The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-23-2010 Council Work Session Mintues Orono City Council Committee of the Whole February 23, 2010,6:30 p.m. Orono City Council Chambers Present: Mayor Jim White, Council Members Cynthia Bremer, Doug Franchot, Lili McMillan and Jim Murphy; Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategy Mike Gaffron, Finance Director Ron Olson, Planning &Zoning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, Public Works Supervisor Scott Oberaigner, City Engineer Tom Kellogg and City Clerk Lin Vee 1. Orono Engineering Costs for 2009 • The annual review of engineering services provided by Bonestroo was completed earlier this year with City staff. • Tom Kellogg reviewed the expenditures from 2009 which fall into three main categories. o General Engineering- 18%of total costs are related to streets, watermains, sanitary sewer, storm sewers, planning and public works o Private -7%of total expenditures are related to pass-through and reimbursable costs o City Infrastructure Projects-62%of costs were directly related to the Casco Point Reconstruction project with another 15%of costs related to projects such as Myrtlewood Utilities, Stonebay Wetland Corrections, etc. • The 2010 estimated expenditures are less than the previous five years. 2. Update on Long Lake Sewer System • Kellogg reviewed the north Orono sewer district. • Flow to the meter station located behind the golf dome is based on water records that indicate the flow contribution is 74%from Orono and 26%from Long Lake. • Per Met Council definition, 90%of flow from a neighboring city would allow Met Council to take over the interceptor. • When all potential areas of development that would serve the northern Orono sewer district are included with the flow contribution calculation, flow percentages would be 94.3%for Orono and 5.7%for Long La ke. • According to the policy statement at Met Council, reinstalling the lift station at Brown Road would be a strong argument for Met Council to take over the sewer line. The city will need to determine Met Council's position. 3. Comp Plan Discussion • Grittman reviewed the proposed changes to the 2030 Future Land Use Map and how to accomplish unit counts to support adequate densities. • In addition to the Dumas/James/Eisinger site, 103 units would be needed in mixed use areas developed at 6 units per acre requiring a minimum of 17 acres. A map identifying potential properties totaling 29.3 acres for mixed use in the Navarre area was discussed. These properties are currently occupied primarily by commercial uses. • Council was in favor of reducing the number of properties identified for mixed uses to approximately 20 acres, but agreed with Grittman that further discussion with Met Council about the mixed use area was appropriate prior to submittal of the final plan. • McMillan asked if parking is an issue for the Navarre mixed use areas. Grittman commented that Met Council won't be reviewing the Comp Plan update for parking; zoning will have the review authority. • Murphy inquired if Met Council includes an incremental progress review toward reaching density requirements through the 20-year period. Grittman responded that Met Council asked for a staging plan for every 5 years and the real lookback will occur the next time a Comp Plan update is required. Page 1 of 3 Orono City Council Committee of the Whole February 23, 2010,6:30 p.m. Orono City Council Chambers • Gaffron stated the city participates in the plat monitoring program and submits an annual report of approved plats and density. If the city is only finishing out development of rural areas, Met Council may respond with "you're not doing what you should be". • Grittman commented that Minnetrista has been reprimanded for denying development that would have met some density requirements, but Minnetrista had other reasons for denial. • Grittman considers approving projects that don't meet the Comp Plan to be a bigger problem than denying projects because they don't meet zoning standards. • Bremer noted that since the city doesn't own property designated for mixed use there will be a number of variables as to how it will be developed. • While the city doesn't have any developers pushing for high density development, the city must guide areas for higher density. When the Comp Plan is presented to the public, the Shadywood Road residents may object to high density all along Shadywood. Most of the proposed areas for higher density can be justified; the Snyder's site may be questionable. • McMillan stated it is important to explain to the public the density requirements that Met Council is placing on the city. • Bremer noted a mixed use classification will be new for residents as currently the city doesn't have any mixed use designations. • Sewer would need to be extended to the Eisinger property in the Hwy 12 area (Dumas/James/Eisinger site), which is a logical area for higher density development. Other areas along Highway 12 that might be acceptable for mixed use have not been identified. • Council is in favor of the areas proposed for higher density development along Highway 12. Council questioned if these areas were developed at higher density if the Met Council would be more amenable to development in the 3-5 acre areas. This will be discussed at the meeting with Met Council. • Gaffron stated that the work Grittman has completed to-date is approaching the approved $10,000 consulting fee. Council authorized additional hours for Grittman to continue work on the Comp Plan. • Terry Schneider, representative of the Klinglehutz site next to the Baywinds Church, commented that he is working on a plan for a memory care facility but can't make an application for the second phase until the Comp Plan update is complete. He would like the project to count towards higher density. • Gaffron stated a meeting is scheduled with Met Council for next week. The plan is to schedule a public hearing in mid to late March. 4. Golf Event 7/5/10 • Olson explained that the Golf Course Manager received a request to rent the golf course for the 2010 Patch Adams Golf Cart "Drive for Life" fundraiser on the afternoon of July 5`h. The golf course would be open to the public in the morning, which is normally the busiest period of the day, and closed to the public for the afternoon. He anticipates collecting a rental fee of$1465. • Council was in favor of approving the request, conditioned upon confirmation of the $1500 rental fee. 5. Police Matters • Labor Negotiations—Council discussed the mediation meeting held on February 11 and the response to be provided to the mediator. • Police Service Contract—Council reviewed and approved a response letter to be sent to Long Lake. 6. Website Update • Council approved the request to include social media sites such as Facebook,Twitter and Flickr as staff continues to develop the new website. • McMillan encouraged staff to continue to use the IT Committee as a resource to share ideas and review IT issues. Page 2 of 3 Orono City Council Committee of the Whole February 23, 2010, 6:30 p.m. Orono City Council Chambers 7. Update on MCWD Rulemaking Process • Gaffron distributed a letter from James Calkins, MCWD, in response to communication they received regarding the proposed revisions to MCWD Rules D, F and N. • The Lake area mayors have a meeting scheduled on February 24`h with MCWD representatives to discuss the proposed rule changes. • The Lake area cities are waiting to receive a strike-out/redlined version of the rule changes. 8. Comments Regarding Information Updates • Council discussed the letter received from Jim Grube requesting a joint meeting with the Orono and Long Lake City Councils regarding the process for the Highway 12 turnback. Gaffron will work on coordinating a meeting. 9. Miscellaneous • Curtis reported that the process required to amend the city code to allow the city to issue an interim use permit was discussed with the City Attorney. In a situation where a zoning application has already been received, the process would be as follows: o current zoning application would be withdrawn by the applicant; o Planning Commission would review a code amendment at their next meeting (March); o Council would review and adopt the code amendment; o to be followed by a new application for an interim use permit that would be reviewed at the next Planning Commission meeting (April). Page 3 of 3