,261 74.1 2 Food Services & Drinking Places $145,778,708 $86,331,750 $59,446,958 25.6 76 Special Food Services $3,728,365 $949,922 $2,778,443 59.4 5 Drinking Places -Alcoholic Beverages $9,107,936 $3,564,223 $5,543,713 43.7 3 Restaurants/Other Eating Places $132,942,406 $81,817,605 $51,124,801 23.8 68 Note: All figures quoted in 2016 dollars. Supply (retail sales ) estimates sales to consumers by establishments, sales to businesses are excluded. Demand (retail potential) estimates theexpected amoutspent by consumers ata retail establishment. Leakage/Surplus factor measures the relationship between supply and demand at ranges from+100 (total leakage) to -100 (total surplus). A positivevalue represents "leakage" of retai I opportunity outside the trade area. A negative value represents a surplus of retail sales, a market where customers are drawn in from outside the trade area. Sources: ESRI; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 46 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 23 RETAIL DEMAND POTENTIAL AND LEAKAGE ORONO CITY 2017 Demand Supply Retail Gap Surplus/Leakage Number of Industry Group (NAICS Code) (Retail Potential) (Retail Sales) (Demand - Supply) Factor Businesses Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink (NAICS 44-45, 722) $273,377,507 $63,595,140 $209,782,367 62.3 39 Tota I Reta i I Tra de (NAI CS 44-45) $245,936,678 $59,162,800 $186,773,878 61.2 33 Total Food & Drink (NAICS 722) $27,440,829 EXPENDITURE $4,432,340 TYPE $23,008,489 72.2 6 Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers $50,578,889 $21,468,058 $29,110,831 40.4 7 AutomobileDeaIers $40,231,314 $1,378,783 $38,852,531 93.4 1 Other Motor Vehicle Dealers $5,803,044 $16,354,747 ($10,551,703) (47.6) 2 Auto Parts, Accessories &Tire Stores $4,544,531 $3,734,528 $810,003 9.8 4 Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores $8,166,792 $3,353,614 $4,813,178 41.8 2 Furniture Stores $4,761,449 $0 $4,761,449 100.0 0 Home Furnishings Stores $3,405,343 $3,353,614 $51,729 0.8 2 Electronics & Appliance Stores $9,444,296 $3,201,648 $6,242,648 49.4 3 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores $19,381,412 $6,201,401 $13,180,011 51.5 5 Bldg Material&Supplies Dealers $17,380,098 $4,781,741 $12,598,357 56.8 4 Lawn & Garden Equip & Supply Stores $2,001,314 $1,419,660 $581,654 17.0 1 Food & Beverage Stores $37,825,732 $14,968,478 $22,857,254 43.3 3 Grocery Stores $30,734,280 $14,482,038 $16,252,242 35.9 2 Specialty Food Stores $1,894,083 $0 $1,894,083 100.0 0 Beer, Wine & Liquor Stores $5,197,369 $486,440 $4,710,929 82.9 1 Health & Personal Care Stores $17,043,787 $0 $17,043,787 100.0 0 Gasoline Stations $25,217,387 $6,279,916 $18,937,471 60.1 2 Clothing & Clothing Accessories Stores $13,882,519 $0 $13,882,519 100.0 0 Cl othi ng Stores $9,254,983 $0 $9,254,983 100.0 0 Shoe Stores $1,891,861 $0 $1,891,861 100.0 0 Jewelry, Luggage & Leather Goods Stores $2,735,675 $0 $2,735,675 100.0 0 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores $7,694,959 $1,561,511 $6,133,448 66.3 3 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Musical Instr Stores $6,689,415 $1,561,511 $5,127,904 62.1 3 Book, Periodical & Music Stores $1,005,544 $0 $1,005,544 100.0 0 General Merchandise Stores $43,125,150 $850,552 $42,274,598 96.1 2 Department Stores Excluding Leased Depts. $32,641,652 $0 $32,641,652 100.0 0 Other General Merchandise Stores $10,483,498 $850,552 $9,632,946 85.0 2 Miscellaneous Store Retailers $9,361,046 $1,029,610 $8,331,436 80.2 5 Florists $710,279 $364,997 $345,282 32.1 2 Office Supplies, Stationary &Gift Stores $2,001,624 $290,005 $1,711,619 74.7 1 Used Merchandise Stores $1,215,961 $0 $1,215,961 100.0 0 Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers $5,433,182 $374,608 $5,058,574 87.1 2 Nonstore Retailers $4,214,709 $248,012 $3,966,697 88.9 1 Electronic Shopping & Mail -Order Houses $3,185,449 $0 $3,185,449 100.0 0 Vending Machine Operators $173,941 $0 $173,941 100.0 0 Direct Selling Establishments $855,319 $248,012 $607,307 55.0 1 Food Services & Drinking Places $27,440,829 $4,432,340 $23,008,489 72.2 6 Special Food Services $691,993 $225,549 $466,444 50.8 1 Drinking Places- Alcoholic Beverages $1,778,415 $863,307 $915,108 34.6 1 Restaurants/Other Eating Places $24,970,421 $3,343,484 $21,626,937 76.4 4 Note: All figures quoted in 2016 dollars. Supply (retail sales ) estimates sales to consumers by establishments, sales to businesses are excluded. Demand (retail potential) estimates theexpected amoutspent by consumers ata retail establishment. Leakage/Surplus factor measures the relationship between supply and demand at ranges from+100 (total leakage) to -100 (total surplus). A positivevalue represents "leakage" of retai I opportunity outside the trade area. A negative value represents a surplus of retail sales, a market where customers are drawn in from outside the trade area. Sources: ESRI; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 47 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 24 RETAIL DEMAND POTENTIAL AND LEAKAGE HENNEPIN COUNTY 2017 Demand Supply Retail Gap Surplus/Leakage Number of Industry Group (NAICS Code) (Retail Potential) (Retail Sales) (Demand - Supply) Factor Businesses Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink (NAICS 44-45, 722) $23,168,709,937 $24,969,872,273 ($1,801,162,336) (3.7) 9,278 Tota I Reta i I Tra de (NAI CS 44-45) $20,858,232,830 $22,157,297,456 ($1,299,064,626) (3.0) 6,390 Total Food & Drink (NAICS 722) $2,310,477,107 EXPENDITURE $2,812,574,817 TYPE ($502,097,710) (9.8) 2,888 Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers $4,308,548,701 $4,935,215,848 ($626,667,147) (6.8) 494 Automobi le Dea I ers $3,446,131,266 $4,381,372,658 ($935,241,392) (11.9) 192 Other Motor Vehicle Dealers $481,691,364 $241,203,595 $240,487,769 33.3 89 Auto Parts, Accessories & Tire Stores $380,726,071 $312,639,595 $68,086,476 9.8 213 Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores $671,176,633 $973,802,560 ($302,625,927) (18.4) 372 Furniture Stores $404,679,267 $719,995,929 ($315,316,662) (28.0) 162 Home Furnishings Stores $266,497,366 $253,806,631 $12,690,735 2.4 210 Electronics & Appliance Stores $779,650,061 $1,050,461,363 ($270,811,302) (14.8) 423 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores $1,467,246,241 $1,520,171,215 ($52,924,974) (1.8) 557 Bldg Material&Supplies Dealers $1,324,440,594 $1,439,612,015 ($115,171,421) (4.2) 476 Lawn & Garden Equip & Supply Stores $142,805,647 $80,559,200 $62,246,447 27.9 81 Food & Beverage Stores $3,305,974,043 $3,075,748,654 $230,225,389 3.6 745 Grocery Stores $2,719,393,786 $2,448,193,873 $271,199,913 5.2 361 Specialty Food Stores $168,265,811 $171,408,676 ($3,142,865) (0.9) 187 Beer, Wine & Liquor Stores $418,314,446 $456,146,105 ($37,831,659) (4.3) 197 Health & Personal Care Stores $1,444,064,248 $1,457,795,870 ($13,731,622) (0.5) 511 Gasoline Stations $2,267,501,559 $1,113,835,678 $1,153,665,881 34.1 247 Clothing & Clothing Accessories Stores $1,142,973,158 $1,663,179,726 ($520,206,568) (18.5) 1,060 Cl othi ng Stores $774,154,614 $1,257,723,092 ($483,568,478) (23.8) 725 Shoe Stores $161,601,699 $177,000,222 ($15,398,523) (4.5) 120 Jewelry, Luggage & Leather Goods Stores $207,216,845 $228,456,412 ($21,239,567) (4.9) 215 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores $647,455,533 $812,335,807 ($164,880,274) (11.3) 531 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Musical Instr Stores $561,028,522 $691,618,003 ($130,589,481) (10.4) 438 Book, Periodical & Music Stores $86,427,011 $120,717,804 ($34,290,793) (16.6) 93 General Merchandise Stores $3,683,528,480 $3,118,258,947 $565,269,533 8.3 300 Department Stores Excluding Leased Depts. $2,768,054,392 $2,128,058,707 $639,995,685 13.1 103 Other General Merchandise Stores $915,474,088 $990,200,240 ($74,726,152) (3.9) 197 Miscellaneous Store Retailers $799,727,609 $848,126,062 ($48,398,453) (2.9) 998 Florists $45,527,447 $63,012,000 ($17,484,553) (16.1) 107 Office Supplies, Stationary & Gift Stores $167,282,748 $177,651,900 ($10,369,152) (3.0) 265 Used Merchandise Stores $104,884,138 $121,419,040 ($16,534,902) (7.3) 163 Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers $482,033,276 $486,043,122 ($4,009,846) (0.4) 463 Nonstore Retailers $340,386,564 $1,588,365,726 ($1,247,979,162) (64.7) 152 Electronic Shopping & Mail -Order Houses $264,788,750 $1,542,255,474 ($1,277,466,724) (70.7) 95 Vending Machine Operators $15,365,586 $18,042,785 ($2,677,199) (8.0) 19 Direct Selling Establishments $60,232,228 $28,067,467 $32,164,761 36.4 38 Food Services & Drinking Places $2,310,477,107 $2,812,574,817 ($502,097,710) (9.8) 2,888 Special Food Services $57,042,060 $85,543,664 ($28,501,604) (20.0) 94 Drinking Places -Alcoholic Beverages $138,339,841 $116,543,152 $21,796,689 8.6 127 Restaurants/Other Eating Places $2,115,095,206 $2,610,488,001 ($495,392,795) (10.5) 2,667 Note: All figures quoted in 2016 dollars. Supply (retail sales ) estimates sales to consumers by establishments, sales to businesses are excluded. Demand (retail potential) estimates theexpected amoutspent by consumers ata retail establishment. Leakage/Surplus factor measures the relationship between supply and demand at ranges from+100 (total leakage) to -100 (total surplus). A positivevalue represents "leakage" of retai I opportunity outside the trade area. A negative value represents a surplus of retail sales, a market where customers are drawn in from outside the trade area. Sources: ESRI; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Selected Available Office Space December 19, 2017 Page 48 Table 25 presents office space that is currently available for lease as of mid-November 2017 in the communities surrounding Navarre including properties in Long Lake, Mound, Orono, Shore- wood, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, and Wayzata. A total of 26 properties available for lease were identified. • The selected properties range in lease rate from $10.03 Net to $45.00 NNN. • A majority (18/26) of the properties are in Wayzata and none are within Navarre. • The space available in the properties ranges from 150 square feet to 160,000 square feet. • Metro -wide, the office market continues to be soft with vacancies averaging between 15% and 18% in the Twin Cities. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. TABLE 25 SELECTED AVAILABLE OFFICE SPACE OUTSIDE NAVARRE $13.33 FSG Ye Yea Property Name/ Address City Bui 1850 Wayzata Blvd Long Lake 19 1850 Wayzata Blvd Minimum Maximum 432 Mill St Long Lake 19 432 Mill St SF 7,500 2350 Wayzata Blvd Long Lake 19 2350 Wayzata Blvd 576 5,576 Freshwater Building Orono 19 2500 Shadywood Rd 980 51,149 Casco Run Orono 19 3701 Shoreline Dr 1,000 1,000 Orono Medical & Dental Center Orono 20 2765 Kelley Pkwy 2,477 26,036 South Lake Office Building Shorewood 2 23505 Smithtown Rd 200 7,112 Tonka Business Center Spring Park 19 4154Shoreline Dr 6,854 24,024 Twelve Oaks Office Center Bldg 5 Wayzata 19 1001 Twelve Oaks Center Or 195 1,825 Twelve Oaks Office Center Bldg 4 Wayzata 19 901 Twelve Oaks Center Dr 4,040 35,000 Twelve Oaks Office Center Bldg 1 Wayzata 19 600 Twelve Oaks Center Dr 299 496 Twelve Oaks Office Center Bldg 2 Wayzata 19 700Twelve Oaks Center Dr 8,639 37,806 Wayzata Crossings Wayzata 19 1415 E Wayzata Blvd 150 150 Twelve Oaks Office Center Bldg 3 Wayzata 19 801 Twelve Oaks Ctr 10,648 A 16,000 Wayzata Executive Park Bldg 3 Wayzata 20 1907 Wayzata Blvd 192 192 Wayzata Executive Park Bldg 2 Wayzata 20 1905 Wayzata Blvd 6,330 25,000 Arne Professional Building Wayzata 19 101 W Lake St 2,466 2,466 100 West Lake Wayzata 19 100 Lake St 11,971 28,000 Wayzata Specialty Center Wayzata N/ 1120 E Wayzata Blvd 1,895 1,895 Wayzata Marquee Place Wayzata 19 641 Lake St 445 Lake St E Wayzata 19 445 Lake St E 701 Building Wayzata 20 701 Lake St 201 Lake Street-Westway Building Wayzata 19 201 Lake St 326-332 Broadway Ave Wayzata N/ 326 Broadway Ave 315 Lake St E Wayzata 2 315 Lake St Piper Jaffray Building Wayzata 19 319 Barry Ave Sources: Xceligent; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC 05 37 90 74 82 03 007 53 78 78 79 77 70 78 01 Ol 96 97 87 88 04 97 009 88 $13.33 FSG N/A $20.83 Gross N/A Negotiable 6,368 $17.50 Gross 1,000 Minimum Maximum Available It Bldg Size Divisible Contiguous SF 7,500 130 275 275 1,728 576 5,576 576 18,000 200 480 980 51,149 295 2,013 6,368 6,474 1,000 1,000 1,000 16,800 2,477 2,477 2,477 26,036 330 673 1,003 142,156 200 7,112 7,112 24,024 732 1,756 6,854 24,024 261 1,500 6,355 23,266 195 1,825 6,841 23,220 209 1,758 4,040 35,000 840 7,000 7,840 24,024 299 496 1,135 42,110 1,910 5,168 8,639 37,806 5,979 5,979 5,979 9,316 150 150 150 12,000 6,355 10,648 10,648 A 16,000 1,500 16,000 16,000 56,000 192 192 192 37,710 3,000 6,330 6,330 25,000 3,005 3,005 3,005 33,220 2,466 2,466 2,466 A 17,899 2,420 6,541 11,971 28,000 2,055 2,055 2,055 29,754 1,895 1,895 1,895 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC December 19, 2017 Page 49 Vacancy Lease Rate N/A $13.33 FSG N/A $20.83 Gross N/A Negotiable 6,368 $17.50 Gross 1,000 $20.00 Gross 2,477 $20.00 N N N 1,003 $27.61- $27.64 Gross 0 $10.50 NNN 5,098 $10.03 - $12.53 Net 6,355 $10.03 - $15.00 Net 5,793 $11.03 - $15.70 Net 3,437 $11.25 - $13.80 Net 7,000 $12.00- $17.00 Net 1,135 $12.53 Net 6,729 $16.00 NNN 5,979 $16.00 NNN 150 $24.00 N N N 0 $30.00 Net 16,000 $30.00 N N N 192 $35.00 Gross 0 $40.00 - $45.00 N N N 3,005 $48.00 Gross 2,466 Negotiable 11,971 Negotiable 0 Negotiable NNN 1,895 Negotiable NNN Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 50 Selected Available Retail Space Table 27 presents retail space that is currently available for lease as of mid-November 2017 in the area outside Navarre including properties in Long Lake, Mound, Orono, Shorewood, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, and Wayzata. A total of 18 properties available for lease were identified. • The selected properties range in lease rate from $12.00 Net to $40.00 Net. • A majority (8/18) of the properties are in Wayzata and none are within Navarre. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 26 SELECTED AVAILABLE OFFICE SPACE OUTSIDE NAVARRE Number of Properties Average Average City Available For Lease Bldg Size Available SF Lease Rates Long Lake 3 9,076 610 $13.33 FSG - $20.83 Gross Mound 0 N/A N/A N/A Orono 3 24,807 3,281 $17.50 Gross - $20.00 NNN Shorewood 1 26,036 1,003 $27.61 Gross - $27.64 Gross Spring Park 1 142,156 7,112 $10.50 NNN Tonka Bay 0 N/A N/A N/A Wayzata 18 27,687 5,689 $10.03 Net - $45.00 NNN Sources: Xceligent; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC Selected Available Retail Space Table 27 presents retail space that is currently available for lease as of mid-November 2017 in the area outside Navarre including properties in Long Lake, Mound, Orono, Shorewood, Spring Park, Tonka Bay, and Wayzata. A total of 18 properties available for lease were identified. • The selected properties range in lease rate from $12.00 Net to $40.00 Net. • A majority (8/18) of the properties are in Wayzata and none are within Navarre. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber December 19, 2017 WSB & Associates, Inc. Page 51 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 27 SELECTED FOR LEASE RETAIL SPACE OUTSIDE NAVARRE Gross Operating Bldg Land Year Minimum Maximum Available Expenses/S Tax Property Name/ Address City Specific Use Size Area Built Tenancy Divisible Contiguous SF Vacancy Lease Rate Taxes/SF F Year 2073AWayzata Blvd Long Lake Freestanding 2,587 98,446 2005 Single -Tenant 1,000 2,587 2,587 2,587 $12.00-$20.00 NNN $5.28 $5.55 2016 2073 W Wayzata Blvd Mound Marketplace Mound Neighborhood Ctr 52,879 270,407 2003 Multi -Tenant 1,597 2,985 6,580 6,580 $18.00 - $22.00 Net $4.95 $3.90 2017 2131 Commerce Blvd Commerce Place - Retail Mound Conv/Strip Ctr 40,053 14,375 1986 Multi -Tenant 839 17,504 28,789 28,789 $8.00 - $18.00 Net $1.77 $2.98 2017 2200 Commerce Blvd Shorewood Village Center Shorewood Neighborhood Ctr 62,308 286,189 1975 Multi -Tenant 1,419 3,393 6,435 6,435 Negotiable NNN $4.71 $6.49 2017 23470 Highway Waterford Center Shorewood Conv/Strip Ctr 22,930 147,233 1994 Multi -Tenant 1,500 5,706 7,206 7,206 $16.50 NNN N/A $7.23 2016 19905 Highway Marina Center Spring Park Conv/Strip Ctr 47,135 507,038 1964 Multi -Tenant 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 $12.00 Net $3.85 $2.12 2016 4669 Shoreline Dr Lakeview Lofts Spring Park Neighborhood Ctr 60,000 24,019 2005 Multi -Tenant 3,964 3,964 3,964 3,964 $23.00 NNN N/A N/A N/A 4100 Spring St Marina Center- Pad Site Spring Park Freestanding 9,120 87,120 N/A Multi -Tenant 1,680 9,120 9,120 9,120 Negotiable N/A N/A N/A 4659 Shoreline Dr Tonka Village Shopping Center Tonka Bay Neighborhood Ctr 25,000 273,992 N/A Single -Tenant 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Negotiable NNN $3.45 $4.04 2017 24324 Smithtown Rd Tonka Village Shopping Center Tonka Bay Neighborhood Ctr 37,126 283,140 1959 Multi -Tenant 1,823 7,441 9,264 9,264 Negotiable NNN $3.45 $4.04 2017 5609 Manitou Rd Wayzata Marquee Place Wayzata Mixed Use 72,000 24,394 1946 NIU}l;i'git 600 1,289 1,889 1,889 $25.00 NNN $12.00 $8.68 2017 603 Lake St E 1330 Wayzata Blvd Wayzata General 4,500 29,621 N/A Multi -Tenant 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300 $40.00 Net $3.00 $7.00 2017 1330 Wayzata Blvd 240 Minnetonka Unit 103 Wayzata Other 1,094 N/A N/A Single -Tenant 1,094 1,094 1,094 1,094 $25.00 NNN N/A N/A N/A 240 Minnetonka The Promenade of Wayzata Wayzata Community Ctr 108,739 632,491 2014 Multi -Tenant 984 20,588 65,665 65,665 Negotiable NNN $11.72 $4.69 2017 801 E Lake St Wayzata Village Shoppes Wayzata Neighborhood Ctr 43,127 119,790 1964 Multi -Tenant 1,215 Lais 1,215 1,215 Negotiable NNN $7.29 $4.25 2017 812 Lake St 240 Minnetonka Unit 102 Wayzata Other 734 25,000 N/A Multi -Tenant 734 734 734 734 $25.00 NNN N/A N/A N/A 240 Minnetonka Ave S Colonial Square Shopping Center Wayzata Neighborhood Ctr 93,338 325,393 1959 Multi -Tenant 1,313 1,313 1,313 1,313 Negotiable NNN $8.85 $3.69 2017 1125 Wayzata Blvd Cross Creek Shoppes Wayzata General 10,145 28,314 1968 Multi -Tenant 1,239 2,994 4,233 4,233 Negotiable NNN N/A $16.00 2017 748 E Lake St Sources: Xceligent; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Conclusions December 19, 2017 Page 52 The impetus for this study was to complete a high-level initial analysis of the future develop- ment potential in Navarre. Previous sections examined the demographic, economic, and mar- ket performance of various real estate uses in the Navarre area. This section summarizes the market potential findings and makes recommendations on the most appropriate product types that may be captured in Navarre. Potential Redevelopment Sites Maxfield Research & Consulting, together with WSB, identified potential areas is Navarre that could support redevelopment. Table 28 identifies parcels of interest sorted into seven poten- tial redevelopment areas. The table shows the parcel address and PID, owner, acreage, land use, last date of sale (if applicable), and current market values and property taxes. The redevel- opment areas range in size from 1.86 acres up to 6.78 acres. The following summarizes the re- development sites and the potential land uses that could result. • Site #1: The first site is the western -most site in Navarre located just north of Shoreline Drive and south of the 6.4 -acre Hennepin County property. This redevelopment consists of five parcels that comprise about 3.7 acres and include a mix of commercial and resi- dential properties. Most of the property is about 200 -feet deep off Shoreline Drive. Recommended land uses could include: o Mid -rise housing o Stand-alone commercial sites o Small retail center Because of the traffic along Shoreline Drive, this site would be accessed by a "right -in right -out" and could experience a longer wait time to make a left turn out of the site. Site #2: This property consists of three properties that collectively are about 4.5 -acres. These sites are not presently on the tax rolls and are either tax forfeited properties or owned by the City of Orono. The site is wooded and located directly to the north of the Navarre Fire Department and west of a for -sale townhome development. The site also abuts the railroad track to the north. Recommended land uses could include: o For -sale twin homes or villas o Attached for -sale townhomes o Mid -rise housing MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Page 53 TABLE 28 PARCELS OF INTEREST NAVARRE Year Market Taxes Number Address Owner Name Land Type Built Sale Date Sale Price Acres Value Total Total Potential Redeviopment 1 Area 1 3890Shoreline Dr EJ &MJ Held Residential 1991 Mar -93 $105,000 0.68 $320,000 $3,361 2 3860 Shoreline Dr David Umbehocker Commercial -Preferred 1930 N/A $0 0.64 $196,000 $5,272 3 3850 Shoreline Dr Leeryan Of Minneapolis LLC Commercial -Preferred 1987 Nov -02 $790,000 0.78 $759,000 $23,802 4 3800 Shoreline Dr M E Brewer& B LBrewer Commercial -Preferred 1956 Jun -01 $239,900 0.70 $290,000 $8,366 5 38 Address Unassigned City Of Orono Vacant Land -Residential N/A N/A $0 0.86 $0 $0 Total 3.66 $1,565,000 $40,801 Potential Reclevlopment 6 Area 2 38Address Unassigned Hennepin Forfeited Land Vacant Land -Residential N/A N/A $0 0.10 $0 $0 7 38 Address Unassigned Hennepin Forfeited Land Vacant Land -Residential N/A N/A $0 0.15 $0 $0 8 3770 Shoreline Dr City of Orono Commercial -Preferred 2003 N/A $0 4.33 $0 $0 Total 4.58 $0 $0 Potential Redevelopment 9 Area 3 3542 Shoreline Dr Shoreline -Navarre LLC Commercial -Preferred 1986 Sep -04 $35,000 0.46 $528,000 $16,199 10 3502 Shoreline Dr Lowell RZitzloff Commercial -Non Preferred 1950 Apr -82 $60,981 0.31 $289,000 $9,512 11 3574ShorelineDr R L & G H Plaisted Commercial -Preferred 1959 Jan -03 $561,705 0.47 $183,000 $4,844 12 3572 Shoreline Dr Leis In Grace LLC Commercial -Preferred 1947 Aug -13 $250,000 0.31 $226,000 $6,260 13 3496 Shoreline Dr Skyt Properties LLC Commercial -Preferred 1979 Nov -13 $320,000 0.31 $339,000 $9,979 Total 1.86 $1,565,000 $46,793 Potential Redevelopment 14 Area 4 3416 Shoreline Dr Germ -Tom Partnership Commercial -Preferred 1955 Jul -87 $360,000 0.54 $581,000 $18,368 15 3400 Shoreline Dr 3400 Properties LLC Commercial -Preferred 1954 Feb -07 $375,000 0.29 $643,000 $19,984 16 3440 Shoreline Dr Richard W Bloomquist Residential 1951 Aug -99 $122,000 0.15 $215,000 $3,984 17 2377 Shadywood Rd Lake Country Corp Investment Commercial -Preferred 2005 Sep -15 $387,000 0.24 $378,000 $11,262 18 38 Address Unassigned City Of Orono Vacant Land -Commercial N/A N/A $0 0.47 $0 $0 19 3360 Shoreline Dr Leroy David Koehnen Commercial -Preferred 1969 Oct -84 $155,000 0.44 $383,000 $11,427 20 2385 Shadywood Rd S H Schmidt/SJ Schmidt Trst Commercial -Preferred 1937 N/A $0 0.18 $197,000 $5,305 * 3400ShorelineDr 3400 Properties LLC Commercial -Preferred 1954 Feb -07 $375,000 0.29 $643,000 $19,984 Total 2.60 $2,397,000 $90,315 Potential Redevelopment 21 Area 5 2474 Carman St W E Edwards & D M Edwards Tr Residential Lake Shore 1990 N/A $0 2.00 $1,130,000 $13,601 22 2480 Carman St R A Edwards Et Al Trustees Residential Lake Shore 1965 N/A $0 2.24 $1,116,000 $13,418 23 3465 Shoreline Dr Navarre Realty LLC Apartment 1952 Jan -80 $210,000 0.96 $795,000 $17,384 24 3423 Shoreline Dr Brook Investment Group LLC Commercial -Preferred 1952 Nov -07 $1,700,000 1.58 $782,000 $24,688 Total 6.78 $3,823,000 $69,091 Potential Redevelopment 25 Area 6 2455 Shadywood Rd Jeanne M Englund Vacant Land -Commercial N/A N/A $0 0.88 $137,000 $3,432 26 2465 Shadywood Rd David J Delaney Trustee Seasonal -Residential Rec 1920 Dec -09 $205,000 1.34 $164,000 $1,766 Total 2.22 $301,000 $5,199 Potential Redevelopment 27 Area 7 2520 Shadywood Rd Ugorets 8098 LLC Vacant Land -Residential N/A N/A $0 2.63 $0 $0 Total 2.63 $0 $0 *The Narrows Saloon Source: Realist Tax; Maxfield Research & Consulting,LLC MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Page 53 • Fri awl �• =tom, ti •' J• �. - �,J���,� .44 LL. �, �}; : " � '1 �,. 1101110 ■111 11 i�Q��►, ,�.f,i oil ■111■�11o11■► .34 1111011'. Potential Redevelopment Areas X11■1 i . If I y Site Parcels The i Narrows•• NVAW Dj33aKkaj=r7e�aat9�iti • !r" - M w-1) `m/;a3PAC m m:)nTslltrg_Ole Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. Sites of Interest for F 2 G 11 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC December 19, 2017 Page 55 3 10 12 Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. 14 16 23 MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC December 19, 2017 Page 56 15 19 24 Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 57 27 • Site #3: The third redevelopment area consists of five commercial properties that make-up 1.86 total acres; the smallest redevelopment area. Most of the commercial buildings are dated as they were constructed between 1947 and 1986. All of the prop- erties have frontage on Shoreline Drive and are surrounding by housing land uses to the north of the parcels. This area would have access and visibility to Shoreline Drive mo- torists; however, it will be challenging making left turns out of the site. Recommended land uses could include: o Mid -rise housing o Modest commercial development • Site #4: Located at the northwest quadrant of Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road; this redevelopment area has the potential be the "gateway" into the Navarre neighbor- hood. The property is at "main and main" and benefits from higher traffic counts and excellent access and visibility from both roadways. As a result, this site could be the cor- nerstone for future redevelopment in Navarre. Collectively the site is 2.6 acres across eight parcels. Most of the existing uses are commercial, however there are two com- mercial uses located in low-density residential structures. Because of this location, this site should be the top priority for attracting redevelopment in Navarre. Recommended land uses could include: o Commercial concentration —front loaded design towards the roadways (parking in rear) o Mixed-use or multi -use development with a mid -rise housing component MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber December 19, 2017 WSB & Associates, Inc. Page 58 • Site #5. This potential redevelopment area also has Shoreline Drive frontage, however on the south side of the roadway. The site is anchored by the east parcel that contains 1.58 acres and is adjacent to the Lunds/Byerly's. The site encompasses four parcels with 6.78 -acres; however, two the properties are zoned residential lake shore that could be subdivided and maintained by the current land owner. As a result, the total developable is about 5.75 acres should the lakeshore properties subdivide the property to align with the two other commercial properties. Recommended land uses could include: o Commercial development o Mid -rise housing development o Mixed-use development featuring housing and first -level commercial space • Site #6. Along Shadywood Road about one block south of the Lunds/Byerly's are two parcels that comprise 2.2 acres. Both properties have thick vegetation to the west and could be combined to create a more marketable site. Recommended land uses could include: o Stand-alone commercial building o Smaller mid -rise housing development. • Site #7. A vacant 2.6 -acre site is in the far southeastern boundary of Navarre area. The property is east of Shadywood Road and south of the five -acre commercial site located directly north of the site. The site has the potential to be the gateway into Navarre for the northbound traveler on Shadywood Road. Recommended land uses could include: o Stand-alone commercial development o Mid -rise housing development o Mixed-use development— 1st floor commercial with housing MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber December 19, 2017 WSB & Associates, Inc. Page 59 Recommended Real Estate Types The previous section outlined the seven potential redevelopment areas. Many of the proper- ties could encompass a few different land use types given their location, access, and surround- ing land uses. The recommended product types that are recommended include: • Retail: As illustrated in the earlier leakage figures, Navarre and the Lake Minnetonka area is under -retailed. Navarre has an opportunity to capture these retail sales on prop- erty either Shoreline Drive or Shadywood Road. Among all the redevelopment areas, the site at the northwest quadrant of Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road has the greatest potential to capture commercial tenants. However, this site will likely need to attract regional or national tenants given the site acquisition and development costs at this location. These credit -worthy tenants will have the means to pay higher lease rates that will be required to support redevelopment. Other sites in Navarre are more likely to cater to "niche or boutique" retailers that may have fled other higher -rent properties in other Lake Minnetonka communities. Because the Navarre area and Orono show leakage in nearly every category of retail sales; Navarre can support more retail than what could be developed given the acreage available within redevelopment sites identified. Several of the identified sites could support retail and there would still be excess demand for retail goods and services. Re- development sites #4 and #5 will be the most attractive sites for retail tenants. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC TABLE 29 SUMMARY OF REDEVELOPMENT SITE POTENTIAL USES Combined Acres Commercial Mixed Use/ Component Multi -Use 1 3.66 x x 2 4.58 x x 3 1.86 x x 4 2.60 x x x x 5 6.78 x x x x 6 2.22 x x 7 2.63 x x x Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC Recommended Real Estate Types The previous section outlined the seven potential redevelopment areas. Many of the proper- ties could encompass a few different land use types given their location, access, and surround- ing land uses. The recommended product types that are recommended include: • Retail: As illustrated in the earlier leakage figures, Navarre and the Lake Minnetonka area is under -retailed. Navarre has an opportunity to capture these retail sales on prop- erty either Shoreline Drive or Shadywood Road. Among all the redevelopment areas, the site at the northwest quadrant of Shoreline Drive and Shadywood Road has the greatest potential to capture commercial tenants. However, this site will likely need to attract regional or national tenants given the site acquisition and development costs at this location. These credit -worthy tenants will have the means to pay higher lease rates that will be required to support redevelopment. Other sites in Navarre are more likely to cater to "niche or boutique" retailers that may have fled other higher -rent properties in other Lake Minnetonka communities. Because the Navarre area and Orono show leakage in nearly every category of retail sales; Navarre can support more retail than what could be developed given the acreage available within redevelopment sites identified. Several of the identified sites could support retail and there would still be excess demand for retail goods and services. Re- development sites #4 and #5 will be the most attractive sites for retail tenants. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 60 • Office: An office building with a build -to -suit tenant would be an excellent land use for several of the identified sites. However, this will be predicated on the ability to secure a single tenant who will commit to a built -to -suit office structure. The multi -tenant office market continues to be very soft with high vacancies and with rents that cannot support new construction costs. The office market continues to be the soft spot in the Twin Cit- ies commercial real estate market and that is likely to continue in the short-term as companies squeeze square footages and more employees work remotely. Since the of- fice market is the weakest commercial real estate product type in the Metro Area; office space will be more challenging to develop in Navarre unless a single -tenant user seeks out new construction. • Hospitality: The Twin Cities is experiencing a major building boom in the hospitality sec- tor due to a variety of conditions: 2018 Super Bowl, future Final Four, and improved economic conditions. However, with all the new supply occupancies have peaked and the hotel market is at equilibrium. If a site had lake access a small, boutique hotel could be considered in Navarre; however, since a lake site is unavailable we do not recom- mend a hotel concept at any of the identified locations. • For -Sale Townhomes: Because townhomes require a lower density than traditional mul- tifamily housing; most of the sites would not be well-suited for townhomes. Townhome land costs are usually lower than other multifamily densities hence the financial return on townhomes would be lower than other housing types located in multi -story con- cepts. However, the site just north of the fire station would make an excellent location for for -sale housing — either a townhome, twinhome, or villa style concept. The site would be well-received for a for -sale housing concept. Based on the site acreage of about 4.6 sites; this site may be able to accommodate upwards of 35 to 45 attached townhome units. • For -Sale Condominiums: The condominium market is ripe for new development as the market was hit hard from the recession and from the lack of new construction from the state law governing condominium development. However, this past year the Minnesota Legislature recently modified the condominium state statute that is resulting in condo- minium developers looking to re-enter the market. New condo construction has fo- cused on the upper -end of the market in Downtown Wayzata and Downtown Minneap- olis. Condominiums in Orono would be well-received and would provide an excellent product for existing residents to downsize from larger lake homes for maintenance -free living. As a result, we find a condominium development would be well-received in Na- varre and would serve a niche in the marketplace. Suburban condominium development should be able to support densities of about 20 to 30 units per acre. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Mr. Eric Zweber WSB & Associates, Inc. December 19, 2017 Page 61 Senior Housing: Long-term the senior housing outlook is very promising given the aging of the population and future demographic shifts. Orono and the Lake Minnetonka area has an older demographic with significant growth in the 65+ population. However, there are several service -based senior housing communities located within five miles of Navarre that would compete with a new development in Navarre. At that same time, there may be an opportunity for active -adult products such as an age -restricted rental, for -sale 55+ condominium, or senior cooperative. However, the Navarre area can likely support one active adult product in the short-term. Suburban senior housing projects are averaging about 25 units or more per acre across the Metro Area. Rental Housing: Navarre and Orono have few rental properties; the City of Orono has an 85% home ownership rate and the majority of rentals are located in single-family housing stock. The Twin Cities is experiencing a major rental housing building boom as rental housing has been a preferred asset class over the past seven years, however the majority of new construction has been located in locations closer to the core. The Na- varre area may be able to support one rental housing development; however, because of development costs a new rental concept would have high rents targeting lifestyle renters. Many of these renters could be from the 55+ demographic who want to down- size from their single-family home. Rental housing could be developed in a stand-alone building or as part of a mixed-use development with first -level commercial space. New suburban rental properties in the Metro Area vary considerably between the inner - ring communities and the outer -ring communities. Densities closer to the core are aver- aging over 50 units per acre; whereas densities in the third -tiers and beyond are averag- ing 25 to 40 units per acre. Combined with properties in the two core cities; the average density for new apartments in the entire Metro Area is 74 units per acre for all new de- velopment in 2017. MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC Navarre Community Engagement Open House: November 16, 2017 Drive-thru Old growth woods Small Crossroads of lake (2) Up north feeling Autopart store central Community Text Responses Small town feel (3) You know everyone The new remodeled storefronts of Narrows is a nice look Walking all year round - sidewalks clean and plowed in winter Everything you need right there - Lund's, liquor store, gas station Location (easy drive to downtown Minneapolis, center of Lake Minnetonka, urban yet woodsy feel) Dakota trail (3) Lake Can walk to fill many retail needs from home Lund's Narrows Create some character for Navarre - it is a blank slate Lighting - more pedestrian (2) Streetscape - planters, Christmas trees, benches Crosswalk - very dangerous Make it pedestrian friendly! (4) More of a town square feeling Nicer storefronts Create a sense of place Increase local businesses and move toward an exterior design patate over time Landscape on County Road 15 - too much concrete Restaurant or coffee shop 0 Highest Priority Planned for a future WW where it was safe to walk and bike and had a zoning/use code that favored local retail like a Made Navarre Continue the tradition of Navarre Restiral bike shop unique! We need more businesses that serve the community not office space, not apartment buildings or senior living - seniors do not spend any money, they will not revitalize the town - please don't make Design standards, the same mistakees as Spring Park or service businesses Wayzata - tax income over common sense. for area residents, Excelsior is a good example, charming sit down restaurant Design standards Walkability and They planned for a future where people were walking and biking - not driving! Navarre Community Engagement Open House: November 16, 2017 Spectrum Survey Average Ranking (Strongly Agree = 1; Strongly Category by Average Percent Agree or Disagree = 5) Ranking Strongly Agree I plan to live in Navarre for the forseeable future. 1.5 100% I would recommend Navarre as a great place to live. 1.9 90% Navarre needs more businesses. 2.0 89% Sidewalks and trails are well-maintained. 2.7 56% There is adequate parking. 3.0 50% 1 can walk to the places I need to go. 2.9 44% Navarre is the Downtown of Orono. 3.1 44% Navarre should be vibrant and active day, night, and on weekends. 2.8 44% There is a strong sense of community. 3.4 27% 1 feel comfortable as a pedestrian. 3.7 33% There is a need for greater variety in housing options. 3.914% Navarre needs more residents. 3.6 11% Navarre Community Engagement Survey Monkey Responses Survey Monkey Online Engagement Please check the following boxes that accurately describe you Number Percent I am a resident of 1 2 Navarre 20 77% 1 am a resident outside 3 7 of Navarre, but in 4 3 Orono 4 15% 1 am not a resident of 11 Average Orono 2 8% 1 own or operate a 15 62.50% business in Navarre 1 4% Rate your desire to see regular community events in Navarre from 1-5 (1 = not at all desired, 5 = very desired) Number 0 0 Annual Festival 1 2 Quarterly/Holiday 2 5 shopping events 3 7 Races/Events 4 3 centered around the 51 9 Dakota Rail Trail 11 Average 1 3.4615385 What types of events would you like to see in Navarre? Number Percent Annual Festival 15 62.50% Quarterly/Holiday shopping events 10 41.67% Races/Events centered around the Dakota Rail Trail 11 45.83% Enhanced branding for Navarre 15 62.50% Cultural events 1 71 29.17% Navarre Community Engagement Survey Monkey Responses Survey Monkey Online Engagement Do you consider Navarre the Downtown of 0 Orono? Number Percent Number Percent Yes 16 61.54% No 3 4 15.38% 1 have not thought 8 57.89% 5 about it 36.84% 6 23.08% Overall, please rate your level of concern regarding the teardown and rebuild of single-family homes in Navarre from 1-5 (1 = not at all concerned, 5 = very concerned). Number 0 2 Number Percent 1 8 2 4 3 3 4 8 57.89% 5 0 36.84% Building height Average 2.28 Regarding the tear down and rebuild of single-family homes in Navarre, which of the following issues are important to you? Number Percent Preservation of existing neighborhood character 11 57.89% Building massing 7 36.84% Building height 9 47.37% Loss of affordable housing 7 36.84% Issues related to construction 8 42.11% Navarre Community Engagement Survey Monkey Responses Survey Monkey Online Engagement Rate your desire for new multi -family residential and commercial development in Navarre from 1-5 (1 = not at all desired, 5 = very desired). Number 0 3 desirable? 1 8 4 2 4 3 2 4 5 15 5 4 Average 1 2.384615 Rate your desire for new multi- family residential and commercial development in the City of Orono from 1-5 (1 = not at all desired, 5 = Number 0 2 desirable? 1 4 4 2 5 31 4 4 7 15 5 4 Average 1 2.8461538 Regarding new multi -family residential and commercial development in Navarre, which of the following characteristics are desirable? Number Percent Affordable housing 4 16.67% Provision of additional business types and services 15 62.50% Places to go and things to do in Navarre 21 87.50% Increased population density 7 29.17 0 Building heights of 3 stories or more 4 16.67% Navarre Community Engagement Survey Monkey Responses Survey Monkey Online Engagement Regarding new multi -family residential and commercial development in the City of Orono, which of the following characteristics are desired? Number Percent Affordable housing 5 22.73% business types and 13 59.09% Places to go and things No concerns, but single family housing ONLY to do in Orono 19 86.36% Increased population I'm for anything that improves the quality and density 3 13.64% Building heights of 3 NOT multi -family residential any place good. stories or more 4 18.18% Comments Just like Minneapolis we need revitalization - main concern is pressure on existing infrastructure, Wide variety of housing is important tear them down damage to lake, inadequate roads I think its great to have old dilapidated homes New development must conform to the torn down and lovely new single family homes neighborhood current density replace them better support of existing business No concerns, but single family housing ONLY walkability, connection to other neighborhoods and No affordable housing at ALL!! No apartments! (no apartments) amenities I'm for anything that improves the quality and value of the housing stock. Tear downs are NOT multi -family residential any place good. Holiday market, car show... Construction site mtc is important, but easily Outdoor music in the park in the summer weekend if its not broke; don't fix it dealt with afternoons Pedestrian and bike connections across the community I Build more beautiful new homes I I think any and all community events are important t d 10 37, - w • imp NP Air 46 '110 s y. Tk�. - 5 t Navarre Community Engagement Social Pinpoint Online Engagement Places I Like to Go/Be Great park - wonderful job Social Pinpoint Map Responses Good Location for a new Amenity or re Development 91 Really didn't need another auto parts store. Navarre and community can have a better image than 3 gas stations and 2 auto part stores New to area, use all the services, improve "Too much concrete, need it developed to store fronts 9 host pop -ups? Iq— Would be nice to have a nice entry point and Wasted space/find a better location for co better signage at the entry to the trail 8,shop! Love the trail - non traffic wonderful place to tde, easy accessibility central gathering place Put a land bridge over 15 to connect the 39 neighborhoods 37 New park location on both sides of the road On the main drag - need better Christmas decorations! There were even lights strung 40 across the street. Also need pretty planters Beautification of street and sidewalk - Great start with new light fixtures and banners - however, they are too high for pedestrian enjoyment and not at people scale. Need a consistent plan for plantings to create some neighborhood charm and character - I have a design background and have done lots of master planning and lighting for places like Edinborough Park - Edina, Minneapolis/St. 49 Paul airport, and landscaping �I Direct access to Lake Minnetonka in Navarre, 36 either a park or residential development Pedestrian only, like a square, gathering spot, 44 benches/fountain, meeting place Add/develop new businesses on the Dakota 42 Trail 45IGreat land to have a walking path to town 9 Navarre Community Engagement Social Pinpoint Map Responses Social Pinpoint Online Engagement In Need better shops - especially on south side 41 of street 43 Sit down restaurant option, nice casual dining More multiple unit housing/city controlled 38 already Empty lot since 1965 tornado, not attractive. Great spot for development. Can't we get Champion auto parts to do something with their building? Disappointed that Patrick's bakery idea was turned down. It was an opportunity to have a slightly more upscale coffee shop/restaurant that is pleasant and 35 not filled with contractors. In Navarre Small Area Plan - Traffic Volumes h hlfr onka Beach v--` ringr L I Ism HENNEPIN FI or i- N1ajnd, Shorewood l ,Tonka B w ! 5 •' / iii , November 30, 2017 1:16,000 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi 0 0.2 0.4 0.8 km Functional Class Road Review _ Find address, intersection orG X ' ice' ° • 1" Metro Area Counties Metro Arca thus & Town &dps �`�_ - V ''1 J / 5 -• , tom/ Lakes and! Riversm� Functional Clams Roads - dick +... /� •�� feature for details _..' - - ' �"' G Functional Class Roads - Planned t? "'���. ;=-'. ti -,;gyp, r'#:,;( _ __ E"a }' i , �� _ •©`� uai Principal Arterial r A Minor Aogmentor , ` .. , ,., A Minor Reliever �v - 1 % �'�` �'�r V�V- Yeti A Minor Expander ° • - `9 1 \, \ ' a ua'-1 ,� a •y�Jy'� ID A Manor Connector �/'� _ r I 1 • \ Ft"i f �} I I ,J BMinor �. ` ',—y-- C - -��i t� : major Collector rr� Minor Collector ��'�� -'-- _1 `rrll Fes- ''Y�- F-� '--�� r•a �,/� J. �i•.o:'C�, •+ �' _,^ Functional Class Roads - Existing `^ , s i '�`.. V' {, iYYf ,� .+�'E.4]L'i} •p rn �_ JI. Principal Arterial I _ AMinor Augmentor 6 c - w . i •Minor RelieverIF -- 6 A Minor Expander • Minor Connector77 B Minor Major Collector ��� i Cs; �, . �S�J�C�.L� ,3. - 'J '✓ +// �-� a i - '�: — Minor Collector L� '.L,,; _ New / Under Review (999) " 'JP r,...� '-➢,Timi�,� ' �- � r �. Z� � � a n.i �° r�7y}��\ �? .ra,- 4'-"r Shoreline Drive (CSAH 15): A -Minor Arterial Shadywood Road (CSAH 19): A -Minor Arterial south of Shoreline Drive; B -Minor Arterial north of Shoreline Drive • Base Volume Is From 2005 Hennepin County Flowmap And Minnesota Dept. Of Transpodation Volumes From 2005 o\ 2030 For ...ts Incorporate Metropolitan Ceueeil Goal Of 1 Doubling Transit Ridership Over The Next 20 Years G =2400 1soa00 a6�ao 1'VIMI VNETONKA► BEACH OREWOOD i BAY GREENWOO.D EXC E L S tOR 22100 I DEEP] NWPF N Roadway System Adequacy 2030 Operations era on vw�,,.rc.p.=.p aaeo .- Roadway Network N Possible Congesfion (1-1.20) N Probable Congestion (1.20) 0 2030 Forecasted ADT Range \\\ reeaN �anmrs�y �zope�w a� reearrya. Planning Level Urban Roadway Capacities Daily Two-way Volume (vehicles) Lower Higher Facility Type Threshold Threshold Two lane undivided 10,000 12,000 Ac[ess­ 30 Are. spr q %9 h. 330 R. 150 M1. tmm T 25.4fl Practical Operating Ranges far Roadway Design Types S,ee 21aie 3.Laik ALail* 1. Lane Undivided Divided Two lane divided or Three lane undivided 15,000 17,000 Arterials Four lane undivided 18,000 22,000 Four lane divided or five lane undivided 28,000 32,000 Four lane freeway 60,000 80,000 Freeways Six lane freeway 90,000 120,000 Eight lane freeway or Calculated on a segment by higher segment basis Choice of Roadway Section Based on ADT and Access spacing Ac[ess­ 30 Are. spr q %9 h. 330 R. 150 M1. tmm T 25.4fl Practical Operating Ranges far Roadway Design Types S,ee 21aie 3.Laik ALail* 1. Lane Undivided Divided Project Name: 2151000 CSAH 15 - Geometric improvements to CSAH 19 intersection Funding Start: 2018 Major Program: Public Works Funding Completion: 2019 Department.- Transportation Roads & Bridges Summary: o Revise the intersection of Shoreline Drive (CSAR 15) at Shadywood Road (CSAH 19) in the City of Orono. p -- -UMN GSTON-AVE Purpose & Description: Federal funding was awarded in 2015 through the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) to address existing safety concerns. The existing intersection is unique due to the abundance of driveways, including gas stations in three of the quadrants, within close proximity of the intersection. The proposed project will improve safety and traffic LYF2IC,AVE— �>. operations by implementing a new striping configuration on Shadywood Road (CSAH 19) to provide left -tum lanes, installing flashing yellow arrows to better facilitate left -turning movements, and eliminating channelized right -turn ORONO islands to provide traffic calming whenever feasible. The project will also include a replacement of the traffic signal system that has reached the end of its service life and an upgrade of the ADA accommodations to ensure accessibility. snag ► "^"' I o� b� QiliS \ REVENUES Budgef Dain .Acf 8i Enc To Date _ `=y13alance �:zol�cBudget 'loss Est(n'iate ia��'�gi�e ` . ,�021"-fEsdinate 2022`�'stiinatiei'� K-'_I3eyo►�d, zE1zz ::Total Property Tax 67,000 (67,000) - - - Federal General - - - 656,000 - - 656,000. Mn/DOT State Aid - Regular - - 250,000 432,000 - - - 682,000' Total - 67,000 (67,000) 250,000 1,088,000 1,338,000 EXPENDITURES Budget"roo Date Act:8 Enc'To'Date ;Balance; 2018 Budget, :2Qi9.Estlsnate . O�Dtitr�aie. ;;202Estiinate , •2d2 Esfliiatie .. "•Beyond 2(172 Land - - - 200,000 - - - 200,000 Construction - 67,000 (67,000) 11088,000 - 1,088,000 Consulting - 5,213 (5,213) 50,000 - - - 50,000 Equipment - - - - - - Fumishings Other Costs - - - - - Contingency - - - - - - Tutal 72,213 (72,213) 230,0001 1,088,000 1,338,000 II -30 Project Name: 2151000 CSAH 15 - Geometric improvements to CSAH 19 intersection Funding Start: 2018 Major Program: Public Works Funding Completion: 2019 Department: Transportation Roads & Bridges Current Year's CIP' Process summary Budget to Date 1-)2018 Budget 2019, Estimate 2020 Estimate t, 2021 -`Estimate I::2022'EWmate::' Beyond 2022 Total Department Requested - 250,000 1,088,000 - - - - 1,338,000 Administrator Proposed - 250,000 1,088,000 - - - - 1,338,000 CBTF Recommended 250,000 1,088,000 - - - 1,338,000 Board Approved Final - - - - - - - - Scheduling Milestones (major phases only): Board Resolutions / Supplemental Information: The funding of this project begins in 2019 with completion in 2020. Scoping: 2015-2016 Design: TBD Procurement: TBD Construction: 2019 Completion: TBD Project's Effect on Annual Operating Budget: No impact to department staff or annual operating costs are anticipated by this project. Annual Impact for Requesting Department: 0 Annual Impact for all other Depts: 0 Total 0 Changes from Prior CIP: . Added $50,000 consultant cost to reflect experience . Increased construction cost by $193,000 based upon engineer's estimate update . Increased costs financed with State Aid Last Year's CIP-Process Summary: Budget to Date :- 2017 :.2018 2019. .:2020 2021 Beyond Total Department Requested - - - 200,000 895,000 - 1,095,000 Administrator Proposed - - - 200,000 895,000 - - 1,095,000 CBTF Recommended - - - 200,000 895,000 - - 1,095,000 Board Approved Final - - 200,000 895,000 - - 1,095,000 II -31