Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
12-09-2019 Council Packet
Agenda Council Meeting Monday, December 9, 2019, 6:30 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 Truth in Taxation Public Hearing — 6:30 p.m. 1. 2020 Budget Hearing a. 2020 Budget Information b. Adopt Final 2019 Levy Collectible in 2020 c. Adopt Final 2020 General Fund Budget d. Adopt the 2020 Special Revenue Funds Budgets Approval of Agenda Consent Agenda 2. City Council Meeting Minutes of November 25, 2019 3. Claims/Bills 4. Authorization to Disburse Claims 5. Adopt 2020 Fee Schedule 6. Cost of Living Adjustments for Non -Union Employees 7. Close Fund 437 — Police Capital Projects Fund 8. 2020 Annual Appointments 9. Adopt Financial Management Policies 10. Approval of Rental Licenses 11. Appointment of 2019 Seasonal Employees 12. Disposal of Unclaimed Property 13. 2018 Drainage Improvement Project — Pay Request No. 2 — Final 14. Anti -Icing Unit #425a 15. LAI 8-000094 — Lakewest Development o/b/o Russel Kocon and Jacqueline Gibney, 3570 Ivy Place — Conditional Use Permit for Permanent Dock — Resolution 16. LAI 9-000041 — Steve Eggert, o/b/o Lake West Development, LLC and Russell Kocon and Jacqueline Gabney, 3570 Ivy Place, Subdivision resulting in a plat — Resolution 17. LAI 9-000089 — Jim Cleary Everlast Enterprises Inc., 275 Crestview Ave, Variance — Resolution 18. LAI 9-000090 — Brent Teele, 577 Park Lane, Variance — Resolution 19. LAI 9-000094 — David Burda, 1966 Shadywood Road, Variances — Resolution 20. LAI 9-000095 — Gordon James, 2927 Casco Point Road, Variances and 1UP — Resolution Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us Agenda Council Meeting Monday, December 9, 2019, 6:30 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us 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. Presentation 21. Three Rivers Park District Commissioner — Marge Beard Finance Director Report 22. Adopt 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Planning Department Report 23. LAI 9-000074 — William Griffith o/b/o Theodore Bonnett, 40 & 45 Smith Avenue, Request for street vacation 24. LA19-000086 — J. Marie Fieger, 580 Big Island, Permit for Dock on Right -of -Way 25. LAI 9-000096 — Denali Custom Homes o/b/o Drew Hueler, 1398 Rest Point Road, Variances 26. LAI 9-000063 — City of Orono Text Amendment Related to Special Event Permitting Mayor/Council Report City Administrator Report City Attorney Report Adjournment Upcoming Events 2019 12-24-19 Official Holiday, City Offices Closed 12-25-19 Official Holiday, City Offices Closed 2020 01-01-20 Official Holiday, City Offices Closed 01-06-20 Parks Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:00 p.m. 01-13-20 Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 01-13-20 City Council Meeting, Monday, 6:00 p.m. 01-20-20 Official Holiday, City Offices Closed Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us Agenda Council Meeting Monday, December 9, 2019, 6:30 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us 01-21-20 Planning Commission Meeting, Tuesday, 6:00 p.m. (Aaron Printup) 01-27-20 Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 01-27-20 City Council Meeting, Monday, 6:00 p.m. Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us AGENDA ITEM Item No.: Item Description: 2020 Budget Hearing Date: December 9, 2019 Presenter: Ron Olson Agenda Truth In Taxation Finance Director Section: Public Hearing 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to approve the 2020 General Fund Budget, Tax Levy, and the 2020 Special Revenue Fund Budgets. 2. Background. Prior to the adoption of the 2020 budget and tax levy, the City is required to hold a public hearing to allow public input on the budget and tax levy. By law, this hearing must occur between November 24`x' and December 28'. When the preliminary tax levy and budget was approved in September, the public hearing was set for December 9, 2019 at 6:30. This public hearing is the final step prior to adoption of the budget and tax levy. The budget process was begun by staff at the beginning of May. At a work session held on May 28t' the Council was provided background information on the budget and an overview of the budget challenges for 2020. Over the summer, a draft budget was prepared and reviewed by the Council at work sessions in June, July and August. In September the preliminary budget and tax levy was publically presented at the meeting of August 26' and adopted at the September 23rd council meeting. In addition to the work on the actual budget, staff has been working on updating the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP identifies the long-term infrastructure needs and is a valuable tool in the budgeting process. The CIP will also be approve as part of tonight's meeting. In conjunction with the budget process, staff has also been reviewing the fee schedule. The 2020 fee schedule, as currently amended, will be adopted at tonight's meeting. Tax Levy The total tax levy required to fund the 2020 budget is $6,007,450. This is an increase of $372,000 or 6.6% over the 2019 levy. The increase includes an additional $153,000 for the road maintenance and reconstruction; reflecting the Council's desire to establish a long term funding solution for the City's road infrastructure. The remaining increase of $219,000 is an increase to the General Fund operating levy. Overall, the tax rate is slightly increasing from 16.406% to 16.498%. Orono continues to have one of the lowest tax rates in both Hennepin County (ranking 41 of 45 cities), and the State of Minnesota. The tax levy is used to fund the general operations of the City (General Fund), pay the debt service on the City's outstanding bonds, and fund the Pavement Management Fund. A levy amount of $6,007,450 was approved as the preliminary tax levy. This has not been changed in the final tax levy. The breakdown of the 2019 levy is $711,000 for debt service, $617,450 for roads, and the remaining $4,679,000 is used in the General Fund. Tax Capacity Rate and the Impact of the Tax Levy on Property Owners The County Assessor provides an annual calculation of the City's tax capacity based on the annual property revaluation. As of September 6, 2019, the City's taxable market value is $3,170,532,631 with a tax capacity of $36,076,004. When compared to last year, taxable market value has increased by 4.32% and the tax capacity by 4.68%. As a result of the City's increased tax capacity, the tax capacity rate will increase from 16.406% in 2019 to 16.498% in 2020. Using this tax rate and assuming no change in a Prepared By:.MRU Reviewed By: JJV Approved By: �bV AGENDA ITEM property's value, the City's share of the property tax bill would be: an increase of $2.16 (0.56% on a home previously valued at $250,000; an increase in tax of $4.60 (0.56%) on a $500,000 home; a $1,000,000 home will see an increase of $10.35 (0.56%); and a $2,000,000 home has an increase of $21.85 (0.56%). The actual tax impact on any particular property will depend on how the property's taxable value changed in relation to the rest of the City. Tables illustrating a 5% increase in value and a 5% decrease in value are included in this budget document. General Fund Budget General Fund Expenditures The 2020 expenditure budget is $9,143,200 which is an increase of $ 565,920 (6.6%) over the 2019 budget. The preliminary budget that is being presented for approval tonight includes expenditures totaling $9,143,200; an increase in expenditures of $565,920 (6.6%). The significant increases are the following. Wages and Benefits (Personal Services) are increasing $296,160 (5.4%). This increase is broken down as follows: Non -Union Wages 3% $27,900 Police Unions (Sgrt and Patrol) 3% + Add Longevity Ste $100,000 Admin and Public Works Unions 2.5% $25,250 Health Insurance $126/month/Employee $34,700 Elections Election Year $45,000 Worker's Comp Ins Exp Rating Change $27,110 Step Increases $36,200 Total $296,160 Insurance expenditures are another category that is increasing significantly (30.5%). This $37,500 increase is due to two factors: one is a change in our loss ratio due to land use lawsuits, and the other is a continuation of a trend of increasing costs related to police departments. There were two changes in accounting practices that increased the General Fund budget, but did not increase overall spending. The first was to move $80,000 in street maintenance from the Pavement Management Fund to the General Fund. The Associated tax revenue was also moved to the General Fund. The other change was to the accounting for the Toward Zero Deaths Grant. This increase of $119,500 is completely offset by an increase in amount of grant revenue recorded. After accounting for these increases, the remaining General Fund increases total $32,760 or 0.3%. General Fund Revenues For revenues the General Fund budget also totals $9,143,200 and is increasing by $565,920. The largest increase in revenues is the property tax line at $299,000. Other significant increases include $125,000 in the State Grant line item which was also discussed in the expenditure section. Administrative Fees charged to the utility Funds are increasing by $38,000 and are based on a percentage of the Finance and Administration budgets. Coop Police Services are increasing by $57,170 and are the amounts charged to the City of Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach and Mound for providing them police services. All other revenue changes total $46,750 and represent 0.5% of the revenue budget. Special Revenue Funds The special revenue funds that budgets are adopted for are the Park Fund, The Drug Forfeiture Fund, and the TIF Fund. Special revenue funds by definition have a primary source of revenue that is dedicated for a specific purpose. In the Park Fund the primary revenue source is park dedication fees collected from developers. By state law, these funds must be used for parkland acquisition and development. The Drug Prepared By:.MRU Reviewed By: JJV Approved By: �bV AGENDA ITEM Forfeiture Fund receives its primary funding from the Police Department's drug and alcohol enforcement activities. The funds must be used for drug and alcohol related activities. The TIF Fund is used to account for revenues related to the Orono Woods Senior Housing Development. Debt Service Levies The 2020 levy for debt service is $711,000. This levy is used to pay the debt service on the City's outstanding bonds. Enterprise Funds The Water, Sewer, Stormwater, and Recycling Funds are designed to account for the business type activities of the City. These funds do not receive any property tax revenue. The goal for the Enterprise funds is to be fully funded by rates without depending on special assessments for infrastructure improvements. While there is no formal adoption of the expenditure budgets, the information is included in the budget book. On the revenue side of the budget, the utility rates are approved annually as part of the fee schedule. The utility rate increases being recommended are Water 35%; Sewer 20%, Stormwater 90%, and Recycling by 60%. Additionally, based on the area (North, South, Wayzata, or Long Lake), the sewer and water will be charged accordingly. Staff has also looked into multi -residential and commercial properties and are recommending charging Billing and Ready -to -Serve charges per SAC Unit. The utility rates will be approved tonight as part of the 2020 Fee Schedule. Water The water fund has historically been operating at a loss. Because depreciation is a non-cash expenditure, the fund has had a positive operating cash flow since 2009. In previous years, the operating loss has been covered by the revenue received from antenna leases on the water towers. The revenue from the antenna leases has been moved out of the Water budget since 2018 and this revenue decrease has been recovered through water rates. As presented, the operating budget for 2020 will have an operating loss of $157,481. The expenditure budget is increasing by $58,540 (6.3%). $18,400 of the increase is due to an increase in depreciation and $6,000 of the increase is due the information technology (IT) being centrally managed going forward. The operating transfer of $55,000 is to the debt service fund supporting the Casco Point Bonds ($55,000). The non-operating interest expense is for the interest on the 2014 Water Bonds. 2020 capital expenditures as identified in the 2020 CIP include a water main replacement at CSAH 15/19 and water valve replacements. The 2020 capital expenditures total $233,855. The Water Fund's anticipated cash balance for the fund at the end of 2019 is $182,900. Sewer In recent years, the sewer fund has mostly operated at a loss. Non-operating revenues however, have consistently offset the operating losses. This has resulted in a positive operating cash flow for the fund. The single largest expense for the sewer fund is the Met Council disposal charges. The four years have seen increases in the amounts of $37,410 (9.5%), $41,276 (9.6%), $82,147 (17.4%) and $64,035 (11.5%) respectively. This is a 57% increase in four years. As has been discussed with the Council during previous budget processes, heavy rains and high water tables increase the flow through the MCES lift stations and increase our disposal charges. Prepared By:.MRU Reviewed By: JJV Approved By: �bV AGENDA ITEM The total operating expenditure budget is increasing by $172,025 (9.92%) The major increases are the previously mentioned MCES charges ($64,035), repairs and maintenance for I&I reduction ($50,000), the Fleet Service Charge ($16,500), and Intergovernmental Services ($20,700). The operating transfer of $115,000 is to cover the sewer improvements that were part of the Casco Point project and will continue for another four years. Upcoming capital expenditures can be covered by the fund's current cash balances. Projects identified in the CIP for 2020 include: Annual sewer rehabilitation ($290,000), additional generators ($150,000), grinder station ($20,000), lift station updates ($120,000), additional road project adjustments ($55,000), and force main replacement for CSAH 15/19 ($180,000), for a total of $815,000. The anticipated cash balance for the fund at the end of 2019 is $1,387,422. Stormwater The Stormwater Fund is for the most part project based. Operating expenditures are mainly limited to engineering associated with NPDES, SWPPP and other state and federal requirements. Public Works time and materials spent on culvert cleaning/replacement are also charged to this fund. The purpose of this fund is to collect money for the larger Stormwater projects that will be required in the future. The attached five- year projection assumes a 10% annual increase. Potential CIP projects in 2020 include: Smith and Lyman Avenues ($25,575), Livingston and Navarre Avenues ($20,000), Windjammer ($7,000), Rest Point Lane ($5,565), Togo Road ($91,000), Fox Street — Orono Orchard to East End ($28,000), East long Lake Road N ($127,000), and Storm Sewer Improvements ($100,000). The capital expenditures total $40,140. The anticipated cash balance for the fund at the end of 2019 is $613,288. Recycling The recycling funds major expenditure line is for contracted recycling charges. The current contract with Waste Management is increasing 62%. The Recycled Materials offset that the City was receiving in 2017 has not been being paid since 2018. The offset is based on the market for recycled materials which weakened it 2018. The full time wages that are charged to the fund represent 10% of the City Clerks wages. The anticipated cash balance for the fund at the end of 2019 is $70,382. Cable The Cable funds projected revenues are based on current subscriber information and rates. The line item for Internet/Other communications covers the costs associated with streaming and online access of council meetings. It has been increased to pay for the increased cost of our fiber internet connection. Revenue for the fund is in the from franchise fees that are set by the City's franchise agreement with Mediacom. Capital Expenditures in 2020 will include upgrades to the presentation equipment in the Council Chambers. The current cash balance of the fund is $169,102. Construction Funds The City does not adopt formal budgets for construction funds. Possible projects for these funds can be found in the CIP. The CIP is a planning tool only; approval of the CIP not approve or authorize any purchases. The projects identified in it will require individual approval from the Council before they can be started. Capital Improvement Plan In 2012 the City formally adopted a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). In order to keep the CIP useful, it Prepared By:.MRU Reviewed By: JJV Approved By: �bV AGENDA ITEM is updated on a yearly basis. An updated copy of the CIP for 2020 is included with this memo and will be approved tonight. The CIP is a planning document only and approval of the CIP does not constitute approval of any expenditures. There are two main focusses of the CIP. First is the CIP items that have been identified as needs by staff. The Second is available funding for the CIP. Many funding sources are not adequate to fund the CIP items so funding will need to be secured prior to moving forward with the projects. The funding for the Street CIP includes an additional $300,000 in tax levy starting in 2023. In that year, the levy needed for debt service will decrease by $300,000 and by transferring the levy to the CIP, there will be adequate funding for roads. This increased levy for the CII' will require Council approval at that time. 3. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the attached budget resolutions setting the 2020 Property Tax Levy, the 2020 General Fund Budget, the 2020 Special Revenue Fund Budgets, and the 2020 Enterprise Fund Budgets. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motions to approve the 2020 Property Tax Levy, the 2020 General Fund Budget, the 2020 Special Revenue Fund Budgets, and the 2020 Enterprise Fund Budget. Exhibits A. Resolution Adopting the 2020 Property Tax Levy B. Resolution Adopting the Final 2020 General Fund Budget C. Resolution Adopting the 2020 Special Revenue Fund Budgets D. Resolution Adopting the 2020 Enterprise Fund Budgets E. Draft 2020 Budget Book Prepared By:.MRU Reviewed By: JJV Approved By: �bV CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FINAL 2020 PROPERTY TAX LEVY BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following sums be levied for the current year, collectible in 2020 upon the taxable property in the City of Orono, for the following purposes: General Fund - Operating $4,679,000 Pavement Management Levy 617,450 G.O Improvement Bond 2010 134,825 G.O. Improvement Bond 2014 162,900 G.O. Improvement Bond 2016 413,275 TOTAL ALL LEVIES &6&07,450 The City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE FINAL 2020 GENERAL FUND BUDGET BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the final 2020 General Fund budget is determined to be as follows: APPROPRIATED EXPENDITURES General Government ESTIMATED REVENUES Taxes - General $4,689,000 Licenses and Permits 528,200 Intergovernmental 393,000 Charges for Services 3,157,700 Fines and Forfeits 80,100 Interest Income 81,100 Recreation Fees 176,000 Miscellaneous 38,100 TOTAL 9 143 200 APPROPRIATED EXPENDITURES General Government $1,471,400 Public Safety 5,836,000 Street Maintenance 608,800 Parks and Recreation 463,500 Engineering - Unallocated 20,000 Reimbursable Expenditures 128,500 Special Projects and Contingency 30,000 Capital Outlay 185,000 Transfers to Other Funds 400,000 TOTAL 9 143 200 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 2020 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND BUDGETS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the 2020 Special Revenue Fund budgets are determined to be as follows: Annronriated Expenditures General Government $ - - $ - - $ 70,000 Public Safety - - 20,000 - - Streets - - - - - - Parks & Recreation 339,500 - - - - Transfers to Other Funds - - - - - - Increase to Fund Balance - - 6,000 7,000 Total Expenditures 339 500 26 000 77 000 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor Drug/Felony Estimated Revenues Park Forfeiture TIF Taxes — General $ - - $ - - 77,000 Interest Income 5,000 1,000 - - User Fees / Loan Payment - - 25,000 - - Park Dedication Fees 5,500 - - - - Intergovernmental - - - - - - Transfers from other Funds - - - - - Use of Fund Balance 329,000 - - - - Total Revenues 339 500 26 000 77 000 Annronriated Expenditures General Government $ - - $ - - $ 70,000 Public Safety - - 20,000 - - Streets - - - - - - Parks & Recreation 339,500 - - - - Transfers to Other Funds - - - - - - Increase to Fund Balance - - 6,000 7,000 Total Expenditures 339 500 26 000 77 000 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 2020 ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the 2020 Enterprise Fund budgets are determined to be as follows: Estimated Revenues Charges for Service Interest Income Non -Operating Total Revenues Appropriated Expenditures Operating Expenses Non -Operating Expenses Interest Expense Debt Service Transfer to Other Funds Total Expenditures Water Sewer Recycling Stormwater Cable $1,134,237 $1,803,429 $205,632 $661,799 $76,000 10,000 35,000 -- 15,000 1,000 -- 20,000 25,000 -- $1,144,237 1 858 429 230 632 676 799 77 000 $911,150 $1,791,200 $216,700 22,100 80,000 55,000 110,000 -- 1 068 2501 901 200 J216,700 $373,000 $71,200 $373,000 73 700 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor CITY OF ORON MINNESOTA 2020 ANNUAL BUDGET 2750 Kelley Parkway IV 0rono, MN 55356 www.c1.orono.mn.us City of Orono 2020 Annual Budget Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction & Summary Introduction/Budget Summary ............... 3 Fund and Department Descriptions ....... 7 Resolutions...............................................13 39 Tax Levies ................................................... 17 Budget Effect on Residential Homes ...... 19 General Fund Revenues ............................23 General Fund Expenditures ......................27 72 Summary of all Funds ............................... 31 Outstanding Debt......................................33 76 Debt Projection ......................................... 35 Section 2: Changes in Fund Balance/Retained Earnings Summary.....................................................37 General Fund..............................................38 Special Revenue Funds ............................. 39 Debt Service Funds....................................46 65 Capital Project Funds ................................ 51 Enterprise Funds........................................58 Section 3: Operating Budgets General Fund Mayor & Council.......................................63 Administration .......................................... 65 Election...................................................... 68 Assessing....................................................70 Finance...................................................... 72 Law/Legal Services ................................... 74 Central Services ........................................ 76 Human Services ........................................ 79 Police Department ................................... 81 Fire Protection ......................................... 85 Building & Zoning ..................................... 87 Engineering................................................90 Public Works..............................................92 Parks........................................................... 95 Golf Course ................................................ 98 Brush Site ...................................................102 Special Services. - Consulting & Police .. 104 Special Projects -Contingencies .............. 106 Enterprise Fund Water......................................................... 109 Sewer..........................................................113 Recycling....................................................118 Stormwater............................................... 121 Cable...........................................................125 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 1 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 2 Budget Process The budget process began at the beginning of May. At a work session held on May 28th, the Council was provided background information on the budget and an overview of the budget challenges for 2020. Over the summer, a draft budget was prepared and reviewed by the Council at work sessions in June, July and August. In September the preliminary budget and tax levy was publically presented at the meeting of August 26th and adopted at the September 23rd council meeting. Prior to the adoption of the 2020 budget and tax levy, the City is required to hold a public hearing to allow public input on the budget and tax levy. By law, this hearing must occur between November 24th and December 28th. When the preliminary tax levy and budget was approved in September, the public hearing was set for December 9, 2019 at 6:30. The final budget and tax levy was adopted at the conclusion of the public hearing. In addition to the work on the actual budget, staff has been working on updating the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP identifies the long-term infrastructure needs and is a valuable tool in the budgeting process. The CIP was also approved as part of the December 9th meeting. In conjunction with the budget process, staff has also reviewed the fee schedule. The 2020 fee schedule, as amended, was adopted on December 9th Tax Lew The total tax levy required to fund the 2020 budget is $6,007,450. This is an increase of $372,000 or 6.6% over the 2019 levy. The increase includes an additional $153,000 for the road maintenance and reconstruction; reflecting the Council's desire to establish a long term funding solution for the City's road infrastructure. The remaining increase of $219,000 is an increase to the General Fund operating levy. Overall, the tax rate is slightly increasing from 16.406% to 16.677%. Orono continues to have one of the lowest tax rates in both Hennepin County (ranking 41 of 45 cities), and the State of Minnesota. The tax levy is used to fund the general operations of the City (General Fund), pay the debt service on the City's outstanding bonds, and fund the Pavement Management Fund. A levy amount of $6,007,450 was approved in the preliminary tax levy. This has not changed in the final tax levy. The breakdown of the 2019 levy is $711,000 for debt service, $617,450 for roads, and the remaining $4,679,000 is used in the General Fund. Tax Capacity Rate and the Impact of the Tax Levy on Property Owners The County Assessor provides an annual calculation of the City's tax capacity based on the annual property revaluation. As of September 6, 2019, the City's taxable market value is $3,170,532,631 with a tax capacity of $36,076,004. When compared to last year, taxable market value has increased by 4.32% and the tax capacity by 4.68%. As a result of the City's increased tax capacity, the tax capacity rate will increase from 16.406% in 2019 to 16.498% in 2020. Using this tax rate and assuming no change in a property's value, the City's share of the property tax bill would be: an increase of $2.16 (0.56% on a home previously valued at $250,000; an increase in tax of $4.60 (0.56%) on a $500,000 home; a $1,000,000 home will see an increase of $10.35 (0.56%); and a $2,000,000 home has an increase of $21.85 (0.56%). The actual tax impact on any particular property will depend on how the property's taxable value changed in relation to the rest of the City. Tables illustrating a 5% increase in value and a 5% decrease in value are included in this budget document. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 3 General Fund Budget General Fund Expenditures The 2020 expenditure budget is $9,143,200 which is an increase of $ 565,920 (6.6%) over the 2019 budget. The preliminary budget that is being presented for approval tonight includes expenditures totaling $9,143,200; an increase in expenditures of $565,920 (6.6%). The significant increases are the following. Wages and Benefits (Personal Services) are increasing $296,160 (5.4%). Insurance expenditures are another category that is increasing significantly (30.5%). This $37,500 increase is due to two factors: one is a change in our loss ratio due to land use lawsuits, and the other is a continuation of a trend of increasing costs related to police departments. There were two changes in accounting practices that increased the General Fund budget, but did not increase overall spending. The first was to move $80,000 in street maintenance from the Pavement Management Fund to the General Fund. The Associated tax revenue was also moved to the General Fund. The other change was to the accounting for the Toward Zero Deaths Grant. This increase of $119,500 is completely offset by an increase in amount of grant revenue recorded. After accounting for these increases, the remaining General Fund increases total $32,760 or 0.3%. General Fund Revenues For revenues the General Fund budget also totals $9,143,200 and is increasing by $565,920. The largest increase in revenues is the property tax line at $299,000. Other significant increases include $125,000 in the State Grant line item which was also discussed in the expenditure section. Administrative Fees charged to the utility Funds are increasing by $38,000 and are based on a percentage of the Finance and Administration budgets. Coop Police Services are increasing by $57,170 and are the amounts charged to the City of Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach and Mound for providing them police services. All other revenue changes total $46,750 and represent 0.5% of the revenue budget. Special Revenue Funds The special revenue funds that budgets are adopted for are the Park Fund, The Drug Forfeiture Fund, and the TIF Fund. Special revenue funds by definition have a primary source of revenue that is dedicated for a specific purpose. In the Park Fund the primary revenue source is park dedication fees collected from developers. By state law, these funds must be used for parkland acquisition and development. The Drug Forfeiture Fund receives its primary funding from the Police Department's drug and alcohol enforcement activities. The funds must be used for drug and alcohol related activities. The TIF Fund is used to account for revenues related to the Orono Woods Senior Housing Development. Debt Service Levies The 2020 levy for debt service is $711,000. This levy is used to pay the debt service on the City's outstanding bonds. Enterprise Funds The Water, Sewer, Stormwater, and Recycling Funds are designed to account for the business type activities of the City. These funds do not receive any property tax revenue. The goal for the Enterprise funds is to be fully funded by rates without depending on special assessments for infrastructure improvements. While there is no formal adoption of the expenditure budgets, the information is included in the budget book. On the revenue side of the budget, the utility rates are approved annually as part of the fee schedule. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 4 The utility rate increases being recommended are Water 35%; Sewer 20%, Stormwater 90%, and Recycling by 60%. Additionally, based on the area (North, South, Wayzata, or Long Lake), the sewer and water will be charged accordingly. Staff has also looked into multi -residential and commercial properties and are recommending charging Billing and Ready -to -Serve charges per SAC Unit. The utility rates will be approved tonight as part of the 2020 Fee Schedule. Water The water fund has historically been operating at a loss. Because depreciation is a non-cash expenditure, the fund has had a positive operating cash flow since 2009. In previous years, the operating loss has been covered by the revenue received from antenna leases on the water towers. The revenue from the antenna leases has been moved out of the Water budget since 2018 and this revenue decrease has been recovered through water rates. As presented, the operating budget for 2020 will have an operating loss of $157,481. The expenditure budget is increasing by $58,540 (6.3%). $18,400 of the increase is due to an increase in depreciation and $6,000 of the increase is due the information technology (IT) being centrally managed going forward. The operating transfer of $55,000 is to the debt service fund supporting the Casco Point Bonds ($55,000). The non-operating interest expense is for the interest on the 2014 Water Bonds. 2020 capital expenditures as identified in the 2020 CIP include a water main replacement at CSAH 15/19 and water valve replacements. The 2020 capital expenditures total $233,855. The Water Fund's anticipated cash balance for the fund at the end of 2019 is $182,900. CPXx7Pr In recent years, the sewer fund has mostly operated at a loss. Non-operating revenues however, have consistently offset the operating losses. This has resulted in a positive operating cash flow for the fund. The single largest expense for the sewer fund is the Met Council disposal charges. The four years have seen increases in the amounts of $37,410 (9.5%), $41,276 (9.6%), $82,147 (17.4%) and $64,035 (11.5%) respectively. This is a 57% increase in four years. As has been discussed with the Council during previous budget processes, heavy rains and high water tables increase the flow through the MCES lift stations and increase our disposal charges. The total operating expenditure budget is increasing by $172,025 (9.92%) The major increases are the previously mentioned MCES charges ($64,035), repairs and maintenance for I&I reduction ($50,000), the Fleet Service Charge ($16,500), and Intergovernmental Services ($20,700). The operating transfer of $115,000 is to cover the sewer improvements that were part of the Casco Point project and will continue for another four years. Upcoming capital expenditures can be covered by the fund's current cash balances. Projects identified in the CIP for 2020 include: Annual sewer rehabilitation ($290,000), additional generators ($150,000), grinder station ($20,000), lift station updates ($120,000), additional road project adjustments ($55,000), and force main replacement for CSAH 15/19 ($180,000), for a total of $815,000. The anticipated cash balance for the fund at the end of 2019 is $1,387,422. Stormwater The Stormwater Fund is for the most part project based. Operating expenditures are mainly limited to engineering associated with NPDES, SWPPP and other state and federal City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 5 requirements. Public Works time and materials spent on culvert cleaning/replacement are also charged to this fund. The purpose of this fund is to collect money for the larger Stormwater projects that will be required in the future. The attached five-year projection assumes a 10% annual increase. Potential CIP projects in 2020 include: Smith and Lyman Avenues ($25,575), Livingston and Navarre Avenues ($20,000), Windjammer ($7,000), Rest Point Lane ($5,565), Togo Road ($91,000), Fox Street — Orono Orchard to East End ($28,000), East long Lake Road N ($127,000), and Storm Sewer Improvements ($100,000). The capital expenditures total $40,140. The anticipated cash balance for the fund at the end of 2019 is $613,288. Recycling The recycling funds major expenditure line is for contracted recycling charges. The current contract with Waste Management is increasing 62%. The Recycled Materials offset that the City was receiving in 2017 has not been being paid since 2018. The offset is based on the market for recycled materials which weakened it 2018. The full time wages that are charged to the fund represent 10% of the City Clerks wages. The anticipated cash balance for the fund at the end of 2019 is $70,382. Cable The Cable funds projected revenues are based on current subscriber information and rates. The line item for Internet/Other communications covers the costs associated with streaming and online access of council meetings. It has been increased to pay for the increased cost of our fiber internet connection. Revenue for the fund is in the from franchise fees that are set by the City's franchise agreement with Mediacom. Capital Expenditures in 2020 will include upgrades to the presentation equipment in the Council Chambers. The current cash balance of the fund is $169,102. Construction Funds The City does not adopt formal budgets for construction funds. Possible projects for these funds can be found in the CIP. The CIP is a planning tool only; approval of the CIP not approve or authorize any purchases. The projects identified in it will require individual approval from the Council before they can be started. Capital Improvement Plan In 2012 the City formally adopted a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). In order to keep the CIP useful, it is updated on a yearly basis. An updated copy of the CIP for 2020 is included with this memo and will be approved tonight. The CII' is a planning document only and approval of the CIP does not constitute approval of any expenditures. There are two main focusses of the CIP. First is the CIP items that have been identified as needs by staff. The Second is available funding for the CIP. Many funding sources are not adequate to fund the CIP items so funding will need to be secured prior to moving forward with the projects. The funding for the Street CIP includes an additional $300,000 in tax levy starting in 2023. In that year, the levy needed for debt service will decrease by $300,000 and by transferring the levy to the CIP, there will be adequate funding for roads. This increased levy for the CIP will require Council approval at that time. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 6 City of Orono Fund and Department Descriptions City Budgets can be confusing due to the number of funds and departments involved. The following descriptions of the General Fund departments and the other funds maintained by the City of Orono is designed to give the user of this document a basic understanding of the purpose of each department and fund. General Fund —This is the general operating fund of the City. It is used to account for all financial resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. The General Fund budget is made up of the following departmental budgets: Mayor and Council —The City Council oversees the policies and procedures that govern the City in promoting the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Orono. This budget includes the wages and employment taxes of the Council; memberships in the League of Minnesota Cities, Metro Cities, and the Suburban Rate Authority. Administration — The Administration Department includes the City Administrator who is responsible for meeting statutory and legal obligations, implementing policy established by the City Council and ensuring the successful management of all city operations. The City Clerk and the rest of the administrative staff perform various functions such as: customer service, permits and licensing, elections, record management, and general administrative duties. • Elections —The Elections Department administers all federal, state, county, and municipal elections held in the city. Elections are held in even numbered years. • Assessing—The Assessing Department performs assessing services in accordance with the requirements of the State of Minnesota. The City maintains a contract with Hennepin County for assessing services. • Finance — The Finance Department oversees the City's financial operations, risk management, and employee benefits. It is responsible for preparing the budget and Comprehensive Annual Financial Report in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. • Legal —The Legal Department includes professional representation and opinion on city services and operations, prosecution services, and jail charges. The City maintains renewable contracts with both a civil law firm and a prosecutor for legal services. • Central Services —The Central Services provides for those operating expenses that encompass all General Fund city departments with the exception of the Police Department. Expenditures include supplies, utilities, municipal insurance coverage, janitorial, and building maintenance. • Human Services —The Human Services Department contracts with area organizations to provide for valuable services for the community. Current contracts are with The Gillespie Center for senior services and Orono Community Education for summer recreation programs. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 7 Police —The Police Department provides for the public safety within Orono and surrounding communities. The City has renewable contracts with the Cities of Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach, and Mound. Due to the contractual agreements the department operates as a "cost center" and is the only General Fund department that has expenditures for costs that are normally covered by Central Services. This budget is also the only one within the General Fund that includes capital expenditures. • Fire — the expenditures of the Fire Department are comprised of renewable contracts with the Cities of Long Lake and Wayzata for fire suppression services • Planning and Zoning — The Planning and Zoning Department oversees the development and redevelopment within the City, including building inspections, in accordance with established policies and guidelines. The policies and guidelines have been created to maintain the health, safety, and welfare of the public, as well as maintaining the aesthetics of the community. • Engineering—The Engineering Department provides professional representation and opinion on city services and operations. This function is provided by a local engineering firm that is retained on a contract basis. • Street Maintenance — The Street Department provides for the maintenance of all city streets to ensure a safe and drivable condition. Standard maintenance includes, patching, snow plowing, and striping. • Parks and Recreation —The Parks and Recreation Department provides for the maintenance of the City's parks. • Golf Course — The Golf Course provides golfing opportunities for both residents and visitors to the City. During the winter months the course is open to sledding. • Brush Site —The Brush Site is open from April through November offering residents (no charge), non-residents and contractors (at a charge) a place to bring brush and tree disposal. • Special Services — The Special Services Department is used to account for expenditures that benefit a single property or organization. An example of this type of expenditure is the legal and engineering fees incurred as the result of a request for a variance, a subdivision application, or other major development. Other expenditures that are included in this department are requests for additional police security or traffic control related to an event. The costs recorded in this department are offset by revenues received for the services provided. Special Projects and Contingencies—The Special Projects and Contingencies Department budget include the annual operating transfer to the Improvement & Equipment Outlay Fund for the purchase of capital equipment for General Fund Departments other than for the Police Department. The department also includes an amount for any unforeseen circumstances that produce additional expenses or revenue shortfalls. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 8 Special Revenue Funds — Special Revenue Funds provide for funding of expenditures that are primarily funded by a revenue source that is not part of the general tax levy and has a restricted use. • Park Fund —The Park Fund's major revenue source are Park Dedication Fees collected as part of a subdivision or major development process. By state law fees received must be placed in a special fund and can be used for specific purposes. Park dedication fees must be used only for the acquisition and development or improvement of parks, recreational facilities, playgrounds, trails, wetlands, or open space based on the approved park systems plan. • Drug and Felony Forfeiture Fund —The Drug and Felony Forfeiture Fund's major sources of revenue are the sale of DWI forfeited vehicles and revenue received from drug enforcement activities. The funds are restricted for law enforcement activities related to alcohol and drug enforcement. Senior Housing TIF Fund —The Senior Housing TIF Fund was created to provide housing opportunities for seniors within the City. Its major revenue source is the additional property taxes collected on the captured value of the property. 90% of the funds collected are forwarded to the developer to help pay for the bonds associated with the project. Debt Service Funds — Debt Service Funds are used to pay for debt service on the City's outstanding bonds. Funding for debt service funds can include: property taxes; special assessments, debt support from other funds; or a combination of the three. 2010 General Obligation Bonds — The 2010 bonds were issued for multiple purposes: to refund the 2003 HRA Public Facility Bonds (Navarre Fire); to fund the reconstruction of Old Crystal Bay Road; and to fund the reclamation of Orono Orchard Road. The refunding portion of the bond issue saved the City an estimated $47,125. Funding is a combination of property taxes and Municipal State Aid money from the State of Minnesota • 2014 General Obligation Bonds — The 2014 bonds were issued for multiple purposes: to refund the 2005 HRA Public Project Revenue Bonds (Big Island); to fund water infrastructure improvements including a new well; and to fund the construction of the Public Safety Garage. Funding is a combination of property taxes; water revenues; and a transfer from the General Fund related to revenues from the Mound police service contract. • 2016 General Obligation Refunding Bonds —The 2016 bonds were issued to refund the 2008 General Obligation Street Reconstruction Bonds. The refunding of the 2008 bonds resulted in interest savings of $220,832. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 9 Capital Project Funds — Capital project funds are used to account for the financing of street projects, equipment replacement, public safety equipment, and facility rehabilitation or renovation. Revenue sources are provided mainly through transfers, special assessments, and bond sales. • Municipal State Aid (MSA) Fund — The MSA Fund provides for the improvement of designated state aid streets which are funded by State of Minnesota funds. • Improvement & Equipment Outlay Fund —The Improvement & Equipment Outlay Fund provides for the purchase of equipment and the construction or renovation of City facilities. • Permanent Improvement Revolving (PIR) Fund — The PIR Fund is designed to provide temporary financing of projects until permanent financing is available. • Community Investment Fund — The Community Investment Fund provides funding for projects of citywide importance that have no other funding source. Enterprise Funds — Enterprise Funds are used to account for the business type activities of the City. These include the following funds: Water, Sewer, Cable TV, Stormwater, and Recycling. • Water — The Water Fund is used to account for the City's utility. The system consists of two water towers, three wells, 18 miles of water mains, and serves 1,087 customers. • Sewer—The Sewer Fund is used to account for the City's sewer utility. The system consists of 47 miles of sewer lines and 46 pumping stations, and serves 2,287 customers. The largest expense for the fund is a charge from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services to pay for their collector lines and the treatment of the wastewater. • Cable TV —The Cable TV Fund was created to account for revenues collected as part of the franchise agreement between the City and Mediacom. • Stormwater — The Stormwater Fund is used to account for the City's stormwater utility. The system consists of culverts, collection ponds, and drainage ways. The utility was created in order to provide funding needed to comply with State and Federal mandates regarding stormwater. All properties within the city are charged a stormwater fee. • Recycling — the city contracts with Waste Management to provide for curbside recycling service. Funding is provided through a combination of a grant from Hennepin County and user fees. In addition the city coordinates a spring cleanup day to assist residents who have materials unsuitable for recycling or regular waste service. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 10 Internal Service Funds — Internal Service Funds are used to track revenue and expense shifts between departments. These include the following funds: Insurance, Fleet Management, Compensated Absences, and Information Technology. • Insurance - The Insurance Fund was created to account for total insurance revenue and expenses between all departments. • Fleet Management—The Fleet Management Fund is used to account for total expenses related to city vehicles. Each fund pays into this fund to cover their appropriate portions of expenses. • Compensated Absences —The Compensated Absences Fund is used to account the liability owed to employees for compensated absences such as Sick, Vacation, Overtime and Comp -Time. • Information Technology (IT) - The IT Fund is used to account for total expenses related to software and technology. Each fund pays into this fund to cover their appropriate portions of expenses. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 11 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 12 � T\ sxo CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE FINAL 2020 GENERAL FUND BUDGET BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the final 2020 General Fund budget is determined to be as follows: APPROPRIATED EXPENDITURES General Government ESTIMATED REVENUES Taxes - General $4,689,000 Licenses and Permits 528,200 Intergovernmental 393,000 Charges for Services 3,157,700 Fines and Forfeits 80,100 Interest Income 81,100 Recreation Fees 176,000 Miscellaneous 38,100 TOTAL 9 143 200 APPROPRIATED EXPENDITURES General Government $1,471,400 Public Safety 5,836,000 Street Maintenance 608,800 Parks and Recreation 463,500 Engineering - Unallocated 20,000 Reimbursable Expenditures 128,500 Special Projects and Contingency 30,000 Capital Outlay 185,000 Transfers to Other Funds 400,000 TOTAL 9 143 200 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 13 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FINAL 2020 PROPERTY TAX LEVY BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following sums be levied for the current year, collectible in 2020 upon the taxable property in the City of Orono, for the following purposes: General Fund - Operating $4,679,000 Pavement Management Levy 617,450 G.O Improvement Bond 2010 134,825 G.O. Improvement Bond 2014 162,900 G.O. Improvement Bond 2016 413,275 TOTAL ALL LEVIES 6 007 450 The City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 14 � T\ sxo CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 2020 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND BUDGETS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the 2020 Special Revenue Fund budgets are determined to be as follows: Appropriated Expenditures General Government $ - - $ - - $ 70,000 Public Safety - - 20,000 - - Streets - - - - - - Parks & Recreation 339,500 - - - - Transfers to Other Funds - - - - - - Increase to Fund Balance - - 6,000 7,000 Total Expenditures 339 500 26 000 77 000 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 15 Drug/Felony Estimated Revenues Park Forfeiture TIF Taxes — General $ - - $ - - 77,000 Interest Income 5,000 1,000 - - User Fees / Loan Payment - - 25,000 - - Park Dedication Fees 5,500 - - - - Intergovernmental - - - - - - Transfers from other Funds - - - - - Use of Fund Balance 329,000 - - - - Total Revenues 339 500 26 000 77 000 Appropriated Expenditures General Government $ - - $ - - $ 70,000 Public Safety - - 20,000 - - Streets - - - - - - Parks & Recreation 339,500 - - - - Transfers to Other Funds - - - - - - Increase to Fund Balance - - 6,000 7,000 Total Expenditures 339 500 26 000 77 000 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 15 � T\ sxo CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 2020 ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota that the 2020 Enterprise Fund budgets are determined to be as follows: Estimated Revenues Water Sewer Recycling Stormwater Cable Charges for Service $1,134,237 $15803,429 $205,632 $661,799 $76,000 Interest Income 10,000 35,000 -- 15,000 1,000 Non -Operating -- 20,000 25,000 -- -- Total Revenues $1,144 237 S676,799 77 000 Annronriated Expenditures Operating Expenses Non -Operating Expenses Interest Expense Debt Service Transfer to Other Funds Total Expenditures $911,150 $1,791,200 $216,700 22,100 80,000 55,000 110,000 -- 1 068 2501 901 200 S116,700 $373,000 $71,200 $373,000 73 700 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 16 City of Orono Local Levy City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 17 2020 Over / Under 2019 2019 2020 Amount Percent TAX LEVIES General Fund $4,380,000 $4,679,000 $299,000 6.83% Pavement Management 544,450 617,450 $73,000 13.41% GO Improvement 2010 132,725 132,725 $0 0.00% GO Improvement 2014 165,300 165,300 $0 0.00% GO Improvement 2016 412,975 412,975 $0 0.00% Additional Pavement Management $0 Total Local Tax Capacity Rate $5,635,450 $6,007,450 $372,000 6.60% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 17 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 18 Levy Increase Tax Capacity (N Tax Capacity R� Net City Tax $ Increase from % Increase frorr Effect of 2020 Tax Levy & Budget on Residential Properties No Change in Value Tax Capacity (net) = 1 % of first $500,000 market value, plus 1.25% of all value over $500,000 ** Assumes no change in value City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 19 Actual Estimated Actual Estimated Actual Estimated Actual Estimated 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 Value $250,000 $250,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 MVE $14,740 $14,740 $0 $0 $0 Tax Value $235,260 $235,260 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 4.49% 4.49% 4.49% 4.49% et) 2,353 2,353 5,000 5,000 11,250 11,250 23,750 23,750 tte 16.406% 16.498% 16.406% 16.498% 16.406% 16.498% 16.406% 16.498% $386.03 $388.20 $820.30 $824.90 $1,845.68 $1,856.03 $3,896.43 $3,918.28 2019 $2.16 $4.60 $10.35 $21.85 12019 0.56% 0.56% 0.56% 0.56% Tax Capacity (net) = 1 % of first $500,000 market value, plus 1.25% of all value over $500,000 ** Assumes no change in value City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 19 Levy Increase Tax Capacity (N Tax Capacity R Net City Tax $ Increase from % Increase from Actual Estimated Actual Estimated Actual Estimated Actual Estimated 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 Value $250,000 $237,500 $500,000 $475,000 $1,000,000 $950,000 $2,000,000 $1,900,000 MVE $14,740 $15,865 $0 $0 $0 Tax Value $235,260 $221,635 $500,000 $475,000 $1,000,000 $950,000 $2,000,000 $1,900,000 4.49% 4.49% 4.49% 4.49% et) 2,353 2,271 5,000 4,688 11,250 10,625 23,750 22,500 RE Effect of 2020 Tax Levy & Budget on Residential Properties 5.0% Decrease in Value m 16.406% 16.498% 16.406% 16.498% 16.406% 16.498% 16.406% 16.498% $386.03 $374.67 $820.30 $773.34 $1,845.68 $1,752.91 $3,896.43 $3,712.05 2019 -$11.36 -$46.96 -$92.76 -$184.38 2019 -2.94% -5.72% -5.03% -4.73% Tax Capacity (net) = 1 % of first $500,000 market value, plus 1.25% of all value over $500,000 Assumes a 5.0% decrease in value City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 20 Levy Increase Tax Capacity (N Tax Capacity R� Net City Tax $ Increase from % Increase frorr Effect of 2020 Tax Levy & Budget on Residential Properties 5.0% Increase in Value Tax Capacity (net) = 1 % of first $500,000 market value, plus 1.25% of all value over $500,000 ** Assumes a 5.0% Increase in value City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 21 Actual Estimated Actual Estimated Actual Estimated Actual Estimated 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 Value $250,000 $262,500 $500,000 $525,000 $1,000,000 $1,050,000 $2,000,000 $2,100,000 MVE $14,740 $13,615 $0 $0 $0 Tax Value $235,260 $248,885 $500,000 $525,000 $1,000,000 $1,050,000 $2,000,000 $2,100,000 4.49% 4.49% 4.49% 4.49% et) 2,353 2,489 5,000 5,313 11,250 11,875 23,750 25,000 tte 16.406% 16.498% 16.406% 16.498% 16.406% 16.498% 16.406% 16.498% $386.03 $410.64 $820.30 $876.46 $1,845.68 $1,959.14 $3,896.43 $4,124.50 2019 $24.60 $56.16 $113.46 $228.08 12019 6.37% 6.85% 6.15% 5.85% Tax Capacity (net) = 1 % of first $500,000 market value, plus 1.25% of all value over $500,000 ** Assumes a 5.0% Increase in value City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 21 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 22 City of Orono 2020 Revenue Budget Summary Percentage 2018 Y -T -D 2019 2020 Increase Revenue Source Actual Oct 31,2019 Budget Budget (Decrease) Current Ad Valorem Taxes 4,270,048 2,210,426 4,380,000 4,679,000 6.8% Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes (36,921) 35,349 10,000 10,000 0.0% Fiscal Disparities 34,614 18,247 - - N/A Personal Property Tax 19,534 20,362 N/A Penalties and Interest -Taxes 831 1,453 - N/A Property Taxes 4,288,106 2,285,838 4,390,000 4,689,000 6.8% Beer & Liquor Licenses 7,125 6,425 7,000 7,100 1.4% Cigarette Licenses 280 750 400 500 25.0% Garbage Haulers Licenses 1,095 990 1,100 1,100 0.0% Other Business License/Permit 11,275 8,811 6,500 10,000 53.8% Rental Licenses 5,003 3,340 - 4,000 N/A Dog Licenses 100 830 - - N/A Total Licenses 24,878 21,146 15,000 22,700 51.3% Building Permits 577,582 475,953 400,000 425,000 6.3% Zoning Permit 1,200 1,733 1,750 1,500 -14.3% Mechanical/Septic/Other 102,411 66,628 55,000 55,000 0.0% Plumbing Permit 39,972 42,068 25,000 28,000 12.0% Total Permits 721,165 586,381 481,750 509,500 5.8% Market Value Credit 392 210 - - N/A Police State Aid 234,178 241,201 220,000 230,000 4.5% Police Training Reimbursement 31,005 33,605 23,000 23,000 0.0% PERA State Aid 7,219 3,610 7,220 - -100.0% State Grant -other 138,854 101,360 20,000 145,000 625.0% Grants/Aids from Other Govts - 5,000 - - N/A Total Intergovernmental 411,648 384,985 270,220 398,000 47.3% Administrative Charges for Svc 69,000 207,488 245,170 283,500 15.6% General Taxable Sales/Service 3,852 1,101 1,000 2,000 100.0% Assessments searches 200 100 300 200 -33.3% Filing fees-elections/plats 1,056 - 4,000 - -100.0% Zoning Disclosure - 50 - - N/A Plan Check/Site Exam Fees 320,621 283,660 190,000 200,000 5.3% Cond Use-Variance-Dev Fees 20,405 21,285 17,000 19,000 11.8% Engineering & Legal Fees 95,817 63,796 40,000 45,000 12.5% Bldg Permits -mail in fees 320 - 700 - -100.0% On-site Septic Program fees 44,933 45,540 44,750 45,800 2.3% Park Reservations - 270 - - N/A Off Leash Annual Pass 16,790 14,740 12,000 15,000 25.0% Coop Agreement -public works 1,241 4,513 3,000 1,500 -50.0% Brush Site Fees - 671 - 800 N/A Total Gen Govt Service Charges 574,234 643,213 557,920 612,800 9.8% Coop Agreement -inspection 18,841 31,004 20,000 15,000 -25.0% Coop Agreement -police 2,307,980 2,256,522 2,370,830 2,428,000 2.4% Police Special Services 150,000 131,938 90,000 100,000 11.1% False Alarm Fees 900 750 2,000 1,000 -50.0% Police Reports 1,431 1,784 850 900 5.9% Police Reserve Receipts - 1,050 300 - -100.0% Explorers program 879 499 - N/A Total Public Safety Service Charges 2,480,030 2,423,548 2,483,980 2,544,900 2.5% Admin Citations 12,915 11,277 - - N/A Court Fines 70,820 63,828 80,000 75,000 -6.3% Dog Impound Fees 140 - 100 100 0.0% Total Fines and Forfeits 83,875 75,105 80,100 75,100 -6.2% Interest on investments 69,482 - 95,910 76,600 -20.1% Interest -NOW account 474 376 500 500 0.0% Total Investment Revenue 69,956 376 96,410 77,100 -20.0% Green Fees 109,792 113,939 110,000 110,000 0.0% Rental -Golf carts & Club 47,691 48,729 49,000 48,000 -2.0% Beer Sales 10,152 9,424 8,000 10,000 25.0% Concessions -taxable 4,983 5,613 6,000 5,000 -16.7% Golf Ball Sales - 1,984 - 1,000 N/A Pro Shop -taxable 2,075 1,250 3,000 2,000 -33.3% Pro Shop -nontaxable 277 137 - - N/A Other Golf Course Receipts 591 - N/A Cash Over/Short 50 11 - - N/A Total Golf Course Receipts 175,609 181,086 176,000 176,000 0.0% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 23 City of Orono 2020 Revenue Budget Summary City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 24 Percentage 2018 Y -T -D 2019 2020 Increase Revenue Source Actual Oct 31,2019 Budget Budget (Decrease) Utility Penalties 1,920 2,260 2,000 2,000 0.0% Miscellaneous Revenue 4,488 7,865 3,000 4,700 56.7% Convenience Fee - 948 - - N/A Rent Income 5,400 4,500 5,400 5,400 0.0% Contributions & donations 2,517 3,855 - - N/A Refunds & Reimbursements 20,376 4,890 500 3,000 500.0% Sale of Equipment 33,097 28,905 15,000 20,000 33.3% Cash Over/Short - (1) - - N/A Filing fees-elections/plats 1,056 - 4,000 3,000 -25.0% Total Miscellaneous Revenue 68,855 53,222 29,900 38,100 27.4% Total Revenue 8,898,357 6,654,899 8,581,280 9,143,200 6.5% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 24 2020 General Fund Revenue Taxes 51% Permits 6% Charges 7% Intergovernmental Revenue 4% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 25 Fines and Foreits Recreation ;: 1% Fees Public Safety 2% Charges 28� Other General Revenue Govt Service 1/ Charges 7% Intergovernmental Revenue 4% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 25 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 26 City of Orono 2020 General Fund Budget Major Expenditure Categories City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 27 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Personal Services 5,370,117 5,469,740 5,765,900 5.41% Supplies & Maintenance 688,297 625,110 611,300 -2.21% Insurances 98,846 122,810 160,300 30.53% Professional Services 1,106,196 1,287,000 1,478,600 14.89% Other Expenses 571,836 374,720 499,000 33.17% Capital Outlay 197,547 184,000 185,000 0.54% Transfers to Other Funds 837,703 400,000 400,000 0.00% Contingencies 8,312 100,000 30,000 -70% Purchases for Resale 8,909 13,900 13,100 -5.76% Total 8,887,763 8,577,280 9,143,200 6.60% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 27 2020 General Fund Major Expenditure Categories Personal Services 63% Professional ` Services 16% Supplies K Maintenanc 7% Other Expenses 6% Insurances 2% LCa italOutla N Y Transfers to 2% Other Funds 4% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 28 City of Orono 2020 General Fund Budget Departmental Budgets City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 29 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Mayor & Council 88,698 34,030 34,500 1.38% Administration 340,623 434,470 426,800 -1.77% Elections 20,037 7,160 69,500 870.67% Assessing 185,750 185,000 203,000 9.73% Finance 315,214 273,050 276,100 1.12% Law/Legal Services 114,340 129,000 134,000 3.88% Central Services 326,633 294,890 315,100 6.85% Human Services 12,125 12,400 12,400 0.00% Police 4,384,955 4,519,170 4,873,800 7.85% Fire Protection Services 389,365 402,100 433,900 7.91% Building & Zoning 707,346 695,910 713,300 2.50% Engineering 15,655 20,000 20,000 0.00% Street Maintenance 596,420 513,180 608,800 18.63% Parks 187,857 218,440 230,000 5.29% Golf Course 213,491 212,730 220,400 3.61% Brush Site - - 13,100 N/A Special Services 145,247 125,750 128,500 2.19% Special Projects -Contingencies 8,312 100,000 30,000 -70.00% Transfers to Other Funds 837,703 400,000 400,000 0.00% Total General Fund Expenditures 8,889,770 8,577,280 9,143,200 6.60% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 29 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4% CENTRAL SERVICES 4% 2020 General Fund Budget Department Budgets POLICE 53% A 11 00 CITY COUNCIL_-- W 0% TRANSFERS TOJ OTHER FUNDS 4% PARKS 3% SPECIAL SERVICES 1% OTHER 1% GOLF COURSE 2% FIRE 5% BUILDING & ZONING 8% ADMINISTRATION FINANCE 5% 3% STREET MAINTENANCE 7% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 30 General Fund Special Revenue Funds Park Drug & Felony Forfieture Senior Housing - TIF Capital Projects Funds PIR Fund IEO Fund MSA Fund PMP Fund Community Investment Debt Service Funds 2010 Improvement Bonds 2014 Improvement Bonds 2016 Refunding Bonds TOTAL GOVT FUNDS Enterprise Funds Water Operating Sewer Operating Recycling Operating Storm Water Operating Cable Operating TOTAL ALL FUNDS City of Orono Combined Summary of Revenues & Other Financing Sources For 2020 Transfers Total Revenues Special Licenses & Inter- Charges for Recreation Fines & Interest Misc. From and Property Tax Assessments Permits Governmental Services Charges Forfeits Income Revenue Other Funds Transfers In 4,689,000 528,200 398,000 3,157,700 176,000 75,100 81,100 38,100 - 9,143,200 - - 5,000 5,500 - 10,500 - - - - - - - 1,000 25,000 - 26,000 77,000 - - - - - - - - 77,000 - - - - - 5,000 - - 5,000 - - - - - 5,000 5,000 300,000 310,000 - - - 600,000 - - - - - 600,000 617,450 - - - - - - - - - 617,450 - - - - - - - 5,000 - - 5,000 134,825 - - - - - - 1,500 - - 136,325 162,900 - - 144,838 - - - 1,500 - 100,000 409,238 413,275 - - - - - 5,000 - 165,000 583,275 6,094,450 - 528,200 1,142,838 3,157,700 176,000 75,100 110,100 73,600 565,000 11,922,988 - - - 1,134,624 - - 10,000 - - 1,144,624 - - - 1,869,978 - - 35,000 20,000 - 1,924,978 - - - - 205,632 - - - 25,000 - 230,632 - - - - 661,799 - - 15,000 - - 676,799 - - - - 76,000 - - 1,000 - 77,000 6,094,450 - 528,200 1,142,838 7,105,733 176,000 75,100 171,100 118,600 565,000 15,977,021 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 31 General Fund Special Revenue Funds Park Drug & Felony Foriieture Senior Housing - TIF Capital Projects Funds PIR Fund IEO Fund MSA Fund PMP Fund Community Investment Fund Debt Service Funds 2010 Improvement Bonds 2014 Improvement Bonds 2016 Refunding Bonds TOTAL GOVT FUNDS Enterprise Funds Water Operating Sewer Operating Recycling Operating Storm Water Operating Cable Operating TOTAL ALL FUNDS City of Orono Combined Summary of Expenditures & Other Financing Uses For 2020 Total Expend General Public Public Enterprise Capital Park & Debt Other Transfers To and Government SakbL Works Operations Outlay Recreation Service Recycling Expenditures Other Funds Transfers Out - - - 1,164,716 - - 1,471,400 5,836,000 608,800 - 185,000 463,500 - - 178,500 400,000 9,143,200 - - - - 469,300 - - - - - 469,300 - - - - 20,000 - - - 13,200 - 33,200 - - - - - - - - 74,000 - 74,000 - - - - 20,305 - - - - - 20,305 - - - - 577,950 - - - - - 577,950 - - - 75,000 - - - - - 75,000 - - - 1,164,716 - - - - - 1,164,716 - - - - - 268,019 - 6,300 - 274,319 - - - - - - 382,275 - 6,300 - 388,575 - - - - - 520,250 - 6,500 526,750 1,471,400 5,836,000 608,800 - 2,512,271 463,500 1,170,544 - 284,800 400,000 12,747,315 - 911,150 233,855 - 80,000 22,100 55,000 1,302,105 - - - 1,791,200 815,000 - - - 110,000 2,716,200 - 216,700 - - - - - 216,700 373,000 404,140 - - - - - 777,140 - - - 71,200 - - - - - - 71,200 1,471,400 5,836,000 608,800 3,363,250 3,965,266 463,500 1,250,544 - 306,900 565,000 17,830,660 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 32 City of Orono Report of Outstanding Indebtedness As of December 31, 2019 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 33 Fund 321 Fund 322 Fund 323 2010 2014 2016 Total Imp/Ref Imp/Ref Ref All Issues Bond Type: Bonds Outstanding 1/1/19 1,845,000 3,650,000 2,470,000 7,965,000 Bonds Issued 0 0 0 0 Bonds Paid or Refunded -205,000 -300,000 -465,000 -970,000 Bonds Outstanding 12/31/19 1,640,000 3,350,000 2,005,000 6,995,000 Anticipated Isuances 2020 0 0 0 0 Payments Due 2020 -215,000 -305,000 -485,000 -1,005,000 Projected Outstanding 2020 1,425,000 3,045,000 1,520,000 5,990,000 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 33 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 34 Debt Issue 2010 MSA, PMP, Refunding Tax Levy MSA Funds 2014 Garage, Water, Refunding Tax Levy Transfers - Contract Revenue Water Fund - Portion 2016 GO Refunding Bonds Tax levy Transfer - Water Transfer - Sewer Current Debt Service Sources Total Levy Required Total Utility Funds Total MSA Total City of Orono - 2020 Budget 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 134,825 131,520 133,325 134,530 130,000 130,725 143,113 139,663 141,063 142,000 137,469 137,688 2026 2027 2028 2029 26,985 162,900 166,700 161,000 282,000 277,000 277,000 278,857 278,000 278,002 100,000 60,000 - - - - - - - 100,430 102,180 101,830 100,430 98,570 101,550 99,350 101,920 99,310 101,500 363,330 328,880 262,830 382,430 375,570 378,550 378,207 379,920 377,312 101,500 413,275 55,000 110,000 412,780 55,000 110,000 416,675 55,000 110,000 641,268 600,063 537,218 658,960 643,039 646,963 405,192 379,920 377,312 101,500 711,000 711,000 711,000 416,530 407,000 407,725 278,857 278,000 278,002 - 365,430 327,180 266,830 100,430 98,570 101,550 99,350 101,920 99,310 101,500 143,113 139,663 141,063 142,000 137,469 137,688 26,985 - - - 1,219,543 1,177,843 1,118,893 658,960 643,039 646,963 405,192 379,920 377,312 101,500 Page 35 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 36 City of Orono Summary of Fund Balances* *Balance of Enterprise Funds reflects actual cash balance, not total Fund balance City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 37 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 General Fund $4,432,713 $4,002,713 $4,002,713 Special Revenue Funds Park Fund $695,544 $492,220 $33,420 Drug & Felony Forfeiture $334,700 $334,700 $321,500 Senior Housing TIF Fund $152,971 $152,971 $78,971 Affordable Housing Fund $133,585 $133,585 $133,585 Lurton Park Fund $17,624 $14,145 $14,145 Employee Development $21,855 $21,855 $21,855 Golf Course Fund $269 $269 $269 Special Revenue Funds $1,356,548 $1,149,744 $603,744 Debt Service 2005 HRA Public Projects $496 $0 $0 2008 Street Reconstruction $978 $0 $0 2010 MSA/PMP/Refunding $688,793 $400,136 $262,142 2014 GO/Water/Abatment $760,175 $724,757 $745,420 2016 GO Imp Refunding $703,860 $489,070 $545,595 Debt Service $2,154,302 $1,613,963 $1,553,157 Capital Projects MSA Fund -$1,920,131 $0 $0 Improvement Eqpt Outlay $529,445 $713,032 $469,432 PIR Fund $1,258,393 $1,419,263 $1,426,095 Pavement Mgmt -$61,122 $0 $0 Community Investment $544,895 $671,755 $676,755 Police Capital Project Fund $24,883 $0 $0 Capital Projects $376,363 $2,804,050 $2,572,282 Enterprise Funds Water Operating $610,690 $182,900 $230,789 Sewer Operating $2,080,665 $1,387,422 $834,800 Storm Water Operating $1,293,813 $613,288 $368,084 Recycling Operating $65,122 $70,382 $84,314 Cable Television $152,301 $169,102 $172,402 Enterprise Funds $4,202,592 $2,423,094 $1,690,389 GRAND TOTAL $12,522,518 $11,993,564 $10,422,285 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 37 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance General Fund Revenues Actual Budget Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues Expenditures Actual Budget Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfers Out: To Equipment Outlay Fund Transfers Out: To Pavement Management Transfers Out: To MSA Transfers Out: To 2014 Debt Service Transfers Out: To 2016 Debt Service In: From Capital Lease Proceeds Sale of Land and Equipment Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures Fund Balance - Beginning of Year Fund Balance - End of Year Fund Balance Components Nonspendable - Prepaids Nonspendable - Inventory Unassigned Total Fund Balance Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 $ 8,897,301 $ 8,577,280 $ 9,143,200 8,193,400 8,577,280 9,143,200 703,901 - - $ 8,542,867 $ 8,206,184 $ 8,758,200 8,193,400 8,206,184 8,758,200 349,468 - - (255,000) (300,000) (300,000) (125,000) (100,000) (100,000) 33,097 28,905 15,000 7,531 (0) - 4,607,351 4,614,882 4,614,882 $ 4,614,882 $ 4,614,882 $ 4,614,882 9,809 20,000 20,000 2,410 5,000 5,000 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 38 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Special Revenue Funds Park Fund City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 39 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Revenues Actual $ 230,354 $ 84,150 $ 10,500 Budget - - 10,500 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 230,354 84,150 - Expenditures Actual $ 296,867 $ 287,474 $ - Budget - - - Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures 296,867 287,474 - Transfers In (Out) From Community Investment Fund - - - Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures (66,512) (203,324) 10,500 Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 762,057 695,544 492,220 Capital Outlay (469,300) Fund Balance - End of Year 695,544 492,220 33,420 Fund Balance Components Restricted for Land Acquisition and Park Development 695,544 492,220 33,420 Total Fund Balance 695,544 492,220 33,420 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 39 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Special Revenue Funds Drug and Felony Forfieture Fund City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 40 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Revenues Actual $ 43,207 $ - $ - Budget - - - Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 43,207 - - Expenditures Actual $ 4,333 $ - $ 13,200 Budget - - 13,200 Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures 4,333 - - Transfers In (Out) Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 38,874 - (13,200) Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 295,826 334,700 334,700 Fund Balance - End of Year 334,700 334,700 321,500 Fund Balance Components Restricted for Crime Prevention 334,700 334,700 321,500 Total Fund Balance 334,700 334,700 321,500 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 40 Revenues Actual Budget Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues Expenditures Actual Budget Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures Transfers In (Out) Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures Fund Balance - Beginning of Year Fund Balance - End of Year Fund Balance Components Restricted for Senior Housing Total Fund Balance City of Orono - 2020 Budget City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Special Revenue Funds Senior Housing TIF Actual 2018 7A.'17n 78,370 R 1 RR7 1,837 76,534 76,437 152,971 152,971 152,971 Estimated 2019 152,971 152,971 152,971 152,971 Estimated 2020 $ 74,000 74,000 (74,000) 152,971 78,971 78,971 78,971 Page 41 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 42 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Special Revenue Funds Affordable Housing Fund Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Revenues Actual $ 1,117 $ - $ - Budget - - - Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 1,117 - - Expenditures Actual $ - $ - $ - Budget - - - Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures - - - Transfers In (Out) Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 1,117 - - Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 132,467 133,585 133,585 Fund Balance - End of Year 133,585 133,585 133,585 Fund Balance Components Restricted for Affordable Housing 133,585 133,585 133,585 Total Fund Balance 133,585 133,585 133,585 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 42 Revenues Actual Budget Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues Expenditures Actual Budget Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures Transfers In (Out) Transfer Out - Big Island Fund Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures Fund Balance - Beginning of Year Fund Balance - End of Year Fund Balance Components Restricted for Park Dev/Maintanence Total Fund Balance City of Orono - 2020 Budget City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Special Revenue Funds Lurton Park Fund Actual Estimated 2018 2019 4a nsi T - 49,051 - 24 4QR R '3 47R 24,498 3,478 24,554 (3,478) (6,930) 17,624 17,624 14,145 17,624 14,145 17,624 14,145 Estimated 2020 14,145 14,145 14,145 14,145 Page 43 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Estimated Estimated 2019 2020 21,855 21,855 21,855 21,855 21,855 21,855 21,855 21,855 Page 44 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Special Revenue Funds Employee Development Actual 2018 Revenues Actual $ 200 Budget - Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 200 Expenditures Actual $ - Budget - Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures - Transfers In (Out) Transfer In: General Fund - Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 200 Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 21,654 Fund Balance - End of Year 21,855 Fund Balance Components Assigned for Employee Development 21,855 Total Fund Balance 21,855 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Estimated Estimated 2019 2020 21,855 21,855 21,855 21,855 21,855 21,855 21,855 21,855 Page 44 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 45 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Special Revenue Funds Golf Course Fund Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Revenues Actual $ 2 $ 644 $ - Budget - - - Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 2 644 - Expenditures Actual $ - $ 644 $ - Budget - - - Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures - 644 - Transfers In (Out) Transfer In: General Fund - - - Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 2 - - Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 267 269 269 Fund Balance - End of Year 269 269 269 Fund Balance Components Assigned for Golf Course Improvements 269 269 269 Total Fund Balance 269 269 269 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 45 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Debt Service Funds 2005 HRA Public Projects Bond - Big Island City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 46 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Revenues Actual $ 496 $ - $ - Budget - - - Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 496 - - Expenditures Actual $ 44,449 $ - $ - Budget - - - Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures 44,449 - - Other Financing Sources (Uses) Close Out in 2018 (496) - Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures (43,953) (496) - Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 44,449 496 (0) Fund Balance - End of Year 496 (0) (0) Fund Balance Components Assigned for Debt Service 496 (0) (0) Total Fund Balance 496 (0) (0) City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 46 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Debt Service Funds 2008 Street Reconstruction Actual Estimated 2018 2019 Revenues Actual $ 978 Budget - Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 978 Expenditures Actual $ 87,803 Budget - Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures 87,803 Other Financing Sources (Uses) Close Out in 2018 - Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures (86,825) Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 87,803 Fund Balance - End of Year 978 Fund Balance Components Assigned for Debt Service 978 Total Fund Balance 978 City of Orono - 2020 Budget (978) (978) 0 Estimated 2020 Page 47 0 0- 0 0 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Debt Service Funds 2010 MSA/PMP/Refunding Bonds City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 48 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Revenues Actual $ 271,061 $ 131,970 $ 134,225 Budget 134,960 131,970 134,225 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 136,101 - - Expenditures Actual $ 266,919 $ 271,694 $ 270,619 Budget 272,619 271,694 270,619 Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures (5,700) - - Other Financinq Sources (Uses) Transfer in: Community Investment - Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 4,142 (139,724) (136,394) Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 684,651 688,793 549,069 Fund Balance - End of Year 688,793 549,069 412,675 Fund Balance Components Assigned for Debt Service 688,793 549,069 412,675 Total Fund Balance 688,793 549,069 412,675 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 48 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Debt Service Funds 2014 GO/Water/Abatement Bonds City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 49 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Revenues Actual $ 180,709 $ 285,651 $ 309,938 Budget 574,638 285,651 309,938 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues (393,929) - - Expenditures Actual $ 523,503 $ 429,225 $ 392,625 Budget 614,325 429,225 392,625 Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures (90,822) - - Other Financing Sources (Uses) Transfer in: Community Investment - - - Transfer in: General Fund 125,000 100,000 100,000 Transfer in: Water Fund - - - Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures (217,794) (43,574) 17,313 Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 977,970 760,175 716,601 Fund Balance - End of Year 760,175 716,601 733,914 Fund Balance Components Assigned for Debt Service 760,175 716,601 733,914 Total Fund Balance 760,175 716,601 733,914 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 49 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Debt Service Funds 2016 Refunding Bond City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 50 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Revenues Actual $ 491,599 $ 407,530 $ 413,975 Budget 193,830 407,530 413,975 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 297,769 - - Expenditures Actual $ 263,014 $ 266,950 $ 515,200 Budget 38,270 266,950 515,200 Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures 224,744 - - Other Financinq Sources (Uses) Transfer in: Community Investment - - - Transfer in: Water Fund 55,000 55,000 55,000 Transfer in: Sewer Fund 110,000 110,000 110,000 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 393,585 305,580 63,775 Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 310,275 703,860 1,009,440 Fund Balance - End of Year 703,860 1,009,440 1,073,215 Fund Balance Components Assigned for Debt Service 703,860 1,009,440 1,073,215 Total Fund Balance 703,860 1,009,440 1,073,215 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 50 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Capital Project Funds Municipal State Aid Fund (MSA) City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 51 Actual Estimated Estimated Revenues 2018 2019 2020 Actual $ 1,820,279 $ 267,430 $ 3,665,724 Budget - - - Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 1,820,279 267,430 3,665,724 Expenditures Actual $ 2,689,450 $ 206,310 $ - Budget - - - Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures 2,689,450 206,310 - Other Financing Sources (Uses) Bond Proceeds - - - Transfer In: General Fund - - Transfer In: Storm Water Excess (deficiency) of revenue Over Expenditures (869,172) 61,119 3,665,724 Fund Balance Beginning of Year (1,050,959) (1,920,131) (1,859,012) Fund Balance End of Year (1,920,131) (1,859,012) 1,806,712 Fund Balance Components Restricted to State Aid Road Construction (1,920,131) (1,859,012) 1,806,712 Total Fund Balance (1,920,131) (1,859,012) 1,806,712 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 51 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Capital Project Funds Improvement Equipment Outlay Fund Balance Components Assigned for Long Lake Fire Equipment 316,000 405,000 9,350 Assigned for Capital Equipment Purchases 213,445 308,032 460,082 Total Fund Balance 529,445 713,032 469,432 The Improvement Equipmpent Outlay Construction Fund was created in 2010. The initial funding was provided by the closing of the Improvement Equipment Outlay Special Revenue Fund. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 52 Actual Estimated Estimated Revenues 2018 2019 2020 Actual $ 12,899 $ 15,000 $ 10,000 Budget - 15,000 10,000 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 12,899 - - Expenditures Actual $ 916,937 $ 131,414 $ 568,600 Budget - - - Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures 916,937 131,414 568,600 Transfers In (Out) From Improvement Equipment Outlay - - - From General Fund 255,000 300,000 315,000 Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures (649,038) 183,586 (243,600) Fund Balance Beginning of Year 1,178,484 529,445 713,032 Fund Balance End of Year 529,445 713,032 469,432 Fund Balance Components Assigned for Long Lake Fire Equipment 316,000 405,000 9,350 Assigned for Capital Equipment Purchases 213,445 308,032 460,082 Total Fund Balance 529,445 713,032 469,432 The Improvement Equipmpent Outlay Construction Fund was created in 2010. The initial funding was provided by the closing of the Improvement Equipment Outlay Special Revenue Fund. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 52 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Capital Project Funds Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund (PIR) City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 53 Actual Estimated Estimated Revenues 2018 2019 2020 Actual $ 14,038 $ 188,860 $ 12,296 Budget 5,000 5,000 12,296 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 9,038 183,860 - Expenditures Actual $ 40,533 $ 27,990 $ 5,464 Budget 20,000 - 5,464 Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures 20,533 27,990 - Transfers In (Out) Transfer From General Fund - - - Transfer To: 2014 Debt Service - - - Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures (26,495) 160,870 6,832 Fund Balance Beginning of Year 1,284,887 1,258,393 1,419,263 Fund Balance End of Year 1,258,393 1,419,263 1,426,095 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 53 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Capital Project Funds Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund (PIR) Fund Balance Components Assigned for: Police Equipment Purchases 216,654 200,000 100,000 Emergency Contingencies ** 325,000 325,000 325,000 Future Construction Projects 716,739 894,263 1,001,095 Total Fund Balance 1,258,393 1,419,263 1,426,095 ** The emergency contingency account is considered fully funded at $325,000. The City established the road/bridge account in 1987 with resolution #2210. The funds came from interest earned on MSA construction monies which were not then needed for MSA projects. Expenditures from the account are restricted to road and bridge projects, as approved by Council. The City established the emergency contingency account with resolution #941, and amended with resolution #2669 in 1989. The account is restricted for us use in a catastrophic situation or for temporary funding in the form of short-term loans to other accounts or funds. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 54 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Capital Project Funds Pavement Management Fund (PMP) Revenues Actual Budget Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues Expenditures Actual Budget Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures Transfers In (Out) Transfer From General Fund Transfer From Sewer Operating Transfer From Storm Water Operating Excess (deficiency) of revenue over expenditures Fund Balance Beginning of Year Fund Balance End of Year Fund Balance Components Restricted to Road Construction Total Fund Balance Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 $ 1,261,513 $ 383,000 $ 544,450 253,000 383,000 544,450 1,008,513 - - $ 1,700,223 $ 653,029 $1,056,295 681,477 653,029 1,056,295 1,018,746 - - - 331,151 511,845 (438,710) 61,122 - 377,588 (61,122) (0) (61,122) (0) (0) (61,122) (0) (0) (61,122) (0) (0) City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 55 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Capital Project Funds Community Investment Fund The Community Investment Special Revenue Fund was closed in 2010 Balance transferred to the Community Investment Construction Fund City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 56 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Revenues Actual $ 6,140 $ - $ 5,000 Budget 5,000 5,000 5,000 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 1,140 (5,000) - Expenditures Actual $ 120,555 $ 3,139 $ - Budget 306,000 114,300 - Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures (185,445) (111,161) - Transfers In (Out) From General Fund From Debt Service Fund - 130,000 - To Pavement Management Fund From Com Investment Fund - - - Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures (114,414) 126,861 5,000 Fund Balance - Beginning of Year 659,309 544,895 671,755 Fund Balance - End of Year 544,895 671,755 676,755 The Community Investment Special Revenue Fund was closed in 2010 Balance transferred to the Community Investment Construction Fund City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 56 City of Orono Changes in Fund Balance Capital Project Funds Police Capital Project Fund Actual 2018 Revenues Actual Q Budget Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues Expenditures Actual Budget Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures Transfers In (Out) Close Out Fund in 2019 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures Fund Balance - Beginning of Year Fund Balance - End of Year City of Orono - 2020 Budget 24,883 24,883 Estimated 2019 (24,883) (24,883) 0 Estimated 2020 Page 57 0 0 City of Orono Changes in Retained Earnings Enterprise Funds Water Fund City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 58 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Operating Revenues Actual $ 956,860 $ 681,550 $1,134,624 Budget 720,000 681,550 1,134,624 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 236,860 - - Operatinq Expenditures Actual $ 708,239 $ 874,710 $ 933,250 Budget 691,611 874,710 933,250 Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures 16,628 - - Excess (Deficiency) of Operating Revenue Over Operating Expenditures 248,622 (193,160) 201,374 Non -Operating Revenues (Expenditures) Leases, Connections, Specials, Interest 21,036 20,000 10,000 Interest Expense - - - Add back: Depreciation Expenditure 186,568 207,400 225,800 Transfer Out: Debt Service (103,630) (102,030) (100,430) Transfer Out: Casco Point System (55,000) (55,000) (55,000) Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 297,596 (122,790) 281,744 Capital Outlays (423,400) (305,000) (233,855) Cash Balance at December 31 610,690 182,900 230,789 Capital outlay items reduce cash, but are not expenditures. Depreciation expenditure is not cash basis. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 58 City of Orono Changes in Retained Earnings Enterprise Funds Sewer Fund City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 59 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Operating Revenues Actual $ 1,427,056 $ 1,505,000 $1,914,978 Budget 1,374,240 1,505,000 1,914,978 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 52,816 - - Operating Expenditures Actual $ 1,429,055 $ 1,624,175 $ 1,791,200 Budget 1,630,240 1,624,175 1,791,200 Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures (201,185) - - Excess (Deficiency) of Operating Revenue Over Operating Expenditures (1,999) (119,175) 123,778 Non -Operating Revenues (Expenditures) Connections, Specials, Interest 55,416 10,000 10,000 Interest Expense - - - Add Back: Depreciation Expenditure 315,278 330,000 353,600 Transfer Out: Casco Point System (110,000) (110,000) (110,000) Transfer Out: EOF - - (115,000) Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 258,695 110,825 262,378 Capital Outlay (972,194) (804,068) (815,000) Cash Balance at December 31 2,080,665 1,387,422 834,800 Capital outlay items reduce cash, but are not expenditures. Depreciation expenditure is not cash basis. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 59 City of Orono Changes in Retained Earnings Enterprise Funds Storm Water Fund City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 60 Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Operating Revenues Actual $ 474,944 $ 281,160 $ 554,936 Budget 281,000 281,160 554,936 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 193,944 - - Operatinq Expenditures Actual $ 143,194 $ 356,810 $ 373,000 Budget 161,132 356,810 373,000 Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures (17,938) - - Excess (Deficiency) of Operating Revenue Over Operating Expenditures 331,750 (75,650) 181,936 Non -Operating Revenues (Expenditures) Connection Fees, Interest 15,000 15,000 15,000 Transfers Out: EOF - - (100,000) Add Back: Depreciation Expenditure 46,257 53,500 62,000 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 393,006 (7,150) 158,936 Capital Outlay (308,080) (708,375) (404,140) Cash Balance at December 31 1,293,813 613,288 368,084 Capital outlay items reduce cash, but are not expenditures. Depreciation expenditure is not cash basis. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 60 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 61 City of Orono Changes in Retained Earnings Enterprise Funds Recycling Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Operating Revenues Actual $ 117,900 $ 110,290 $ 205,632 Budget 83,600 110,290 205,632 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 34,300 - - Operating Expenditures Actual $ 127,046 $ 134,530 $ 216,700 Budget 130,150 134,530 216,700 Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures (3,104) - - Excess (Deficiency) of Operating Revenue Over Operating Expenditures (9,146) (24,240) (11,068) Non -Operating Revenues (Expenditures) Grants 23,887 29,500 25,000 Other Non -Operating - - - Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 14,741 5,260 13,932 Capital Outlay - - - Cash Balance at December 31 65,122 70,382 84,314 Capital outlay items reduce cash, but are not expenditures. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 61 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 62 City of Orono Changes in Retained Earnings Enterprise Funds Cable TV Actual Estimated Estimated 2018 2019 2020 Operating Revenues Actual $ 80,258 $ 81,820 $ 77,000 Budget 78,000 77,000 77,000 Actual Revenues Over (Under) Budgeted Revenues 2,258 4,820 - Operating Expenditures Actual $ 51,944 $ 65,019 $ 71,200 Budget 50,545 67,030 71,200 Actual Expenditures Over (Under) Budgeted Expenditures 1,399 (2,011) - Excess (Deficiency) of Operating Revenue Over Operating Expenditures 28,314 16,801 5,800 Non -Operating Revenues (Expenditures) Other Non -Operating - - - Excess (Deficiency) of Revenue Over Expenditures 28,314 16,801 5,800 Capital Outlay - - - Cash Balance at December 31 152,301 169,102 174,902 Capital outlay items reduce cash, but are not expenditures. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 62 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Mayor & Council 41110 City Council Total 88,698 34,030 34,500 1.38% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The City Council oversees the policies and procedures that govern the city in promoting the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Orono. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for City Council Representatives. *City-wide Memberships are as follows: Suburban Rate Authority League of Minnesota Cities Metro Cities *Other Expenses includes training and meeting expenses. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 63 o/ 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 19,665 19,690 19,700 0.05% City Wide Memberships 67,976 12,090 12,500 3.39% Other Expenses 1,056 2,250 2,300 2.22% City Council Total 88,698 34,030 34,500 1.38% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The City Council oversees the policies and procedures that govern the city in promoting the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Orono. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for City Council Representatives. *City-wide Memberships are as follows: Suburban Rate Authority League of Minnesota Cities Metro Cities *Other Expenses includes training and meeting expenses. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 63 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Mayor & Council 41110 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular 18,200 18,210 18,200 -0.05% FICA 1,392 1,400 1,400 0.00% Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 73 80 100 25.00% Total Personal Services 19,665 19,690 19,700 0.05% Other Expenses IT Services 0 800 800 0.00% Memberships 67,976 12,090 12,500 3.39% Training & Development 66 250 300 20.00% Meeting Expenses 990 1,200 1,200 0.00% Other Miscellaneous Charges 0 0 0 N/A Total Other Expenses 69,032 14,340 14,800 3.21% City Council Total City of Orono - 2020 Budget 88,698 34,030 34,500 1.38% Page 64 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Administration 41300 o� 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 329,327 408,470 401,500 -1.71% Supplies & Maintenance 207 300 300 0.00% Professional Serivices 4,545 12,500 12,500 0.00% Other Expenses 6,543 13,200 12,500 -5.30% Administration Total 340,623 434,470 426,800 -1.77% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Administration Department includes the City Administrator who is responsible for meeting satatutory and legal obligations, implementing policy established by the City Council and ensuring the successful management of all city operations. In addition the City Administrator is responsible for overseeing the human resource function. The City Clerk and Administrative Staff are also included in the Administration Department and perform various function such as customer service, general administrative duties, permits and licensing, elections, data practices, OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for the City Administrator and Administration Staff (90%). *Professional Services includes the city recorder for city council meetings. *Other Expenses includes training and development, memberships in professional organizations for the Administrative Staff, and the City Administrator's car allowance. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 65 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Administration 41300 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular 242,257 290,270 285,800 -1.54% Full -Time Employees Overtime 434 1,300 1,300 0.00% Part -Time Employees 0 0 0 N/A Temporary/Seasonal Employees 8,910 10,500 10,500 0.00% PERA 18,204 21,870 21,500 -1.69% FICA 18,714 23,110 22,800 -1.34% City Benefit Contribution 39,411 59,460 57,600 -3.13% Unemployment Benefit Payments 0 0 0 N/A Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 1,397 1,960 2,000 2.04% Total Personal Services 329,327 408,470 401,500 -1.71% Supplies & Maintenance Books & Periodicals 207 300 300 0.00% Total Supplies & Maintenance 207 300 300 0.00% Professional Services IT Services 0 6,500 6,500 0.00% Professional Services 4,545 6,000 6,000 0.00% Total Professional Serivices 4,545 12,500 12,500 0.00% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 66 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Administration cont. 41300 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 67 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Other Expenses Travel Expenses 750 4,000 3,500 -12.50% General Advertising 0 0 0 N/A Memberships 1,245 1,200 1,500 25.00% Training & Development 1,444 4,500 4,000 -11.11% Meeting Expenses 439 500 500 0.00% Other Miscellaneous Charges 2,665 3,000 3,000 0.00% Total Other Expenses 6,543 13,200 12,500 -5.30% Administration Total 340,623 434,470 426,800 -1.77% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 67 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Elections 41410 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 12,692 1,160 58,200 3365.52% Supplies & Maintenance 3,315 5,000 3,400 -32.00% Other Expenses 4,030 1,000 7,900 690.00% Elections Total 20,037 7,160 69,500 619.27% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Elections Department administers all federal, state, county, and municipal elections held in the city. Temporary election judges are hired to provide the necessary staffing at polling locations, and for the operation of voting machines. The Administrative Staff provides supervision to the election judges as needed and maintains election records. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services are the wages for the temporary election judges and Administration Staff (10%). 2020 is an election year. *Other expenses include professional services, postage, travel expenses, advertising, building/equipment rental, training, meeting expenses and other miscellaneous expenses. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 68 Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular Full -Time Employees Overtime Temporary/Seasonal Employees PERA FICA City Benefit Contribution Worker's Comp Insurance Prem Total Personal Services Supplies & Maintenance Books & Periodicals Equipment Parts & Accessories Small Tools and Minor Equip Total Supplies & Maintenance Other Expenses Professional Services Postage Travel Expenses General Advertising Building Rentals Other Equipment Rentals Training & Development Meeting Expenses Other Miscellaneous Charges Total Other Expenses Elections Total City of Orono - 2020 Budget City of Orono 0 0 N/A 2020 Line Item Budget 5,000 2,500 -50.00% Elections 0 900 N/A 41410 5,000 3,400 -32.00% 0 0 0 N/A 2018 2019 0 2020 Increase Actual Budget 0 Recommended (Decrease) 0 0 18,000 N/A 0 1,000 1,000 0.00% 12,556 0 31,300 N/A 0 80 1,400 1650.00% 137 80 1,500 1775.00% 0 0 4,600 N/A 0 0 400 N/A 12,692 1,160 58,200 3365.52% 0 0 0 N/A 2,725 5,000 2,500 -50.00% 591 0 900 N/A 3,315 5,000 3,400 -32.00% 0 0 500 N/A 397 1,000 1,000 0.00% 352 0 500 N/A 226 0 400 N/A 0 0 0 N/A 0 0 0 N/A 67 0 500 N/A 1,543 0 2,800 N/A 1,443 0 2,200 N/A 4,030 1,000 7,900 690.00% 20,037 7,160 69,500 619.27% Page 69 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Assessing 41550 o� 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Assessing Contract 185,750 185,000 203,000 9.73% Assessing Total 185,750 185,000 203,000 9.73% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The City maintains a renewable contract agreement with Hennepin County to provide Assessing services. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 70 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Assessing 41550 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Assessing Services Assessing Services 185,750 185,000 203,000 9.73% Total Assessing Service 185,750 185,000 203,000 9.73% Assessing Total 185,750 185,000 203,000 9.73% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 71 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Finance Department 41500 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES The Finance Department oversees the City's financial operations, insurances, and employee benefits. It is responsible for preparing the budget document and annual report in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for the Finance Department Staff. Staff includes: Finance Director (90%), Accountant and Payroll/Utility Billing Clerk (50%). *Other Expenses includes training and development, and memberships in professional organizations for the Finance Staff. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 72 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 310,761 262,750 265,700 1.12% Supplies & Maintenance 0 0 0 N/A Professional Services 293 4,900 5,000 2.04% Other Expenses 707 5,400 5,400 0.00% Finance Total 311,760 273,050 276,100 1.12% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES The Finance Department oversees the City's financial operations, insurances, and employee benefits. It is responsible for preparing the budget document and annual report in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for the Finance Department Staff. Staff includes: Finance Director (90%), Accountant and Payroll/Utility Billing Clerk (50%). *Other Expenses includes training and development, and memberships in professional organizations for the Finance Staff. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 72 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Finance Department 41500 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 73 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular 205,932 162,670 169,300 4.08% Full -Time Employees Overtime 0 200 200 0.00% Part -Time Employees 29,987 31,010 31,800 2.55% Temporary/Seasonal Employees 1,164 0 0 N/A PERA 17,408 14,530 15,100 3.92% FICA 17,369 14,820 15,400 3.91% City Benefit Contribution 37,278 38,120 32,400 -15.01% Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 1,623 1,400 1,500 7.14% Total Personal Services 310,761 262,750 265,700 1.12% Supplies & Maintenance Books & Periodicals 0 0 0 N/A Total Supplies & Maintenance 0 0 0 N/A Professional Services Auditing and Acct'g Services 293 0 0 N/A IT Services 0 4,900 5,000 2.04% Total Professional Services 0 4,900 5,000 2.04% Other Expenses Travel Expenses 392 1,500 1,500 0.00% Memberships 315 400 400 0.00% Training & Development 3,454 3,500 3,500 0.00% Total Other Expenses 4,161 5,400 5,400 0.00% Finance Total 314,921 273,050 276,100 1.12% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 73 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Law/Legal Services 41600 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Professional Services 114,340 129,000 134,000 3.88% Law/Legal Services Total 114,340 129,000 134,000 3.88% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The City maintains a renewable contract agreement with two local legal firms to provide legal services. The Legal Department provides professional representation and opinion on city services and operations. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Professional Services includes the costs associated with the contract with legal staff, prosecution costs, code enforcement, and jail charges. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 74 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Law/Legal Services 41600 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Professional Services Legal -Retainer 0 0 0 N/A Legal -Prosecution 35,762 40,000 40,000 0.00% Legal -Consulting 72,928 75,000 80,000 6.67% Code Enforcement 998 2,000 2,000 0.00% Jail Charges 4,652 12,000 12,000 0.00% Total Professional Services 114,340 129,000 134,000 3.88% Law/Legal Services Total 114,340 129,000 134,000 3.88% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 75 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Central Services 41900 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Supplies & Maintenance 121,379 60,500 79,000 30.58% Professional Services 40,896 89,000 89,000 0.00% Insurances 30,200 38,290 44,800 17.00% Other Expenses 134,158 107,100 102,300 -4.48% Capital Outlay & Transfers 0 0 0 N/A Central Services Total 326,633 294,890 315,100 6.85% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Central Services Department provides for those operating expenses that encompass all city departments. By consolidating these expenditures, the City can more accurately determine the effectiveness of the costs and benefits provided. The City maintains a renewable contract agreement with an outside janitorial service for general cleaning and upkeep of city facilities. The Central Services Department also pays for a portion of the costs associated with the annual audit. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Supplies & Maintenance include the operating supplies and maintenance expenses on city equipment and facilities. *Other Expenses includes utilities, publishing costs, copier leases, and other miscellaneous charges related to city operations. *Insurance Expenses includes a portion of the City's general and liability insurance costs. *Professional Services includes annual audit expenses and fees associated with administering city benefit plans. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 76 Supplies & Maintenance Office supplies Equipment Parts & Accessories Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Repairs/Maint-Office Equip Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Janitorial Services Software Licensing City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Central Services 41900 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) 11,026 12,000 12,000 0.00% 6,411 500 1,000 100.00% 3,482 3,500 3,500 0.00% 6,839 500 500 0.00% 211 3,000 3,000 0.00% 29,337 22,000 40,000 81.82% 18,959 19,000 19,000 0.00% 45,115 0 0 N/A Total Supplies & Maintenance 121,379 60,500 79,000 30.58% Professional Services Auditing and Acct'g Services 20,250 22,000 24,000 9.09% Data Processing Communication 0 0 0 N/A IT Services 0 49,000 50,000 2.04% Professional Services 20,646 18,000 15,000 -16.67% Insurance Agent of Record 0 0 0 N/A Total Professional Services 40,896 89,000 89,000 0.00% Insurances General Liability Ins 10,000 12,000 10,200 -15.00% Umbrella Liability Ins 5,000 10,000 15,100 51.00% Bonds Insurance 200 1,040 700 -32.69% Boiler & Machinery Ins 1,300 0 0 N/A Property Insurance 5,000 10,000 14,100 41.00% Equipment Floaters Ins 1,300 0 0 N/A Automotive Insurance 7,400 5,250 4,700 -10.48% Total Insurances 30,200 38,290 44,800 17.00% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 77 Other Expenses Bank Fees Telephone Postage Internet/Other Communications Printing & Publishing Gas & Electric Water Utilities Office Equipment Rental Special Equipment Replacement Other Miscellaneous Charges City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Central Services cont. 41900 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) 18,503 20,000 23,000 15.00% 12,724 10,000 12,000 20.00% (845) 10,000 6,000 -40.00% 15,264 0 0 N/A 21,853 16,000 22,000 37.50% 31,055 29,100 33,300 14.43% 2,893 4,000 4,000 0.00% 20,591 17,500 1,500 -91.43% 0 0 0 N/A 12,120 500 500 0.00% Total Other Expenses 134,158 107,100 102,300 -4.48% Capital Outlay Spec Assmts on Land & Int 0 0 0 N/A Interest on Special Assmnts 0 0 0 N/A Total Capital Outlay 0 0 0 N/A Central Services Total 326,633 294,890 315,100 6.85% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 78 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Human Services 41800 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Contributions 12,125 12,400 12,400 0.00% Human Services Total 12,125 12,400 12,400 0.00% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Human Services Department is comprised of area organizations that provide equal opportunity in employment, housing, public services, and education. The City maintains an affiliation with these organizations to ensure a strong relationship with area communities and their citizens. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Contributions are the contributions made to Human Service Organizations in the Orono area. Organizations include: The Gillespie Center 9,500 Orono Community Education 2,900 12,400 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 79 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Human Services 41800 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Other Expenses Contributions to Civic Org's 12,125 12,400 12,400 0.00% Total Other Expenses 12,125 12,400 12,400 0.00% Human Services Total 12,125 12,400 12,400 0.00% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 80 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Police Department 42110 o� 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 3,536,561 3,680,660 3,868,100 5.09% Supplies & Maintenance 241,921 239,300 246,500 3.01% Professional Services 105,067 212,630 224,000 5.35% Insurances 55,000 71,000 102,100 43.80% Other Expenses 248,859 131,580 248,100 88.55% Capital Outlay 197,547 184,000 185,000 0.54% Police Total 4,384,955 4,519,170 4,873,800 7.85% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Police Department provides for the public safety within Orono and several surrounding communities. This is accomplished through preventive patrol, traffic enforcement, education, criminal investigation and prosecution. Through renewable contract agreements, the city provides police services to the communities of Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach, and Mound. Due to the nature of these cooperative agreements, the Police Department operates, and is budgeted for as a 'cost center'. This enables the City to accurately determine the portion of operating costs that pertain to each contract city. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for the Police Department. Staff includes: Police Chief, Deputy Chief, Sergeant (4), Investigators (3), Patrol Officers (19), Community Service Officer, Office Manager, Administrative Assistant (2) *Supplies & Maintenance include the operating supplies and maintenance expenses on police equipment and facilities. *Other Expenses includes utilities, fuel, publishing costs, copier leases, and other miscellaneous charges related to police operations. *Insurance Expenses includes a portion of the City's general, liability, and auto insurance costs. *Professional Services includes the police records system, internet, animal care, and medical and psychological City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 81 Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular Full -Time Employees Overtime Part -Time Employees Temporary/Seasonal Employees PERA FICA City Benefit Contribution Unemployment Benefit Payments Worker's Comp Insurance Prem City of Orono 6,000 5,000 -16.67% 2020 Line Item Budget 1,000 1,000 Police Department 80,560 100,000 42110 0.00% 7,612 4,000 16,500 312.50% 202 1,300 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) 2,506,424 21580,810 2,676,300 3.70% 35,048 50,000 50,000 0.00% 67,358 56,000 60,000 7.14% 0 0 0 N/A 391,268 418,860 459,300 9.65% 50,590 52,040 54,000 3.77% 371,872 397,880 418,500 5.18% 0 0 0 N/A 114,000 125,070 150,000 19.93% Total Personal Services 3,536,561 3,680,660 3,868,100 5.09% Supplies & Maintenance Office supplies Books & Periodicals Motor Fuels & Lubricants Equipment Parts & Accessories Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Clothing & personal equipment Training Supplies Explorers Program expenses Small Tools and Minor Equip Repairs/Maint-Office Equip Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Janitorial Services Software Licensing 3,314 6,000 5,000 -16.67% 462 1,000 1,000 0.00% 80,560 100,000 100,000 0.00% 7,612 4,000 16,500 312.50% 202 1,300 1,000 -23.08% 52,820 27,000 27,000 0.00% 8,507 16,000 16,000 0.00% 3,337 4,000 4,000 0.00% 7,781 5,000 5,000 0.00% 3,413 500 1,000 100.00% 35,857 45,000 40,000 -11.11% 4,297 8,000 7,000 -12.50% 9,009 6,500 7,500 15.38% 14,649 15,000 15,500 3.33% 10,101 0 0 N/A Total Supplies & Maintenance 241,921 239,300 246,500 3.01% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 82 Professional Services Engineering -Consulting Legal -Consulting LOGIS-Applications Data Processing Communication IT Services Animal Care Professional Services Insurance Agent of Record Total Professional Services Insurances General Liability Ins Umbrella Liability Ins Property Insurance Equipment Floaters Ins Automotive Insurance Insurance Deductibles Total Insurances City of Orono - 2020 Budget City of Orono 40,000 57,400 2020 Line Item Budget 10,000 15,000 Police Department cont. 66.00% 1,000 42110 1,100 10.00% 0 0 0 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) 0 0 0 N/A 6,233 8,000 8,000 0.00% 83,004 110,790 112,500 1.54% 3,511 6,000 6,000 0.00% 0 72,840 80,000 9.83% 1,132 500 3,000 500.00% 11,187 14,500 14,500 0.00% 0 0 0 N/A 105,067 212,630 224,000 5.35% 35,000 40,000 57,400 43.50% 10,000 15,000 24,900 66.00% 1,000 1,000 1,100 10.00% 0 0 0 N/A 9,000 15,000 18,700 24.67% 0 0 0 N/A 55,000 71,000 102,100 43.80% Page 83 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Police Department cont. 42110 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 84 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Other Expenses Telephone 20,333 23,230 24,000 3.31% Postage 1,269 1,000 800 -20.00% Internet/Other Communications 4,260 0 0 N/A Travel Expenses 0 250 300 20.00% General Advertising 0 0 0 N/A Printing & Publishing 1,947 1,800 1,500 -16.67% Gas & Electric 17,842 20,000 20,000 0.00% Water Utilities 2,300 3,000 3,000 0.00% Office Equipment Rental 5,478 4,500 3,000 -33.33% EDP/Communications Equip Rent 26,320 23,000 26,000 13.04% Memberships 6,650 5,000 5,500 10.00% Towing Charges 515 0 0 N/A Training & Development 23,876 38,000 38,000 0.00% Distribution to Other Govmnts 120,671 0 119,500 N/A Meeting Expenses 1,398 2,500 2,200 -12.00% Special Equipment Replacement 14,451 5,000 0 -100.00% Licenses & Taxes 1,273 1,300 1,300 0.00% Other Miscellaneous Charges 276 3,000 3,000 0.00% Total Other Expenses 248,859 131,580 248,100 88.55% Capital Outlay Automotive Equipment 144,220 160,000 164,000 2.50% Furniture and Fixtures 0 0 0 N/A Office Equip and Furnishings 2,727 3,000 0 -100.00% IT Hardware & Applications 7,223 0 0 N/A Other Equipment 431377 21,000 21,000 0.00% Total Capital Outlay 197,547 184,000 185,000 0.54% Police Total 4,384,955 4,519,170 4,873,800 7.85% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 84 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Fire Protection Services 42260 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Fire Department is comprised of renewable contract agreements with the surrounding community of Long Lake for fire suppression services. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Professional Services are the costs associated with the contract agreements with Long Lake. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 85 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Professional Services 389,365 402,100 433,900 7.91% Fire Protection Services Total 389,365 402,100 433,900 7.91% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Fire Department is comprised of renewable contract agreements with the surrounding community of Long Lake for fire suppression services. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Professional Services are the costs associated with the contract agreements with Long Lake. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 85 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Fire Protection Services 42260 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 86 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Professional Services Fire Services 389,365 402,100 433,900 7.91% Professional Services 0 0 0 N/A Total Professional Services 389,365 402,100 433,900 7.91% Fire Protection Services Total 389,365 402,100 433,900 7.91% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 86 Building & Zoning Total 707,346 695,910 713,300 2.50% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Planning & Zoning Department oversees the development and redevelopment within the City in accordance with established policies and guidelines. The policies and guidelines have been created and are enforced to maintain the health, safety, and welfare of the public, as well as the aesthetics of the community. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for Planning and Zoning Staff. Staff includes: Director of Community Development, Planners (2), Planning Assistant and Building Officials. *Professional Services include engineering, legal consulting services and contracted building inspections. *Other Expenses includes training and development, and memberships in professional organizations for the Planning & Zoning Staff. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 87 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Building & Zoning 42400 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 536,406 527,860 549,500 4.10% Supplies & Maintenance 3,919 5,000 5,000 0.00% Professional Services 160,394 139,180 146,800 5.47% Other Expenses 6,626 23,870 12,000 -49.73% Building & Zoning Total 707,346 695,910 713,300 2.50% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Planning & Zoning Department oversees the development and redevelopment within the City in accordance with established policies and guidelines. The policies and guidelines have been created and are enforced to maintain the health, safety, and welfare of the public, as well as the aesthetics of the community. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for Planning and Zoning Staff. Staff includes: Director of Community Development, Planners (2), Planning Assistant and Building Officials. *Professional Services include engineering, legal consulting services and contracted building inspections. *Other Expenses includes training and development, and memberships in professional organizations for the Planning & Zoning Staff. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 87 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Building & Zoning 42400 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular 417,978 399,530 415,400 3.97% Full -Time Employees Overtime 0 200 200 0.00% Part -Time Employees 0 0 0 N/A Temporary/Seasonal Employees 0 0 0 N/A PERA 30,430 29,980 31,200 4.07% FICA 30,971 30,580 31,800 3.99% City Benefit Contribution 54,608 65,260 68,300 4.66% Unemployment Benefit Payments 0 0 0 N/A Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 2,419 2,310 2,600 12.55% Total Personal Services 536,406 527,860 549,500 4.10% Supplies & Maintenance Books & Periodicals 255 500 500 0.00% Motor Fuels & Lubricants 0 1,500 1,500 0.00% Equipment Parts & Accessories 3,534 3,000 3,000 0.00% Clothing & personal equipment 0 0 0 N/A Small Tools and Minor Equip 0 0 0 N/A Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip 0 0 0 N/A Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip 130 0 0 N/A Total Supplies & Maintenance 3,919 5,000 5,000 0.00% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 88 Professional Services Engineering -Consulting GIS/Mapping Legal -Consulting Inspection Services Bank Fees IT Services Professional Services Total Professional Services OtherExaenses Telephone Travel Expenses General Advertising Other Equipment Rentals Software Licensing Memberships Training & Development Meeting Expenses Licenses & Taxes Total Other Expenses Building & Zoning Total City of Orono - 2020 Budget City of Orono 0 2020 Line Item Budget Increase Building & Zoning cont. (Decrease) 42400 0.00% 2018 2019 Actual Budget 181194 5,000 0 0 14,863 16,000 116,250 90,000 4 0 0 8,180 11,085 20,000 160,394 139,180 146,800 5.47% 458 0 2020 Increase Recommended (Decrease) 5,000 0.00% 3,000 N/A 15,000 -6.25% 90,000 0.00% 0 N/A 23,800 190.95% 10,000 -50.00% 160,394 139,180 146,800 5.47% 458 0 500 N/A 1,296 2,250 2,000 -11.11% 1,057 500 500 0.00% 0 0 0 N/A 559 15,600 0 -100.00% 859 1,200 1,600 33.33% 2,167 3,020 7,400 145.03% 178 1,200 0 -100.00% 52 100 0 -100.00% 6,626 23,870 12,000 -49.73% 707,346 695,910 713,300 2.50% Page 89 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Engineering 43170 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Professional Services 15,655 20,000 20,000 0.00% Engineering Total 15,655 20,000 20,000 0.00% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The City maintains a renewable contract with a local firm to provide all engineering services. The Engineering Department provides professional representation and opinion on city services and operations. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Professional Services are the costs associated with the contract agreement with the engineering firm. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 90 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Engineering 43170 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 91 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Professional Services Engineering -Retainer 0 0 0 N/A Engineering -Consulting 151655 20,000 5,000 -75.00% GIS/Mapping 0 0 15,000 N/A Total Professional Services 15,655 20,000 20,000 0.00% Engineering Total 15,655 20,000 20,000 0.00% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 91 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Public Works Department 43000 o� 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 356,636 282,060 293,200 3.95% Supplies & Maintenance 192,913 184,370 176,100 -4.49% Professional Services 697 3,270 96,800 2860.24% Other Expenses 44,166 43,480 42,700 -1.79% Public Works Total 594,413 513,180 608,800 18.63% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Street Department provides for the maintainance of all city streets to ensure a safe and driveable condition. Standard maintenance includes seal -coating, patching, snow plowing, and sweeping. Due to its excess storage capacity, the City maintains cooperative agreements with surrounding communities for storage and sale of salt/sand supplies. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for the Public Works Department. Staff includes: Director of Public Works/City Engineer (15%), Public Works Supervisors *Supplies & Maintenance include general operating supplies for street repair/maintenance, and vehicle and equipment maintenance. *Other Expenses include electricity costs for street lighting and employee development. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 92 Total Personal Services 356,636 282,060 293,200 3.95% Supplies & Maintenance City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget 0 170 0 Public Works Department Motor Fuels & Lubricants 35,000 35,000 43000 -100.00% Equipment Parts & Accessories 16,229 24,000 0 -100.00% Vehicle Equipment & Parts 2018 2019 2020 Increase -100.00% Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Personal Services 8.00% Clothing & personal equipment 6,484 Full -Time Employees Regular 239,821 183,520 191,000 4.08% Full -Time Employees Overtime 14,024 11,000 11,000 0.00% PERA 15,639 14,590 15,200 4.18% FICA 15,631 14,890 15,400 3.43% City Benefit Contribution 46,067 41,430 44,200 6.69% Unemployment Benefit Payments 6,157 0 0 N/A Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 19,296 16,630 16,400 -1.38% Total Personal Services 356,636 282,060 293,200 3.95% Supplies & Maintenance Books & Periodicals 0 170 0 -100.00% Motor Fuels & Lubricants 35,000 35,000 0 -100.00% Equipment Parts & Accessories 16,229 24,000 0 -100.00% Vehicle Equipment & Parts 8,000 8,000 0 -100.00% Street Maint. Materials/Supply 67,886 50,000 54,000 8.00% Clothing & personal equipment 6,484 4,000 7,400 85.00% Small Tools and Minor Equip 2,000 3,000 3,000 0.00% Telephone 678 200 1,700 750.00% Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip 10,000 10,000 0 -100.00% Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip 10,672 20,000 0 -100.00% Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds 13,612 10,000 10,000 0.00% Contracted Street Maint. 22,351 20,000 100,000 400.00% Total Supplies & Maintenance 192,913 184,370 176,100 -4.49% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 93 Professional Services PW Engineering -Consulting GIS/Mapping IT Services Fleet Services Professional Services Total Professional Services OtherExaenses Travel Expenses Gas & Electric Street Lighting EDP/Communications Equip Rent Other Equipment Rentals Software Licensing Memberships Training & Development Licenses & Taxes Other Miscellaneous Charges Total Other Expenses City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Public Works Department cont. 43000 2018 2019 Actual Budget 332 0 0 0 0 3,270 0 0 365 0 697 3,270 96,800 2860.24% 205 175 2020 Increase Recommended (Decrease) 800 N/A 800 N/A 3,500 7.03% 91,700 N/A 0 N/A 697 3,270 96,800 2860.24% 205 175 200 14.29% 2,308 4,880 2,700 -44.67% 28,069 29,000 29,000 0.00% 1,763 1,145 2,400 109.61% 91277 4,000 4,000 0.00% 0 0 0 N/A 334 250 300 20.00% 1,965 3,500 3,500 0.00% 176 250 300 20.00% 69 280 300 7.14% 44,166 43,480 42,700 -1.79% Public Works Total 594,413 513,180 608,800 18.63% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 94 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Parks & Recreation Department provides for the maintainance of the City's parks. In addition, the city participates in a joint recreation program with area organizations to ensure a community -wide effort in providing adequate recreational facilities. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services includes the wages and employment taxes for the Parks Department. Staff includes: Director of Public Works (10%), Parks/Golf Supervisor (50%), Maintenance Workers (5%) *Supplies & Maintenance includes the operating supplies and maintenance for all park facilities. *Other Expenses includes the costs associated with equipment rental. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 95 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Parks 45200 o� 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 90,194 127,210 134,500 5.73% Supplies & Maintenance 82,296 80,400 78,000 -2.99% Professional Services 4,950 1,980 8,400 324.24% Other Expenses 10,417 8,850 9,100 2.82% Parks Total 187,857 218,440 230,000 5.29% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Parks & Recreation Department provides for the maintainance of the City's parks. In addition, the city participates in a joint recreation program with area organizations to ensure a community -wide effort in providing adequate recreational facilities. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services includes the wages and employment taxes for the Parks Department. Staff includes: Director of Public Works (10%), Parks/Golf Supervisor (50%), Maintenance Workers (5%) *Supplies & Maintenance includes the operating supplies and maintenance for all park facilities. *Other Expenses includes the costs associated with equipment rental. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 95 Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular Full -Time Employees Overtime Part -Time Employees Temporary/Seasonal Employees PERA FICA City Benefit Contribution Worker's Comp Insurance Prem Total Personal Services Supplies & Maintenance Motor Fuels & Lubricants Equipment Parts & Accessories Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Park Initiatives Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total Supplies & Maintenance Professional Services Engineering -Consulting IT Services Fleet Services Professional Services Total Professional Services City of Orono - 2020 Budget City of Orono 500 0 -100.00% 2020 Line Item Budget 500 0 Parks 9,197 10,000 10,000 45200 9,584 10,000 10,000 0.00% 474 200 0 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) 56,793 75,920 79,400 4.58% 534 0 0 N/A 0 0 0 N/A 9,252 14,650 15,700 7.17% 4,177 5,700 6,000 5.26% 4,333 6,930 7,300 5.34% 10,511 16,230 17,400 7.21% 4,594 7,780 8,700 11.83% 90,194 127,210 134,500 5.73% 69 500 0 -100.00% 1,984 500 0 -100.00% 9,197 10,000 10,000 0.00% 9,584 10,000 10,000 0.00% 474 200 0 -100.00% 959 1,200 0 -100.00% 60,028 58,000 58,000 0.00% 82,296 80,400 78,000 -2.99% 30 0 0 N/A 0 840 1,000 19.05% 0 0 6,300 N/A 4,920 1,140 1,100 -3.51% 4,950 1,980 8,400 324.24% Page 96 Other Expenses Telephone Travel Expenses Printing & Publishing Gas & Electric Other Equipment Rentals Software Licensing Meeting Expenses Licenses & Taxes Other Miscellaneous Charges Contributions to Civic Org's City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Parks cont. 45200 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) 245 0 400 N/A 0 0 0 N/A 257 0 500 N/A 349 550 600 9.09% 7,891 7,000 7,000 0.00% 1,047 1,000 0 -100.00% 0 0 0 N/A 581 300 500 66.67% 46 0 100 N/A 0 0 0 N/A Total Other Expenses 10,417 8,850 9,100 2.82% Parks Total 187,857 218,440 230,000 5.29% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 97 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Golf Course provides a golfing opportunity for both residents and visitors to the City. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for the Golf Course. Staff includes: Parks/Golf Supervisor (50%), Clubhouse Manager, Seasonal Golf Course Employees Supplies & Maintenance include general operating supplies for the course and equipment repairs and maintenance. Insurances include the golf courses share of the City's general, liability, liquor, and auto insurance polices. Other Expenses include utilities, golf cart rental, and advertising. Purchase for Resale are items that are food, beverage, clothing and golf supplies that are sold in the clubhouse. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 98 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Golf Course 45210 o� 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 116,089 119,130 122,900 3.16% Supplies & Maintenance 41,418 33,840 23,900 -29.37% Insurances 13,646 13,520 13,300 -1.63% Other Expenses 33,429 32,340 47,200 45.95% Purchases for Resale 8,909 13,900 13,100 -5.76% Golf Course Total 213,491 212,730 220,400 3.61% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Golf Course provides a golfing opportunity for both residents and visitors to the City. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for the Golf Course. Staff includes: Parks/Golf Supervisor (50%), Clubhouse Manager, Seasonal Golf Course Employees Supplies & Maintenance include general operating supplies for the course and equipment repairs and maintenance. Insurances include the golf courses share of the City's general, liability, liquor, and auto insurance polices. Other Expenses include utilities, golf cart rental, and advertising. Purchase for Resale are items that are food, beverage, clothing and golf supplies that are sold in the clubhouse. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 98 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Golf Course 45210 Total Personal Services Supplies & Maintenance Office supplies Motor Fuels & Lubricants Equipment Parts & Accessories Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Clothing & personal equipment Small Tools and Minor Equip Repairs/Maint-Office Equip Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total Supplies & Maintenance 116,089 119,130 122,900 3.16% 262 0 300 N/A 1,068 3,500 2018 2019 2020 Increase 0 Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Personal Services (128) 300 500 66.67% Full -Time Employees Regular 37,180 36,210 38,200 5.50% Full -Time Employees Overtime 344 0 0 N/A Part -Time Employees 0 0 0 N/A Temporary/Seasonal Employees 56,480 57,040 58,200 2.03% PERA 3,790 2,720 2,900 6.62% FICA 4,347 7,140 7,400 3.64% City Benefit Contribution 7,980 8,080 8,800 8.91% Unemployment Benefit Payments 75 0 0 N/A OPEB Expense 0 0 0 N/A Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 5,893 7,940 7,400 -6.80% Total Personal Services Supplies & Maintenance Office supplies Motor Fuels & Lubricants Equipment Parts & Accessories Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Clothing & personal equipment Small Tools and Minor Equip Repairs/Maint-Office Equip Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total Supplies & Maintenance 116,089 119,130 122,900 3.16% 262 0 300 N/A 1,068 3,500 0 -100.00% 4,151 2,500 0 -100.00% 9,560 7,200 8,500 18.06% (128) 300 500 66.67% 1,763 500 500 0.00% 0 100 100 0.00% 2,000 300 0 -100.00% 3,791 5,440 0 -100.00% 18,951 14,000 14,000 0.00% 41,418 33,840 23,900 -29.37% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 99 Insurances General Liability Ins Umbrella Liability Ins Boiler & Machinery Ins Property Insurance Equipment Floaters Ins Automotive Insurance Dram Shop Insurance Total Insurances Other Expenses Engineering -Consulting Bank Fees IT Services Fleet Services Professional Services Telephone Travel Expenses General Advertising Printing & Publishing Gas & Electric Other Equipment Rentals Memberships Training & Development Special Equipment Replacement Licenses & Taxes Other Miscellaneous Charges Total Other Expenses City of Orono - 2020 Budget City of Orono 0 0 N/A 2020 Line Item Budget 5,000 3,700 Golf Course cont. 0 1,640 2,000 45210 0 0 14,100 N/A 404 0 0 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) 7,500 7,500 7,400 -1.33% 1,500 1,500 1,500 0.00% 300 350 400 14.29% 2,300 2,650 2,700 1.89% 300 350 300 -14.29% 370 370 400 8.11% 1,376 800 600 -25.00% 13,646 13,520 13,300 -1.63% 383 0 0 N/A 3,431 5,000 3,700 -26.00% 0 1,640 2,000 21.95% 0 0 14,100 N/A 404 0 0 N/A 2,926 3,300 3,300 0.00% 0 0 0 N/A 859 1,750 1,800 2.86% 1,723 750 1,300 73.33% 8,313 8,500 8,700 2.35% 141376 10,200 11,000 7.84% 150 300 300 0.00% 116 150 200 33.33% 0 0 0 N/A 325 550 600 9.09% 424 200 200 0.00% 33,429 32,340 47,200 45.95% Page 100 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Golf Course cont. 45210 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 101 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Purchases for Resale PURCHASES FOR RESALE 0 0 0 N/A Beer For Resale 3,498 3,800 3,800 0.00% Soft Drinks For Resale 2,860 3,600 3,600 0.00% Concessions For Resale-Txbl 582 1,500 1,500 0.00% Concessions For Resale-NonTax 1,037 2,500 2,300 -8.00% Pro Shop Items For Resale 932 2,500 1,900 -24.00% Other For Resale 0 0 0 N/A Total Purchases for Resale 8,909 13,900 13,100 -5.76% Golf Course Total 213,491 212,730 220,400 3.61% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 101 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Brush Site 45220 o� 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 0 0 11,600 N/A Supplies & Maintenance 0 0 300 N/A Insurances 0 0 100 N/A Other Expenses 0 0 1,100 N/A Brush Site Total 0 0 13,100 N/A PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Brush Site provides a place for residents and contractors to drop off tree branches and brush. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: Personal Services include the wages and employment taxes for the Brush Site. Staff includes: Brush Site Attendant Supplies & Maintenance include general operating supplies for repair and maintenance of the brush site. Insurances include the brush site's share of the City's general insurance polices. Other Expenses include convenience fee, IT services, insurance, gas/electricity, repairs/maintenance and equipment rental. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 102 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Brush Site 45220 Total Other Expenses 0 0 1,500 N/A 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Personal Services 13,100 N/A Temporary/Seasonal Employees 0 0 10,800 N/A FICA 0 0 800 N/A Total Personal Services 0 0 11,600 N/A Other Expenses Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies 0 0 300 N/A Bank Fees 0 0 0 N/A IT Services 0 0 300 N/A General Liability Ins 0 0 100 N/A Gas & Electric 0 0 300 N/A Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds 0 0 500 N/A Other Equipment Rentals 0 0 0 N/A Total Other Expenses 0 0 1,500 N/A Brush Site Total 0 0 13,100 N/A City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 103 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Special Services -Consulting & Police 43280 o� 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 61,785 40,750 41,000 0.61% Professional Services 83,462 85,000 87,500 2.94% ipecial Services -Consulting & Police Total 145,247 125,750 128,500 2.19% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Special Services Department provides a separate 'cost center' for tracking city -provided consulting and Police special service details. Orono residentswho apply for land use variations are subject to be billed for any additional staff, legal, and engineering time that is spent reviewing their application. Thesecharges are recorded in this departmental budget, and the applicants are subsequently billed for this additional time. Orono businesses or residentswho wish to contract with the city for Police security or traffic control are billed for the officers time. The City's costs are recorded in this departmentaIbudget, and are offset by the revenues received from the requesting parties. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES (Reimbursed): *Personal Services include Police Officer overtime wages for security work and/or traffic control. *Professional Services include legal and engineering review expense for land use applications. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 104 Total Personal Services Professional Services Engineering -Consulting Legal -Consulting Professional Services Special Projects, Contingency 61,785 40,750 41,000 0.61% 63,323 City of Orono 73,000 -2.67% 19,885 2020 Line Item Budget 14,500 45.00% 254 Special Services -Consulting & Police 0 N/A 0 43280 0 N/A 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Personal Services Full -Time Employees Overtime 53,543 35,000 35,000 0.00% PERA 7,555 5,250 2,600 -50.48% FICA 687 500 2,700 440.00% City Benefit Contribution 0 0 0 N/A Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 0 0 700 N/A Total Personal Services Professional Services Engineering -Consulting Legal -Consulting Professional Services Special Projects, Contingency 61,785 40,750 41,000 0.61% 63,323 75,000 73,000 -2.67% 19,885 10,000 14,500 45.00% 254 0 0 N/A 0 0 0 N/A Total Professional Services 83,462 85,000 87,500 2.94% Special Services - Consulting & Police Total 145,247 125,750 128,500 2.19% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 105 2020 General Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Special Projects -Contingencies 43290 o� 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 0 0 0 N/A Professional Services 0 0 0 N/A Other Expenses 0 0 0 N/A Capital & Transfers 837,703 400,000 400,000 0.00% Contingency Items 8,312 100,000 30,000 -70.00% Special Projects -Contingencies Total 846,015 500,000 430,000 -14.00% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Special Projects & Contingencies Department includes funds allocated for planned projects or events that benefit the entire city, and for any unforseen circumstances that produces additional expenses. This department also provides for operating transfers to other funds. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: * Transfers are as follows: Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund 300,000 2014 Improvement Bond Debt Service Fund 100,000 400,000 *Contingency Items is an amount for unbudgeted and unforseen items that require action before the next budget cycle. GENERAL FUND TOTAL 8,884,309 8,577,280 9,143,200 6.60% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 106 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Special Projects -Contingencies 43290 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended (Decrease) Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular 0 0 0 N/A Total Personal Services 0 0 0 N/A Professional Services Engineering -Consulting 0 0 0 N/A Professional Services 0 0 0 N/A Total Professional Services 0 0 0 N/A Other Expenses Other Miscellaneous Charges 0 0 0 N/A Total Other Expenses 0 0 0 N/A Capital & Transfers Land 0 0 0 N/A Operating Transfers 837,703 400,000 400,000 0.00% Total Capital & Transfers 837,703 400,000 400,000 0.00% Contingency Items Special Projects, Contingency 8,312 100,000 30,000 -70.00% Total Contingency Items 8,312 100,000 30,000 -70.00% Special Projects -Contingencies Total 846,015 500,000 430,000 -14.00% GENERAL FUND TOTAL 8,887,470 8,577,280 9,143,200 6.60% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 107 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 108 2020 Enterprise Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Water 49400 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Water Operating Fund provides for the funding of the City's water distribution system. These funds are accounted for separately and are designed to be funded primarily through water rates. OPERATING COST ACTIVITI ES: *Included in 'Personal Services' are the wages and employment taxes for the Water Department Staff. Staff includes: Director of Public Works (20%), Public Works Supervisors (25%), Maintenance Workers (25%) and a Seasonal Employee. *Supplies & Maintenance' includes the operating supplies and maintenance for the water distribution system. *Professional Services' includes a portion of the costs related to the City's annual financial audit, IT Services, and engineering consulting costs related to water projects. *Other Expenses' include power supply costs, purchased water from the City of Wayzata, and a depreciation charge on the fixed assests. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 109 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Adopted (Decrease) Personal Services 234,281 247,730 255,500 3.14% Supplies & Maintenance 209,490 130,810 125,400 -4.14% Professional Services 22,909 36,700 53,500 45.78% Insurances 10,280 7,070 7,800 10.33% Other Expenses 362,847 452,400 491,050 8.54% Operating Transfers 55,000 55,000 55,000 0.00% Total Water Operating Fund 894,807 929,710 988,250 6.30% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Water Operating Fund provides for the funding of the City's water distribution system. These funds are accounted for separately and are designed to be funded primarily through water rates. OPERATING COST ACTIVITI ES: *Included in 'Personal Services' are the wages and employment taxes for the Water Department Staff. Staff includes: Director of Public Works (20%), Public Works Supervisors (25%), Maintenance Workers (25%) and a Seasonal Employee. *Supplies & Maintenance' includes the operating supplies and maintenance for the water distribution system. *Professional Services' includes a portion of the costs related to the City's annual financial audit, IT Services, and engineering consulting costs related to water projects. *Other Expenses' include power supply costs, purchased water from the City of Wayzata, and a depreciation charge on the fixed assests. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 109 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Water 49400 Total Personal Services 239,060 247,730 255,500 3.14% Supplies & Maintenance Office supplies 2018 2019 2020 Increase Books & Periodicals Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services 4,500 4,680 0 -100.00% Full -Time Employees Regular 161,106 147,460 152,700 3.55% Full -Time Employees Overtime 5,531 10,000 10,000 0.00% Part -Time Employees 14,994 15,510 15,900 2.51% Temporary/Seasonal Employees 0 7,500 5,200 -30.67% PERA 11,988 12,980 13,400 3.24% FICA 12,280 13,810 14,100 2.10% City Benefit Contribution 25,371 29,860 34,300 14.87% OPEB Expense 3,284 1,800 1,800 0.00% Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 4,506 8,810 8,100 -8.06% Total Personal Services 239,060 247,730 255,500 3.14% Supplies & Maintenance Office supplies 0 200 100 -50.00% Books & Periodicals 0 0 0 N/A Motor Fuels & Lubricants 4,500 4,680 0 -100.00% Chemicals and Chem Products 40,500 35,000 37,300 6.57% Equipment Parts & Accessories 0 0 0 N/A Vehicle Equipment & Parts 1,007 1,150 0 -100.00% Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies 1,269 200 1,400 600.00% Clothing & personal equipment 141 1,000 1,000 0.00% Utility System Maint. Supplies 39,182 25,000 27,900 11.60% Small Tools and Minor Equip 2,500 2,500 2,500 0.00% Repairs/Maint-Office Equip 44 0 200 N/A Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip 0 0 0 N/A Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip 7,000 6,080 0 -100.00% Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds 3,008 4,000 4,000 0.00% Repairs/Maint-Watermains/plant 104,907 51,000 51,000 0.00% Software Licensing 5,432 0 0 N/A Total Supplies & Maintenance 209,490 130,810 125,400 -4.14% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 110 Professional Services Auditing and Acct'g Services Engineering -Consulting GIS/Mapping Legal -Consulting Bank Fees IT Services Fleet Services Professional Services Total Professional Services Insurances General Liability Ins Umbrella Liability Ins Property Insurance Equipment Floaters Ins Automotive Insurance City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Water cont. 49400 22,909 36,700 53,500 45.78% 4,000 3,000 3,600 20.00% 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease 5,000 5,000 5,000 0.00% 8,333 15,000 10,600 -29.33% 0 0 2,500 N/A 4,469 3,000 3,000 0.00% 5,108 2,400 3,700 54.17% 0 11,300 17,300 53.10% 0 0 11,400 N/A 0 0 0 N/A 22,909 36,700 53,500 45.78% 4,000 3,000 3,600 20.00% 1,800 0 0 N/A 3,800 3,440 3,500 1.74% 380 330 400 21.21% 300 300 300 0.00% Total Insurances 10,280 7,070 7,800 10.33% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 111 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Water cont. 49400 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Other Expenses 341,367 430,360 468,950 8.97% Telephone 4,173 2,500 3,400 36.00% Postage 708 1,050 800 -23.81% General Advertising 0 0 0 N/A Printing & Publishing 468 1,000 400 -60.00% Gas & Electric 81,706 73,000 79,700 9.18% Water Utilities 933 1,100 1,000 -9.09% Intergovernmental Services 35,452 30,000 38,800 29.33% Depreciation & Amortization 186,568 207,400 225,800 8.87% Other Equipment Rentals 53 0 0 N/A Memberships 452 650 650 0.00% Training & Development 3,701 3,500 3,500 0.00% Administrative Charge 16,000 102,660 107,400 4.62% Licenses & Taxes 882 3,500 3,500 0.00% Fines & Penalties 7,031 0 0 N/A Other Miscellaneous Charges 3,241 4,000 4,000 0.00% Total Other Expenses 341,367 430,360 468,950 8.97% Bond Interest 21,480 22,040 22,100 Total Operating Expenses 823,105 852,670 911,150 6.86% Non -Operating Expenses Bond Interest 21,480 22,040 22,100 0.27% Other Long -Term Oblig Interest 0 0 0 N/A Other Interest Expense 0 0 0 N/A Operating Transfers 55,000 55,000 55,000 0.00% Total Non -Operating Expenses 76,480 77,040 77,100 0.00% Total Water Fund 899,586 929,710 988,250 6.29% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 112 2020 Enterprise Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Sewer 49450 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Sewer Operating Fund provides for the funding of the City's sewer collection system. The funds are accounted for separately and are designedto be funded primarily through sewer unit charges. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Included in 'Personal Services' are the wages and employment taxes for the Sewer Department Staff. Staff includes: Director of Public Works (30%), Public Works Supervisors (25%), Maintenance Workers (25%) *Supplies & Maintenance' includes the operating supplies and maintenance for the sewer collection system. *Professional Services' includes a portion of the costs related to the City's annual financial audit, IT Services, and engineering consulting costs related to sewer projects. *Other Expenses' includes the City's disposal charges with the MCES, and a depreciation charge on fixed assets. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 113 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Adopted (Decrease) Personal Services 267,559 276,750 281,500 1.72% Supplies & Maintenance 148,495 202,470 238,200 17.65% Professional Services 13,452 42,750 59,800 39.88% Insurances 18,930 12,730 14,000 9.98% Other Expenses 933,316 1,089,475 11197,700 9.93% Operating Transfers 110,000 110,000 115,000 4.55% Total Sewer Operating Fund 1,491,753 1,734,175 1,906,200 9.92% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Sewer Operating Fund provides for the funding of the City's sewer collection system. The funds are accounted for separately and are designedto be funded primarily through sewer unit charges. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Included in 'Personal Services' are the wages and employment taxes for the Sewer Department Staff. Staff includes: Director of Public Works (30%), Public Works Supervisors (25%), Maintenance Workers (25%) *Supplies & Maintenance' includes the operating supplies and maintenance for the sewer collection system. *Professional Services' includes a portion of the costs related to the City's annual financial audit, IT Services, and engineering consulting costs related to sewer projects. *Other Expenses' includes the City's disposal charges with the MCES, and a depreciation charge on fixed assets. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 113 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Sewer 49450 Total Supplies & Maintenance 143,901 202,470 238,200 17.65% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 114 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular 162,890 158,250 163,800 3.51% Full -Time Employees Overtime 4,346 12,000 12,000 0.00% Part -Time Employees 14,994 15,510 15,900 2.51% Temporary/Seasonal Employees 10,764 15,730 10,400 -33.88% PERA 15,251 13,940 14,400 3.30% FICA 15,308 15,420 15,500 0.52% City Benefit Contribution 31,629 30,950 35,400 14.38% OPEB Expense 3,489 2,200 2,200 0.00% Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 16,498 12,750 11,900 -6.67% Total Personal Services 275,168 276,750 281,500 1.72% Supplies & Maintenance Office supplies 440 400 400 0.00% Motor Fuels & Lubricants 9,000 8,840 0 -100.00% Equipment Parts & Accessories 1,500 1,530 0 -100.00% Vehicle Equipment & Parts 5,162 2,300 0 -100.00% Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies 1,888 1,000 2,700 170.00% Clothing & personal equipment 163 1,000 1,500 50.00% Utility System Maint. Supplies 5,381 9,000 7,500 -16.67% Small Tools and Minor Equip 2,505 2,500 2,500 0.00% Repairs/Maint-Office Equip 656 0 1,100 N/A Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip 3,124 1,440 0 -100.00% Repairs/Maint-Misc. Equip 5,000 960 0 -100.00% Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds 347 1,500 500 -66.67% Repairs/Maint-Swr lines/lifts 108,735 147,000 147,000 0.00% Repairs/Maint-I&I Reduction 0 25,000 75,000 200.00% Total Supplies & Maintenance 143,901 202,470 238,200 17.65% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 114 Professional Services Auditing and Acct'g Services Engineering -Consulting GIS/Mapping Legal -Consulting Bank Fees IT Services Fleet Services Professional Services Total Professional Services General Liability Ins Umbrella Liability Ins Property Insurance Equipment Floaters Ins Automotive Insurance City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Sewer cont. 49450 13,452 42,750 59,800 39.88% 8,000 9,000 9,900 10.00% 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease 6,500 6,500 6,500 0.00% 4,141 15,000 11,000 -26.67% 0 0 4,000 N/A 222 1,000 1,000 0.00% 2,590 3,000 3,500 16.67% 0 17,250 17,300 0.29% 0 0 16,500 N/A 0 0 0 N/A 13,452 42,750 59,800 39.88% 8,000 9,000 9,900 10.00% 3,600 0 0 N/A 3,200 2,550 2,800 9.80% 1,230 330 300 -9.09% 2,900 850 1,000 17.65% Total Insurances 18,930 12,730 14,000 9.98% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 115 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Sewer cont. 49450 Total Other Expenses 937,910 1,089,475 1,197,700 9.93% Total Operating Expenses 1,389,362 1,624,175 1,791,200 10.28% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 116 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Other Expenses Telephone 3,548 5,000 4,000 -20.00% Postage 1,262 4,800 1,700 -64.58% Travel Expenses 0 100 100 0.00% General Advertising 0 0 0 N/A Printing & Publishing 42 300 300 0.00% Gas & Electric 29,123 35,000 35,000 0.00% Water Utilities 1,066 0 0 N/A MCES-Sewer 473,217 555,365 619,400 11.53% Intergovernmental Services 58,174 45,000 65,700 46.00% Depreciation & Amortization 315,278 330,000 353,600 7.15% Other Equipment Rentals 350 1,000 1,000 0.00% Software Licensing 4,594 0 0 N/A Memberships 309 1,250 1,200 -4.00% Training & Development 3,938 4,500 4,500 0.00% Administrative Charge 32,000 102,660 107,400 4.62% Meeting Expenses 0 0 0 N/A Special Equipment Replacement 0 0 0 N/A Licenses & Taxes 32 1,000 300 -70.00% Other Miscellaneous Charges 14,976 3,500 3,500 0.00% Total Other Expenses 937,910 1,089,475 1,197,700 9.93% Total Operating Expenses 1,389,362 1,624,175 1,791,200 10.28% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 116 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Sewer cont. 49450 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 117 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Non -Operating Expenses Other Interest Expense 0 0 0 N/A Operating Transfers 110,000 110,000 115,000 4.55% Total Non -Operating Expenses 110,000 110,000 115,000 4.55% Total Sewer Fund 1,499,362 1,734,175 1,906,200 9.92% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 117 2020 Enterprise Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Recycling 49500 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The city participates in a program to provide curbside recycling service. In addition, the city also provides a spring cleanup day for residents who have materials unsuitable for curbside recycling pickup. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services are a portion of the City Clerk's wages and the wages for City Staff whom participate in the spring cleanup. *Other Expenses includes disposal of items collected during the clean up day and materials related to organics recycling. *'Professional Services includes the costs associated with recycling collection. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 118 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Adopted (Decrease) Personal Services 6,770 7,400 10,200 37.84% Supplies & Maintenance 0 0 0 N/A Professional Services 110,424 117,880 193,500 64.15% Insurances 0 500 0 (1) Other Expenses 9,851 8,750 13,000 48.57% Recycling Total 127,046 134,530 216,700 61.08% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The city participates in a program to provide curbside recycling service. In addition, the city also provides a spring cleanup day for residents who have materials unsuitable for curbside recycling pickup. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Personal Services are a portion of the City Clerk's wages and the wages for City Staff whom participate in the spring cleanup. *Other Expenses includes disposal of items collected during the clean up day and materials related to organics recycling. *'Professional Services includes the costs associated with recycling collection. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 118 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Recycling 49500 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 119 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular 6,030 6,380 7,200 12.85% Full -Time Employees Overtime 0 0 0 N/A Part -Time Employees 0 0 0 N/A Temporary/Seasonal Employees 0 0 0 N/A PERA 450 480 500 4.17% FICA 460 490 600 22.45% City Benefit Contribution 0 0 1,800 N/A Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 40 50 100 100.00% Total Personal Services 6,980 7,400 10,200 37.84% Supplies & Maintenance Equipment Parts & Accessories 0 0 0 N/A Repairs/Maint-Office Equip 0 0 0 N/A Total Supplies & Maintenance 0 0 0 N/A Professional Services Legal -Consulting 0 0 0 N/A IT Services 0 0 2,500 N/A Contract Recycling Pickup 110,424 117,880 191,000 62.03% Professional Services 0 0 0 N/A Total Professional Services 110,424 117,880 193,500 64.15% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 119 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Recycling cont. 49500 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 120 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Other Expenses Printing & Publishing 0 0 0 N/A General Liability Ins 0 500 0 -100.00% Software Licensing 0 1,750 0 -100.00% Administrative Charge 625 2,500 2,500 0.00% Spring,Fall,X-mas Cleanup 464 4,000 10,000 150.00% Organics Recycling 0 500 500 0.00% Total Other Expenses 1,089 9,250 13,000 40.54% Total Recycling Fund 118,494 134,530 216,700 61.08% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 120 2020 Enterprise Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Stormwater 49910 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Adopted (Decrease) Personal Services 46,374 128,190 132,500 3.36% Supplies & Maintenance 11,261 31,530 21,500 -31.81% Professional Services 15,663 21,500 37,200 73.02% Insurances 1,970 3,380 3,900 15.38% Other Expenses 67,926 172,210 177,900 3.30% Total Stormwater Operating Fund 143,194 356,810 373,000 4.54% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Stormwater Operating Fund provide sfunding to for the City's Stormwater responsibilities. The funds are accounted for separately and are designedto be funded primarily through stormwater service and trunk fees. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Included in 'Personal Services' are the wages and employment taxes for the Public Works Department Staff. Staff includes: Director of Public Works (10%), Public Works Supervisors (25%), Maintenance Workers (5%) * Supplies & Maintenance includes material associated with culvert maintenance. *Other Expenses includes depreciation and an administrative charge and the annual LMCD Levy. *Professional Services includes engineering and annual audit charges. City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 121 Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular Full -Time Employees Overtime Temporary/Seasonal Employees PERA FICA City Benefit Contribution OPEB Expense Worker's Comp Insurance Prem Total Personal Services Supplies & Maintenance Office supplies Equipment Parts & Accessories Bldg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Utility System Maint. Supplies Small Tools and Minor Equip Repairs/Maint-Office Equip Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Swr lines/lifts Total Supplies & Maintenance City of Orono - 2020 Budget City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Storm Water 49910 0 0 0 N/A 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease 36,677 78,640 81,100 3.13% 377 0 0 N/A 0 15,000 15,600 4.00% 2,779 5,900 6,100 3.39% 2,881 7,170 7,400 3.21% 3,104 14,350 15,300 6.62% 670 530 500 -5.66% 1,057 6,600 6,500 -1.52% 47,545 128,190 132,500 3.36% 0 0 0 N/A 1,300 1,530 0 -100.00% 826 0 0 N/A 3,894 9,500 5,000 -47.37% 1,000 1,000 1,000 0.00% 0 1,500 1,500 0.00% 4,000 4,000 0 -100.00% 242 0 0 N/A 0 14,000 14,000 0.00% 11,261 31,530 21,500 -31.81% Page 122 Professional Services Auditing and Acct'g Services Engineering -Consulting GIS/Mapping Legal -Consulting IT Services Fleet Services Professional Services Total Professional Services Insurances General Liability Ins Umbrella Liability Ins Equipment Floaters Ins Automotive Insurance Insurance Agent of Record Insurance Deductibles City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Storm Water cont. 49910 15,663 21,500 37,200 73.02% 500 2,950 3,500 18.64% 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease 3,500 3,500 3,500 0.00% 11,942 15,000 8,000 -46.67% 0 0 6,000 N/A 222 1,000 1,000 0.00% 0 2,000 5,000 150.00% 0 0 13,700 N/A 0 0 0 N/A 15,663 21,500 37,200 73.02% 500 2,950 3,500 18.64% 220 0 0 N/A 1,250 280 300 7.14% 0 150 100 -33.33% 0 0 0 N/A 0 0 0 N/A Total Insurances 1,970 3,380 3,900 15.38% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 123 Other Expenses Postage Travel Expenses Printing & Publishing Depreciation & Amortization Other Equipment Rentals Software Licensing Memberships Training & Development Administrative Charge Licenses & Taxes Other Miscellaneous Charges Total Other Expenses Total Operating Expenses City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Storm Water cont. 49910 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease 1,262 5,100 1,700 -66.67% 0 0 0 N/A 24 0 0 N/A 46,257 53,500 62,000 15.89% 0 0 0 N/A 3,208 2,000 0 -100.00% 1,020 58,780 59,000 0.37% 155 500 500 0.00% 16,000 51,330 53,700 4.62% 0 0 0 N/A 0 1,000 1,000 0.00% 67,926 172,210 177,900 3.30% 144,365 356,810 373,000 4.54% Non -Operating Expenses Easements & Rights of Way 0 0 0 N/A Storm Sewer Utility Const 0 0 0 N/A Total Non -Operating Expenses 0 0 0 N/A Total Stormwater Fund 144,365 356,810 373,000 4.54% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 124 2020 Enterprise Fund Operating Budget Departmental Summary Cable Franchise 49840 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Cable TV Fund was created to account for the Franchise fees that are collectected as part of the City's Franchise agreement with Mediacom. Expenditures include costs associated with recording and streaming meetings. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Included in 'Personal Services' are 10% of the wages for the IT Tech *Professional Services includes IT Services and audit charges. * Other Expenses include webcasting/online content and an administrative charge to the General Fund City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 125 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Adopted (Decrease) Personal Services 14,026 18,430 20,600 11.77% Supplies & Maintenance 330 2,000 0 -100.00% Professional Services 5,335 9,500 16,000 68.42% Other Expenses 32,253 37,100 34,600 -6.74% Total Sewer Operating Fund 51,944 67,030 71,200 6.22% PROGRAM DESCRIPTION & OBJECTIVES: The Cable TV Fund was created to account for the Franchise fees that are collectected as part of the City's Franchise agreement with Mediacom. Expenditures include costs associated with recording and streaming meetings. OPERATING COST ACTIVITIES: *Included in 'Personal Services' are 10% of the wages for the IT Tech *Professional Services includes IT Services and audit charges. * Other Expenses include webcasting/online content and an administrative charge to the General Fund City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 125 City of Orono 2020 Line Item Budget Cable Franchise 49840 City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 126 2018 2019 2020 Increase Actual Budget Recommended Decrease Personal Services Full -Time Employees Regular 12,470 13,990 14,800 5.79% Full -Time Employees Overtime 0 0 0 N/A PERA 935 1,050 1,100 4.76% FICA 954 1,080 1,100 1.85% City Benefit Contribution 0 2,200 3,500 59.09% Worker's Comp Insurance Prem 86 110 100 -9.09% Total Personal Services 14,445 18,430 20,600 11.77% Professional Services Auditing and Acct'g Services 2,000 2,000 2,000 0.00% Legal -Consulting 0 0 0 N/A IT Services 0 7,500 10,000 33.33% Professional Services 3,335 0 4,000 N/A Total Professional Services 5,335 9,500 16,000 68.42% Other Expenses Internet/Other Communications 24,863 30,000 30,000 0.00% Repairs/Maint-Office Equip 330 2,000 0 -100.00% Depreciation & Amortization 4,890 4,600 4,600 0.00% Administrative Charge 2,500 2,500 0 -100.00% Total Other Expenses 32,583 39,100 34,600 -11.51% Total Operating Expenses 52,363 67,030 71,200 6.22% Total Cable TV Fund 52,363 67,030 71,200 6.22% City of Orono - 2020 Budget Page 126 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 25, 2019 7:00 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: City Council Members Richard Crosby II, Matt Johnson, Aaron Printup, and Victoria Seals. The following member was absent: Mayor Dennis Walsh. Representing Staff were City Administrator Dustin Rief and Public Works Director/City Engineer Adam Edwards. Acting Mayor Printup 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 NOVEMBER 12, 2019 2. CLAIMS/BILLS 3. APPROVAL OF 2020 LIQUOR LICENSES 4. LIQUOR VIOLATION — ORONO GOLF COURSE 5. SMALL WIRELESS FACILITY COLLOCATION AGREEMENT WITH VERIZON WIRELESS 6. ACCEPT RESIGNATION & RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR SANDY PETTIT 7. NON -WAIVER OF TORT LIMITS 8. APPROVAL TO DISPOSE OF BICYCLES Crosby moved, Seals seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PUBLIC COMMENTS None PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER REPORT 9. 2020 DRAFT PUBLIC WORKS PLAN Edwards stated he annually puts together a list of the capital improvements as well as the larger operating budget expenses within Public Works for the upcoming year. The Plan is broken out by department, and approval this evening gives direction as far as expending Staff and starting consulting efforts towards achieving the aims. All of the capital improvement plans will come before the City Council again for approval before expenditures can be made. Crosby moved, Seals seconded, to approve the 2020 Public Works Plan. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Page 1 of 3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 25, 2019 7:00 o'clock p.m. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Seals stated Thanksgiving is coming, snow is forecast, so everyone should be careful on the roads. Tree Lighting will be December 7. The Public Works Staff took care of all the decorating. If there is snow, sledding is possible. Johnson asked about beverage options available at the golf course. Seals said December 7 will be the opening night of the winter season at the golf course. There will be staff on weekends for limited hours; and there will be food and a variety of beverages available, including those of a fun nature. Edwards said he thought the hours were 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Crosby wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving with special thoughts going out to Veterans who are overseas and can't be with their families. Johnson said he mentioned to Rief that maybe summer hours should be reviewed, as far as whether they should be kept as -is. Seals agreed that should be looked at and said she did not feel the summer hours are fair to the rest of the staff, commenting neither Public Works nor the Police get summer hours. In addition, Maple Plain extended their summer hours because that is the busiest time for a lot of their departments. Johnson suggested getting public feedback and said he knew of a couple instances where someone wanted to accomplish something but it was closed already. Printup asked if Work Sessions would be talking about it. Rief said it is on the schedule for January 27 and it can be worked on this winter. Printup wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving and added we need to be thankful because we are the greatest country on earth. He referenced the history of the first Thanksgiving and encouraged fellow Council members to look up the story. Printup asked for clarification of the December meeting time. Rief stated the start time was 6:30 p.m. Johnson asked about the acronym along with the council meeting information on the website. Rief stated it was TnT, Truth In Taxation, which is a public hearing for anybody to comment on the budget. That meeting is set at the beginning of every year/when the calendar is approved which will take place at 6:30 on December 9. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT Page 2 of 3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 25, 2019 7:00 o'clock p.m. Rief noted City plows would be out shortly and reminded everyone not to follow too closely and to slow down if it is slick. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT There was no Attorney Report. ADJOURNMENT Seals moved, Crosby seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 7:11 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor Page 3 of 3 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 3 Item Description: Claims/Bills Date: December 9, 2019 Presenter: Ron Olson Agenda Consent Agenda Finance Director 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 112973 to 113070, totaling $178,566.47. 3. Noteworthy Payments. Vendor Amount Description of Payment #113023 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District $14,568.75 Payment for 4' quarter Lake Minnetonka Conservation District levy. #113028 LOGIS $33,779.65 Payment for hosted server project, core switch replacement and software renewals for 2020. #113034 Minger Construction $10,755.22 Final payment for the 2018 Drainage Improvement Project. 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:./ MP—'U Reviewed By: 5d1(9 Approved By: -SbV City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 1 Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Invoice GL Account Check Check Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number City of Wayzata\DMV 12/04/2019 112814 103019 Total 112814: Bottled Water Police Department 7.98- CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 11/27/2019 112909 111919 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 11/27/2019 112909 111919 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 11/27/2019 112909 111919 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 11/27/2019 112909 111919 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 11/27/2019 112909 111919 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 11/27/2019 112909 111919 CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH 11/27/2019 112909 111919 Total 112909: UPS Shipping Charge Police Department 43.71- NAVARRE HARDWARE 11/27/2019 112946 164554 NAVARRE HARDWARE 11/27/2019 112946 321335 NAVARRE HARDWARE 11/27/2019 112946 321354 Total 112946: Christmas Tree Extension Cord Special Projects -Contingencies 103.56 NAVARRE HARDWARE 11/27/2019 112973 321335 NAVARRE HARDWARE 11/27/2019 112973 321354 Total 112973: Bottled Water Police Department 7.98 Bridgewater Bank 11/27/2019 112974 111919 Bridgewater Bank 11/27/2019 112974 111919 Bridgewater Bank 11/27/2019 112974 111919 Bridgewater Bank 11/27/2019 112974 111919 Bridgewater Bank 11/27/2019 112974 111919 Bridgewater Bank 11/27/2019 112974 111919 Bridgewater Bank 11/27/2019 112974 111919 Total 112974: 1550 Bohns Pt Rd Install Conduit Sewer 4,271.95 A 1 ELECTRIC SERVICE OF WA 12/09/2019 112977 21739 A 1 ELECTRIC SERVICE OF WA 12/09/2019 112977 21740 A 1 ELECTRIC SERVICE OF WA 12/09/2019 112977 21741 A 1 ELECTRIC SERVICE OF WA 12/09/2019 112977 21743 A 1 ELECTRIC SERVICE OF WA 12/09/2019 112977 21805 Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount 231-45650-441 2000 GMC Yukon 37.00- 37.00- 101-42110-439 Bottled Water Police Department 7.98- 101-42110-489 Alcohol Compliance Police Department 55.30- 101-42110-489 Tobacco Compliance Police Department 8.47- 101-42110-401 Repair coffee machine Police Department 4.49- 101-42110-331 Parking Reimbursement Police Department 7.00- 101-41300-489 Condolence Card Administration 3.77- 101-42110-322 Postage Police Department 1.76- 88.77- 101-42110-322 UPS Shipping Charge Police Department 43.71- 101-43290-800 Christmas Tree Extension Cord Special Projects -Contingencies 103.56- 601-49400-223 Utility Heater Water 59.98- 207.25- 101-43290-800 Christmas Tree Extension Cord Special Projects -Contingencies 103.56 601-49400-223 Utility Heater Water 59.98 163.54 101-42110-439 Bottled Water Police Department 7.98 101-42110-489 Alcohol Compliance Police Department 55.30 101-42110-489 Tobacco Compliance Police Department 8.47 101-42110-401 Repair coffee machine Police Department 4.49 101-42110-331 Parking Reimbursement Police Department 7.00 101-41300-489 Condolence Card Administration 3.77 101-42110-322 Postage Police Department 1.76 88.77 602-49450-406 1550 Bohns Pt Rd Install Conduit Sewer 4,271.95 602-16500 LS #1 Generator Install 4,276.91 602-16500 LS #9 Generator Install 1,423.90 225-45200-520 Bederwood Electrical Locating 120.00 101-43000-404 PW South Door Garage Opener Public Works Department 145.79 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 2 Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Total 112977: Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number PW Copier Lease 11/20/19-12/20/19 Total 112978: Amount A 1 ELECTRIC SERVICE OF WA 12/09/2019 112977 21807 101-41900-403 CH & PD Sprinkler System Replace Extension Cord Central Services 423.61 A 1 ELECTRIC SERVICE OF WA 12/09/2019 112977 21808 101-41900-404 CH CC Replace Exit Lights Central Services 335.90 Total 112977: ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIO 12/09/2019 112978 400905162 710-49970-413 PW Copier Lease 11/20/19-12/20/19 Total 112978: ALLSTREAM 12/09/2019 112979 16507643 101-42110-321 Phone service ALLSTREAM 12/09/2019 112979 16507643 101-41900-321 Phone Service ALLSTREAM 12/09/2019 112979 16507643 601-49400-321 Phone Service ALLSTREAM 12/09/2019 112979 16507643 602-49450-321 Phone Service Total 112979: ANNA CARLSON 12/09/2019 112980 2019 101-41300-437 MCFOAConference ANNA CARLSON 12/09/2019 112980 2019 101-41410-437 Election Judge Training Discussion ANNA CARLSON 12/09/2019 112980 2019 101-41300-437 LMCIT Safety & Loss Workshop ANNA CARLSON 12/09/2019 112980 2019 101-41410-331 Ballot Counter Pickup ANNA CARLSON 12/09/2019 112980 2019 101-41410-437 PNP Training ANNA CARLSON 12/09/2019 112980 2019 101-45200-331 Park Commission Cupcakes ANNA CARLSON 12/09/2019 112980 2019 603-49500-331 Recycling Meeting ANNACARLSON 12/09/2019 112980 2019 101-41300-331 Mileage Reimbursement Total 112980: ASPEN EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 112981 10210592 701-49800-402 Unit #426, 427, 424 Repairs Total 112981: Aspen Mills 12/09/2019 112982 244917 101-42110-226 Uniform Total 112982: BAGY JO Inc 12/09/2019 112983 69385 101-42110-229 Explorer Polo Shirts Total 112983: Berkley Risk Admin Co LLC 12/09/2019 112984 5384 703-49960-379 Skid Steer Backed into Vehicle Police Department Central Services Water Sewer Administration Elections Administration Elections Elections Parks Administration Police Department Police Department 10,998.06 116.76 116.76 433.72 72.29 42.69 28.19 28.19 20.07 31.20 6.03 14.85 147.90 1,561.95 375.60 375.60 59.00 59.00 1.776.84 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 3 Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Payee Issue Date Number Number Total 112984: Description Department Invoice Amount 1,776.84 BIFFS INC 12/09/2019 112985 W742780 101-45200-415 Bederwood Park Parks 99.57 BIFFS INC 12/09/2019 112985 W742781 101-45200-415 Summit Beach Parks 99.57 BIFFS INC 12/09/2019 112985 W742782 101-45200-415 Hackberry Park Parks 80.76 BIFFS INC 12/09/2019 112985 W742783 101-45210-415 Orono Golf Course Golf Course 40.38 BIFFS INC 12/09/2019 112985 W742784 101-45200-415 Crystal Bay Playground Parks 40.38 BIFFS INC 12/09/2019 112985 W742785 101-45200-415 Navarre Playground Parks 99.57 BIFFS INC 12/09/2019 112985 W742786 101-45200-415 French Creek Preserve Parks 40.38 BIFFS INC 12/09/2019 112985 W742787 101-45200-415 Lurton Park Parks 96.50 BIFFS INC 12/09/2019 112985 W742788 101-45220-415 Brush Site Brush Site 40.38 Total 112985: 637.49 BRAD SCHOENHERR 12/09/2019 112986 112619 101-42110-226 SWAT Equipment and Clothing Police Department 1,384.44 Total 112986: 1,384.44 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 110419 225-45200-489 Cupcakes for PC 14.97 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 110719-2 101-41300-489 Staff Retirement Card Administration 6.12 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 111219-2 101-41110-439 Cookies for CC Meeting 11/12/19 Mayor & Council 3.99 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 111519 101-41110-439 Picture of LMCD Representative w/ Frame Mayor & Council 11.81 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 111519-1 234-45680-221 Dog Park Tree Signs 399.93 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112119 101-45210-223 Natural Gas Fireplace Insert Golf Course 2,149.00 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112219 101-42110-229 Explorers Year -End Banquet Police Department 232.18 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112219-1 101-42110-226 Uniforms Shirts Police Department 91.85 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112519 101-41300-489 Staff Retirement Administration 12.90 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112519-1 101-41300-489 Staff Retirement Administration 27.52 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112519-1 101-41110-439 Cookies for CC Meeting 11/25/19 Mayor & Council 4.49 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112519-2 101-42110-321 Phone Charges Police Department 32.16 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112619 101-41300-489 Staff Retirement Administration 68.15 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112619-1 101-41300-489 Staff Retirement - Food Administration 67.62 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112719 101-41300-489 Staff Clean Up Day - Food Administration 55.83 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112719-1 101-41300-489 Staff Clean Up Day - Drinks Administration 17.19 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 112719-2 101-42110-489 City Cleanup - Lunch - PD Police Department 136.63 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 120319 101-42110-229 Explorers Holiday Appreciation Dinner Police Department 15.16 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 120319-1 101-42110-229 Explorers Holiday Appreciation Dinner Police Department 64.25 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 120319-2 101-45210-441 Liquor Buyer's Card Golf Course 20.50 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 12/09/2019 112987 120419 101-43000-437 Bridge Refresher Training Public Works Department 125.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Payee Issue Date Number Number Total 112987: CARGILL SALT 12/09/2019 112988 2905083512 601-49400-216 Nav Wtr Plant Salt Total 112988: CEMSTONE 12/09/2019 112989 C2129654 101-43000-224 Storage Bins Total 112989: Century Link 12/09/2019 112990 111919 101-45210-321 GC phone/internet 11/19/19-12/18/19 Total 112990: CHAD STENSRUD 12/09/2019 112991 110219 101-42110-226 investigator clothing Total 112991: CHRIS FISCHER 12/09/2019 112992 112619 101-42110-226 Reimburse -Clothing CHRIS FISCHER 12/09/2019 112992 2019 101-42110-439 WCC Meetings Jan -April 2019 CHRIS FISCHER 12/09/2019 112992 2019 101-42110-439 GTO Luncheon Total 112992: Christianson, Carver 12/09/2019 112993 112219 101-42110-319 Compliance Checks Total 112993: CINTAS CORPORATION 12/09/2019 112994 11292019 101-41900-404 Mat Service - CC CINTAS CORPORATION 12/09/2019 112994 4033485079 101-43000-226 Uniform CINTAS CORPORATION 12/09/2019 112994 4033485079 101-43000-221 Shop Towels CINTAS CORPORATION 12/09/2019 112994 4035741476 101-43000-226 Uniform CINTAS CORPORATION 12/09/2019 112994 4035741476 101-43000-221 Shop Towels CINTAS CORPORATION 12/09/2019 112994 4035848767 101-41900-404 Mat Service - CC CINTAS CORPORATION 12/09/2019 112994 4035848823 101-41900-404 Mat Service - CH CINTAS CORPORATION 12/09/2019 112994 4036374386 101-43000-226 Uniform CINTAS CORPORATION 12/09/2019 112994 4036374386 101-43000-221 Shop Towels Department Water Public Works Department Golf Course Police Department Police Department Police Department Police Department Police Department Central Services Public Works Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Central Services Central Services Public Works Department Public Works Department Page: 4 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Invoice 3,557.25 5,226.44 5,226.44 1,040.00 1,040.00 233.38 233.38 94.73 94.73 10.80- 59.54 2.63 59.54 2.63 10.80 21.92 59.54 2.63 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Payee Issue Date Number Number Total 112994: CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 12/09/2019 112995 1900348 601-49400-489 Bacterial Water Testing Water Total 112995: CITYVIEW PLUMBING & HEATIN 12/09/2019 112996 102717366 601-49400-405 2871 Casco Pt Rd Repl Water Meter and Horn Water Total 112996: COMMERCIAL ASPHALT 12/09/2019 112997 191115 101-43000-224 2019 Road Patching 19-009 Public Works Department Total 112997: CONCEPT LANDSCAPING 12/09/2019 112998 120519 101-22205 Escrow Refund RAS19-000026 1300 Spruce PI Total 112998: CORE & MAIN 12/09/2019 112999 L500932 101-45210-223 Golf Drainage Fittings Golf Course Total 112999: David Weekley Homes 12/09/2019 113000 120519 101-22205 Escrow Refund RPS19-000044 580 Sandhill Dr David Weekley Homes 12/09/2019 113000 120519 101-39615 Escrow Refund RPS19-000044 580 Sandhill Dr Total 113000: DELTA DENTAL 12/09/2019 113001 7818130 101-21709 4842130001 December 2019 Dental DELTA DENTAL 12/09/2019 113001 7818130 101-15998 4842130001 December 2019 Dental Total 113001: DUSTIN RIEF 12/09/2019 113002 2019 101-41300-331 Mileage Reimbursement Administration Total 113002: ECM PUBLISHERS INC 12/09/2019 113003 738328 101-41900-352 Ordinance 234 Central Services ECM PUBLISHERS INC 12/09/2019 113003 739920 101-41900-352 Ordinance 234 Central Services ECM PUBLISHERS INC 12/09/2019 113003 741595 408-48800-590 CSAH 112 Phase 2 Bids Page: 5 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Invoice Amount 208.43 31.50 31.50 517.29 517.29 191.27 191.27 1,000.00 1,000.00 59.36 59.36 1,000.00 30.00- 3,204.13 188.15 188.15 50.66 71.52 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Page: 6 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Payee Check Issue Date Check Number Invoice Number Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount Total 113003: 169.86 EDDIES AUTO AND MARINE 12/09/2019 113004 47581 101-42110-402 Squad Tires and Repair Police Department 310.00 Total 113004: 310.00 EMBEDDED SYSTEMS INC. 12/09/2019 113005 343988 101-42110-403 Siren Maint 01/01/20-6/30/20 Police Department 1,107.00 Total 113005: 1,107.00 FILEONQ INC 12/09/2019 113006 8125 101-42110-221 CipherLab Mobile Scanner Police Department 575.00 Total 113006: 575.00 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 12/09/2019 113007 3270-452968 101-45210-240 Golf Shop Supplies Golf Course 31.97 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 12/09/2019 113007 3270-459747 701-49800-222 Unit #712 Parking Brake Cable Task 33564 54.99 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 12/09/2019 113007 3270-460096 701-49800-222 Unit #429 Oil Filter Task 34393 79.52 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 12/09/2019 113007 3270-460108 701-49800-222 Unit #429 Air Filter 156.76 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 12/09/2019 113007 3270-460370 701-49800-222 Unit #431 Resistor and Washer Pump 49.98 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 12/09/2019 113007 426450 101-42110-402 Credit for Squad Supplies Police Department 373.22 - Total 113007: .00 GEPHART ELECTRIC CO INC 12/09/2019 113008 158990 601-49400-405 Install Starter for Well Pump #4 Water 1,102.84 Total 113008: 1,102.84 GOPHERACE 12/09/2019 113009 8547143 101-42110-221 PD Cleaning Supplies & Hardware Police Department 22.76 GOPHERACE 12/09/2019 113009 B547174 101-42110-221 PD Cleaning Supplies Police Department 17.58 Total 113009: 40.34 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 12/09/2019 113010 9110649 601-49400-489 locates Water 144.45 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 12/09/2019 113010 9110649 602-49450-489 locates Sewer 144.45 Total 113010: 288.90 H & L MESABI 12/09/2019 113011 05016 701-49800-222 Snow Plow Cutting Edge 2,125.10 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Page: 7 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Payee Check Issue Date Check Number Invoice Number Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount Total 113011: 2,125.10 HEATHER GEHLEN 12/09/2019 113012 112119 101-42110-437 Training & Conference - Mileage Reimb. Police Department 47.56 Total 113012: 47.56 HENNEPIN COUNTY ELECTION 12/09/2019 113013 1219-1 101-41410-322 2019 PVC's Elections 332.71 HENNEPIN COUNTY ELECTION 12/09/2019 113013 1219-2 101-41410-221 AutoMARK Machine Maintenance Elections 1,923.20 Total 113013: 2,255.91 Hennepin County Public Works G 12/09/2019 113014 1000136130 602-49450-441 HCRRA Lease 10/14/19-9/30/2020 Sewer 366.69 Total 113014: 366.69 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASUR 12/09/2019 113015 112219 101-41900-352 2020 TNT Costs Central Services 1,082.05 Total 113015: 1,082.05 HERC U LIFT 12/09/2019 113016 R056334 101-43000-415 Lift Rental For Xmas Deco Public Works Department 948.50 Total 113016: 948.50 JACKIE YOUNG 12/09/2019 113017 111819 101-41300-319 CC Meeting 10/14/19 Administration 190.00 JACKIE YOUNG 12/09/2019 113017 111819 101-41300-319 CC Meeting 10/28/19 Administration 165.00 JACKIE YOUNG 12/09/2019 113017 111819 101-42400-319 PC Meeting 10/21/19 Building & Zoning 240.00 JACKIE YOUNG 12/09/2019 113017 111819 101-45200-319 Park Meeting 11/4/19 Parks 190.00 Total 113017: 785.00 JAM] WITTKE 12/09/2019 113018 120319 101-42110-226 Uniform Reimbursement Police Department 47.00 Total 113018: 47.00 JANE SZCZEPANIK 12/09/2019 113019 111419 101-42110-226 Investigation Uniforms Police Department 116.45 Total 113019: 116.45 John Kraemer & Sons 12/09/2019 113020 120519 101-22205 Escrow Refund RPS18-4 & D18-7 2565 Kelly Ave 9,002.50 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 8 Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Payee Check Issue Date Check Number Invoice Number Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount John Kraemer & Sons 12/09/2019 113020 120519 101-39615 Escrow Refund RPS18-4 & D18-7 2565 Kelly Ave 30.08 - Total 113020: 8,972.42 JOHNSON CONTROLS FIRE PR 12/09/2019 113021 21298668 101-41900-404 PW Fire Alarm Monitoring & Sprinkler System Central Services 818.80 Total 113021: 818.80 JR'S ADVANCED RECYCLERS 12/09/2019 113022 99542 603-49500-442 Discarded Items from Ditches 344.00 Total 113022: 344.00 LAKE MTKA CONSERVATION DI 12/09/2019 113023 093019 651-49910-433 4th Qtr 2019 LMCD Levy Storm Water 14,568.75 Total 113023: 14,568.75 LANO EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 113024 03-717486 701-49800-222 Bobcat Wheel Bolts/Nuts 31.08 LANO EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 113024 03-717846 701-49800-222 Hydraulic Fluid S250/S570 87.20 LANO EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 113024 03-718872 701-49800-222 Unit #452 BPA Replacement Grapple Bucket 171.36 Total 113024: 289.64 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES 12/09/2019 113025 120219 703-39640 Due to LMCIT for Dock Claim CP87922 5,985.73 Total 113025: 5,985.73 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES 12/09/2019 113026 312235 101-42110-437 PATROL Subscription Police Department 2,610.00 Total 113026: 2,610.00 Lieberman, Samuel 12/09/2019 113027 112219 101-42110-319 Compliance Checks Police Department 45.00 Total 113027: 45.00 LOGIS 12/09/2019 113028 47850 405-48500-575 Hosted Servers Project 1,937.50 LOGIS 12/09/2019 113028 47878 101-42110-310 Police Records 12/19 Police Department 7,293.00 LOGIS 12/09/2019 113028 47878 101-41900-329 Backups 12/19 Central Services 850.00 LOGIS 12/09/2019 113028 47878 710-49970-329 Internet 12/19 218.00 LOGIS 12/09/2019 113028 47878 614-49840-329 Internet 12/19 Cable Franchise 218.00 LOGIS 12/09/2019 113028 47923 405-48500-580 Core Switch Replacement 21,994.47 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 9 Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Payee Check Issue Date Check Number Invoice Number Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount LOGIS 12/09/2019 113028 47923 710-49970-221 Patch Cables 267.80 LOGIS 12/09/2019 113028 47923 710-49970-416 VMware Renewal 607.56 LOGIS 12/09/2019 113028 47923 710-49970-416 Cisco Web Security Renewal 393.32 Total 113028: 33,779.65 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 113029 P23591 701-49800-221 Sweeper Mirror Task 34132 91.65 Total 113029: 91.65 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 12/09/2019 113030 21558063 101-42110-212 Unleaded Fuel Police Department 2,103.27 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 12/09/2019 113030 21558064 701-49800-212 Diesel Fuel 301.63 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 12/09/2019 113030 21558109 101-42110-212 Unleaded Fuel Police Department 1,081.52 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 12/09/2019 113030 21558110 701-49800-212 Diesel Fuel 542.26 Total 113030: 4,028.68 MARGARET UNG 12/09/2019 113031 120319 101-41500-331 Mileage 11/21/19 Finance Department 6.38 MARGARET UNG 12/09/2019 113031 120319 101-41300-489 Staff Development Event Administration 29.96 Total 113031: 36.34 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTA 12/09/2019 113032 113019 101-39610 November 2019 SAC 74.55 - MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTA 12/09/2019 113032 113019 101-20809 November 2019 SAC 7,455.00 Total 113032: 7,380.45 METRO WEST INSPECTIONS S 12/09/2019 113033 2205 101-42400-310 Inspection Services Oct 2019 Building & Zoning 9,222.00 Total 113033: 9,222.00 MINGER CONSTRUCTION 12/09/2019 113034 EST3-FINAL 651-20600 2018 Drainage Improvements 18-016 5,755.22 MINGER CONSTRUCTION 12/09/2019 113034 EST3-FINAL 651-16500 2018 Drainage Improvements 18-016 5,000.00 Total 113034: 10,755.22 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 113035 P87711 101-45210-221 Greensmaster Spark Plugs Golf Course 8.49 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 113035 P87714 101-45210-221 Greensmaster Parts Golf Course 26.10 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 113035 P87803 101-45210-221 Greensmaster Filters Golf Course 55.98 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 113035 P88131 101-45210-403 Greensmaster Tire Repair Golf Course 29.95 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Page: 10 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Payee Check Issue Date Check Number Invoice Number Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 113035 P88142 101-45210-221 Rough Mower Parts Golf Course 61.30 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT 12/09/2019 113035 P88163 101-45200-221 Snowblower Shoes Parks 105.36 Total 113035: 287.18 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 12/09/2019 113036 120119 601-20802 2019 -4th Qtr Water Connection fee 1,695.00 Total 113036: 1,695.00 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUST 12/09/2019 113037 ABR0222759 101-43000-403 Pressure Vessel Public Works Department 30.00 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUST 12/09/2019 113037 ABR0222760 601-49400-403 Navarre Water Plant Treatment Water 10.00 Total 113037: 40.00 MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 12/09/2019 113038 113019 101-34210 Sales Tax 11/2019 1.00 MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 12/09/2019 113038 113019 101-34650 Sales Tax 11/2019 18.00 MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 12/09/2019 113038 113019 601-39610 Sales Tax 11/2019 51.00 MN DEPT OF REVENUE -WIRE 12/09/2019 113038 113019 101-37910 Sales Tax 11/2019 7.00 Total 113038: 77.00 MN MOLD INSPECTION LLC 12/09/2019 113039 ORONGOLF 101-45210-404 Golf Course Mold Inspection Golf Course 625.00 Total 113039: 625.00 MN NATIVE LANDSCAPE 12/09/2019 113040 22422 101-45200-404 Saga Hill Herbicide Application Parks 1,550.00 Total 113040: 1,550.00 MOUND TRUE VALUE 12/09/2019 113041 164554 101-42110-322 UPS Shipping Charge - Weapon Police Department 43.71 MOUND TRUE VALUE 12/09/2019 113041 164665 101-42110-240 PD Supplies Police Department 37.10 MOUND TRUE VALUE 12/09/2019 113041 164771 101-42110-221 PD Supplies Police Department 20.17 Total 113041: 100.98 MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATI 12/09/2019 113042 00336143 101-41900-352 Code of Ordinance Updates Central Services 1,180.00 Total 113042: 1,180.00 NAVARRE HARDWARE 12/09/2019 113043 321700 101-42110-240 Shovels For Patrol Use on Calls Police Department 17.99 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 11 Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Payee Issue Date Number Number Total 113043: NEWEGG INC 12/09/2019 113044 1302505284 710-49970-221 Cables for PW Trucks NEWEGG INC 12/09/2019 113044 1302505998 710-49970-221 Monitor for Microfiche NEWEGG INC 12/09/2019 113044 1302506211 710-49970-221 Cables for PW Trucks NEWEGG INC 12/09/2019 113044 1302508029 710-49970-221 Monitor Adaptor for Microfiche Computer Monitor Total 113044: NOLA DICKHAUSEN 12/09/2019 113045 120419 101-41410-437 Election Training Mileage Reimbursement Total 113045: NOVA COMMUNICATIONS 12/09/2019 113046 135140 710-49970-401 Annual Server & Software Support Total 113046: OFFICE DEPOT 12/09/2019 113047 3885017580 101-42110-201 Office Supplies - PD OFFICE DEPOT 12/09/2019 113047 3885024430 101-42110-201 Office Supplies - PD OFFICE DEPOT 12/09/2019 113047 3941000440 101-42110-201 Office Supplies - PD OFFICE DEPOT 12/09/2019 113047 3941322390 101-42110-201 Office Supplies - PD OFFICE DEPOT 12/09/2019 113047 3966865830 101-41900-201 Office Supplies OFFICE DEPOT 12/09/2019 113047 4054286050 101-42110-201 Office Supplies - PD Total 113047: OP5 Orono LLC 12/09/2019 113048 120519 101-22205 Escrow Refund LA19-000079 580 Sandhill Dr Total 113048: Professional Yacht Services 12/09/2019 113049 1529 101-45200-402 Shrink Wrap - Big Island Pontoon Total 113049: RANDYS ENVIRONMENTAL SER 12/09/2019 113050 NOVEMBER 101-41900-404 Garbage Service RANDYS ENVIRONMENTAL SER 12/09/2019 113050 NOVEMBER 101-45200-404 Garbage Service RANDYS ENVIRONMENTAL SER 12/09/2019 113050 NOVEMBER 101-45220-404 Garbage Service Department Invoice Amount Elections Police Department Police Department Police Department Police Department Central Services Police Department Parks Central Services Parks Brush Site 17.99 269.99 21.90 5.49 23.78 90.26 21.16 31.49 160.33 25.11- 25.44- City of Orono 12/09/2019 113055 1452446 101-41900-319 Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Central Services Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Payee Issue Date Number Number 12/09/2019 113055 Total 113050: 601-49400-319 Annual Fire Extinguisher Inspection -Well House Water SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/09/2019 SAFETY VEHICLE SOLUTIONS 12/09/2019 113051 1880 701-49800-402 Unit #429 Replacement Warning Lights TAsk 34380 SAFETY VEHICLE SOLUTIONS 12/09/2019 113051 1881 701-49800-222 Replacement Warning Lights Total 113051: SCHWAAB INC 12/09/2019 113052 4332223 101-41900-201 Notary Stamp Total 113052: SUN LIFE FINANCIAL 12/09/2019 113056 1219LIFE SCOTT OBERAIGNER 12/09/2019 113053 120319 101-43000-226 2019 Safety Boots Total 113053: 101-21714 STD-Dec/2019 Total 113056: STOP STICK LTD 12/09/2019 113054 0016169 -IN 101-42110-580 New Stop Stick for Squads Total 113054: 113057 112019 101-41600-306 Prosecution Services -11/2019 Law/Legal Services Department Central Services Public Works Department Police Department SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/09/2019 113055 1452446 101-41900-319 Annual Fire Extinguisher Inspection -CH Central Services SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/09/2019 113055 1452447 101-45210-319 Annual Fire Extinguisher Inspection -GC Golf Course SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/09/2019 113055 1452469 601-49400-319 Annual Fire Extinguisher Inspection -Well House Water SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/09/2019 113055 1453287 101-42110-319 Annl Fire Extinguisher Inspection -PD Police Department SUMMIT COMPANIES 12/09/2019 113055 1453292 101-43000-319 Annual Fire Extinguisher Inspection -PW Public Works Department Total 113055: SUN LIFE FINANCIAL 12/09/2019 113056 1219LIFE 101-15998 Life Ins-Dec/2019 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL 12/09/2019 113056 1219LIFE 101-21710 Life Ins-Dec/2019 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL 12/09/2019 113056 1219STD 101-21714 STD-Dec/2019 Total 113056: TALLEN AND BAERTSCHI 12/09/2019 113057 112019 101-41600-306 Prosecution Services -11/2019 Law/Legal Services Total 113057: Terry & Lynda Sandvold 12/09/2019 113058 120519 101-22205 Escrow Refund RAS19-17/27 1140 Wyndmere Rd Terry & Lynda Sandvold 12/09/2019 113058 120519 101-39615 Escrow Refund RAS19-17/27 1140 Wyndmere Rd Page: 12 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Invoice Amount 525.93 525.00 330.00 855.00 37.75 37.75 184.79 184.79 380.00 380.00 25.00 30.00 82.00 353.00 499.00 989.00 43.40 1,167.35 835.65 2,046.40 4,541.65 4,541.65 2,000.00 30.00- City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Page: 13 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Department Invoice Amount 1,970.00 1,732.03 1,732.03 Parks Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Payee Issue Date Number Number Police Department 204.96 204.96 176.63 176.63 Total 113058: 75.00 75.00 Central Services 272.75 THE HARTFORD 12/09/2019 113059 1219LTD 101-21713 LTD 12/2019 Total 113059: 324.81 Police Department 94.00 94.00 THE HOME DEPOT 12/09/2019 113060 2525532 101-45200-221 Park Supplies THE HOME DEPOT 12/09/2019 113060 4311203 101-43290-800 Parks Christmas Event THE HOME DEPOT 12/09/2019 113060 7012741 101-43290-800 Parks Christmas Event THE HOME DEPOT 12/09/2019 113060 9019625 101-43000-221 Small Tools - PW Total 113060: THOMSON WEST 12/09/2019 113061 841376371 101-42110-311 West Information Total 113061: TITAN MACHINERY 12/09/2019 113062 13305554 701-49800-222 Unit #429 Mirror Total 113062: TRI COUNTY LAW ENFORCEME 12/09/2019 113063 111519 101-42110-319 2020 Dues Total 113063: TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 12/09/2019 113064 Z118223 101-41900-404 PW Door Repair Total 113064: TWIN CITY SEED COMPANY 12/09/2019 113065 46055 101-45210-223 Tee Box Seed Blanket TWIN CITY SEED COMPANY 12/09/2019 113065 46057 101-45210-223 Tee Box Supplies Total 113065: UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVI 12/09/2019 113066 120219 101-42110-322 Annual Box Rental Total 113066: VANGUARD CLEANING SYSTE 12/09/2019 113067 69471 101-41900-407 Janitorial service Page: 13 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Department Invoice Amount 1,970.00 1,732.03 1,732.03 Parks 54.80 Special Projects -Contingencies 59.97 Special Projects -Contingencies 157.83 Public Works Department 64.90 337.50 Police Department 204.96 204.96 176.63 176.63 Police Department 75.00 75.00 Central Services 272.75 272.75 Golf Course 106.00 Golf Course 218.81 324.81 Police Department 94.00 94.00 Central Services 1,435.50 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 14 Check Issue Dates: 11/26/2019 - 12/9/2019 Dec 05, 2019 01:51 PM Payee Check Issue Date Check Number Invoice Number Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Amount VANGUARD CLEANING SYSTE 12/09/2019 113067 69471 101-42110-407 Janitorial service Police Department 1,039.50 Total 113067: 2,475.00 VARNER MOBILE SERVICES LL 12/09/2019 113068 7647 701-49800-402 Unit#426 Task 34379 92.75 VARNER MOBILE SERVICES LL 12/09/2019 113068 7648 701-49800-402 Unit #712 Task 33564 Replace Rear Spring and Left 1,339.41 Total 113068: 1,432.16 WILDTHREADS 12/09/2019 113069 24363 101-45210-095 Golf Course apparel Golf Course 1,151.29 Total 113069: 1,151.29 Yamaha Golf & Utility 12/09/2019 113070 01-233532 101-45210-403 Golf Cart Repair Golf Course 2,241.76 Total 113070: 2,241.76 Grand Totals: 178.566.47 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: Authorization to Disburse Claims Presenter: Ron Olson Agenda Consent Agenda Finance Director Section: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to authorize the Treasurer to disburse city funds in payment of claims that would normally be approved at the 2nd meeting in December. 2. Background. Typically during the month of December the City has only one council meeting. The meeting which would fall on or near the Christmas holiday is cancelled. Staff is requesting authorization to process a normal claims processing for the canceled meeting. This practice is routinely done in December with the Council then formally approving the claims at the first meeting in January of the following year. Without this authorization, no claims would be processed from December 9" to January 13th, this would make it difficult to comply with State Stature 471.425 requiring prompt payment of claims. 3. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends authorizing the Treasurer to disburse city funds in payment of claims received for the December 23rd council meeting prior to formal approval at the January 13, 2020 council meeting. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to authorize the City Treasurer to disburse city funds in payment of claims received for the December 23' council meeting which has been canceled, and that such paid claims be presented for formal approval at the January 13, 2020 council meeting. Prepared By: NX Reviewed By: j1ja Approved By: -19 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: Item Description: Adopt 2020 Fee Schedule Date: December 9, 2019 Presenter: Ron Olson, Agenda Consent Agenda Finance Director Section: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to consider the 2020 fee schedule. 2. Background. The City updates its fee schedule annually. Changes to the current fee schedule are highlighted in yellow. New fees for Zoning Applications includes consultant fees. Escrows were removed for Variance Zoning Applications and Vacation for Subdivision easements. Fee was added for l s'time Dock installation, Sign (altercation of cabinet or raceways) and Zoning Confirmation Letter. There were adjustments to the New Development Land Use fees. In the Utility Fee Section, the fees have been adjusted for Water, Sewer, Recycling, and Storm Water as part of the rate study performed in conjunction with the 2020 budget process. These fees were discussed with the Council at the October 28' work session. 3. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the fee schedule as presented. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Consider a motion to adopt the attached Ordinance adopting the City's Fee Schedule for 2020 and Summary Ordinance for publication. Exhibits A. Fee Schedule Ordinance B. Fee Schedule Exhibits Prepared By: J tP-U Reviewed By: StJU Approved By: -SbV ORDINANCE NO. , THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2020 FEE SCHEDULE AND AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 217, THIRD SERIES THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Ordinances Repealed. Ordinance No. 217, Third Series, entitled 2019 Fee Schedule is hereby repealed. SECTION 2. The City Council of Orono per Section 2-171 of the Municipal Code hereby ordains the fees attached as Exhibits A -G effective during the calendar year 2020: SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance establishing the 2020 Fee Schedule shall be published as a Summary Ordinance and shall be effective on January 1, 2020 and publication. ADOPTED this 9th day of December, 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. 2020 Orono Fee Schedule Table of Contents A. Buillding, Planning, and B. License Fees and C. Utility Rates and Fees D. Administrative Offenses E. Park Fees F. Police Administration G. Documents and Services Zoning Miscellaneous Charges Zoning Applications Commercial Marina Sanitary Sewer and Municipal Traffic/ Vehicle Golf Course Dogs at large Zoning Documents Water Connection Zoning Permits Joint Use Dock Sewer Projects Snowmobile Violations Lurton Park Animals at large General Administrative documents Building Code Administration Rental License Water Connections Animals Summit Beach Large Assemble Permit Building Permits Garbage Hauler Water Meter and Horn Public Nuisances Bederwood & Hackberry Fireworks Sport Fields Contractual Inspections Home Occupation Sewer and Water unit Open Burning Firearms adjustment charges Fire Temporary Trailers and Utility Service Fees Noise Trapping Buildings Park Dedication Kennel Licenses Municipal Water Rates Park Violations Special Events Storm Water Trunk Beer, Wine, and Liquor Stormwater Utility Rates Sign Violations False Alarm Amusement Devices Recycling Charge Juvenile Violations Fingerprinting Public Dance Sump Pump Surcharge Seasonal Overweight Vehicles Police Special Services General Administrative PW supplies and service Parking Copy Service Licenses/Fines Miscellaneous Charges Miscellaneous Photos No Parking signs Statements Fire arm storage Exhibit A Buillding, Planning, and Zoning PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING All fees, unless otherwise noted, are application fees and are non-refundable after staff work has begun on the application. All after the fact applications are double fees. All applicants are responsible for actual costs incurred by the City by its' consultants in the review of the application. Application Adiusted Fee Escrow Notes ZONING APPLICATIONS: Variance $275.00 $700.00 + Consultant fees 1st Extension $50.00 $780.00 Staff approved 2nd and subsequent $50.00 $799-89 City Council meeting Conditional Use Permit $275.00 $700.00 + Consultant fees CUP amendment $275.00 $700.00 1st Extension $50.00 Staff approved Interim Use Permit $275.00 $700.00 + Consultant fees Site Plan Review $275.00 $700.00 + Consultant fees Zoning Amendments including map amendments $275.00 $700.00 + Consultant fees Concept Review $275.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $275.00 $700.00 + Consultant fees Subdivision Subdivision: Sketch Plan $275.00 Subdivision: Class I and II $275.00 $1,000.00 + Consultant fees Subdivision: Class III Prel Plat $500.00 $5,000.00 + Consultant fees Subdivision: Final Plat $500.00 $2,500.00 + Consultant fees Subdivision: Preliminary plat extension $275.00 Subdivision Exception $50.00 n/a applicable Vacations Vacations: Road $275.00 $700.00 Vacation: Easement not associated with subdivisions $275.00 $700.00 Vacation: Easements associated with a subdivision $0.00 $80.99 Easement Creation (see Class I Subdivision) $700.00 Appeal of Administrative Decision $150.00 $700.00 ZONING PERMIT: Stairway to Lake $50.00 Structures not requiring a building permit $50.00 plus engineering costs Encroachment Permit/ Agreement $150.00 Tree removal in shore setback $0.00 Signs (Alteration of cabinent or raceway) $50.00 Vehicle Storage $50.00 78-1577 (C) Land Alteration $50.00 $1,000.00 May also require a CUP 1st time dock Dock $50.00 installation Tent/ Canopy Permits $50.00 *City Administrator may require an erosion control $1,000.00 Variable depending on escrow for projects disturbing soils. project scope, but not to exceed Request for zoning Zoning confirmation letter $ 50.00 confirmation letter Application Adjusted Fee Escrow Notes BUILDING CODE ADMINISTRATION: $26.25 Address Change Request by Owner $50.00 Based on Value Building Permits Table 65% of Building Plan Review Fee Permit Fee Minimum Fee $26.25 Based on Value Sign structure Table Based on Value Entrance monuments Table 3% of project value, Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Escrow not to exceed $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $10,000 City Administrator may require an erosion control additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including escrow for projects disturbing soils. $1,000.00 Valuation based on ICC 2012 Building Valuation tables Total Valuation Fee $1.00 to $500 $26.25 $501.00 to $2,000.00 $26.25 for the first $500.00 plus $3.41 for each additional $100.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00 $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $77.40 for the first $2,000.00 plus $15.49 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $433.67 for the first $25,000.00 plus $11.29 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00 $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $715.92 for the first $50,000.00 plus $7.88 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $1109.92 for the first $100,000.00 plus $6.30 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00 $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $3,629.92 for the first $500,000.00 plus $5.25 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 $1,000,001.00 and up $6,254.92 for the first $1,000,000.00 plus $4.20 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof State Surcharge as required by State Demolition: Principal structure Demolition: Accessory structure Retaining walls Plumbing Backflow registration Plumbing minimum Mechanical (All Types) Mechanical Minimum Tent/ Canopy Municipal Connection permit Sewer SAC (Sewer Availability Charge) (MCES) Water Horn $100.00 $50.00 Based on Value Table 1.25% of project $10.00 $26.25 1.25% of project $26.25 $50.00 $50.00 $2,485.00 $50.00 Quote Basis $1,000.00 May require City Council approval $1,000.00 (Variance or CUP) n/a n/a n/a Application Septic Residential System Permit, Repair Residential System Permit, New/ replace Non -Residential System Permit Subdivision site evaluation review Inspection surcharge for RS zones (Big Island and Deering island) Reinspection fee Site inspection without permit Annual Septic Fee Septic Late Fee Contractural Inspection Service Monthly Retainer Fee (Includes clerical time) Inspection Charge Plan Review Charge Clerical Fee (Only charged if clerical use is excessive) FIRE Fire Protection inspection All fire suppression and alarm permits are based on value, and include a plan review fee and are subject to the state surcharge. Fire Plan review fee Burning permits Reinspection Adjusted Fee Escrow Notes $100.00 $460.00 $1,000.00 $260.00 $60.00 Per lot $30.00 $30.00 $30.00 $45.00/per year, plus applicable late fee plus 8% interest for unpaid charges $10.00 $30/ month $30.00 per inspection Per 2008 Building Permit Fee Based on Valuation $20.00 per hour Actual Cost Per 2012 Building Permit Fee Based on Valuation o... 9012 BUila:..,. permit Pee gaged Gf�- 65% of permit fee D... 9019 BUildin. rtt� No Charge $20.00 plus cost of boat rental if transportation not provided. plus $60/ hour after 1st hour PARK DEDICATION Land Dedication Minimum Area - Subdividers shall be required to dedicate to the City for parks, playgrounds, trails, open spaces and other public purposes as a minimum that percentage of gross land area, or other such amount as may be determined by the City Council, as set forth below: (1) Residential/Agricultural/Multiple Residential Zoned Land. Dedication requirement of 8% of the land being platted or subdivided. (Exclusive of lot that includes an existing residence.) (2) Commercial/Industrial Zoned Land. Dedicated requirement of 8% of the land being platted or subdivided. Cash Contribution in Lieu of Lands. In those instances where a cash contribution is to be made by the subdivider, in lieu of a conveyance or dedication of land, the cash contribution to be contributed shall be that would otherwise have been conveyed or dedicated. The City shall account for such funds inequivalent to the fair market value of the equivalent undeveloped land a special fund named Park Dedication Funds. The City Council has established by resolution a minimum residential park fee of $3,250 per dwelling unit and a maximum of $5,550 per dwelling unit. Res. 4738 (12-10-01) The City Council has established by resolution a minimum commercial/industrial park fee of $8,125 per acre and a maximum of $13,875 per acre. Res. 4739 (12-10-01) Application Adjusted Fee Escrow Notes STORMWATER AND DRAINAGE TRUNK FEES Storm water trunk fees apply to new development and redevelopment of existing properties and provide funding for the storm water infrastructure necessary to serve the City. The trunk fee is based on the land use and acreage of the property being developed. An equivalency factor multiplier is assigned to each land use type, with a 2 -acre residential lot considered as the standard in the City with an equivalency factor of 1.0. The table below lists the storm water trunk fees per acre for the various zoning districts and land uses in the City. NEW DEVELOPMENT LAND USE TFURI- Fee ^^- Ac Stormwater and Drainage Trunk fees as established by Subdivision IV, Section 14-283 of the City Code. Single Family Residential 5 Acre Zone(maximum fee/let =$1�'�^^) $3,' Single Family Residential 2 Acre Zone(m^��'r feeilet -$0— 60.^0) $$4.030.00 Single Family Residential 1 Acre Zone (max murn fee/let =$5,25A-00) $5,250.00 Single Family Residential 1/2 Acre Zone fee/let =$3,025.00) $6,050.00 Multi Family Residential 4 Units/Acre or Less r' Multi Family Residential Greater than 4 Units/Acre $$8,490.00 Commercial or Industrial x$9,690.00 6haFged an a peF lot bas s. QAlY aEFeage platted as buildiAg lots shall be shaFged the tFURIE fee. AEFeage platted as FBad- F%ltiplyiAg (a) the R _'FAbeF Af Rev-, lots by (b) the zeRiAg distFiet base aeFeage peF !at by (E) the base 4blAkfee PeF l8t -.bushed o the Git y Fee Schedule shall be deemed the Base Il...,..1...... ent T.i ink Pep iRGlHdiAg Shall be 6haFged- , ' trunk fee equal the t Rk fee fAF a n 5 aGFP el Multi -family and High -Density Single Family Developments. Trunk fee shall be charged on a per -acre basis, except that the following acreages will not be subject to the trunk fee: all wetland acreage up to the delineation line acreage of stormwater ponding or similar improvements that provide additional treatment benefits beyond what is required to treat the stormwater runoff from the development site. acreage of conservation easements resulting from Conservation Design process Per Per new lot, or new buildable structure on acre previously vacant lot $ 16,150.00 $ 8,060.00 $ 5,250.00 $ 3,025.00 $ 7,275.00 $ 8,490.00 $ 9,690.00 Exhibit B Licenses and Miscellaneous Charges License Fees for new licenses may be prorated; after 75% of the license period has elapsed, the fee is reduced by 50%. Type Fee COMMERCIAL MARINA LICENSE Initial Application Fee $300.00 Renewal Application & Inspection Fee $200.00 Late fee $100.00 JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE Initial Application Fee $50.00 Renewal Application Fee $20.00 Plus each slip $2.00 Late Fee $25.00 CANOE RACK RENTAL $40.00 Per Slip RENTAL LICENSE License Fee $100.00 2 year term GARBAGE HAULER LICENSE Flat Rate $75.00 Ch. 54, Article III Per Hauler $15.00 Per Truck Transfer Fee $30.00 HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE (Level 2) $100.00 Initial Review Fee Sec. 26-76 $30.00 Annual Review Fee TEMPORARY TRAILERS & BUILDINGS $30.00 KENNEL LICENSES Sec. 62-161 thru 62-185 Commercial Application & Inspection Fee (Annual) $150.00 Residential Application & Inspection Fee (Annual) $50.00 BEER, WINE & LIQUOR LICENSES Initial Investigation $500.00 Per License Ch. 34, Article II On -Sale & Off -Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licenses Ch. 34, Article II On -Sale & Off Sale 3.2% Malt Liquor/Wine Licenses Ch. 34, Article II In state investigation Actual cost up to $10,000 Out state investigation Actual cost Off -Sale Liquor License $150.00 Sec. 34-66 On -Sale Liquor License $5,000.00 Sec. 34-66 On -Sale Wine License $2,000.00 Sec. 34-77 3.2 % Malt Liquor Off -Sale (Annual) $50.00 Sec. 34-66 3.2 % Malt Liquor On -Sale (Annual) $100.00 Sec. 34-66 Setup (Annual) $100.00 Sec. 34-126; 34-143 Club Liquor License Sec. 34-66 (weekday) $200.00 Sec. 34-66 (Sunday) $200.00 Sec. 34-66 Temporary Set-up Permit (1-4 days) $25.00 Each Sec. 34-42 Temporary On Sale 3.2% Malt Liquor (1-7 days) $25.00 Each Sec. 34-82 Temporary Off -Sale Wine License (wine auction) $25.00 Each Sec. 34-42 Temporary On -Sale Wine License (1-4 days) $25.00 Each Sec. 34-42 Temporary On -Sale Liquor License (1-4 days) $25.00 Each Sec. 34-42 Liquor Violations (3 years immediately prior to date of most current violation) 1st Violation $500.00 Sec. 34-41 2nd Violation $1,000.00 & 3 -day license $100.00 suspension 3rd Violation $2,000.00 & 2 -week license suspension 4th Violation License revocation AMUSEMENT DEVICE LICENSES Sec. 38-601 thru 38-603 Per Establishment (Annual) $100.00 + Machine fee Per Machine Fee $25.00 Each PUBLIC DANCE LICENSE $125.00 Annual License $100.00 Sec. 38-501 thru 38-506 Individual License $10.00 GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSES/FINES Gambling & Raffle Investigation $10.00 Ch. 38, Article II Massage Therapy License $100.00 Ch. 31, Article II Background Investigation $150.00 Annual Renewal $100.00 Solicitor/Transient Merchant/Peddler License $100.00 + Actual costs up to Ch. 30 $1,500.00 Tobacco Licenses $125.00 Ch. 50, Article II Licensee or Employee Violations within 24 month period 1st Offense $150.00 2nd Offense $400.00 3rd Offense & Over $500.00 Penalty for Use of Tobacco Where Prohibited $100.00 Sec. 51-5 MISCELLANEOUS FEES Convenience Fee - Credit Card Transactions 2.75% Returned Check $ 30.00 Exhibit C Utility Rates and Fees ALL SANITARY SEWER AND MUNICIPAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGES Connection fees have been determined as a way to provide a fair and equitable recovery of the costs associated with providing water and wastewater utility services to new customers to avoid placing these costs on existing customers. The connection fee includes those portions of existing assets that will benefit new customers together with any anticipated future capital improvements constructed for the purpose of providing utility services to new customers. The connection charge applies to those properties not previously assessed for the associated utility project. MUNICIPAL CONNECTION PERMIT Fee Sewer $50.00 SAC (Sewer Availability Charge) (MCES) $2,485.00 Water $50.00 Horn Quote Basis Connection inspection (Water or Sewer) $100.00 Disconnection inspection (Water or Sewer) $100.00 SEWER PROJECTS Connection to existing City Sewer System: $5,380.00 $ <� 225.00 Connection to City Sewer in areas still within their assessment window (less than 15 years since project was assessed) shall pay an amount equivalent to the assessment amount plus interest that residences were charged at the time of the project: Connection to Sewer System in adjacent city Fee 2004 North Long Lake East Extension $16,495.00 2004 West Farm/Homestead $9,900.00 2005-1 Webber Hills/S Brown Rd Ext $14,990.00 2005-1 Dickey Lake Dr N $19,125.00 2006-1 Jamestown Road $15,930.00 2007 Farview Lane Sewer $12,025.00 2010 North Farm Road $20,020.00 2014 Green Trees $21,830.00 2015 Green Trees Extension $20,890.00 Connection to Sewer System in adjacent city WATER CONNECTIONS Connection to existing City Water Main $4,24^0$4,370 per unit *or 20% over adjacent city's fee schedule, whichever is greater of r........,.«:, n to %VaZeF sys% in adja..en . i% Current Fee per Fee Adjacent City $1,900.00 or per current Long Connection to Long Lake Sewer System Lake Fee Schedule Connection to Long Lake Water System $1,000 or per current Wayzata Connection to Wayzata Sewer System Fee Schedule WATER CONNECTIONS Connection to existing City Water Main $4,24^0$4,370 per unit *or 20% over adjacent city's fee schedule, whichever is greater of r........,.«:, n to %VaZeF sys% in adja..en . i% Current Fee per Fee Adjacent City $1,900.00 or per current Long Connection to Long Lake Water System Lake Fee Schedule $2,351.00 $2,292.90 or per Connection to Wayzata Water System current Wayzata Fee Schedule WATER METER AND HORN 5/8" (3/4"0-1/2") meter with horn including sales tax Actual Cost 3/4" (3/4"x9") meter with horn including sales tax Actual Cost 1" meter with horn including sales tax Actual Cost Larger meter Actual Cost SEWER AND WATER UNIT ADJUSTMENT CHARGES CHARGES Charges shall result from either an intensification of an existing non-residential use or a new non-residential use that replaces a former use on a property located within an area already assessed and served by municipal sewer and water. CREDIT Credit for previously assessed sewer or water units shall be applied against the total number of sewer and water units established for the new use. UNIT CHARGE Each sewer and each water unit adjustment charge shall be equal to the current Service Availability Charge established by the Metropolitan Council Wastewater Services or its successor and shall be payable to the City of Orono upon application for a building permit. UTILITY SERVICE FEES Municipal Sewer Rate By Unit: 1st 2nd By flow: Long Lake Service Minimum Charge (10,000 Gallons or Less Water Usage) Over 10,000 Gallons Water Usage, per 1,000 Gallons Wayzata Service Metered Service Minimum Charge (10,000 Gallons or Less Water Usage) Over 10,000 Gallons Water Usage, per 1,000 Gallons Unmetered Service Per Property $188.16/per quarter $ 5680/peFquaFteF $166.32/per quarter t99 `^ mer $6.96/1000 gallon plus $5.90j1000 alle p6s $18.00/per quarter/per SAC unit $' 99/peF GiblaFteF/peF EGRReetieA $188.16/per quarter $6.96/1000 gallon $188.16/per quarter $6.96/1000 gallon $188.16/per quarter Some Properties on Mytlewood and Old Long Lake Road are not connected to water. Wayzata bills Orono based on a quarterly usage of 25,000 gallons. Charge is based on the metered rates and 25,000 gallons. MUNICIPAL WATER RATES Residential Billing & Ready to Serve Charge $50.00/qtr Unconnected Property Charge $50.00/qtr Water Usage Rate Navarre Area (Area #1) and Hwy 12 (Area #2) Tier 1 (0-10,000 gal) $7.07/1000 gal $5.24/1000� gal Tier 2 (11-25,000 gal) $9.90/1000 gal $7."�, 000 -gal Tier 3 (>25,000 gal) $14.85/1000 gal $11.00/1000 gal Chevy Chase Area (Area #3) Tier 1 (0-15,000 gal) $7.07/1000 gal $5.24/1999 gal Tier 2 (15-25,000 gal) $9.90/1000 gal $7.QQ��gal Tier 3 (>25,000 gal) $14.85/1000 gal $''.^^ gal Long Lake Area (Area #4) $7.07/1000 gal $5.'"� ' gal Tier 1 (0-8,000 gal) $7.07/1000 gal Tier 2 (8-22,000 gal) $9.90/1000 gal Tier 3 (>22,000 gal) $14.85/1000 gal Multi -Family Billing & Ready to Serve Charge per SAC Unit $50.00/qtr Unconnected Property Charge $50.00/qtr Water Usage Rate Tier 1(9 99,999 gay (0-25,000 gal) $7.07/1000 gal $5.'"� ' gal Tier 2 (5 ' 50 000 ^," 25-100,000 al ,-.�-� so., ( gal) t"'"^^^ gal 9.90/1000 gal �,-�� Tier 3 (>159,090 gal) (>100,000 gal) $14.85/1000 gal $11.00/1000 gal Commercial Billing & Ready to Serve Charge per SAC Unit $50.00/qtr Unconnected Property Charge $50.00/qtr Water Usage Rate Tier 1 (9 9^� X999 gal) (0-25,000 gal) $7.07/1000 gal $5.24/1000� gal Tier 2 (5 ' 50 000 "'" 25-100,000 al -.�-�-6Q., ( gal) $7.33 1999 gal 9.90/1000 gal �,-�� Tier 3 (>, 9^T X99 gal) (>100,000 gal) $14.85/1000 gal $11.00/1000 gal Federally Mandated Safe Drinking Water $9.72/year on second quarter billing « 36/yeaF OR second quaFte• billing Testing Program (Charged per service connection) Quarterly Service Charge for Non -Functioning or Inaccessible $100.00 Water Meter Bulk sale to Minnetonka Beach for Lafayette Ridge Area Water Usage Rate $7.07/1000 gal $5.'^�� / 000 gal Billing $50.00 Bulk sale - All Others $50.00 PeF 186ati.-....1.15 aFea Fate peF/, 999 galleRs. Processing Fee (Per Monthly Billing Cycle) $25.00 Plus Water Usage Rate $7.07/1000 gal i.e. Fill swimming pool or watering sod. Penalty for late payment of sewer/water bills - 8% after 30 days from billing date (applied to the total unpai balance). Interest at 8% on unpaid water/sewer bills certified. Assessment Charge for Unpaid Accounts Certified $25.00 County Fee for Unpaid Accounts Certified $2.50 Water Turn -On $50.00 Water Turn-off $50.00 Water System Repair/Replacement if damage caused by property owner: Labor - Current Hourly Rate Parts - At Cost STORM WATER UTILITY RATES The basic intent of storm water regulations is to minimize the impact of development on natural drainage systems. One residential unit: $46.25/per quarter $24.34 Non-residential unit: Based on "Residential Equivalent Factor" RECYCLING CHARGE $64.00/year $40.90/year Recycling Cart from Waste Management No Charge SUMP PUMP SURCHARGE $100.00 per month PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLIES & SERVICES Right of Way Permit $50.00/permit Right of Way Escrow (for other than Public Utility) $1,500 New Street Intersections (See zoning section - Special improvement fees) On -Call Service to Other Cities Base On -Call Fee $61.60/day Call -Out Fee Actual wage and equipment rates Water Meter Sales (See Building Permit Section) Wetland Buffer Signs $8.00 Exhibit D Administrative Offenses ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSES (POLICE ADMINISTERED) Applicable Code or MN State TRAFFIC/VEHICLE OFFENSES Fee Statute (MSS) Number Unsafe Operation 66-259 Unreasonable Acceleration $60.00 66-258 Exhibition Driving $60.00 66-7 Failure to Obey Traffic Control $60.00 169.06 MSS Expired Registration $60.00 169.79 MSS Unsafe Equipment $60.00 169.47 MSS Loud Exhaust $60.00 169.69 MSS No Driver License in Possession $60.00 171.08 MSS Failure to Change Address on DL $60.00 171.11 MSS Driving to Avoid Traffic Signal $60.00 66-5 SNOWMOBILE VIOLATIONS Operation $60.00 66-159 Equipment $60.00 66-160 Hours of Operation $60.00 66-159 ANIMALS $60.00 Dog at Large $60.00 62-104 Animal License Required $60.00 62-131 Feces Clean Up $60.00 22-95 & 22-114 Barking Dog $60.00 62-10 PUBLIC NUISANCES $60.00 Public Nuisance/General Prohibition $60.00 70-4 Peace and Safety Violation $60.00 70-166 Discharge of Firearm $60.00 70-97 OPEN BURNING No Permit $60.00 58-186 Negligent Burning $60.00 58-193 No Open Burning $60.00 58-193 NOISE Loud Noise Prohibited $60.00 58-120 PARK VIOLATIONS Hours of Operation $60.00 22-89 Operating a Motor Vehicle within Park $60.00 22-92 No Permit $60.00 22-102 Feces Clean Up $60.00 22-95, 22-102 & 22-114 SIGNS VIOLATIONS $60.00 Violation of General Provisions $60.00 18-4 Sign Impoundment Fee $25.00 JUVENILE $60.00 Curfew $60.00 70-274 Possession of Tobacco $60.00 609.685 Sub 3 MSS SEASONAL OVERWEIGHT VEHICLES 1,000-9,999 lbs overweight .15 cents 169.824 Sub 1 MSS per lb over PARKING General $25.00 66-78 Seasonal 0200-0600 on $25.00 66-80 Street Prohibited Handicapped $60.00 66-85 Fire Lane $25.00 46-85 MISCELLANEOUS Watering Restrictions $60.00 610.50 Sub 15 MSS Placing Snow on Street $25.00 18-5 Exhibit E Park Fees GOLF COURSE FEES - Effective Date: 2019 Season MONDAY THRU SUNDAY RATES Individual (Regular) $19.00 i8.00 Juniors (12 -18 years old) $12.00 Seniors (60 years or older) $16.00 is.00 Second Round $10.00 goo Children under 12 golf free with an adult SEASON PASS RATES (Unlimited Play) Base Resident Individual Season Pass $550.00 $435.00 Junior Season Pass (12 - 18 years old) $300.00 $260.00 Senior Season Pass (60 years or older) $450.00 $499.99 $330.00 Family Season Pass $590.00 $500.00 $575.00 (Entire Family*) * Family meaning: Immediate family living in the same household. Children must be 18 years old or younger. GOLF CART RENTAL RATES Motorized Cart Rental/Per Round $19.00 $ig.(A) Pull Carts/Per Round $3.00 Golf Clubs/Per Round $3.00 FALL RATES (Begins 1st Monday of October) 1st Nine Holes Fall $13.00 $Q.00 2nd Nine Holes Fall $5.00 Junior Fall (18 years or younger) $9.00 $9 -.Go Senior Fall (60 years or older) $9.00 $9-.99 CONCESSION RATES LURTON PARK PASSES As Posted Resident $25.00 Non -Resident $40.00 Passes will go on sale for the following year on Nov l't. Passes to be prorated at 50% on August 1st. SUMMIT BEACH CANOE RACK RENTAL $40.00/slip BEDERWOOD & HACKBERRY SPORT FIELDS PARK FACILITY USE PERMIT Resident (individual, business or group) $15.00 Non -Resident (Individual, business or group) $25.00 Exhibit F Police Administration DOGS AT LARGE - RELEASE FEE Sec. 62-104 1st Offense $60.00 2nd Offense $80.00 3rd Offense $100.00 After Hours, Weekend & Holiday $75.00 Release Charge ANIMALS AT LARGE (Other than dogs) - RELEASE FEE Ch. 62, Article I 1st Offense $55.00 2nd Offense $65.00 3rd Offense $75.00 Trace & Catch Animal $35.00 Per Hour Trailer Charge $55.00 + 0.31/Mile (Total Distance) CARE OF IMPOUNDED ANIMAL LARGE ASSEMBLY PERMIT (over 300 people) FIREWORKS PERMIT Display of Fireworks/Pyrotechnic Special Effects Sale and/or Storage of Consumer Fireworks FIREARMS DISCHARGE PERMIT Pest Control (limited use) Game Animals (limited use) Annual (Club Only) LIMITED TRAPPING PERMIT SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT (Includes Parades, Noise Exemption, Use of Public Property) Fee is doubled if application is not received 10 business days prior to event Actual Cost $200.00 + $60.00 each additional Sec. 38-801 thru day; actual costs up to 38-803 $1,500 $100.00 $100.00 $25.00 $25.00 $25.00 $20.00 Sec. 70-99 Ch. 70, Article III Sec. 70-71 $100.00 Under 300 people Ch. 66, Article VI $200.00 If Over 300 people; actual costs up to $1,500 FALSE POLICE ALARM USER FEES Ch. 42, Article III 1st false alarm/per calendar year No Charge 2nd false alarm/per calendar year $50.00 3rd false alarm/per calendar year $100.00 4th false alarm/per calendar year $150.00 5th and over false alarm/per calendar $250.00 year FALSE FIRE ALARM USER FEES Ch. 42, Article III 1st false alarm/calendar year No Charge 2nd false alarm/calendar year $75.00 3rd false alarm/calendar year $250.00 4th false alarm/calendar year $350.00 5th & over false alarm/calendar year $500.00 Each Call FINGERPRINTING SERVICE $25.00 Per Application NON-RESIDENTS ONLY (Residents No Charge) POLICE SPECIAL SERVICES (3 Hours Minimum) Officer 119 Rate Police Reserve Officers COPY SERVICE - Police Records First Two Copies Additional Copies More than 100 pages (actual costs) PHOTOS SIGNS: "NO PARKING ORDER OF POLICE" Paper signs (no lath included) STATEMENTS $120.00 Per Hour $30.00 Per Hour $0.25 Per Page $0.25 Each $10.00 On CD $1.00 $10.00 For CD & (transcribed copy or CD when available; subject to Data Privacy Act - will be charged an actual hourly fee) FIREARM STORAGE FEES $50.00 Per Gun (Police Policy 3056) Ex G Documents and Services ZONING DEPARTMENT DOCUMENTS 2010-2030 Comprehensive Plan Municipal Code Book - complete (Ch. 1-94 w/revisions) Municipal Code Book - Portions Ch 78 only (Zoning Code) w/revisions Ch 82 only (Subdiv. Code) w/revisions Other Individual Chapters Binder GIS and City Maps Black & white Color City Street Number Maps Building & Planning Publications GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DOCUMENTS Listing Information Assessment Search - Written (Verbal searches not given) Fax Charge Copy Service (for public City records only) 11" x 17" copies Individual copies of Ordinance Sections (1 copy) Reprint of Oversized Documents that have been microfilmed Building Plan Copies Labels from Utility Billing System Electronic Labels Information Provided on CD Information Provided on DVD Shipping/ Handling mailing of requested information Surcharge for Staff Expense in Excess of Regular Fees Professional Time Clerical Time Legal/Engineering Consultants Mileage/Copies/Postage/Etc. Returned Check Charge $75.00 $60.00 With Binder $25.00 loose $15.00 loose $ .25 Per Page 55.00 8 1/2 x 11 11x17 17x22 2204 $0.25 $1.00 $2.00 $4.00 $2.00 $4.00 $8.00 $16.00 $0.25 $2.00 $5.00 As Posted - Prices subject to Change $10.00 $20.00 Per Parcel No charge up to 6 pages; $.25 Each Additional page $ .25 Each $ 1.00 Each No Charge Cost of copying service, Cost of Copying, Messenger Service & Min. Clerical Fee of $5.00 (Entire amount to be paid upon request) $ .05 Per Label (Approximately $150.00) $10.00 Per sheet, 30 Labels max per sheet $ 10.00 Per CD $ 20.00 Per DVD $ 3.00 + cost of information (DVD, pages, etc.) $ 50.00 Per Hour $ 30.00 Per Hour Actual Billed Cost Actual Cost $30.00 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: Cost of Living Adjustments for Non -Union Employees Presenter: Ron Olson Agenda City Administrator's Finance Director Section: Report 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to adopt a resolution approving pay plan adjustments for non-union city employees for 2020. 2. Background. The City adopts an updated non-union pay scale annually. This action will set the 2020 wage and benefits for the following positions: Office Manager (PD), City Clerk, Building Official, Deputy Chief, Community Development Director, Public Works Director, Finance Director, Police Chief, and the City Administrator. a. Compensation. The 2020 budget has includes a 3.0% COLA increase to the City's pay scale. A copy of the updated pay scale is included with this memo. b. Insurance. For 2020 the City's insurance contribution for employees selecting family (employee plus) coverage is budgeted for $1,472.50 which is an increase of $126.00 over 2019. The contribution for employees selecting single coverage remains frozen at the 2011 amount of $915. The waiver amount decreases to $205.00. c. Mileage. The attached resolution also confirms that the City will continue to reimburse employees at the IRS allowed mileage rate in 2020. The 2019 IRS standard rate is currently set at 58.0 cents per mile. The 2020 rate has not yet been released. d. Safety Shoe Allowance. This reimbursement will increase to $250 annually, matching the amount in the Public Works union contract. 3. Cost. The total cost of a 3.0% COLA is $27,900. The increased insurance contribution adds a total of $882. 4. Funding. The funding for these expenditures are included in the 2020 budget. 5. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of a resolution approving pay plan adjustments for non-union city employees for 2020. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt a resolution approving pay plan adjustments for non-union city employees for 2020. Exhibits A. Resolution B. Updated Non -Union Pay Scale Prepared By:,%JV Reviewed By: .1bV Approved By: .2)V CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Z RESOLUTION APPROVING PAY PLAN ADJUSTMENTS FOR NON-UNION CITY EMPLOYEES FOR 2020 WHEREAS, the City Administrator is responsible for annually presenting pay adjustments for City employees, with the exception of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements; and WHEREAS, sufficient funds have been appropriated in the proposed 2020 Annual Budget to fund the recommended pay adjustments and such other matters of compensation as herein specified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Orono City Council as follows: 1. That the City's non-union pay scale be increased by 3% to reflect a Cost of Living increase. 2. That the City's cafeteria benefit plan contribution will increase $126.00 to $1,472.50 per month for employees on family coverage, remain at $915 for single (no cash) and will decrease $81.50 to $205.00 for waivers. 3. That City employees using their own vehicles for approved work related business shall be compensated at a rate allowed by the IRS (currently $0.58 per mile). 4. That the 2020 Safety Shoe Reimbursement will remain at $250 for employees that qualify for this reimbursement. Adopted by the Council this 9th day of December, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor Compensation Plan Non -Union Employees Pay Grades and Steps For 2020 BUDGET Grade Start Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 HourlyAnnual HourlyAnnual HourlyAnnual HourlyAnnual HourlyAnnual HourlyAnnual Hourl Annual HourlyAnnual 1 17.00 35,351.54 17.522 36,444.88 18.06 37,572.05 18.62 38,734.07 19.20 39,932.03 19.79 41,167.04 20.40 42,440.25 21.04 43,752.83 2 18.08 37,608.02 18.64 38,771.15 19.22 39,970.26 19.81 41,206.46 20.42 42,480.88 21.06 43,794.72 21.71 45,149.20 22.38 46,545.57 3 1 19.23 40,008.53 19.83 41,245.91 20.44 42,521.56 21.08 43,836.66 21.73 45,192.43 22.40 46,590.13 23.09 48,031.07 23.81 49,516.56 4 20.46 42,562.26 21.10 43,878.62 21.75 45,235.70 22.42 46,634.74 23.11 48,077.05 23.83 49,563.97 24.57 51,096.87 25.33 52,677.19 5 21.77 45,279.01 22.44 46,679.39 23.14 48,123.08 23.85 49,611.43 24.59 51,145.80 25.35 52,727.63 26.13 54,358.38 26.94 56,039.57 6 23.16 48,169.16 23.87 49,658.93 24.61 51,194.77 25.37 52,778.12 26.16 54,410.43 26.97 56,093.23 27.80 57,828.07 28.66 59,616.56 7 24.64 51,243.78 25.40 52,828.64 26.18 54,462.52 26.99 56,146.93 27.83 57,883.43 28.69 59,673.64 29.58 61,519.21 30.49 63,421.87 8 26.21 54,514.67 27.02 56,200.69 27.86 57,938.86 28.72 59,730.78 29.60 61,578.13 30.52 63,482.60 31.46 65,445.98 32.44 67,470.08 9 27.88 57,994.33 28.74 59,787.96 29.63 61,637.08 30.55 63,543.38 31.49 65,508.64 32.47 67,534.68 33.47 69,623.38 34.51 71,776.68 10 29.66 61,696.09 30.58 63,604.21 31.52 65,571.36 32.50 67,599.34 33.50 69,690.04 34.54 71,845.40 35.61 74,067.43 36.71 76,358.17 11 31.55 65,634.14 32.53 67,664.06 33.54 69,756.77 34.57 71,914.19 35.64 74,138.34 36.75 76,431.28 37.88 78,795.13 39.05 81,232.09 12 33.57 69,823.55 34.61 71,983.04 35.68 74,209.32 36.78 76,504.46 37.92 78,870.58 39.09 81,309.87 40.30 83,824.61 41.55 86,417.12 13 35.71 74,280.37 36.82 76,577.70 37.95 78,946.09 39.13 81,387.72 40.34 83,904.87 41.59 86,499.86 42.87 89,175.11 44.20 91,933.11 14 37.99 79,021.67 39.17 81,465.64 40.38 83,985.20 41.63 86,582.68 42.91 89,260.50 44.24 92,021.13 45.61 94,867.14 47.02 97,801.18 15 40.42 84,065.61 41.67 86,665.58 42.95 89,345.96 44.28 92,109.24 45.65 94,957.98 47.06 97,894.82 48.52 100,922.50 50.02 104,043.81 16 43.00 89,431.49 44.33 92,197.41 45.70 95,048.89 47.11 97,988.55 48.57 101,019.12 50.07 104,143.42 51.62 107,364.35 53.21 110,684.90 17 45.74 95,139.89 47.15 98,082.36 48.61 101,115.84 50.12 104,243.14 51.67 107,467.15 53.26 110,790.87 54.91 114,217.40 56.61 117,749.89 18 48.66 101,212.65 50.16 104,342.94 51.72 107,570.05 53.32 110,896.96 54.96 114,326.77 56.66 117,862.64 58.42 121,507.88 60.22 125,265.85 19 51.77 107,673.03 53.37 111,003.12 55.02 114,436.22 56.72 117,975.49 58.47 121,624.21 60.28 125,385.78 62.15 129,263.69 64.07 133,261.54 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 7 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: Close Fund 437 — Police Capital Projects Fund Presenter: Ron Olson, Agenda Consent Agenda Finance Director Section: 1. Purpose. To Close Fund 437, Police Capital Projects Fund. 2. Background. The Police Capital Projects Fund was created in 2013 to collect and spend resources for the City's police remodel, the police garage addition and a reconfiguration of the City Hall front counter. The project was completed in 2015 and the fund is no longer needed. The primary funding for this project was through the sale of bonds, with some funding for City Hall improvements coming from the Improvement & Equipment Outlay Fund. The fund's current balance is $24,883.38. 3. Staff Recommendation. Staff is recommending transferring the assets of the fund to the 2014 Bond Debt Service Fund that is servicing the debt on the bonds. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt a Resolution to close the Police Capital Projects Fund and to transfer the balance to the 2014 Bond Debt Service Fund. Exhibits A. Resolution Closing the Police Capital Projects Fund Prepared By: AtP-' i Reviewed By: RIO Approved By: -SbV CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION TO CLOSE THE POLICE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND WHEREAS, the Police Capital Projects Fund was established to collect and spend resources for the City's police department remodel, the construction of the police garage, and the reconfiguration of the city hall front counter; and WHEREAS, the project was started in 2014 and completed in 2015; and WHEREAS, the expenditures related to the project have been paid in full; and WHEREAS, there are outstanding bonds that were sold to fund the project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Police Capital Projects Fund be closed and that the remaining equity in the fund be transferred to 2014 Bond Debt Service Fund. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor AGENDA ITEM Item No. 8 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: 2020 Annual Appointments Presenter: Dustin Rief, City Administrator Agenda Consent Agenda Section: Purpose. Each year the Council adopts a resolution that sets the annual appointments. The attached draft resolution is provided for your consideration. In addition, in 2016 the city approved the attached resolution adopting a Request for Proposal (RFP) schedule. It states that when a specific professional service comes due under the schedule, that service will be reviewed by the City Council at appointment time each January. During the review process, the City Council will decide whether or not the professional service will be subject to an RFP process. This year the schedule suggests the Engineer should be advertised for RFP. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Consider a motion to amend or adopt the attached resolution designating selected appointments for 2020, provide direction on whether an RFP for the Engineer should be advertised. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. RFP Schedule Resolution Prepared By: AMC Reviewed By: AMC Approved By: CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING SELECTED APPOINTMENTS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota that the appointments and designations for the year 2020 are as follows: APPOINTMENT/DESIGNATION Acting Mayor Aaron Printup Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Legislative Contact Dennis Walsh Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Representative Dustin Rief Attorney -City Lead (Civil) Soren Mattick Attorney -City Firm (Civil) Campbell, Knutson Attorney -Alternate Dorsey & Whitney Attorney -Lead Prosecuting Tallen & Baertschi Attorney -City Prosecuting Firm Tallen & Baertschi Auditor Abdo Eich & Meyers, LLP Code Review Committee Dennis Walsh Jeremy Barnhart Ben Goodwin Will Haack Matt Johnson Peter Lanpher Andy Johnsrud Communications Committee Dennis Walsh Victoria Seals Dustin Rief Anna Carlson Data Practices Compliance Official Anna Carlson Data Practices Compliance Official — Police Department Correy Farniok Development Review Committee Laura Oakden Melanie Curtis Emergency Preparedness Director Engineer -Lead Consulting Engineer -City Firm Fiscal Agents Gillespie Center Hennepin Emergency Communications Organization Highway 12 Safety Coalition Highway 12 Turnback Committee Housing and Redevelopment Authority Insurance Agent of Record Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Long Lake Fire Advisory Commission Mayor's Association Official Newspaper CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Jeremy Barnhart Correy Farniok or designee David Martini Bolton & Menk Ehlers & Associates Dennis Walsh Correy Farniok Dennis Walsh Aaron Printup Correy Farniok Dennis Walsh Mark McCutcheon Bob Erickson Adam Edwards Dustin Rief Dennis Walsh, Chair Dustin Rief, Executive Director Richard Crosby Matt Johnson Aaron Printup Victoria Seals Ron Olson, Secretary Ronald Youngdahl, Northern Capital Richard Anderson Aaron Printup Richard Crosby Dustin Rief Dennis Walsh The Laker & Pioneer Official Depositories/Investment Vendors Organizational Development Committee CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1St State Bank — DeQueen Ally Bank — Midvale, UT Belmont Savings Bk — Mass Berkshire Bank — Pittsfield, MA BMO Harris Bank Bridgewater Bank — Navarre, MN Cal Private Bank — La Jolla, CA Capital Bank — Little Rock, AR Capital One Bank NA — Glen Allen, VA CIT Bank — Pasadena, CA Citibank NA — Sioux Falls, SD Connectone Bank, Englewood, CO Discover Bank — Greenwood, DE Enerbank USA — SLC, UT Flagstar Bank — Troy, MI Goldman Sachs Bank — New York, NY Great Western Bank — Watertown, SD HSBC Bank — McClean, VA JP Morgan Chase - Lakeside Bank — Chicago, IL League of MN Cities — 4M Fund Lee Bank - MA Live Oak Bkg - Wilmington, NC Mercantil Commerce Bank, Coral Gables, FL Merrick Bank — UT MS Bank — SLC, UT MS Private Bank — NY Peoples Bank Codorus — York, PA RBC Wealth Management, Mpls RCB Bank - Claremore, OK Sallie Mae Bank — Salt Lake City, UT Silvergate Bank — La Jolla, CA Southpoint Bank — Birmingham, AL State Bank Chilton — Chilton, WI Sterns Bank — St Cloud, MN Suntrust Bank - Atlanta, GA Synchrony Bank — Draper, UT TBK Bank - Dallas, TX Tennessee State Bank — Pigeon Forge, TN Townebank — Portsmouth, VA Toyota Savings Bank — Henderson, NV Wells Fargo Bank NA — CA Wells Fargo Advisors, Minneapolis UBS Financial Services, Wayzata Victoria Seals Aaron Printup CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Dustin Rief Orono Ice Arena Board Member Dennis Walsh Park Commission Chair Brian Roath Park Commission Representative Dennis Walsh Victoria Seals Planning Commission Chair Alternating Planning Commission Representative to Council Alternating Police Advisory Commission Dennis Walsh Matt Johnson Dustin Rief School District Committee Dennis Walsh Victoria Seals Coffey Farniok Dustin Rief Suburban Rate Authority Adam Edwards Transportation Committee Adam Edwards Correy Farniok or designee Weed Inspector Dennis Walsh Weed Inspector -Assistant Jason Goehring Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 65�J A RESOLUTION ADOPTING REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) SCHEDULE WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 471.345 authorizes municipalities to enter into contracts. Contracts must generally follow the municipal contracting law (competitive bidding law) except when entering into contracts with professional services; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono finds adopting a schedule to review and compare professional service, through a Request for Proposals (RFP) process, will result in services and prices that best serve the interest of the citizens of our community; and WHEREAS, the objective of the schedule is to create greater accountability and transparency for the professional services contracted with the City; and WHEREAS, the professional services schedule will cycle over a five year time span at a minimum and more often as requested: Professional Services Schedule Service 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 12021 2022 2023 2024 12025 Prosecuting Attorney X X Auditor X X Insurance Agent X X I Fiscal Agent X X Civil Attorney X X Engineer X X X - Year indicates when proposals will be requested. Service may or may not start until following year. WHEREAS, the service will be reviewed by the City Council at appointment time each year in January. During the review process, the City Council will decide whether or not the professional service will be subject to an RFP process. Regardless of the council's decision, the professional service will come up for review again in another 5 years. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Orono City Council adopts a RFP schedule listed above for professional services. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ADOPTED this 8th day of February 2016, by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota. Approved: Lih Tod McMillan, Mayor Attested: AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 9 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: Adopt Financial Management Policies Presenter: Ron Olson, Agenda Finance Director Finance Director Section: Report 1. Purpose. To establish and update financial management policies to guide in the preparation and management of the City's overall budget and major objectives to be accomplished. 2. Background. The overall goal of the City's financial policies is to establish and maintain effective management of the City's financial resources. Formal policy statements and major objectives provide the foundation for achieving this goal. In order to comply with GASB standards and based on the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) policy, the Fund Balance Policy was first adopted by Resolution 5994 on November 22, 2010 and last amended by resolution 6105 on December 12, 2011. The change that has been made is shown through Policy #1-c) through 9, which clarifies each fund more in depth than the previous policy. Also included with the financial management policies is the Investment Policy, first established in 1988, last amended by Resolution 6399, April 28, 2014. Two changes have been made, in section 5-6 Banks and Dealers. The requirement the investments are restricted to "Financial institutions located in the State of Minnesota" has been removed. The requirement the broker/dealers "have a local office in the State of Minnesota," has been added. This is to clarify that it is acceptable to purchase CD's offered by non - Minnesota based banks. In section 5-7 the maximum amount to be invested with a specific dealer has been increased from 30% to 35%. No other changes have been made to this policy. Additionally, policies that have not been formally adopted, but the City follows include: Operating Budget Policy, Revenue Policy, Expenditure and Purchasing Policy, Debt Management Policy, Fixed Asset Policy and Grant Policy. One major change from current operations is to section 4-3. The expenditure threshold requiring Council approval is being increased from $5,000 to $10,000. The limit has been at $5,000 for over 22 years. With economic inflation through the years, prices have increased significantly causing routine expenditures to also inflate. Wording has been added to allow the purchases of routine operating supplies and services in excess of $10,000 to be purchased without Council Approval. Another change from current operation of the City is found in section 7-2 of the Fixed Asset Policy. The capitalization threshold of fixed assets is being increased from $5,000, originally set on June 24, 2010, to $10,000. Again, with economic inflation, more items purchased meets the capital threshold easily. Items not capitalized in previous years are now meeting the capitalization threshold. As indicated, with the exception of the Fund Balance and Investments Policies, formal financial management policies have not been previously adopted. To follow the Government Finance Officers Association's best practices, it is recommended that the City adopts financial management policies. 3. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends that the City Council approves of the resolution to adopt the Financial Management Policy. Prepared By:.M.L'2l Reviewed By: '?JC Approved By: AGENDA ITEM COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the resolution to adopt the City of Orono Financial Management Policies. Exhibits A. Financial Management Policy B. Resolution Prepared By: AtP- l Reviewed By: '?JC Approved By: City of Orono Financial Management Policies The City of Orono has an important responsibility to its citizens to plan the adequate funding of services desired by the public, to manage the municipal finances wisely, and to carefully account for public funds. The City strives to ensure that it is capable of adequately funding and providing local government services needed by the community. The City will maintain or improve its infrastructure on a systematic basis to insure the maintenance of quality neighborhoods for its citizens. Contents OPERATING BUDGET(POLICYI)......................................... 1-1 FUND BALANCE (POLICY 2) ................................................ 2-1 REVENUE (POLICY 3) ......................................................... 3-1 EXPENDITURE AND PURCHASING (POLICY 4) .................... 4-1 INVESTMENT (POLICY 5) ................................................... 5-1 DEBT MANAGEMENT(POLICY 6) ....................................... 6-1 FIXED ASSET(POLICY7)..................................................... 7-1 GRANT (POLICY 8)............................................................. 8-1 City of Orono Financial Management Policies Policy 1- Operating Budget 1-1. PURPOSE The operating budget is the annual financial plan for funding the costs of City services and programs. The general operating budget includes the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, and Capital Project Funds. Enterprise operations are budgeted in separate Enterprise Funds. 1-2. BALANCED BUDGET The City Administrator shall submit a balanced budget for the General Fund in which appropriations shall not exceed the total of the estimated revenues and available fund balance. Balanced budget is defined as a budget in which current revenues plus net operating transfers and one-time use of excess reserves will be sufficient to support budgeted expenditures. One- time revenues or use of excess reserves will not be used to fund on-going expenditures. One- time funding sources shall only be used to fund capital improvements, equipment, one-time expenditures, or to improve fund balance. The City will provide for all current expenditures with current revenues. The City will avoid all budgetary procedures that balance current expenditures at the expense of meeting future years' budgets, such as postponing expenditures, rolling over short-term debt, and using reserves to balance the operating budget. 1-3. BUDGET PERIOD The City's budget year is the calendar year. The City legally adopts an annual budget for the General Fund. Budgets for Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service Funds, Capital Project Funds, Enterprise Funds, and Internal Service Funds are for management purposes only. 1-4. BASIS OF BUDGETING The modified accrual basis will be used for all of the Governmental Funds in the budget. The accrual basis will be used for the budgets of the Enterprise Funds. The basis of budgeting is the same as the basis of accounting used in the City's audited financial statements. 1-5. BUDGET AMENDMENT PROCESS Budget appropriations are by department total within the General Fund rather than by account. Budget changes that involve the transfer of appropriations among accounts only require the approval of the City Administrator or designee. Council approval is required for budget changes that involve a transfer of appropriations between funds or from contingency accounts. The budget changes can be made at any Council meeting. 1-6. LONG-TERM FINANCIAL FORECASTS The Finance Director will coordinate the development of the five-year capital improvement plan budget and five-year outlook with the development of the operating budget. Operating costs associated with new capital improvements will be projected and included in future operating 1-1 budget forecasts. The budget will provide for adequate maintenance of the building and equipment, and for their orderly replacement. The impact on the operating budget from any new programs or activities being proposed should be minimized by providing funding with newly created revenues whenever possible. 1-7. BUDGET FORM AND INFORMATION Excess revenues from a specific fiscal year will be placed into the City's reserves in a manner consistent with the City's fund balance reserve policies. The operating budget will describe the goals to be achieved and the services and programs to be delivered for the level of funding. All unencumbered appropriations for the City's operating budget lapse at year end. Amounts reserved for encumbrances are classified as assigned fund balance. Budget carryovers from a prior fiscal year must be approved by the City Administrator, Finance Director and City Council. 1-8. LEVEL OF CONTROL The City Administrator will ensure that a budgetary control system is in place to adhere to the adopted budget. The City Administrator or designee may approve the transfer of budget amounts between accounts within a department's budget. City Council approval is required for any increase in a department's budget. The budget changes can be made at any Council meeting. The legal level of budgetary control is at the department level in budgeted funds. 1-9. PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT The Finance Department will provide regular quarterly reports comparing actual revenues and expenditures to the budgeted amounts. The City's annual Budget shall be made available to citizens and the public upon request and available on the City's website. The City shall maintain transparency and accountability of its financial resources and assets. 1-2 City of Orono Financial Management Policies Policy 2 - Fund Balance 2-1. PURPOSE The City understands it has a responsibility to maintain prudent financial operations to ensure stable city operations for the benefit of city residents and businesses. Fund balance reserves are an important component in ensuring the overall financial health of a community, by giving the City cushion to meet contingency or cash-flow timing needs. The Office of the State Auditor recommends that at year-end, local governments maintain an unreserved fund balance in their general fund and special revenue funds of approximately 35 to 50% of fund operating revenues, or no less than five months of operating expenditures. 2-2. POLICY 1. The City will maintain a minimum unassigned General Fund balance of 45% of the fund's annual operating budget. a) Unassigned fund balances in excess of 50% will be transferred to the Community Investment Construction Fund. Such transfer is pursuant to Council approval. b) Unassigned fund balance of less than 45% will be addressed through the budgeting process or by transfers in from other funds. c) An assignment or restriction of fund balance may be used to offset revenues earned in one year where substantial services are required to be performed in the next fiscal period. 2. When both restricted and unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the City's policy to first use restricted resources, and then use unrestricted resources as they are needed. When unrestricted resources are available for use, it is the City's policy to use resources in the following order: 1) committed, 2) assigned, 3) unassigned. These fund balance classifications apply only to Governmental Funds, not Enterprise Funds or Internal Service Funds. 3. The Park Fund is a Special Revenue Fund that provides for parkland acquisition and improvements. Its major funding source is Park Dedication Fees which are restricted for this use. 4. The Drug/Felony Forfeiture Fund is a Special Revenue Fund that provides for expenditures related to drug and alcohol enforcement activities. Its major revenue sources are the sale of forfeited vehicles and drug enforcement activities. The funds are restricted for law enforcement use related to drug and alcohol enforcement. 5. The Lurton Park Fund is a Special Revenue Fund that provides for the development and maintenance of Lurton Park. These funds are restricted by a stipulation of the property's owner when the land was donated to the City. 2-1 6. The Senior Housing TIF Fund is a Special Revenue Fund that accounts for the Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1 which was created to provide housing opportunities for seniors within the City. Its funding source is the property taxes on the captured value. The funds are restricted. 7. The Affordable Housing Fund is a Special Revenue Fund that provided purchase assistance to qualified home buyers. Funding was through grants from the Metropolitan Council, Hennepin, CDBG grants. The funds are restricted. 8. Capital project Funds are used to account for the financing of street projects, equipment replacement, public safety equipment, and facility rehabilitation or renovation. Revenue sources are provided mainly through transfers, special assessments, bond sales, and park dedication fees. The City's goal is to maintain fund balances in the Municipal State Aid (MSA), the Improvement Equipment Outlay, the Community Investment, and the Pavement Management Plan (PMP) funds in an amount sufficient to support the ongoing capital expenditures planned in the CIP. Revenues not legally restricted will be assigned. 9. Fund balances in Debt Service Funds for future debt payments are restricted. 10. The Enterprise Funds are used to account for the City's utility operations. This includes the following funds: Water, Sewer, Storm Water, Recycling, and Cable. The City's long term goal is to have self-sustaining funds that do not require revenue from special assessment, issuance of debts or taxes. a) For Water, Sewer and Storm Water Funds, the City's goal is to maintain 25% operating reserve and 25% capital reserve. b) The Recycling Fund's goal is to maintain 25% operating reserve. c) The Cable Fund does not have a reserve and its purpose is to fund the Council Chamber improvements and operating expenses related to recording and streaming council meetings. 11. The Internal Service Funds are used to track revenue and expense shifts between departments. These include the following funds: Insurance, Fleet Management, Compensated Absences, and Information Technology. a) The Insurance Fund was created to account for total insurance revenue and expenses between all departments. The purpose of this fund is to allow for high deductible, which results in long term savings for the City. It has been determined that a fund balance of $300,000 is adequate for this purpose and fund balance in excess of $300,000 will be transferred to a fund designated by the City Council. b) The Fleet Management Fund is used to account for total expenses related to city vehicles. Each fund pays into this fund to cover their appropriate portions of expenses. c) The Compensated Absences Fund is used to account the liability owed to employees for compensated absences such as Sick, Vacation and Comp -Time. Fund balance is equal to the liability owed to employees at each year-end. d) The IT Fund is used to account for total expenses related to software and technology. Each fund pays into this fund to cover their appropriate portions of expenses. The long-term goal of this fund is to provide funding for all technology improvements. 2-2 2-3. PROCEDURES 1. City shall maintain necessary funds in accordance with City policy and Minnesota statutes. 2. Annual financial statements shall be prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles establishing the fund balance at the end of each year. As part of this process the Finance Director is authorized to make the appropriate assignments of fund balance. 3. As part of the annual budget process the Finance Director shall prepare a current analysis of the City's fund balance. The analysis shall include the prior year ending fund balance as established by the annual financial statements, and the projected fund balance for the current year. 4. Council shall review the amounts in fund balance in conjunction with the annual budget approval, and make adjustments as necessary to meet expected cash-flow needs. 5. The policy should be periodically reviewed, especially if the composition or timing of revenue receipts change. 2-4. RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY Administrative implementation of policies is the responsibility of staff and council. 2-5. ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Original Policy — Resolution 5994, adopted November 22, 2010 Amended Policy — Resolution 6105, adopted November 12, 2011 2-3 City of Orono Financial Management Policies Policy 3 -Revenue 3-1. PURPOSE The City will strive to maintain a diversified and stable revenue system to shelter it from sharp annual fluctuations in any one revenue source. 3-2. RESPONSIBILITY The City Administrator is the responsible authority overseeing all City revenues. Responsibility for administering this Revenue Policy has been delegated to the Finance Department. 3-3. POLICY 1. The City will conservatively estimate and budget for its annual revenues by an objective, analytical process. All existing and potential revenue sources will be re-examined annually prior to adopting a budget. 2. The City will pursue an aggressive policy of collecting revenue to ensure that the City's revenue estimates are met, all taxpayers are treated fairly and consistently, and delinquencies are kept to a minimum. 3. The City will pursue opportunities for federal or state grant funding in order to provide citizens assurance that the City is striving to obtain any and all state and federal funds to which it is entitled, thereby reducing dependence upon local taxpayers for the support of local public services. 4. The City will establish all user charges and fees for the General Fund program activities at a level related to the full cost of the providing services, or as adjusted (by the Council) for particular program goals. Sensitivity to market rates will also be taken into account. Ongoing, the City will review the full cost of activities supported by user fees to identify the impact of inflation and other cost increases and the City Council will review these fees along with net property tax costs at budget time. 5. The City will set fees and user charges for each Enterprise Fund such as water or wastewater at a level that fully supports the total direct and indirect cost of the activity, including depreciation of capital assets and debt service, and to maintain a positive cash flow and provide adequate working capital. These fees and user charges will be reviewed each year at budget time. Replacement (or bonding for replacement) of enterprise infrastructure will be paid for from accumulated (or annual) earnings from the particular system. Transfers of equity from an Enterprise Fund to the General Fund should only be done on a one-time exception basis, for example, to fund an unusual, extraordinary expense and in no event shall such equity transfers be made in consecutive years except those considered a reimbursement for administrative costs. Equity transfers must be approved in advance by the City Council. 6. Donations Received shall be referred to the City Council for action acknowledging receipt and for a budget amendment if needed for an expenditure. 3-1 City of Orono Financial Management Policies Policy 4 - Expenditure and Purchasing 4-1. PURPOSE The City Council recognizes that public funds may only be spent if the expenditure meets a public purpose and the expenditure relates to the governmental purpose for which the City of Orono was created. The meaning of "public purpose" is constantly evolving. The Minnesota Supreme Court has followed a broad approach and has generally concluded that "public purpose" means an activity that meets ALL of the following standards: • The activity will primarily benefit the community as a body. • The activity is directly related to functions of government. • The activity does not have as its primary objective the benefit of a private interest whether profit or not-for-profit. This policy is intended to provide guidelines regarding which expenditures are for public purposes and authorized in accordance with the City's annual budget process, and which expenditures are not considered to fall within the public purpose definition and are therefore not allowed. There is a public benefit in ensuring high employee productivity and morale. 4-2. RESPONSIBILITY The City Administrator is the responsible authority overseeing all City expenditures and as such is the chief purchasing agent for the City. Responsibility for administering this Expenditure and Purchasing Policy has been delegated to the Finance Department. Further, all officers and employees authorized by their Department to make purchases for the benefit of their respective departments are responsible for complying with this policy and corresponding procedures. 4-3. POLICY Expenditures of public funds must comply with the public purpose standards defined above. For non -routine, non -budgeted operating expenditures over $10,000, council approval is needed before purchase. For budgeted routine operating expenditures, department heads or supervisors may submit order prior to council approval. Examples include, but are not limited to: utility bills, such as electricity or natural gas, automotive fuel, lift -station repairs, and water plant chemicals. When an invoice is received for the purchased good or service, it will be forwarded to the appropriate personnel for account coding and payment approval. All invoices need proper approval prior to submitting to Finance Department for processing of the payment. The Finance Department will verify and make sure invoices are coded correctly in the accounting system. 4-1 City of Orono Financial Management Policies Policy 5 - Investment 5-1. PURPOSE The purpose of this investment policy is to establish: • The City's investment objectives • Investment reporting practices to management and council • Appropriate investment instruments • Criteria for selection of banks and dealers • Requirements regarding maturities and diversification • Investment principles of risk, prudence and ethics, and • Responsibilities of the investment function 5-2. SCOPE The investment policy applies to all funds in the custody of the City, including: • The General Fund • The Special Revenue Funds • The Debt Service Funds • The Capital Projects Funds • The Enterprise Funds • The Internal Service Funds Unless specified by City Council action, or otherwise required, City monies will be pooled in the Pooled Investment Trust Fund with the resulting investment income accruing to the various City funds as provided in Resolution No. 2105. 5-3. OBJECTIVES The objectives of the City's investment program are: 1. To preserve investment principal in the overall portfolio is the primary objective. 2. To remain sufficiently liquid to meet expenditure requirements. It is essential that cash is available when needed, therefore, the objective is to maximize yield while matching maturity dates with expenditure needs including provision of a cushion for possible unforeseen needs. 3. To diversify the investment portfolio by individual financial institution, government agency or by corporation in the case of commercial paper to reduce the exposure to risk of loss. 4. As custodians of the public trust, all participants in the investment process shall seek to act responsibly and avoid any transaction that might impair the credibility of the City. 5-1 5-4. REPORTING The investment reporting includes budgetary, interim/internal, and annual. 1. Budgetary Reporting. As part of the annual budget process interest income shall be estimated for all budgeted funds based on a cash flow forecast. 2. Interim/Internal Reporting. The Finance Department shall provide to management and the Council a quarterly report, including the total of all investments. The report will include a description of each investment, purchase date, maturity date, rate -of -return, cost, and par value. 3. Annual Reporting. The Finance Department shall provide an annual report on the investment program. In addition to the quarter -end information the report will include an annualized rate of return, the total interest earned for the period, the current market value of the investments, and a comparison to the prior year. 5-5. INSTRUMENTS Minnesota municipalities are restricted to certain types of investments, as reflected in Minnesota Statutes 118A.04. The permissible investments are: 1. U.S. Treasury Obligations, which have the full faith and credit of the U. S. Government pledged for repayment. 2. Federal Agencies, which are created and supervised by the federal government so that, for all practical purposes, there is an absence of credit risk. 3. General Obligations of the State of Minnesota or any of its subsidiaries issued to provide for essential services that are rated by at least one national rating agency with a rating level of at least the following: • general obligation rated "A" or better • revenue obligation rated "AA" or better 4. Commercial paper issued by United States corporations or their Canadian subsidiaries that is rated the highest quality (Al, P1, F1, D1) by at least two nationally recognized rating agencies and matures in 270 days or less. 5. Certificates of deposit that are fully -insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Deposits exceeding FDIC_insurance levels shall be covered by a surety bond or collateralized with U.S. Treasury or agency securities computed at market value which shall be at least ten percent more than the amount of each deposit in excess of the insured portions. Collateral consisting of first mortgages shall be at least forty percent more than the amount of deposit in excess of the insured portion. All collateral shall be assigned to the City from the depository. The institution issuing the certificate of deposit shall have a minimum allowable net worth to asset ratio of 5.0%. If the dealer/broker marketing the certificate of deposit subscribes to the rating service of IDC Financial Publishing, Inc., the institutions overall IDC ranking shall be excellent (165-199) or superior (200-300). 6. Bankers Acceptances shall be restricted to those of U.S. banks eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System. 7. Repurchase Agreements must be from a national or state bank in the U.S. that is a member of the Federal Reserve System and whose capital and surplus is at least $10,000,000 or is a primary reporting dealer in U.S. government securities to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; or a securities broker-dealer licensed pursuant to chapter 80A, or an affiliate of it, regulated by the securities and exchange commission and maintaining a combined capital and surplus of $40,000,000 or more, exclusive of subordinated debt. The City shall receive a confirmation safekeeping receipt with a complete description of the collateral on the repurchase agreement. 8. Shares in mutual funds investing exclusively in U.S. government and agency issues with maturities of no longer than 13 months, referred to as "money market funds". The City will not invest in the following instruments: a) Reverse Repurchase agreements b) Mortgage -Backed securities, as defined in Minnesota Statutes 118A.04 Subd. 6 c) Future Contracts d) Options e) Guaranteed investment contracts 5-6. BANKS AND DEALERS The City will conduct its investment transactions with financial institutions designated by the City Council. These institutions will meet the following criteria: 1. Banks, Savings Banks and Savings and Loans shall be restricted to those having a minimum capital and surplus of $10,000,000 and a net worth to asset ratio minimum of 5.0%, except for the City's main checking account at the Bridgewater Bank, Navarre. 2. Security broker/dealers shall be restricted to those regulated by the SEC, have a minimum capital of $40,000,000 and may include "primary" dealers or regional dealers. 3. Municipalities must obtain from their brokers certain representations regarding future investments. Minnesota Statutes 118A.05 requires the City to provide each broker with information regarding the City's investment restrictions. All brokers will provide the City with a Broker/Dealer Certification stating that they will do business with the City according to Minnesota Statute and the Orono Investment Policy. The Broker/Dealer Certification will be signed by an officer of the company. 5-7. MATURITIES AND DIVERSIFICATION The City's policy for portfolio diversification shall be to stagger maturities which will avoid undue concentration of assets while providing stability of income and reasonable liquidity. Short-term investments will mature on or near the anticipated date of need to pay for recurring operations. Long-term investments are made for debt service requirements; and represent an opportunity to extend maturities and achieve higher yields. Maturities should not be extended beyond eight 5-3 years and the longer term securities may be sold if it is advantageous to do so in the opinion of the Treasurer. Generally the allowable portfolio maximum for a specific maturity is 5% and 35% for a specific dealer. 5-8. RISK, PRUDENCE AND ETHICS The standard of prudence to be used by investment officials involved in the investment process shall be the "prudent investor" and shall be applied in the context of managing the overall portfolio. Investment officers acting in accordance with this policy and with MN Statute 118A and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, as provided in MN Statute 118A.02 Subd 2. 5-9. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY The City Council hereby delegates the management of the investment program and the designation of depositories to the city treasurer, as authorized in Minnesota Statute 118A.02. In his absence the deputy treasurer or the city administrator shall exercise the same authority. The treasurer shall have full authority, as stated in Resolution No. 2089, to initiate such wire transfers or interbank transfers as may be necessary to accomplish the investment objectives as stated within this policy. The treasurer shall provide the Council with a detailed list of electronic wire transfers at the next available council meeting. The treasurer shall be authorized to designate depositories on behalf of the City Council at times other than the beginning of the year, as provided in Resolution No. 2563, and will provide to the Council the identity of each new depository and the investment purchased as part of the quarterly investment report. 5-10. ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Original Adoption — December 12, 1988 Amended Policy — Resolution 4246, adopted February 22, 1999 Amended Policy — Resolution 5952, adopted July 26, 2010 Amended Policy — Resolution 6399, adopted April 28, 2014 5-4 City of Orono Financial Management Policies Policy 6 - Debt Management 6-1. PURPOSE The purpose of the debt policy is to ensure that debt is used wisely and that future financial flexibility remains relatively unconstrained. Debt is an important mechanism to fund capital expenditures. It can reduce long-term costs due to inflation, prevent lost opportunities, and equalize the costs of improvements to present and future constituencies. Debt management is an integral part of the financial management of the City. Adequate resources must be provided for the repayment of debt, and the level of debt incurred by the City must be effectively controlled to amounts that are manageable and within levels that will maintain or enhance the City's credit rating. A goal of debt management is to stabilize the overall debt burden and future tax levy requirements to ensure that issued debt can be repaid and prevent default on any municipal debt. A high debt level places a financial burden on taxpayers and can create economic problems for the community. The debt policies ensure that the City's outstanding debt does not weaken the City's financial structure, provides manageable limits on debt, and allows for the best possible credit rating. 6-2. POLICY The city will limit long-term debt to capital improvements which cannot be financed from current revenues. Incurring long-term debt serves to obligate future taxpayers. Excess reliance on long-term debt can cause debt levels to reach or exceed the government's ability to pay. Therefore, conscientious use of long-term debt will provide assurance that future residents will be able to service the debt obligations left by former residents. The city will repay borrowed funds, used for capital projects, within a period not to exceed the expected useful life of the project. This policy reflects the view that those residents who benefit from a project should pay for the project. Adherence to this policy will also help prevent the government from over -extending itself with regard to the incurrence of future debt. The city will not use long-term debt for financing current operations. This policy reflects the view that those residents who benefit from a service should pay for the service. Utilization of long-term debt to support current operations would result in future residents supporting services provided to current residents. The city will adhere to a policy of full public disclosure with regard to the issuance of debt. Full public disclosure with regard to the issuance of debt provides assurance that the incurrence of debt, for which the public is responsible, is based upon a genuine need and is consistent with underwriter guidelines. 6-1 City of Orono Financial Management Policies Policy 7 - Fixed Asset 7-1. SCOPE The City of Orono establishes and maintains a capital asset system to ensure adequate accounting procedure and record and to provide users with consistent and comparable asset information for current and future periods. 7-2. DEFINITION Capital assets are assets that: 1) are used in City operations; 2) have an initial life in excess of one year; 3) are valued over $10,000. The term embraces both tangible assets (land, buildings, site & building improvements, machinery & equipment, infrastructure) and intangible assets (easements, software, mineral rights). Assets acquired for the purpose of sale or investments do not qualify as capital assets, regardless of their form, because they are not used in operations. 7-3. POLICY Fixed asset purchases or construction projects all require City Council approval. The Council action approving the project or purchase is the first step in the recording of the asset. Assets that are purchased for an Enterprise Fund are all coded to account code 16500 which is titled "Fixed Assets — Const in Progress". This includes all engineering and legal bills and other ancillary costs associated with the asset/project. This coding is done by the Finance Director. A report detail report is run identifying these assets after the close of the year to identify any additional assets that were purchased after the insurance application was processed. Enterprise Fund assets are added to the appropriate schedule. Other fixed assets are paid for from the various construction funds (402 — 437), unless otherwise instructed. Reports are generated for these funds similar to the detail reports that are run for the enterprise funds. In the case of the construction funds, any engineering/legal fees are coded directly to the cost of the asset. These reports are then used to update the General Fixed Asset Schedule (GFA). In the case of the Police Department, fixed assets are coded to object codes 500 — 580. Reports for these items are reviewed at the close of the year. These assets are added to the GFA listing at year end. Assets that are disposed of are generally tracked by the revenue lines associated with the sale of equipment. If an asset is traded in on the new asset, the trade in value is recorded as a revenue and the new asset is recorded at its full price. This way, the disposal of the 7-1 asset is recorded as a revenue on the books at the same time the new asset is purchased. Detail revenue reports are used to identify the deletions from the Fixed Asset record. During the insurance renewal process, assets listings distributed to the Departments and are compared to the listings from the LMCIT. This is a final check to verify if assets are missing or need to be deleted from the fixed asset listing. 7-4. DEPRECIATION The City's capital assets are depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives. If assets are acquired in June or before, half a year will be depreciated. If the assets are acquired July or after, depreciation will start in the next year. For capital projects, acquired date is the date the project is complete. In the Enterprise Fund, assets will be recoded from the 16500 to the appropriate asset account once acquired in its entirety. Depreciation will start based on the on the half- year convention described above at this time. Estimated useful life guideline is as follows: 25 years Storm Sewer 30 years Storm Sewer System 50 years Storm Sewer Improvements/Replacements 50 years Ravine Stabilization 25 years Ravine Improvement 30 years Concrete 100 years Corrugated Metal 50 years Sanitary Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation 25 years Grinder Station Rehabilitation 30 years Lift Station Monitoring 20 years Main Rehabilitation 50 years Force main/Sewer main Replacement 70 years Water Scada Upgrade 10 years Water Plant Painting 15 years Salt Brine Tank Rehabilitation 50 years Well Inspection & Maintenance 10 years Well Rehabilitation 20 years Well Screen 30 years Water Main Replacement 75 years Water Valve Replacement 50 years 7-2 Water Meter Replacement 15 years Cable Equipment 10 years General Land Not Depreciable Irrigation System 15-25 years Parking Lots 30 years Wells 30-40 years Infrastructure & Streets Bridge 75 years Street Lights 50 years Sidewalks 40 years Road 40 years Buildings Building Foundation/Frame/Structure 50 years Roof 20 years Counter 25 years Clubhouse 40-50 years Garage 25 years Carpeting 15 years Furnace 20 years Plumbing 25 years Parks Playground Equipment 25 years Docks 25 years Grounds Equipment 10 years 7-3 City of Orono Financial Management Policies Policy 8 -Grant 8-1. PURPOSE With continued decreases in local government revenues, grant revenues have become an even more important part of the City's overall resource picture, especially in funding capital improvements. Although grant programs themselves are being reduced and becoming more competitive, actively seeking out grant revenues that assist in achieving identified City goals and objectives should nonetheless play a key role in the City's overall financial health strategies The purpose of this policy is to set forth an overall framework for guiding the City's use and management of grant resources. 8-2. GOALS 1. Set forth the importance of grant programs in accomplishing City goals and objectives. 2. Establish general concepts and framework for seeking and managing grant programs. 3. Identify roles and responsibilities in managing grant programs. 4. Establish criteria for evaluating the benefits and costs of grant programs. 5. Set forth the City's policy in complying with Single Audit Act requirements. 8-3. DEFINITION 1. Grant — a monetary award of financial assistance or property provided to the City to carry out an activity or project for a public purpose or public good. 2. Grant Manager — The Grant Manager is the individual responsible for the administration of the project as stated in the grant proposal. The Grant Manager shall be listed on the grant application as the primary contact when there are co - grantees. 8-4. GENERAL CONCEPTS AND FRAMEWORK 1. The City will pursue grant funding from federal, state and other sources, consistent with identified City goals and objectives. 2. Aside from entitlement grants, the City should focus its efforts on securing grants for capital improvements. This approach will allow the City to compete for projects we might not otherwise be able to afford while maintaining financial independence should future grant sources diminish. E. 3. Grants for operating purposes may be considered on a case-by-case basis after careful consideration of the benefits of the program and the ongoing impacts on the City if grant funding is no longer available. 4. The City should extensively analyze grants that fund "pilot" operating programs or short-term staffing enhancements to existing programs. Taking on these programs could ultimately aggravate the City's fiscal position should the desire for the program remain once the grant funding is no longer available. 5. The City will only seek grants when sufficient staff resources are available to effectively administer the program in compliance with grant requirements and successfully perform the grant work scope and provide necessary matching requirements (both cash and in-kind matches). 6. Indirect costs of administering grant programs will be recovered to the maximum extent feasible. 7. Operating departments have the primary responsibility for seeking out grant opportunities, for preparing effective grant applications and for successfully managing grant programs after they have been awarded. 8-5. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council 1. Approves all grant applications in excess of $10,000 and delegates receipt and contract execution to the City Administrator if delegation is allowed by the grantor agency. 2. Approves resolutions accepting grant funds and matching funds, if required. City Administrator or Designee The City Administrator is the only authorized person to sign contracts, agreements, and grants on behalf of the City. If the grant is to be submitted electronically, then the City Administrator shall be listed as the authorizing agent or person. The City of Orono is the Grantee, not the specific department or division. 1. Receives grants and executes related contract documents when delegated to do so by the Council. 2. Approves all grant applications under $10,000 and delegates receipt and contract execution to the department head requesting the grant application if delegation is allowed by the grantor agency. Operating Departments 1. Develop systems for maintaining ongoing information regarding grant availability within their functional areas of responsibility. 2. Evaluate benefits and costs of specific grant programs on a case-by-case basis: E. a) Purpose of the grant program and its consistency with identified City goals and objectives. b) Additional staffing, office space, facilities, supplies or equipment that will be required if the grant is awarded. c) Ongoing impacts of the grant program after it is completed. d) Responsibilities of other departments and impacts on them in preparing the grant application or performing work scope if the grant is approved. e) Amount of indirect costs to be recovered from the grant, f) Total program costs, including portion funded through grant revenues and any required City contribution. g) Source of funding for any required City share. h) Compliance and audit requirements, paying special attention to those areas where the grantor's administrative procedures are different than the City's. 3. Prepare grant application(s) a) Work with the grantor agency in identifying special program requirements and developing strategies for preparing a successful grant application. b) Complete grant application documents. c) Coordinate with affected departments as necessary. d) For grants in excess of $10,000, prepare a Council agenda report requesting authorization to seek grant funding. This report should describe the grant program's conformance with this policy, including the results of the cost/benefit analysis. e) For grants of $10,000 or less, Operating Departments may submit the grant application without further approval, subject to the following conditions: • There will be no changes to existing staffing. • Matching funds or in-kind contributions are already available within existing resources, and no additional appropriation of unreserved, undesignated fund balance or working capital is required. • At the conclusion of the grant, there will be no ongoing commitments or obligations to continue the program. • The purpose of the grant program is clearly consistent with current City plans, policies, and goals. 4. Administer grant programs if awarded. a) For grants in excess of $10,000, prepare a City Council agenda accepting the grant award, including a budget adjustment request in the fiscal impact section, and attaching the grant summary form signed by Finance (see attached). b) Coordinate execution of grant documents by the City Administrator and return executed documents to grantor agency. E -IN c) For grants of $10,000 or less, execute and return grant documents to grantor agency. d) Notify affected departments of grant award. e) Provide the Administrative Services — Finance Department with electronic copies of the following: • Grant Award Letter; • Grant Contract; • Grant Summary Form; • Grant Amendments; • Reimbursement/ Drawdown request; • Close Out Reports. f) Maintain financial and other records in accordance with grant requirements. g) Complete and submit required reports, including requests for funds (reimbursements, drawdowns, advances). h) Monitor grant expenditures and receipt of revenues. All methods of payments shall be made payable to the "City of Orono" and not to City Departments or employees via check or electronic fund transfer. i) Coordinate on-site management reviews by the grantor agency during the grant term. j) Ensure compliance with grant requirements, paying special attention to those areas where the grantor's administrative procedures are different than the City's. k) Perform the grant work scope. 5. Complete grant closeout. a) Complete the grant work scope. b) Notify affected departments, that the project is completed and schedule a "close-out" meeting if necessary to resolve any final procedural issues. c) Ensure final receipt of grant revenues. d) Prepare and submit any required grant close-out documents. e) Return unobligated funds, if applicable, to funding agency. f) Review grant file for completeness. g) Retain all necessary program and financial records for the period of time required by grantor agency, but not less than five (5) years after the City audit. h) Coordinate any on-site management reviews or audits by the grantor. i) Resolve any audit findings. Finance Department 1. Develops, recommends and maintains grant management policies. EM 2. Provide technical assistance to operating departments in preparing grant applications, submitting reports, maintaining records and responding to any audit or information requests from granting agencies. 3. Upon approval by City Council, increase revenues and expenditure appropriations. 4. Coordinate the accounting and recording for all receipts and disbursements related to the grant. Finance will determine setup and maintain the most appropriate method(s) of accounting for grants in the financial system. 5. To ensure proper coding of the grant(s), the Accountant will receive general ledger account coding from the Finance Director before posting receipt and expenditure. 6. If applicable, Finance will create an invoice to the grantor per the operating department's request. 7. Provide technical support to the operating departments preparing and submitting request for funds, drawdowns, advances, financial performance reports, close out, etc. 8. Schedule Single Audit and coordinate preparation and distribution of single audit reports. Other Departments Provides assistance to the managing department as identified during the grant application and award process. 8-6. SINGLE AUDIT ACT REQUIREMENT Background The City is subject to the financial and compliance requirements of the Single Audit Act of 1984, amended in 1996, which is applicable to all local and state governments expending more than $750,000 in federal financial assistance during a fiscal year. The purpose of the Act is to: 1. Improve the financial management and accountability of state and local governments with respect to federal financial assistance programs. 2. Establish uniform requirements for audits of federal grants. 3. Promote efficient and effective use of audit resources. 4. Assure that federal departments and agencies rely upon and use audit work performed during a single audit rather than performing the audit work themselves. Under this Act, federal grants are included under an inclusive single audit program that is incorporated into the City's annual audit and financial report preparation process. During the audit, tests are made to determine the adequacy of the internal control structure, including that portion related to federal financial assistance programs, as well as to determine that the City has complied with applicable laws and regulations. E City's Policy Regarding the Single Audit Approach For federal grants included in the scope of the City's single audit approach, it is the City's policy that all financial and compliance issues have been met through the single audit, and follow-up audits to determine these issues are not necessary unless specifically related to findings or recommendations included in the single audit report. As noted above, the purpose of the Act is to establish uniform audit requirements, promote efficient use of audit resources, and assure that federal agencies rely upon audit work already completed; its purpose is not to audit local agencies twice. Accordingly, the City will strongly resist any efforts by federal agencies to duplicate audit work already performed in complying with Act requirements. As such, whenever federal grantor agencies request final audits, the managing department should notify the Department of Finance in order to ensure a consistent response to these types of requests. 8-7. OTHER REGULATIONS All grants are subject to Federal, State and Local Regulations. These regulations may be updated from time to time by the Federal or State government. The applicable guidelines will vary depending upon the grant awarded. The following are regulations that provide guidelines for grant administration and followed by the City: 1. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a. Circular A-21 —cost principles for determining cost applicable to grants, contracts and other agreements with educational institutions. b. Circular A-87 — establishes principles and standards for determining cost for Federal awards carried through grants, cost reimbursement contracts and other agreements with State and local governments. c. Circular A-102 — establishes consistency and uniformity among Federal agencies in the management of grants. This included the adoption of government -wide common rule for terms and conditions on grants. d. Circular A-110 — uniform administrative requirements for grants and agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and other non-profit organizations. e. Circular A-122 — establishes cost principles for determining cost of grants, contracts and other agreements with non-profit organizations. 2. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) subpart 31.2 — defines allowable and unallowable costs regarding contracts with commercial organizations. 3. 45 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) 74 — establishes uniform administrative requirements to determine cost applicable to research and development under grants and contracts with hospitals. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE CITY OF ORONO FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES WHEREAS, financial management policies guide in the preparation and management of the City's overall budget and major objectives to be accomplished; and WHEREAS, Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) best practices recommends government formally adopt financial policies; and WHEREAS, the Fund Balance Policy, last amended by Resolution 6105, and Investment Policy, last amended by Resolution 6399, will be amended to be part of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Operating Budget Policy, Revenue Policy, Expenditure and Purchasing Policy, Debt Management Policy, Fixed Asset Policy and Grant Policy will be adopted; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Orono Council, hereby authorizes the adoption of the Financial Management Policies Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held December 9, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 10 Date: December 9, 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 December 9, 2019 to December 31, 2021. 2. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the rental licenses as listed in Exhibit A for the license period of December 9, 2019 to December 31, 2021. 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 December 9, 2019 to December 31, 2021. Exhibits A. Listing of Rental Licenses Prepared By: AMC Reviewed By: AMC Approved By: J192 Exhibit A City Council 2019 Rental License License# Licensee I Total License Fees RL19-000044 Creekview Farms 100 RL19-000045 Green Acres Asset Managment 100 RL19-000046 Beth Trautman 100 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 11 Date: December 9, 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 and part time employees. 2. Background. The hourly pay is proposed to be $12.00-14.00 for the Golf Course Clubhouse Attendants, Brush Site Attendants, and Sledding Attendants; $12-$16 for Parks and Golf Course Maintenance Employees, and $10-$16 for Utilities Maintenance Workers; and a pay range of $15.00- $20.00 for the Clubhouse Manager. The Clubhouse Manager will be a part time employee. All other employees will be seasonal and fall under the 6 month PERA Classification and are therefore excluded from PERA membership. 3. Seasonal Employee Appointments and Candidates. Prepared By: JG Reviewed By: 5bV Approved By: jS)jGZ Name Position Wage Remarks ($/hr) Robert Howells G.C. Clubhouse Manager $20.00 Resigned 6 ay Paul Tolzmann G.C. Clubhouse Attendant $13.00 Returnee N Scott Prochnow G.C. Clubhouse Attendant $13.00 Returnee wN Stuart Mayer Brush Site Attendant $13.00 Resigned Mitchell Hall Parks and Golf Maintenance $15.00 Returnee Danielle Middendorf Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 Returnee N Marshall Hambro Clubhouse Attendant $13.00 Returnee c Marie Jorland Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 Returnee Diana Otrey Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 Resigned 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 e' 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 Resigned March 19, 2019 Approved Megan Schiller Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 Resigned May 13, Fermin Aragon Parks and Golf Maintenance $12.00 New hire 2019 Grace Mattila Parks and Golf Maintenance $12.00 Resigned Approved Chad Stowell Parks and Golf Maintenance $14.00 New hire May 28, 2019 Approved Max Bjorklund Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 New hire June 10, 2019 Prepared By: JG Reviewed By: 5bV Approved By: jS)jGZ AGENDA ITEM Approved July 17, 2019 Max Taggart Clubhouse / Brush Site Attendant $12.00 Resigned Approved Samantha Trammel Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 New hire August 12, Amber Nasby Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 Resigned 2019 David Lindstrom Clubhouse Attendant $12.00 Resigned Marie Jorland Clubhouse Manager $15.00 Promotion Approved October 21, 2019 Mitchell Hall Parks and Golf Maintenance 11-4-2019 Start Date $15.00 Returnee Requesting Marshall Hambro Sledding Attendant $13.00 Returnee Approval Wendy Middendorf Sledding Attendant $12.00 Returnee 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: jS)V AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 12 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: Approval to Dispose of unclaimed property Presenter: Correy Farniok Police Chief Agenda Consent Agenda Section: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain approval for the disposal of unclaimed property. 2. Background. The Orono Police Department has unclaimed property that has been turned in to the department. The unclaimed property was found or abandoned within the city. The following property has not been claimed. All of the property has been in the department's possession for more than 60 days. The police department considers the property as abandoned property and would like to dispose through K -Bid or similar public auction. 3. Project Scope. Disposal of unclaimed property. To include the following Multiple fishing poles, a reel, a tackle box and contents Pentax Binoculars Pruners Filet knife A pair of Glacier gloves and a pair of Thinsulate gloves Upland hunting coat Buck Knife Fly reel Sheffield Utility Knife Misc. Coins A diamond and gold ring with one stone missing A clear stoned ring A compound bow A Daisy BB gun 4. Staff Recommendation. I recommend that the disposal of unclaimed property. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the dispose of the unclaimed property through K -Bid or other similar public auction. Prepared By: Correy Farniok Reviewed By: -SbV Approved By: -SbV AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 13 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: 2018 Drainage Improvement Project - Pay Request No. 2 — Final Presenter: Adam T. Edwards Agenda Consent Agenda Public Works Director/City Engineer Section: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain Council authorization for Pay Request No. 2 — Final for the 2018 Drainage Improvement Project. 2. Background. On April 23', 2018 the City awarded the Contract to Minger Construction. Construction was completed in 2018 with site restoration and additional work orders completed in 2019. 3. Project Scope. The project consisted of the replacement, repair or installation new stormwater structures as listed below: a. Orono Orchard Road — Replace storm sewer inlet b. Farview Lane — Replace culvert c. Turnham Road — Replace inlet and storm sewer outlet d. North Arm Drive — Install drop structure on culvert and stabilize ravine e. Fagerness Point Road — Replace inlet and storm sewer outlet f. Watertown Road — Install curb and gutter 4. Cost. Pay request 2 is for $10,755.22. This included payment of the retainage. Total payments to Minger Construction including Pay request 2 is $120,104.36. 5. Funding. This project is funded from the Storm Water Fund. 6. Staff Recommendation. I recommend that Minger Construction be paid $10,755.22 and the project closed. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve Pay Request No. 2 -Final to Minger Construction Paving in the amount of $10,755.22 for the Drainage Improvement Project. Exhibits A. Pay Request Prepared By: Reviewed By: -1V Approved By: -T Contractor: Minger Construction Name of Project: 2018 Drainage Improvements COMPLETED AFTER THIS ESTIMATE............................................................................................................ ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT....................................................................................................... CHANGE ORDERS/EXTRA WORK: Estimate Number: Application Date: Pay Period: No. Description Additions Deductions $ - $ - $ - $ - TOTALADDITIONS.......................................................................................................................... SUBTOTALS.......................................................................................................................................... TOTAL DEDUCTIONS............................................................................................................................... Final 11/25/2019 11/25/2019 122.5% $ 98,048.70 $ 98,048.70 CONTRACT AMOUNT TO DATE................................................................................................................... $ 98,048.70 TOTAL COMPLETED TO DATE............................................................................................................................ $120,104.36 MATERIALSSTORED.......................................................................................................................... $ - TOTAL COMPLETED AND STORED TO DATE..................................................................................................................... $ 120,104.36 LESSRETAINAGE................................................................................................................................ $ - TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE..................................................................................................................... $ 120,104.36 LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS: Est. No. 1 Amount $ 39,939.52 Est. No. Amount $ - Est. No. 2 Amount $ 69,409.62 Est. No. Amount - Est. No. Amount $ - Est. No. Amount —$ - Est. No. Amount $ - Est. No. Amount —$ - Est. No. Amount $ - Est. No. Amount —$ - Est. No. Amount $ - Est. No. Amount —$ - —$ Total Estimates $ 109,349.14 AMOUNT DUE THIS ESTIMATE.............................................................................................................................. $ 10,755.22 Payment requested by: Approved and recommended for payment by: Minger Construction Co., Inc. Bolton & Menk, Inc. Contractor Representative Project Engineer By: By: b J Date: Date: 11/25/2019 H:\ORNO\C13116377\7_Construction\E_Pay Applications\Pay App 3\[116377_Pay Estimate_Final.xls]Estimate App Final AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 14 Item Description: Anti Icing Unit #425a Date: December 9, 2019 Presenter: DJ Goman Agenda Consent Agenda Streets and Stormwater Supervisor Section: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this request is to gain Council approval for the purchase of an Anti Icing System by Aspen Equipment. 2. Background. This unit is used ahead of an ice or snow storm for pretreating of the roadways, bridge decks and public facility parking areas. Anti -icing breaks the bond between the surface and the snow or ice, thus allowing easier removal, less plowing and salt / salt sand on the surface. This unit is built on a skid and would go on the back of our existing plow truck #425 3. Cost. The City received two quotes, listed below. Both vendors have the state contracting for Anti— Icing systems. The low quote for the unit and related items was from Aspen Equipment for the amount of $19,182.00 The total cost includes purchase, installation and training Component Company / Model Cost Anti -Icing System Aspen Equipment $ 19,182.00 Anti -Icing System Towmaster Truck Equipment $ 19,386.00 4. Funding. Funding will be provided from the Equipment Outlay Fund. The 2020 CIP and Public Works Annual Plan allocated $27,600 for this piece of equipment. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the purchase of an Anti — Icing System by Aspen Equipment. Prepared By: DJG Reviewed By: Approved By: _SbV AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 15 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: LAI 8-000094 — Lakewest Development o/b/o Russel Kocon and Jacqueline Gibney, 3570 Ivy Place — Conditional Use Permit for Permanent Dock — Resolution Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart, AICP Agenda Consent Agenda Community Development Director Section: 1. Purpose. To consider granting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a permanent dock at 3570 Ivy Place. 2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was received on October 29, 2018 and considered to be complete on November 12, 2019. The 60 -Day review period will expire on January 11, 2020. 3. Background. This action is predicated on the approval of a plat combining lots 1 and outlot A for Ivy Place, reviewed as case LA19-000041. If the plat is not approved, the applicant lacks zoning authority to have an accessory structure (dock) on a lot without a principal structure. The applicant proposes construction of permanent dock on the west side of the property. A permanent improvement in the floodplain triggers the CUP. There are two easements in the area of the proposed improvement, illustrated on the attached annotated site plan. The dock encroaches into the Wetland Restoration easement, indicated in blue. This is a permissible encroachment. The dock also encroaches into the sanitary sewer easement, indicated in red. This level of encroachment is negligible and not expected to impact the use of the easement, though the Council could require the applicant to remove the encroachment. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. On November 18th, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. The Commission voted 7-0 to approve the application, subject to a number of conditions suggested by staff. 1. Reflectors be added every 25 feet along the edges of the dock 2. A path no wider than 4 feet be maintained for access to the dock. 3. All requirements of the DNR and Watershed District shall be followed. Commissioners primarily questioned the impact of the dock on adjacent properties and their use of the lake. Commissions also discussed the impact of the dock on the existing easements in the area. 5. Public Comment. To date, no comments for or against the application have been received, though some questions regarding the application have been fielded. 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 Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: -SbV Approved By: -SbV AGENDA ITEM B. PC staff report C. PC Minutes — Draft D. Annotated site Plan E. Dock plans References PC Staff Report & Exhibits 11/18/19 Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: -SbV Approved By: -SbV CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PURSUANT TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1118(3) - FILE NO. LA18-000094 WHEREAS, Russell Kocon and Jacqueline Gibney are the Owners of property at 3570 Ivy Place (hereinafter "the Applicants") within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City"), and legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Ivy Place Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) pursuant to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78- 1118(3) for construction of a permanent dock extending into the floodplain; and Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File LA18-000094. 2. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on November 18, 2019 and recommended approval of the CUP based on the following findings: a. The Property is conforming due to size and width. b. The dock is a water use feature and its extension into the floodplain is reasonable. c. The dock will not support lights, negating any nighttime light pollution. d. The dock will be built of sturdy materials designed for the specific use, minimizing upkeep and annual maintenance. Page 1 of 4 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. e. The dock will support reflectors to provide safety to lighted vehicles in darkness. 3. Conditional Use Permit Analysis. The City Council makes the following findings with regard to the criteria necessary for the granting of a conditional use permit. a) Consistent with the community management plan; The property is guided and will continue to be used for residential purposes. b) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; Accessory docks are permitted by the zoning code. c) Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management; The proposed dock is not expected to increase needs for these services. d) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; The proposed dock will not increase need for water or sanitary sewer services. e) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; The proposed dock will not increase demand of these services. f) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future; A seasonal dock has been placed in the general area in past years. g) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The permanent dock is not expected to impact the neighborhood character. h) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The permanent dock is not expected to impact the character of the improvements in the surrounding area. i) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; The permanent nature of the dock is not expected to impact the use and enjoyment of property in the area, provided the dock does not impact an established channel into the lake. j) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; No screening is proposed or recommended. k) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes, dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; No testimony has been offered that suggests the dock will establish a nuisance. Page 2 of 4 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or unsafe access; The permanent nature of the dock will not increase traffic. m) Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact; The dock built for the floodplain will not impact the natural features of the lake. n) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; no lighting is proposed and o) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. The dock is not expected to introduce hazards, though adding reflectors at intervals along the dock will help winter users of the lake. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the Applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed conditional use permit on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the Applicants' request would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) pursuant to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78- 1118(3) for construction of a permanent dock extending into the floodplain, subject to the following conditions: 1. This approval is for dock depicted on the attached Exhibit A. 2. Light reflectors shall be placed every 25 feet along the edges of the dock to notify users of the water/ ice level of structure. 3. The path through the shoreland restoration easement be no wider than 4 feet wide. 4. All requirements of the DNR and the Watershed District shall be followed. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions Page 3 of 4 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 9th day of December, 2019. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor Page 4 of 4 Date Application Received: October 29, 2018 Date Application Considered as Complete: November 12, 2019 60 -Day Review Period Expires: January 11, 2019 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director Date: November 18, 2019 Subject: #LA18-000094, Steven Eggert o/b/o Lakewest Development and Rusty Kocon, 3570 Ivy Place, Conditional Use Permit for Permanent Dock in the Floodplain Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit approval to construct a permanent dock in the floodplain. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval, subject to the following conditions: Reflectors be added every 25 feet along the edges of the dock A path no wider than 4 feet be maintained for access to the dock. All requirements of the DNR and Watershed District shall be followed. Background The property is and has been the subject of a number of recent land use applications. The lot was created in 2018 as part of the Ivy Place Plat (LA18-14). In 2019, a variance was granted (LA19-28) allowing the replat of the subject parcel and Outlot A, both of Ivy Place Plat, into one parcel. The variances was necessary because Lot 1 is the 'front' lot of a front lot/ back lot plat configuration and the applicant desires lake frontage on the lagoon side. The Planning Commission and Council are concurrently considering application (LA19-41) that would replat the property as permitted by the variance. The applicant desires to install a permanent dock on the west side of the property. A permanent improvement in the flood plain requires a conditional use permit. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Applicable Regulations: Conditional Use Permit (78-1118 (3) ) Standards for floodway conditional uses (78-1119) Applicable Regulation: Conditional Use Permit (Section 78-916) The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) as the use permit was applied for or in modified form. On the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the city must find that the proposed use at the proposed location is or will be: 1) Consistent with the community management plan; The property is guided and will continue to be used for residential purposes. FILE #LA18-000094 November 18, 2019 Page 2 of 4 2) Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; Accessory docks are permitted by the zoning code. 3) Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management; The proposed dock is not expected to increase needs for these services. 4) Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; The proposed dock will not increase need for water or sanitary sewer services. 5) Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; The proposed dock will not increase demand of these services. 6) Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is planned to be used in the future; A seasonal dock has been placed in the general area in past years. 7) Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The permanent dock is not expected to impact the neighborhood character. 8) Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The permanent dock is not expected to impact the character of the improvements in the surrounding area. 9) Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses; The permanent nature of the dock is not expected to impact the use and enjoyment of property in the area, provided the dock does not impact an established channel into the lake. 10) Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; No screening is proposed or recommended. 11) Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors, fumes, dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; No testimony has been offered that suggests the dock will establish a nuisance. 12) Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or unsafe access; The permanent nature of the dock will not increase traffic. 13) Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the area and to minimize environmental impact; The dock built for the floodplain will not impact tha natural features of the lake. 14) All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; no lighting is proposed and 15) Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. The dock is not expected to introduce hazards, though adding reflectors at intervals along the dock will help winter users of the lake. A CUP may be granted subject to such conditions as the Council may prescribe. Additionally, a CUP shall remain in effect as long as the conditions imposed by the City Council are observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. FILE #LA18-000094 November 18, 2019 Page 3 of 4 Septic System Status Not applicable. The subject property is served by municipal sewer. Conditional Use Permit Analysis The dock is proposed on the west side of Lot 1, Block 1. The dock as proposed is not intended for human habitation, and will have a low flood damage potential. The dock will not impede flood waters. Electrical features, if added, will need to be elevated above regulatory flood elevation. These meet the floodplan standards. There are two easement in the general area that may be impacted by the proposed dock. Shoreline stabilization Easement (Document T5036119) was established in 2012 to stabilize the shoreline. The easement language (Exhibit D) includes the following: "All Planted and seeded areas will be maintained in perpetuity free from mowing or other vegetative disturbance, except as specified herein, fertilizer application, yard or other waste disposal, and the placement of structures or any alterations that impede the function of the shoreline in protecting water quality, shading the riparian edge, moderating flow into any adjacent wetland or waterbody, or provided wildlife habitat." The dock is not expected to impede the water quality protection, riparian edge water shading, or moderating water flow functions. However, site improvements, including but not limited to tree and vegetative removal, storage features, and seating areas can impede these functions and should not be incorporated in the easement area. Staff concurs with the watershed district's recommendation that a path no wider than 4 feet be established for access to the dock. The Commission could require the corresponding dock sections be no wider than 4 feet. Permanent Drainage and Utility Easement (Document T05539808) The proposed improvement encroaches very minimally into the easement area, and is setback from the sanitary sewer. The improvement is not expected to impact the improvement or the easement. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. 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 Planning Staff supports the Conditional Use Permit as shown, with the following conditions: List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application FILE #LA18-000094 November 18, 2019 Page 4 of 4 Exhibit B. Site Plan Exhibit C. Dock Plans Exhibit D. Shoreland Stabilization Easement Document Exhibit E. Permanent Drainage and Utility Easement Document Exhibit F. Public Notice information Exhibit G. MCWD comments MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. 2. LA18-000094 LAKEWEST DEVELOPMENT, 3570 IVY PLACE, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PERMANENT DOCK, 6:36 P.M. - 6:49 P.M. Steve Eggert, o/b/o Lakewest Development, and Russell Kocon, were present. Barnhart said this is the second part of the application. Assuming the replat is approved, the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow the construction of a permanent dock on the west side of the newly created lot. Using an exhibit, he indicated the lot that was recently created. Staff received one comment with a concern about encroaching onto a channel area within the lagoon -type area. It does not appear that it will encroach, but Staff will look more closely with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD). Barnhart noted the previous replatting action did not erase existing Easements. The first Easement is a Shoreline Stabilization Easement granted in 2012 from the previous owner for shoreline stabilization practices. This dock encroaches into that Easement a bit, but the Watershed District is not concerned with the level of encroachment. They asked that the path through the Easement to not be wider than 4 feet to help minimize loss of vegetation and impacts. Staff is recommending to incorporate that into the draft conditions. The second Easement is a Sanitary Sewer Easement that cuts along the entire shoreline of the properties on the point, and the proposed dock minimally encroaches into that area a couple feet. It does not look like it impacts the manhole or sanitary sewer. The City Engineer did not have any concerns with the level of encroachment. Staff noted any improvement placed in an Easement is at the property owner's risk. Staff is recommending approval of the CUP which would allow a permanent dock on that location with three conditions: 1) reflectors be added every 25 feet along the edges of the dock, primarily to alert wintertime users who may not be expecting a dock that extends into the water or into the ice area; 2) the 4 -foot path that was identified earlier in regards to the Shoreline Stabilization Easement; 3) adherence to DNR and Watershed District regulations. Ressler noted the concern about the dock length getting in the way of the lagoon and asked if that would be enforced by the LMCD or City. Barnhart said a site plan will be approved by the LMCD, but the third condition allows Staff to manipulate the final approved site plan to some degree. Ressler asked if the Commission would approve the site plan subject to the DNR or LMCD being on board with the approval. Barnhart answered yes. Ressler noted the City Engineer provided approval of the proposed placement but asked if it could be relocated if the dock disrupts the use of the sewer. Page 1 of 4 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart said Staff is comfortable with the placement of the dock in relationship to the sewer. The variable is the location of the channel, which is somewhat subject to the LMCD regulations. Staff is not concerned from a mapping standpoint, but additional information from the Watershed District and the LMCD would be helpful. Ressler asked if the City Engineer reviewed the placement of the dock as it relates to the drainage and not the lagoon. Barnhart stated that was correct. Gettman asked where the dock was on 3545 Ivy Place or what the impact would be on the neighbor immediately south. Mr. Rusty Kocon said there is one existing neighbor, and the lot on the west side is flat and no one is there. The neighbor's dock to the east is on Carman Bay. Ressler requested that Staff finish the presentation and the homeowner be available for questions and clarifications after that. Gettman asked Barnhart to point to where the dock will be located. Ressler said it did not look like it would impact their ease of use or usability. Barnhart agreed and said the dock would extend to the edge of the finger on the map, and indicated the amount of space available for access. Thiesse asked if there was any reason the Commission would ask the applicant to keep the dock out of the Easement, to come in at an angle, as it would not add any more dock. Barnhart asked which Easement. Thiesse indicated the Stabilization Easement. Barnhart said that it was within the Commission's rights. Gettman asked what the Easement was for, if it was just a restoration. Barnhart responded the red Easement indicated is the Sanitary Sewer Trunk Easement. Thiesse stated he was referring to the other Easement. Page 2 of 4 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart stated that area is the blue Easement, which is the Shoreline Stabilization. That allows work to be done to stabilize the slope and add some material and vegetation. The Easement is not exclusive. It allows projects that don't impact those goals, including docks. Thiesse asked, if the Commission instructed the applicant to put safety equipment on something and they either do it or don't do it or do it halfway, does the Commission have any liability. Barnhart said the City Attorney could be asked that question. He did not raise that as a concern when dealing with the dock at 2520 Shadywood, where a similar condition was imposed. . Mr. Steve Eggert, Lakewest Development, said the design was mindful of the LMCD and meets the setbacks on the north side of the dock. The design was mindful for an easy-in/easy-out on the maximum traffic going to the west of the dock. Mr. Eggert spoke with the property owner, and Rusty is okay with the reflectors and the 4 -foot path. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:45 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:45 p.m. Ressler noted the placement of the dock as proposed makes sense. The current placement is probably more respectful for his neighbors than having it go straight out based on the angulation of the shoreline. He is in favor of the project as proposed based on the contingencies recommended by Staff. Ms. Penny Saiki, 2874 Casco Point Road, asked where the road is relative to the shore and land setback. She also asked if the road was on the sanitary sewer. Barnhart, using a map, indicated where Ivy Place Road ends and responded that it was roughly near it. Some portions may be on the sanitary sewer, which is not uncommon. Bollis, Erickson, and Gettman stated they did not have any concerns. Libby stated he agreed with Chair and Staff. Libby moved, Gettman seconded, to approve Application LA18-000094 Lakewest Development, 3570 Ivy Place, Conditional Use Permit For A Permanent Dock with the conditions recommended by the staff. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Page 3 of 4 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Barnhart said the City Council will review the previous applications on December 9. Page 4 of 4 PROPOSED DOCK LOCATION EXHIBIT Lot 1, Block 1, IVY PLACE SECOND ADDITION City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota \ \ , ,o� �� /LOT 1 Fay°i/— \\aBLOCK 1 I ,L 9P I , �, Po i _ i `� o'Q°s Xao G \ cc C0�� r<I°�s�° <�^ IVY PLACE ' \ �COND ADD. ° ' 0 1 < -10 06 i sr p � �a`•/ i,� � OLn Q �/ / W / J < J Edge of Water �� j' "—J < / t S y 9� s�°roc Fos 1 1p 1 ^ 0. \ 10. PAX < \S o o NOTE: 'Po° / PROPOSED DOCK LOCATION, DIMENSIONS Otos o r AND SETBACK LINES ARE SHOWN PER 'Q 00`�0�`yo` \ PERMANENT DOCK SITE PLAN PREPARED �'0,'�PAX BY LAKE WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC DATED 4/9/19 \fir/ - MINNESOTA CERTIFICATION N \io .. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I 99■■ am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the lawC .i V State of Minnesota. G R O V P Dated this 23rd day of October, 201 0 0 60 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CivilSiteGroup.com Rory L. Synstelien Minnesota License No. 44565 SCALE IN FEET Project No. 17059.04 SHEET 1 OF 1 DOCK & LIFT, INC. DOCKf.LiFT Tim & Mike Lafterner 4550 Shoreline Drive Spring Park, MN 55384 www.dockandlift.com DOCK SKETCH Phone: 952/471-8343 or 952/474-7934 Fax: 952/471-2608 e-mail. info@dockandliR.com r Name t �II�� TT AA Customer Address Customer Phone Customer City, State & Zip Date Customer E -Mail __0L_fn ...'-----'--" ---------------- - - - - - - - - - - �n :- --i--.-i.-..i. LJO �[. �r - ..-:... , 944. - :...:....:....:.................................................. ....... :................ ...:..... i DOCK&LIFT DOCK & LIFT, INC. Tim & Mike Latterner 4550 Shoreline Drive Spring Park, MN 55384 www.dockandlift.com DOCK SKETCH Phone: 952/471-8343 or 952/474-7934 Fax: 952/471-2608 e-mail., info@dockandliff.com C4=m rName Customer Address isno Customer Phone I CAtomer City, State & Zip Date rm r- DOCK & LIFT, INC. DOCK&LIFT Tim & Mike Latterner 4550 Shoreline Drive Spring Park, MN 55384 www.dockandlift.com DOCK SKETCH Phone: 952/471-8343 or 952/474-7934 Fax: 952/471-2608 e-mail: info@dockandlift.com C er Name Customer Address i", -({ r N 351D I\h'-I l tj Customer Phone Customer City, State & Zip Date --------r ----"---- ' - PROPOSED DOCK LOCATION EXHIBIT Lot 1, Bods 1, IVY PLACE SECOND ADDMON City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota LOT 1 \a9P \ ,��� P BLOCK �°s@�m o°0"; ���P� IVY PLACE rl COND ADD, x u ✓ Me / Y p\ ` p m Edge of Water- �" "1 <rl t s0 'L gGi\\ 10� �_ l t 1 !\ ^I B ° a , 1 ( Bo ^( c \ qP G Y . v op q! P„ NOTE: 90 / PROPOSED DOCK LOCATION, DIMENSIONS pFos oy r AND SETBACK LINES ARE SHOWN PER pc�° °G EPARED enf°c \ PERMANENT DOCK SITE PLAN PR"r i5o�i eI! BY LAKE WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC �i'01, 10 DATED 4/9/19 -\ 1°°�• MINNESOTA CERTIFICATION N I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was ti:-' <P;F it rru�amprepared Li en or under my direct supervision antl that IC i S �/ am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the Is State of Minnesota. G R O u P Dated this 23rd day of October, 201 0 0 60 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200 ST, LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CivilSiteGroup.com Rory L. Synstelien Minnesota License No. 44565 SCALE IN FEET Project No. 17059.04 SHEET 1 OF 1 S A 1. E S A N P S E R V I C E Rusty Kocon 3570 Ivy Place Orono, MN 55391 Specs for Piling Dock: DOCK & LIFT, INC. Tim & Mike Latterner 4550 Shoreline Drive Spring Park, MN 55384 952/471-8343 or 952/474-7934 Fax: 952/471-2608 e-mail: info@dockandlift.com www.dockandlift.com We will furnish all labor, material and equipment to install piling dock as per sketch. Material to be used will be 8" to 10" in diameter treated piling, pressure treated stringers and cross pieces and 2" x 8" decking. All lag bolts and decking screws are plated. Piling length vary between 20' and 35', driven into lake bottm 5' to 10'. Distance between piling varies between 10' to 16'. Any alterations to the dock lay out could change this quote. Thank you for the opportunity to give you a proposal on this project. If you have any questions or concerns, please give me a call. Sincerely, Tim Latterner AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 16 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: LAI 9-000041 — Steve Eggert, o/b/o Lake West Development, LLC and Russell Kocon and Jacqueline Gabney, 3570 Ivy Place, Subdivision resulting in a plat — Resolution Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart, AIC? Agenda Consent Agenda Community Development Director Section: 1. Purpose. To consider a resolution approving a replat of an existing outlot and buildable lot. 2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was received on May 22, 2019 and considered to be complete on November 12, 2019. The 60 -Day review period has been extended and will expire on March 11, 2020. Background. The replat will combine outlot A and lot 1, block 1, all of Ivy Place into one lot, providing lake frontage on the lagoon (west side) of the peninsula and is illustrated as Exhibit D. As Ivy Place plat (provided as Exhibit C) was originally platted in a front lot/ back lot configuration, an outlot for access was required. Earlier this year, the City Council granted a variance from this requirement (case LA19-000028). Access to the back lot will be via an easement to be recorded against the subject property. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. On November 18th, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 7-0 on a motion to approve the replat. 5. Public Comment. To date, no comments for or against the application have been received. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution approving the preliminary plat, subject to the granting of an easement preserving and protecting access to the `back lot'. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED City Council should review the approval resolution and adopt or amend. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. PC Staff report C. PC Minutes - Draft D. Proposed Plat E. Original Plat References PC Staff Report & Exhibits 11/19/18 CC Staff report and Packet for Case LAI 9-000028 Record for approval of the Ivy Place Plat Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: -Sb)R Approved By: -TV CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR IVY PLACE SECOND ADDITION FILE NO. LA19-41 WHEREAS, on May 22, 2019, Lake West Development on behalf of themselves and Russell Kocon and Jacqueline Gibney ("Applicant[s]"), applied for a preliminary plat for the property legally described as: Lot 1 and Outlot A Ivy Place (hereinafter the "Property"); WHEREAS, on November 18, 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 November 18, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 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 #LA19-41. 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 LR -1C Zoning District. 3. The property is guided for Low -Medium Density Residential in the 2040 Community Management Plan. I CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 4. The Property contains 0.82 acres in area and has a defined lot width of over 200 feet. 5. The property will be served by municipal water and sanitary sewer. 6. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25 % according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. 7. The 2 parcels will be combined into 1 buildable lot. The outlot, originally provided as access for the back lot (Lot 2, Block 1, Ivy Place) will be replaced with an easement, as provided by via a variance approved as case LAI 9-000028 8. The lot will conform to the requirements of the zoning district related to lot area and width, and provides adequate building sites within the required front, side, rear, lake yard, and average lake yard setbacks. 9. Access to the property is via the northern extension of Ivy Place, a public road, and via a private easement through 3560 Ivy Place, a private occupied residence. 10. In considering this application for platting, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed subdivision 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. 11. 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. The City will confirm the park dedication required at the time of final plat. 12. A number of easements impact the property, identified those identified in Resolution 6789, approving the preliminary plat for Ivy Place. 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 replatting of the lot and outlot into 1 buildable parcel, as CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL depicted on the plans dated October 22, 2019 prepared by Civil Site Group, attached as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions: 1. No structure may be closer than 75 feet to the lake on either side. 2. The Average Lake Shore Setback shall be 75 feet from the Ordinary High Water line on all sides. 3. The property line between lot 1 and the adjacent Ivy Place Plat lot 2 shall function as aside property line, requiring 15 feet setback (150% of 10 feet side yard setback for LR -1C). 4. Declaration and documentation of wetland buffer as required by MCWD. 5. All comments of the city engineer, outlined in a memo dated August 14, 2017 for the original Ivy Place Plat shall remain applicable. 6. Ivy Place and the portion of the drive within the easement at 3560 Ivy Place shall be inspected and its condition noted prior to construction. All damage shall be repaired to the satisfaction of the city prior to release of financial security. 7. The applicant had represented they have legal access. To the extent that the access rights are modified through court order or other means, the plat would be voided. 8. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. 9. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 10. An easement providing access through lot 1, Block 1 Ivy Place second addition shall be granted to the benefit of the city and the owner of Lot 2, Block 1, Ivy Place. 10. 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 (December 9, 2020). 11. 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. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of December, 2019. ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor 4 Date Application Received: May 22, 2019 Date Application Considered as Complete: November 12, 2019 120 -Day Review Period Expires: March 11, 2020 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Jeremy Barnhart, Community Development Director Date: November 18, 2019 Subject: #LA19-000041, Steve Eggert, o/b/o Lake West Development, LLC, 3570 Ivy Place, Subdivision resulting in a plat Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting to replat the existing Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A, both of Ivy Place into one buildable lot. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the Plat, subject to the provision of an easement for access and utilities to 3600 Ivy Place. The applicant, on behalf of the owner of 3570 Ivy Place, proposes plat approval, creating a new Ivy Place second addition. This plat will incorporate Outlot A and Lot 1, Block 1, both of Ivy Place into one buildable lot. This configuration will establish lake frontage on two sides for 3570 Ivy Place. Access for 3600 Ivy Place will be maintained via an easement. Background The City Council granted a variance earlier this year (Case #LA19-000028) that allowed for the replatting of the subject parcels, removing the access outlot A as required by Ordinance. Analysis Given the approved variance, and the provision of an easement to preserve and protect access, staff has no issues with the proposal. The now larger Lot 1, Block 1 will not create any non - conformities. The revised configuration of the lot will not impact the character of the neighborhood. The platting action will not impact existing easements within the subject area. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Planning Commission have any concerns with the proposed plat? 2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval, subject to the provisions of an easement maintain access to lot 2, Block 1, Ivy Place recording of an easement for access and utilities. FILE # 19-41 November 18, 2019 Page 2 of 2 List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Summary Exhibit B. Narrative Exhibit C. Ivy Place second addition preliminary plat Exhibit D. Ivy Place Final Plat Exhibit E. Public Notice Information MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. 1. LA19-000041 LAKEWEST DEVELOPMENT, 3570 IVY PLACE, SUBDIVISION TO REPLAT LOT 1 AND OUTLOT A OF IVY PLACE, 6:32 P.M. - 6:36 P.M. Steve Eggert, o/b/o Lakewest Development, was present. Barnhart stated the applicant is proposing to plat an existing outlot and Lot 1, Block 1, all part of the original plat of Ivy Place, into one buildable lot. The one lot will have frontage on Lake Minnetonka on two sides. Access will be provided to the lot at the point via an Easement. The Easement will allow for utility access as well. Ressler asked if Staff was in support as proposed or if there was an amendment Staff was requesting which was not illustrated. Barnhart said Staff is not proposing or suggesting any changes to be made. The Easement would be a separate document drafted by the City Attorney and signed by the property owner. Mr. Steven Eggert, Lake West Department, on behalf of Rusty Kocon, said he was available for questions. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:34 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:34 p.m. The Planning Commission had no comments, concerns, or questions. Ressler said the request seemed reasonable. Staffs feedback seems prudent to be approving but subject to access for the utilities of the 3600 lot. Erickson moved Gettman seconded, to approve Application LA19-000041, Lakewest Development, 3570 Ivy Place, Subdivision to Replat Lot 1 and Outlot A of Ivy Place. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Page 1 of 1 PRELIMINARY PLAT: IVY PLACE SECOND ADDITION Edge of Water –Lake O� Dock X9� S \/\� On, x \ ' \oma <'� e o Q\P / \ \.rev' G��%• d \ c'9 j sz o��� // a ° Xo�2g2�C9\ \V 1�v��� \ VA\ T \ o \\ \ \^00.x, 0� - Xg3� i Op 110 • / / `1 q0 xv 932 \\ p) ,X 0 i ° �• P „ �9 9 / V / / \x X 10 l0 97o X0 \�yA�J �sP g}2 F� \ \ \\ \�9 Ria / 9; 'Q�r'i \"d~\\\ \ \` \ � 2�� e"��2o 9 � \` "•\`.- s9 � //``aye •S A1-1 \ / O 0/\ ° \ I 1 (5' \\ O O 10 ps a � �^ ' O �/ < 'c�6, r `rSo \\ � � f S� Oq COs d' �� r sr� \ o w� ��- \ 2°� / �,y� ' <� o 9 "0 O 0> 0-SMH � \4 �r_C( ` �O ' inv=926 2, 0264 1 I / X. i.. J < / Zr III170 0� ' I - \ �g6 "� •'� 1 r1 IM S7 �\\\�Oo 105041 o 9 p�co, -q"" 0000 °O�p 1�0 N� / O 47 i 00. ,A U r ` <'O�� \ r 1j O 6�5 Cor A S „ \ 0d < �s s/021Cp S o S, 0<1- r pf�O;P, G QOf oic S f0 1 2 �s 0,� PRELIMINARY PLAT GENERAL NOTES LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1, Block 1, IVY PLACE Together With Outlot A, IVY PLACE Hennepin County, Minnesota DATE OF PREPARATION: 10-22-2019 APPLICANT: Russell Kocon 612-865-2421 Address: 3570 Ivy Place, Orono, MN 55391 BENCHMARKS: Elevations are based on the NGVD 29 Datum. Site Benchmark is the top nut of fire hydrant located along southwest corner of the dead end street of Ivy Place. Elevation =935.70. EXISTING ZONING: LR -1 C: One Family Lakeshore Residential - 1/2 acre (Per City of Orono online zoning map) AREAS: 35,600+/- square feet or 0.82 +/- acres Rory L. Syn ien Minnesota License No. 44565 rory@civilsitegroup.com 30 15 0 15 30 60 SCALE IN FEET Linetype & Symbol Legend (C�07ao 2�0�e G3 © M p 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200 ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 CivilSiteGroup.com H FIBER OPTIC U SIGN LLJW M 0CY) O Ou M d C L0 f') FL GASMAIN® 0 Z BOLLARD O C O ( SANITARY MANHOLE O a WATERMAIN QE � O L0 > C C ST M O L O LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE H FIBER OPTIC U SIGN LLJW AIR CONDITIONER Ou UTILITY MANHOLE d U FO FIBER OPTIC __U_ SIGN ❑A AIR CONDITIONER Ou UTILITY MANHOLE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, GAS GASMAIN® BOLLARD SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WAS ( SANITARY MANHOLE PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT WATERMAIN QE ELECTRIC MANHOLE SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY > SANITARY SEWER ST STORM MANHOLE LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE » STORM SEWER ® CATCH BASIN a-- FLAG POLE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. OHu OVERHEAD UTILITIES 4 FLARED END SECTION ® ROOF DRAIN TEL TELEPHONE LINE GAS VALVE ❑T TELEPHONE BOX ELE ELECTRIC LINE TELEPHONE MANHOLE HANDICAP SYMBOL RORY L STELIEN CTV CABLE LINE DATE 10-22-2019 LICENSE No. 44565 x CHAINLINK FENCELINE ® ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER cO' HYDRANT WOODEN FENCELINE ® TRAFFIC SIGNAL O WATER MANHOLE VICINITY MAP o—o— GUARDRAIL © CABLE TV BOX g WATER VALVE I.i, a a CONCRETE SURFACE ELECTRICAL METER � POWER POLE OoQ, ;a i d 0O tv,19.5NpRE GUY WIRE m "` u'S1 FL PAVER SURFACE © GAS METER_ • FOUND IRON MONUMENT CONIFEROUS TREE Sprlr� Pork p BITUMINOUS SURFACE O SET IRON MONUMENT ,� W, � ®' � 0 DECIDUOUS TREE o"SiTE ko O CAST IRON MONUMENT I GRAVEL/LANDSCAPE SURFACE s Lnhe Mtnneonka Vgai La4r REVISION SUMMARY 'ROJECT NO.: 17059.04 PRELIMINARY PLAT V1.1 ©COPYRIGHT 2019 CIVIL SITE GROUPOQ COPYRIGHT 2019 CIVIL SITE GROUP INC 1,6.024- \\4 'V po; I 0. 0. X/ A 1, lA011 111- M 'X 0FRUAL KAT IVY PLACE M A2 )0701 =xX.=NND!—.MANAN- OMOMA D. M— xvv vua an0 acez hereby eeelmemme puma Nr -l. M.sure .I.M.MMA, AID, -MO.—M... MIA. N." —DA -1 A— -DA. IAO -- I� .1-- —. II—M, -I; I — ---- AM Nth d Tu,vE aa. d.11 1. I." .... AMA-I.—AM-1.11 I.- -- IN— - 111. 1.1; .-1 1-1 —0.. --d N.— OF MAN— =EIIN_I '_A Jill C�� I— A 1 O'HINTA 11.1100' by 11. 1-11. 'M DII.. If OMM-N, D. wmxen =21-1 1-1.1=.,.,-",.,.T".�.01==I=l�e5�uM H- E---. D, D� I.N.— I.MA 0 03 ill Nrvr AND — — SEAMOCIMI, H..Ml OMOO, Nift- 11-1 lj�%tl 111" 1111 hl" bee. DIM Ir NOI :-11 111, ON. — Id - ay ._M -1— A.1 MD; b— .,A— 0.. MM... I A.1 .. Ahl� :AA Ned 1. IND 25t .1.1 1— —,NM---'p—M. . UK I - L- --- ----jll--_2L--- . CivilSite NOT TOSCALE t E IlAft—M=I: . Mij.ft,g . In., unless -M.N, — 0, 1— d. ..—n DO - DAL AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 17 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: LA19-000089 — Jim Cleary Everlast Enterprises Inc., 275 Crestview Ave, Variance — Resolution Presenter: Laura Oakden Agenda Consent Agenda Planner Section: 1. Purpose. To consider a variance from the rear yard setback requirement. 2. Background. The property owners recently bought the property from the builder who constructed a new home. The property received a lot area, lot width, and rear yard setback variances in 2018. The applicant proposes stairs to the deck for access and use of the back yard. The applicants have stated the stairs are necessary and reasonable to the enjoyment of their property. 3. 15.99 Deadline. The application made a complete application on October 31.2019. The 60 -day review period expires on December 30, 2019. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. The Planning Commission reviewed the application at their meeting on November 18"'. Commissioners discussed the project and the layout of the stairs. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 on a motion to recommend approval for the requested variance. 5. Public Comment No public comments were received. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt or amend the approval resolution. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. Proposed Survey and Plans C. Draft PC Minutes D. PC Staff Report References PC Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Proposed Survey and Setback Map Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Photos Exhibit F. Property Owners List and Map Prepared By: LLO Reviewed By: -Sb)Z Approved By -T)a CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-305 FILE NO. LA19-000089 WHEREAS, on October 31, 2019, Jim Cleary Everlast Enterprises Inc ("Applicant"), applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 275 Crestview Avenue and legally described as: Lot 6, Block 2 Bayside Addn to Lake Minnetonka (hereinafter the "Property"); WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-305 to allow for a rear yard setback of 20.9 for deck stairs where 50 feet is required; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 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 November 18, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 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 variance 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 #LA19-000089. 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 LR -1A, 2 acre, Zoning District. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3. The Property contains 0.14 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 50 feet. 4. The Property is within Tier 3 and hardcover is limited to 35 % according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. 5. Applicant has applied for the following variances: a. Rear yard setback 6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and 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. ANALYSIS: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The applicant is proposing to deck stairs which is consistent with the intent of the ordinance. The variances for a rear yard setback request is reasonable considering buildable area of the property. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in a permit for a deck stairs in a residential zone 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; The applicant is proposing use of the property in a reasonable manner. The deck, already approved by variance, encroaches into the setback. Any stairs would require a variance. Stairs are a reasonable improvement for an elevated deck. There is limited space to construct a conforming structure on the site. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The plight of the property owner is due to the existing substandard lot size and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The character of the neighborhood is not likely to be significantly altered from replacement of the residence 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 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. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 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 a single family home is an allowed use in the LR -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. The size of the lot within the LR -1A zoning district is unique for the requested rear yard setback variances. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The size of the lot and its locations as it pertains to the existing zoning district is peculiar to the property 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Deck stairs are a relative minor improvement but important to the use of the deck and yard. 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. Granting of the requested variance would not impair health, safety, comfort or morals and would be in keeping with 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. The application has stated the shallow lot has setback challenges. The property is unique in size for this zoning district. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-305 to allow for rear yard setback subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. 2. The approved project shall conform to the survey with the revisions dated 8/1/2019 and submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. 3. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (December 9, 2020). 5. 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. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this day of 20 ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor a 956 9 xist, /Garage GFE= 956.9 956• x -- - .4,g6, Grading As-Bult Survey Prepared for: Everlost Enterprises Existin Hous, FFE=361.0 1 - gy6. -- 24.5 � g5�' 6 X 951 N89 46'47"W x g5$' x 95� 125.30 (comp.) g o 9s9 ti $ -9'575 x 125.25 (plot) I � 9� 958.1 x + 95e a S "! I --RW 958.5x Q 955 6 Deck *� Steps .9 a--- 30.7 _ --ss6 10.1 O g55 955.3 J 40955 x 954.7 955 1 i 9999%__ 40.7 -----F--; / txisting House FFE= 962.9 T0F=96 i.3 GFE= 961.0 Drain Tile- a g54 9 9555 -955.8 I o 5.8 955.7 I j 'S'>3 `' 1 12.9 3 g5a coo.G Outlet l,,m 9sR9* NIIgyr�Ll,_jRW o I 53 gnu g53 5 9538 t' 9541 .50' 9554 f �y5.3 -4 g55.6 _ 95 ' 6.3. / a� * 951 f -Fence S89 4526 "E 125.40 (comp.) 1 125.25 (plat) I - Bearings based on assumed datum. 9S9 i 6� 13 _- x g5 9s 960.4 24.4 -- �. g SCALE 29 a 10 20 ao _ i 1 inch = 20 feet Book Pa e: LL Lot 6, Block 2, BAYSIDE ADDITION TO LAKE Drawing Name: everlost.dwq INC.Drawn C 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE www.SchoborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 MINNETONKA, according to the recorded plot " Bituminous thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. /C14o.a Driveway W ab N 6A 0 -1060" 0° 24.4 vers _RW � As -Built Elevations.- levations:First FirstFloor = 962.9 951.3 9511.1 1 h 47 Garage Floor = 961.0 Ox S--,924.5 s+ --�' v s � a 959.9 I, Le end • Found Iron Monument Drainage O Set Iron Monument (LS 14700) Existing Well x 000.0 Existing Elevation Manhole Site Address: 275 Crestview Ave Orono, MN 55356 Proposed Elevations: First Floor = 963.5 Garage Floor = 961.0 Top of Foundation = 961.3 Lookout Window = 956.8 Basement Floor = 953.3 Project Benchmark: Top of Rim of Manhole at centerline Crestview Ave and Lot 5. Elevation = 960.8 SCNCBORG LANDSERVICES 1 hereby certify that this certificate of survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the lows of the State of Minnesota. / 9999_ ___ - �_____v- _- aul B. Schoborg Date. % c �'l __ � G%/__ Registration No. 14700 Boundary Description (supplied by client) SCALE 29 a 10 20 ao _ i 1 inch = 20 feet Book Pa e: LL Lot 6, Block 2, BAYSIDE ADDITION TO LAKE Drawing Name: everlost.dwq INC.Drawn C 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE www.SchoborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 MINNETONKA, according to the recorded plot MHR-960.8 10-1-18 house dimesnions thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Subject to any and all easements of record. N 960 6 0° Q) W As -Built Elevations.- levations:First FirstFloor = 962.9 aj Garage Floor = 961.0 Top of Foundation = 961.3 9 Top of Foundation (lookout) = 956.5 959.9 As -Built Hardcover Coics. (sq. House 1,456 6 Bituminous Driveway 469 g5g Can til e ver 31 Stoop & .steps 47 gsss Po vers 84 Deck & Steps 132 Retaining Wail 72 2,291 (less cantilevers > 4 ft above grade) -31 (less the first 100 sq. ft. of deck) -100 2,160 Total Lot Area 6,264 Percent Hardcover 34.59 Proposed Elevations: First Floor = 963.5 Garage Floor = 961.0 Top of Foundation = 961.3 Lookout Window = 956.8 Basement Floor = 953.3 Project Benchmark: Top of Rim of Manhole at centerline Crestview Ave and Lot 5. Elevation = 960.8 SCNCBORG LANDSERVICES 1 hereby certify that this certificate of survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the lows of the State of Minnesota. / 9999_ ___ - �_____v- _- aul B. Schoborg Date. % c �'l __ � G%/__ Registration No. 14700 Job Number: 8670 SCALE 29 a 10 20 ao _ i 1 inch = 20 feet Book Pa e: LL SurveyDate: 5129118, 12 20 18 7129119 Drawing Name: everlost.dwq INC.Drawn C 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE www.SchoborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 b . DMS Revisions: 7-11-18 hardcover calcs _ 10-1-18 house dimesnions 12-20-18 foundation as -built 8-1-19 (gradingas-built I—I TN 994 FINISHED SQUARE FEET .�IAIN LEVEL PLCCR FLAN 5GALE. 1/4" = 1'-0" 999 5F. SHEET # OF 5 O U N N � N v3 O � n 11 11 00 cvOti`o:^, w c_n E2 CL rvooLU F— Z w N smile !■lr�C:lRaw, SHEET # OF 5 Grading As-Bult Survey Prepared for: Everlast Enterprises ffl0F1Nn=,7g-1, Ouo //Site Address.•275 Crestview Ave seOrono, MN 55356 57 1 956 -- 6 -- 24.5 g569 13 956 9 I Boundary Description (supplied by client) x/stin x 95 N89 4647"W y6y x 956 Lot 6, Block 2, BAYSIDE ADDITION TO LAKE 11 x 9 "� MINNETONKA, according to the recorded plot X 95 Ff 956.9 957 125.30 (comp.) *q590 959sN 95g6 �„o MHR 960.8 thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Subject x-956-� 5z 125.25 (plot) * .. to any and all easements of record. 6 * 6 9Ss2 9568 V. 958.1 z * 958.8 960 C4 I s' ® m N 957,4�_RW3z 9593+-� N li 9552 s. Ls�' 513 958.52 5g9 605 *960.4 I � As -Built Elevations: `� 59 2.9 9566* *N Deck 60. 9 - 900.1 , -- 02 �� First Floor r 961 6 N Garage Floor = 961.0 5' o& g6' '� 602 Top of Foundation = 961.3 O O sss Steps // O 9 Top of Foundation (lookout) = 955.5 s to.t Existing House e b v � ---- 30.7 ---- � * Bituminous 4 FFE=962.9 y X 954^ O h �.. q55! * 3* N TOF=961.3 N �,o°' Driveway aW 959.9 O 956. * g556 GFE=961.0 0 -i9e s (� 954.7 9556 /// 22.1/ 61 0� � sy -Can t. 960 - _ (P m • "'� -- -- 40.7 ---- - 3a1 ' Pavers 9 p o As -Built Hardcover Coics. ft.) Drain Tile- 9549 9556 9556 0 5.8 g559 BS)3 `" 12.9 3 96p. 606 -RW 605 `rss Z G House 1,456 Outlet `gym s5 6> N 961 x z E Bituminous Driveway 469 5 1 49* a*I�96 -R go 563 9ss a9s 10 13 1�1 sses/ �� g5g6 Cantilever 31 953' 95'Je* i• 95k' 546 955' 553 x 956 9 * 95 * 95 * 95 r 95e� /m m Stoop & Steps 47 '01,. s 3s ss 9s� ;� S?e °x s Pavers 84 -Fence S8945 26 E .9 s o __ _24.5 - ss Deck &Steps 732 125.40 (comp.) 0 ° Retaining Wall 72 g5F/////: fi`�w2,291 125.25 (plot) FFE= 59.1 `-(less cantilevers 0 4 ft above erode) - 07(less the first 100 sq. ft. of deck) 2,1 0 2,160 Legend Total Lot Area 6,264 Found Iron Monument f- Drainage O Set Iron Monument (LS 14700) ® Existing Well Percent Hardcover 34.5% Bearings based on assumed datum. SCHOBORG D SERVICES INC. x 000.0 Existing Elevation ® Manhole l hereby certify that this certificate of survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that l am a duly Registered Land Surveyorunderthe laws of the State of Minnesota. oul B.B. Schobo� 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE www.SchoborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 Date: Registration No. 14700 Proposed Elevations: First Floor = 963.5 Garage Floor = 961.0 Top of Foundation = 961.3 Lookout Window = 956.8 Basement Floor = 953.3 Proiect Benchmark: Top of Rim of Manhole at centerline Crestview Ave and Lot 5. Elevation = 960.8 SCALE 20 o 10 20 40 1 inch = 20 feet X 9511 U U w r C1-. Drain Outlet 953 5 X56 9 xrstin /Garage GFE=956.9 CO g56 x -- - s� Grading As - Prep o; Everlost E FF =961.06 � gyy. -- 24.5 ---�- X g51 N80 446 s47"Wx 9g0 x g58 g i 125.3® (comp.) g5g �s g5g 8 857.5 x 12525 (plot) R �g5g6 9.58. i x x 958 6 • ,r �l A n � r.. • f� � lV`' •lVl �i IR ,n � Deck 5y� & a g'.9 a �' Steps Q ---- 30.7 - -- -'s 10.1 l p 055 g55'3y � � g55 S x 954.7 6 955 6 40.7 ----y--- 95 g55 955 6 7 9S 9,S9 A 4 -_RW X11 958 5 x 95g 9 5a g '` 9so �- 8$¢9t N*i g5b � Sq„6 9g5 � 55,3 '--Fence S894526 "E 125.40 (comp.) 125.25 (plat) r Legend FFA=962.9 ✓ xTOF=961.3 j Bituminous �. Driveway gs gs� N 12.s1 y ssa. �a `RW 6a 5�x 9y 958.9 q55.5 5 O R g55 3 s'ss �. `'� g5? A* 957 3 x 9g1�1 s� 'ss�r s�'� �,s'•o ',,-�_- � x'24.5 -- g55`t Existing house - - FFE= 959.1 •- Found Iran Monument ---w-- Drainage © Set Iron Monument (LS 14700) a Existing Well Bearings based on assumed datum. x 000.0 Existing Elevation �f Manhole 1 hereby certify that this certificate of survey was prepared by me '(�;�-�fOB(� or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Registered LAND SERVICES Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. _-- f�aul 8. Schobor 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE ---- www.5choborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 Dater -- __ Registration No. 14700 3u It S u rvey ad for: terprises Site Address: 275 Crestview Ave Orono, MN 55356 Boundary Descri tion (SuQolled by client) Lot 6, Block 2, BAYSIDE ADDITION TO LAKE MHR 960.8 MINNETONKA, according to the recorded plot thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesoto. Subject to any and all easements of record. q• .0 M s—Built Elevations.' First Floor = 962.9 0? Q1 Garage Floor = 951.0 r� Top of Foundation = 961.3 F Q; gid Top of Foundation (lookout) = 956.5 � 959.9 a As—Built Hardcover Calcs c House 1,456 o Zg Bituminous Driveway 469 g5 Can tilever 31 XPa �j Stoop & Steps 47 (3 SOS vers Igo Q Deck & Steps 132 Retaining Fall 72 —2,297 (less cantilevers 3 4 ft above grade) —31 (less the first 100 sq. ft. of deck) —100 2,160 Total Lot Area 6,264 Percent Hardcover 34.57. b Number: 8670 rvey Vote. 12 12Z 20 18 Y29119 awin Name: everlast.dw awl DMS visions: 7-11-18 (hardcover colcs) 10-1-18 house dimesnions 12-20-18 foundation as—built 8-1-19 (grading as—buil t) Proposed Elevations: First Floor = 963.5 Garage Floor = 951.0 Top of Foundation = 961.3 Lookout Wndow = 956.8 Basement Floor = 95.3,3 Protect Benchmark, Top of Rim of Manhole at centerline Crestview Ave and Lot 5. Elevation = 960.8 SCALE 20 0 16 20 40 1 inch = 20 feet I—I TN 994 FINISHED SQUARE FEET .�IAIN LEVEL PLCCR FLAN 5GALE. 1/4" = 1'-0" 999 5F. SHEET # OF 5 O U N N � N v3 O � n 11 11 00 cvOti`o:^, w c_n E2 CL rvooLU F— Z w N smile !■lr�C:lRaw, SHEET # OF 5 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. 6. LA19-000089 CHARLENE BYSTROM, 275 CRESTVIEW AVENUE, VARIANCE, 9:06 P.M. - 9:17 P.M. Jim Cleary, Everlast Enterprises, Inc., was present. Oaken stated the applicant is requesting a rear yard setback variance. The property owner bought the property from a builder who constructed the new home. The property received a lot area, lot width, and rear yard setback variance in 2018 for the home and the deck, as it is a 50 -foot setback for the rear yard. It is a small lot in a large zoning district. The applicant is proposing to construct stairs, which already exist on the deck, to access the use of the backyard. The applicant stated the stairs are necessary and reasonable for the enjoyment of their property. They are proposing a setback of 20.9 feet from the rear yard where a 50 -foot is required. They were granted that 30.7 with their 2018 variance for the deck; stairs were not included in that application at the time. Staff finds inherent practical difficulties with the small lot in the LR -IA 2 -acre zone. The Commission should discuss whether the rear yard setback encourages development out of character with the neighborhood. No public comment has been received by Staff. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance. Ressler asked whether the application was 2017 initially or '18. Oakden indicated it was '18. Ressler asked if at that time the setback was around 30 feet. Oakden stated the requirement is a 50 -foot rear yard setback. The variance in 2018 gave them a 40 -foot setback for the house and a 30 -foot setback for a 10 -foot deck to be added on to the house. They want to add stairs to access and use their rear yard, which makes it a 20 -foot setback because of the stairs structure. They are requesting 10 additional feet, 10 feet closer, for deck stairs to their rear yard. Ressler stated the Lot Analysis Worksheet indicates the rear required 30.8. Oakden said she should have clarified the information better. Required is 30.8, noted because of their 2018 variance. 30.8 is what they were granted in 2018. For the zoning district it's a 50 -foot setback, and they are requesting roughly 10 feet for the 20.9 -foot rear yard setback. They are allowed the 30.7 for the deck structure. Gettman asked whether the deck and stairs were already built. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Oakden stated they were built with the house. It was reviewed as part of the as -built survey that the stairs itself were not permitted, so the applicant chose to go through the variance process to request them. She believes if the variance is not allowed, the stairs will not be permitted. McCutcheon noted the property owner is in a large zoning district and they are the oddity with the smaller lot but the neighbors already have detached garages within the setback. Mr. Jim Cleary, 4109 North Shore Drive, the home builder, stated he got a variance for the backyard setback. The homeowners bought the house before it was finished. They asked him to put stairs on the deck and so he did. He was later informed upon inspection the deck stairs did not conform. At that time, he said he had a variance for the backyard setback; they said no, that was to the back of the deck. Mr. Cleary would like to get the homeowners the variance because they have two dogs that access the backyard as well as the deck is far enough off the ground where they can't jump. The homeowner has completely fenced off the backyard, so none of the neighbors can see the stairway or the deck. Gettman asked if there was any reason why he couldn't put the stairs off to the side instead of coming straight off the back. Mr. Cleary said he could have but chose not to because it would block off the windows, which is the only light into the finished lower level. Gettman asked whether, if the stairs were put in the other direction, it would have been impacted by the other setback. Mr. Cleary stated they could not, that there was not enough room on the side yard. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 9:14 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 9:14 p.m. McCutcheon stated he lives close to the area and he has a 2 -acre lot with the same setback, but it is a small lot in an odd district and he sees the practical difficulty. If they were in another district, it would not be a problem. He feels they are a victim of position. Libby, Erickson, Bollis, Gettman, and Thiesse indicated they have no objection to the variance and tend to support Staff s recommendation. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Ressler stated the Commission hates to see things a second time. He does not feel anything was done intentionally to come back after the fact and ask for forgiveness instead of permission. He does not have a problem with it and agrees with Staff that this does not seem to be too egregious of a change. If this were not built already, he would have asked it to be built to run alongside of the back and said the City Council can decide on that. Erickson said if this encroached on a Conservation Easement, he would change his vote. There isn't any on this property, so he is happy to support the application. Gettman moved, Bollis seconded, to approve Application LAI 9-000089, Charlene Bystrom, 275 Crestview Avenue, Variance. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Date Application Received: 10.23.2019 Date Application Considered as Complete: 10.31.2019 60 -Day Review Period Expires: 12.31.19 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Laura Oakden, Planner Date: November 18, 2018 Subject: LA18-000089, Jim Cleary Everlast Enterprises Inc, 275 Crestview Ave, Variance, Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a rear setback variances Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval Background The property owners recently bought the property from a building who constructed a new home. The property received a lot area, lot width and rear yard setback variances in 2018. The applicant is proposing to construct stairs to an already existing deck to access and use of the back yard. The applicants have stated the stairs are necessary and reasonable to the enjoyment of their property. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-305 - Setbacks: DISTRICT LR -1A Required Proposed Front 24.5' 24.5' Rear 30.8 20.9' Side (North) 10' 12.3' Side (South) 10' 10.2' Section 78-1700 -Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Total Area in Allowed Existing Proposed Overlay District Zone Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover Tier 2,192.45 s.f. 2,128 2,160 s.f. Tier 3 6,264s.f (35%) (34%) (34.5%) Applicable Regulations: Rear Setback (78-305) The applicant is proposing to construct stairs for a rear deck, proposed to be setback 20.9 foot from the rear yard, 50 feet is required in the LR -1A Zoning District. 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 LA19-000089 November 18, 2019 Page 2 of 3 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 is proposing to deck stairs which is consistent with the intent of the ordinance. The variances for a rear yard setback request is reasonable considering buildable area of the property. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances resulting in a permit for a deck stairs in a residential zone are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 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 applicant is proposing use of the property in a reasonable manner. The deck, already approved by variance, encroaches into the setback. Any stairs would require a variance. Stairs are a resoinable improvement for an elevated deck. There is limited space to construct a conforming structure on the site. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The plight of the property owner is due to the existing substandard lot size and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The character of the neighborhood is not likely to be significantly altered from replacement of the residence 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 have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 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 a single family home is an allowed use in the LR -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. LA19-000089 November 18, 2019 Page 3 of 3 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The size of the lot within the LR -1A zoning district is unique for the requested rear yard setback variances. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The size of the lot and its locations as it pertains to the existing zoning district is peculiar to the property 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Deck stairs are a relative minor improvement but important to the use of the deck andf yard. 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. Granting of the requested variance would not impair health, safety, comfort or morals and would be in keeping with 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. The application has stated the shallow lot has setback challenges. The property is unique in size for this zoning district. 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 completed the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Practical Difficulties Analysis Staff finds is inherent practical difficulties with the small lot on the LR -1A, 2 acre zone. The applicant has stated the deck stairs are necessary for the enjoyment of their property without stairs to the deck. The Commission should discuss whether the rear yard setback encourages development out of character with the neighborhood. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. Issues for Consideration Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the requested variance. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Proposed Survey and Setback Map Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Photos Exhibit F. Property Owners List and Map AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 18 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: LAI 9-000090 —Brent Teele, 577 Park Lane, Variance —Resolution Presenter: Laura Oakden Agenda Consent Agenda Planner Section: 1. Purpose. The applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance. 2. Background. The applicant is request an average lakeshore setback variance to construct a covered screened in porch over an existing 2" d story deck. An extension of the roof line is required to create the screened in porch. There is an existing screened porch on the main level directly below the proposed addition. The home currently sits forward of the average lakeshore setback. There would be no changes to any other setbacks, hardcover or structural coverage. The applicant received a hardcover variance for a home addition in July 2019. 3. 15.99 Deadline. The applicant made a complete application on October 10, 2019. Staff has extended the timeline for another 60 -days to expire February 10, 2019 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment Commissioners discussed the project and the layout of the stairs. The Planning Commission made a motion to recommend approval for the requested variance. 5. Public Comment 567 Park, the neighbor to the North, has submitted a letter of support for the project, attached as exhibit E. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt or amend the approval resolution. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. Proposed Survey and Plans C. Draft PC Minutes D. PC Staff Report E. Public Comments References PC Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Survey/Site Plan Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Annotated Survey Exhibit F. Neighbor Acknowledgement Signature/Letter Exhibit G. Property Owners List and Map Prepared By: LLO Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By _T)a CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1279 FILE NO. LA19-000090 WHEREAS, on October 10, 2019, Brent Teele ("Applicant"), applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 577 Park Lane and legally described as: Lot 12, Block 6, Minnetonka Summit Park (hereinafter the "Property"); WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for an average lakeshore setback variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow the creation of the second story 3 season porch; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 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 November 18, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 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 variance 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 #LA19-000090. 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 LR -1 B Zoning District. 3. The Property contains 0.21 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 50 feet. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25% according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. 5. Applicant has applied for the following variance: a. To allow a 3 season porch over an existing second story deck forward of the average lakeshore setback 6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and 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. ANALYSIS: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance The proposed location of the home additions do not block lake views of the adjacent property owners, and therefore is harmonious with the intent of the Ordinance. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The average lakeshore setback variance is consistent with the goals in the comprehensive plan to protect lake views. 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 variance requests are residential in nature and are reasonable considering the unique nature of the property as a large peninsula on the lake. The relatively large flood hazard area and existing improvements on the property creates difficulties in locating a conforming structure. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; ; The location of the structures on the property and configuration of the lot were not created by the property owner; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The visual impacts resulting from the additions proposed within the average lakeshore setback will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Rather, the home will not impact views from the lake nor will it appear to be more visually obtrusive than the existing buildings on the property. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 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 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 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 a residential home is an allowed conditional use in the LR -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. The existing home footprint is not set to change. The applicant I looking to include the 2nd story of the home over an existing main level. The home currently sits within the setback and the addition is not going to change the setback from the lake. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The proposed addition will not change the current setbacks from the lake or property lines. The location of the existing home is unique. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The existing home can be re -built in kind, the proposed addition is necessary to permit the property owners continued enjoyment of their property. The addition is located in a location which serves the intent and goals of the ordinance by minimizing visual impacts to the lake. 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 proposed project will not impair the health, safety, comfort, or morals of the public. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Granting of the variance will resolve and alleviate a demonstrated practical difficulty. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-171279 to allow for structure in the average lakeshore setback, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. 2. The approved project shall conform to the survey dated September 3, 2019 and building plans submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (December 9, 2020). 5. 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. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this day of 20 ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor 19-131B I i ` I 'If V_J 1' irl.I /� I lIV, _kJ 1 0 i ALL DIMENSIONS AND SIZE DESIGNATIONS GIVEN ARE SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION ON JOB'SITE AND ADJUSTMENT TO FIT JOB CONDITIONS. SPECIAL ROOF NOTE ( Z ROOF PITCH SHOWN 15 ASSUMED, TO BE CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXACT PITCH, HEEL HEIGHT, AND OVERHANG BEFORE ORDERING TRUSSES. TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO ADJUST TRUSS HEEL HGT, PITCH, AND OVERHANG TO MATCH EXISTING CONSTRUCTION, NOTICE: THESE PLANS ARE DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF R�r I�Ivly✓: HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. AND ANY REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WR'TTEN CONSENT OF HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. ALTHOUGH EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE IN DESIGNING AND PREPARING THESE PLANS AND CHECKING FOR ACCURACY, THE INSTALLER, OWNER, OR CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. W LA U Lu M, Z ZZuj N C .] Z HLai Y �QO Lu a Z HK cc inn0 Z q � � f .:• ; z• a o. 17 m .� h13 N,Nvz lul N zi•'m.❑ D n co It Lf) .Q N:12 N N.N� O Nw Nto, w w in. toN ❑ 7n. uIL1 i 0cl) :- z m tJL. h C9 n m W W �z ' ul:� I:Z.o L . Z W F N V co It Lf) d O a y 0cl) m cc a W W W ca Z Z ZDV ZQa a aa mj W a� a W a°�Z WW C'3coo g0Z z_ O N _ cc co cc OMO N co SHEET NUMBER ONE OF 15 SHEETS PLAN NUMBER 19 099 M 1 '5affo • ALL DIMENSIONS AND SIZE DESIGNATIONS GIVEN ARE SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION ON JOB SITE AND ADJUSTMENT TO FIT JOB CONDITIONS. NOTICE: THESE PLANS ARE DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF RGyIJIVPIa: HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. AND ANY REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WP47TEN CONSENT OF HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. ALTHOUGH EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE IN DESIGNING AND PREPARING THESE PLANS AND CHECKING FOR ACCURACY, THE INSTALLER, OWNER, OR CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AMY CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. . r W M M z z N 0 z W)LLI Y NJa z Lu N Lu N PIn0 d Z n F N I u W o Z' � F u z. n ❑ m 0 z Z Z U n 7 1-: aulz 0 wmIt o 0 a S F n N p U W Z WId to NNS _9 to In N NW W N Wm 0 W � m N m ❑ .'7 a Ij 3 w zz DLla C�zz z N W ZZ� ozo aU l d Z N W N V M u 0 a W o m N w w C�zz z LLI :) ZZ� a a a NJ J w Im co w aZ�°� Ww co �0zt`Z_ O wo N M _ d "JCC 0 a co to �"- N SHEET NU TwoMBER OFS SHEETS PLAN NUMBER 19 099 Po � �•t�IL>n.t, PI L,� huP�?%;, ALL DIMENSIONS AND SIZE DESIGNATIONS GIVEN ARE SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION ON , JOB SITE AND ADJUSTMENT TO FIT JOB CONDITIONS. EXISTING WALLS. (WALLS TO BE REMO 'V ED NEW CONSTRUCTION DIMENSIONS ON EXISTING ,BARE APPROXIMATE - !CONTRACTOR TO ADJUST SIN FIELD AS REQD. NOTICE: THESE PLANS ARE DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF REV151ON5: HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. AND ANY REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WP4TTEN CONSENT OF HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. ALTHOUGH EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE IN DESIGNING AND PREPARING THESE PLANS AND CHECKING FOR ACCURACY, THE INSTALLER, OWNER. OR CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. . W W Ln U W (" z z Lm aJz LAJ H Y W CL Z Lu N� Ln O ■ V Z II W Q N M It �± Lr) O � a � o m N x Lu w w z co C7 Lu Z::) Z UJ 1 Y Z a� a CC C) Z J .�J WUJacoC7 V Z_ 1` Z_ 0 NM m I V) ILG7CL = 00 0)) U) SHEET NUMBER THREE OF !S SHEETS PLAN NUMBER 19 099 A F 0 a z.. � I u T Z' G z 7 Z � o Z m u z N In z nNn In 0 0 Id o N Ln Z In Wrc NtoWW In to N 0 n'NW 0 ZZ, ❑m AM am a jI Lo N 1n z z ply" 4 z n ■ V Z II W Q N M It �± Lr) O � a � o m N x Lu w w z co C7 Lu Z::) Z UJ 1 Y Z a� a CC C) Z J .�J WUJacoC7 V Z_ 1` Z_ 0 NM m I V) ILG7CL = 00 0)) U) SHEET NUMBER THREE OF !S SHEETS PLAN NUMBER 19 099 A I Po �? I (z) iP/ o X I I I V'� L'41, K(I> fz- Cl �t • I�tfv'r�� LA r► (v �'l('4W(o 1, agog ('oug 0000) O EC.�Kl qto 'rel tcl I/f 0 f ALL DIMENSIONS AND SIZE DESIGNATIONS GIVEN ARE SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION ON JOB SITE AND ADJUSTMENT TO FIT JOB CONDITIONS. EXISTING WALLS WALLS TO BE REMOVED NEW CONSTRUCTION DIMENSIONS ON EXISTING ARE APPROXIMATE — CONTRACTOR TO ADJUST IT FIELD AS REOD. ELECTRICAL NOTES ELECTRICIAN TO VERIFY LOCATIOI!J. OF ALL LIGHT FIXTURES,.SWITCNES, {SND OUTLETS BEFORE -INSTALLATION. NOTICE: THESE PLANS ARE DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF REV1510N5: HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. AND ANY REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. ALTHOUGH EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE IN DESIGNING AND PREPARING THESE PLANS AND CHECKING FOR ACCURACY, THE INSTALLER, OWNER, OR CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AIjY CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. Its cc LAJ Lf) Z_ U UJ M �Z W z Z. W FOUR IJ1 x m a OF 5 SHEETS zzc a W Y L N N x F O 19 099 y�.�m.o CA p m a Z N.m m 0 N.mW p Lu .. -'3 ( o4�. z ❑a Lu F -^o LIQ � W a Its cc Z O 2 V z Z_ _ _ O C4 ct) �Z W N Z. FOUR x m OF 5 SHEETS :3 a V rr N N x F O 19 099 y�.�m.o CA p m N a W� N.m m 0 N.mW p Q .. -'3 ( o4�. z ❑a Lu Z LIQ � W a a J Q a W Z mj a°Ca a -13-z . o Its cc Z O 2 V z Z_ _ _ O C4 ct) W N SHEET NUMBER FOUR OF 5 SHEETS a V M le IIf) � O 19 099 acl CA p m Q LLJ Lu z W ca Lu Z ZQa a a J Q a W a W mj a°Ca a ZJJ cc O 2 V z Z_ _ _ O C4 ct) = co N N SHEET NUMBER FOUR OF 5 SHEETS PLAN NUMBER 19 099 i, i! I y i, ;I 12 Lo WOO ro (old l -co _Ia-.ICt� av l j i. NOTICE: THESE PLANS ARE DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF REV151ON5: HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. AND ANY REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT ALL DIMENSIONS AND SIZE DESIGNATIONS THE EXPRESS W TTEN CONSENT OF HOME PLANNNG ASSOCIATES INC. GIVEN ARE SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION ON ALTHOUGH EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE IN DESIGNING AND PREPARING THESE PLANS I JOB SITE AND ADJUSTMENT TO FIT JOB INSTALLER, OWNER. OR CONTRACTOR MUST VE R FYCHECKING FORURACYALL DETAILS AND CONDITIONS. DIMENSIONS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. i 24x36 CLEMPRMT6 REVISIONS BY N W N V M � � O a V� W m V W M z z I Lu :5 W Ow Z V1 Y Zn LU j W a Z LJj F- to O a .F 0 W R) W o z� U� a � L3 a N U1 Z. N W Z hl.o. N ry2 "z Nm Wly uNi.mm o mm D .13 IL o n7 zz. .Q ¢ W m � :l Z C. Z. o z N W N V M � � O a V� o m aww W Ow Z Z Zn j ZQ LJj a a Q W R) W oCYoY aZJ�J Z V z z O N M 20 0. a =oN�m a SHEET NUMBER FIVE OF cj' SHEETS 5� PLAN NUMBER 19 099 A, 19-131B 19-131B I i ` I 'If V_J 1' irl.I /� I lIV, _kJ 1 0 i ALL DIMENSIONS AND SIZE DESIGNATIONS GIVEN ARE SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION ON JOB'SITE AND ADJUSTMENT TO FIT JOB CONDITIONS. SPECIAL ROOF NOTE ( Z ROOF PITCH SHOWN 15 ASSUMED, TO BE CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY EXACT PITCH, HEEL HEIGHT, AND OVERHANG BEFORE ORDERING TRUSSES. TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO ADJUST TRUSS HEEL HGT, PITCH, AND OVERHANG TO MATCH EXISTING CONSTRUCTION, NOTICE: THESE PLANS ARE DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF R�r I�Ivly✓: HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. AND ANY REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WR'TTEN CONSENT OF HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. ALTHOUGH EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE IN DESIGNING AND PREPARING THESE PLANS AND CHECKING FOR ACCURACY, THE INSTALLER, OWNER, OR CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. W LA U Lu M, Z ZZuj N C .] Z HLai Y �QO Lu a Z HK cc inn0 Z q � � f .:• ; z• a o. 17 m .� h13 N,Nvz lul N zi•'m.❑ D n co It Lf) .Q N:12 N N.N� O Nw Nto, w w in. toN ❑ 7n. uIL1 i 0cl) :- z m tJL. h C9 n m W W �z ' ul:� I:Z.o L . Z W F N V co It Lf) d O a y 0cl) m cc a W W W ca Z Z ZDV ZQa a aa mj W a� a W a°�Z WW C'3coo g0Z z_ O N _ cc co cc OMO N co SHEET NUMBER ONE OF 15 SHEETS PLAN NUMBER 19 099 M 1 '5affo • ALL DIMENSIONS AND SIZE DESIGNATIONS GIVEN ARE SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION ON JOB SITE AND ADJUSTMENT TO FIT JOB CONDITIONS. NOTICE: THESE PLANS ARE DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF RGyIJIVPIa: HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. AND ANY REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WP47TEN CONSENT OF HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. ALTHOUGH EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE IN DESIGNING AND PREPARING THESE PLANS AND CHECKING FOR ACCURACY, THE INSTALLER, OWNER, OR CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AMY CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. . r W M M z z N 0 z W)LLI Y NJa z Lu N Lu N PIn0 d Z n F N I u W o Z' � F u z. n ❑ m 0 z Z Z U n 7 1-: aulz 0 wmIt o 0 a S F n N p U W Z WId to NNS _9 to In N NW W N Wm 0 W � m N m ❑ .'7 a Ij 3 w zz DLla C�zz z N W ZZ� ozo aU l d Z N W N V M u 0 a W o m N w w C�zz z LLI :) ZZ� a a a NJ J w Im co w aZ�°� Ww co �0zt`Z_ O wo N M _ d "JCC 0 a co to �"- N SHEET NU TwoMBER OFS SHEETS PLAN NUMBER 19 099 Po � �•t�IL>n.t, PI L,� huP�?%;, ALL DIMENSIONS AND SIZE DESIGNATIONS GIVEN ARE SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION ON , JOB SITE AND ADJUSTMENT TO FIT JOB CONDITIONS. EXISTING WALLS. (WALLS TO BE REMO 'V ED NEW CONSTRUCTION DIMENSIONS ON EXISTING ,BARE APPROXIMATE - !CONTRACTOR TO ADJUST SIN FIELD AS REQD. NOTICE: THESE PLANS ARE DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF REV151ON5: HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. AND ANY REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WP4TTEN CONSENT OF HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. ALTHOUGH EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE IN DESIGNING AND PREPARING THESE PLANS AND CHECKING FOR ACCURACY, THE INSTALLER, OWNER. OR CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. . W W Ln U W (" z z Lm aJz LAJ H Y W CL Z Lu N� Ln O ■ V Z II W Q N M It �± Lr) O � a � o m N x Lu w w z co C7 Lu Z::) Z UJ 1 Y Z a� a CC C) Z J .�J WUJacoC7 V Z_ 1` Z_ 0 NM m I V) ILG7CL = 00 0)) U) SHEET NUMBER THREE OF !S SHEETS PLAN NUMBER 19 099 A F 0 a z.. � I u T Z' G z 7 Z � o Z m u z N In z nNn In 0 0 Id o N Ln Z In Wrc NtoWW In to N 0 n'NW 0 ZZ, ❑m AM am a jI Lo N 1n z z ply" 4 z n ■ V Z II W Q N M It �± Lr) O � a � o m N x Lu w w z co C7 Lu Z::) Z UJ 1 Y Z a� a CC C) Z J .�J WUJacoC7 V Z_ 1` Z_ 0 NM m I V) ILG7CL = 00 0)) U) SHEET NUMBER THREE OF !S SHEETS PLAN NUMBER 19 099 A I Po �? I (z) iP/ o X I I I V'� L'41, K(I> fz- Cl �t • I�tfv'r�� LA r► (v �'l('4W(o 1, agog ('oug 0000) O EC.�Kl qto 'rel tcl I/f 0 f ALL DIMENSIONS AND SIZE DESIGNATIONS GIVEN ARE SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION ON JOB SITE AND ADJUSTMENT TO FIT JOB CONDITIONS. EXISTING WALLS WALLS TO BE REMOVED NEW CONSTRUCTION DIMENSIONS ON EXISTING ARE APPROXIMATE — CONTRACTOR TO ADJUST IT FIELD AS REOD. ELECTRICAL NOTES ELECTRICIAN TO VERIFY LOCATIOI!J. OF ALL LIGHT FIXTURES,.SWITCNES, {SND OUTLETS BEFORE -INSTALLATION. NOTICE: THESE PLANS ARE DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF REV1510N5: HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. AND ANY REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. ALTHOUGH EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE IN DESIGNING AND PREPARING THESE PLANS AND CHECKING FOR ACCURACY, THE INSTALLER, OWNER, OR CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AIjY CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. Its cc LAJ Lf) Z_ U UJ M �Z W z Z. W FOUR IJ1 x m a OF 5 SHEETS zzc a W Y L N N x F O 19 099 y�.�m.o CA p m a Z N.m m 0 N.mW p Lu .. -'3 ( o4�. z ❑a Lu F -^o LIQ � W a Its cc Z O 2 V z Z_ _ _ O C4 ct) �Z W N Z. FOUR x m OF 5 SHEETS :3 a V rr N N x F O 19 099 y�.�m.o CA p m N a W� N.m m 0 N.mW p Q .. -'3 ( o4�. z ❑a Lu Z LIQ � W a a J Q a W Z mj a°Ca a -13-z . o Its cc Z O 2 V z Z_ _ _ O C4 ct) W N SHEET NUMBER FOUR OF 5 SHEETS a V M le IIf) � O 19 099 acl CA p m Q LLJ Lu z W ca Lu Z ZQa a a J Q a W a W mj a°Ca a ZJJ cc O 2 V z Z_ _ _ O C4 ct) = co N N SHEET NUMBER FOUR OF 5 SHEETS PLAN NUMBER 19 099 i, i! I y i, ;I 12 Lo WOO ro (old l -co _Ia-.ICt� av l j i. NOTICE: THESE PLANS ARE DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE USE OF REV151ON5: HOME PLANNING ASSOCIATES INC. AND ANY REPRODUCTION OR OTHER USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT ALL DIMENSIONS AND SIZE DESIGNATIONS THE EXPRESS W TTEN CONSENT OF HOME PLANNNG ASSOCIATES INC. GIVEN ARE SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION ON ALTHOUGH EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE IN DESIGNING AND PREPARING THESE PLANS I JOB SITE AND ADJUSTMENT TO FIT JOB INSTALLER, OWNER. OR CONTRACTOR MUST VE R FYCHECKING FORURACYALL DETAILS AND CONDITIONS. DIMENSIONS AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. i 24x36 CLEMPRMT6 REVISIONS BY N W N V M � � O a V� W m V W M z z I Lu :5 W Ow Z V1 Y Zn LU j W a Z LJj F- to O a .F 0 W R) W o z� U� a � L3 a N U1 Z. N W Z hl.o. N ry2 "z Nm Wly uNi.mm o mm D .13 IL o n7 zz. .Q ¢ W m � :l Z C. Z. o z N W N V M � � O a V� o m aww W Ow Z Z Zn j ZQ LJj a a Q W R) W oCYoY aZJ�J Z V z z O N M 20 0. a =oN�m a SHEET NUMBER FIVE OF cj' SHEETS 5� PLAN NUMBER 19 099 A, MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. 7. LA19-000090 BRENT TEELE, 577 PARK LANE, VARIANCE, 9:17 P.M. - 9:26 P.M. Jesse Hartung, on behalf of the applicant, was present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance to construct a covered screen porch on an existing second -story deck. This would require an extension of the roof line to create a screened -in porch which today is just an open deck. There is an existing screen porch on the main level below the proposed addition. The home currently sits forward of the average lakeshore setback, so the extension of the roof would be a new massing protrusion into the average lakeshore but it would not create any new setbacks, new hardcover, or new structural coverage, as the lower level is all enclosed in as a 3 -season porch currently. The applicant received a hardcover variance for a home addition in July of 2019. She referenced a survey and referenced the proposed addition. When the applicant submitted the building permit, they included the survey as part of the building permit application when Staff noticed encroachment into the average lakeshore setback, which is why the Commission is seeing it again. It is an increased new roof line on the second level to create that screened -in porch, so that is an average lakeshore setback variance. Staff finds there is practical difficulty in the existing location of the current home. In order to have a reasonable use of the second -floor deck for year-round use, the roof must be extended over the existing deck footprint. The applicant is not creating any new or increasing setbacks from the lake. The proposed screened -in porch addition is entirely over the current home footprint. Oakden stated the neighbor at 560 Park submitted a letter of support for the application and the neighbor to the south signed an acknowledgment form to say they spoke about the project. Ressler asked Staff to enlighten him about the structure existing today versus what's proposed. Oakden stated today it is a house with a lower level screened -in porch. What they are proposing is a new roof line, new gable. They have a current second -story deck, so they're looking to extend the roof line to make a 3 -season porch. Oakden answered questions of Commissioners, indicating there is no roof right now; rather, it is a second -story deck that is uncovered and the applicant has a 3 -season porch off the main level and an open deck above. The lower level is completely enclosed currently so it's counted as structural coverage. From a massing calculation/structural coverage it's already in the calculations, but from a visual impact and with the average lakeshore setback, it's a new protrusion into that setback which triggers the need for a variance. Erickson asked if it would be a fair statement that they are moving the screened area from the lower level to the upper level. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Oakden said she is not sure if they are changing the area, but they are looking to screen in the second level which is currently an open deck. Erickson noted it is not like they never had a screened porch before; they've got one now but in a different place. Ressler asked if there is a photo of the screened porch with the second -floor deck in the packet. Oakden responded they have not built it yet; they are proposing it. They submitted it as part of a building permit application for the home addition from earlier this year. Staff held their permit so they can go through this process and work through it all. Ressler noted this is an amendment they are trying to make. Oakden stated that was right. The City issued the home addition permit and the homeowner is hoping to get that wrapped into this project, so that's why they are going through it now. Mr. Jesse Hartung, contractor, 18837 Ogden Street, Elk River, said he is representing the applicant who is out of the country. He stated their understanding as a builder was that they were looking at hardcover. You learn something new every day; massing is new to them. They did amend the plans for the addition, and now they are requesting that they can extend the roof line. The lower section is all there; there has been no construction done. He indicated an area on the drawing and stated that everything below that area is existing and it is a flat roof that sits above it. The railings are existing currently for the deck above. He was proposing to take the existing gable that is on the back of the house, which would look exactly the same, and just extend it farther out to cover that as well as screen it in. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 9:25 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 9:25 p.m. Ressler said in the past, the Commission has approved a variance when someone is just going up and not doing something exotic or egregious. The roof line does not appear to exceed the proposed roof line of the previous project on the main part of the house, nor is it a high ceiling. Thiesse stated the average lakeshore setback is set to protect the neighbor's view of the lake, and the most affected neighbor has written a letter saying that they are in favor of this. The limiting criteria for him is if the neighbors are happy with it on an average lakeshore setback. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. McCutcheon moved, Erickson seconded, to approve Application LA19-000090, Brent Teele, 577 Park Lane, Variance as applied. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Date Application Received: 10.10.2019 Date Application Considered as Complete: 10.10.2019 60 -Day Review Period Expires: 12.10.2019 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Laura Oakden, Planner Date: November 18, 2019 Subject: LA19-000090, Brent Teele, 577 Park Lane, Variance, Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting an average Lakeshore setback variance. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. Background The applicant is request an average lakeshore setback variance to construct a covered screened in porch to an existing 2nd story deck. An extension on the roof line is required to create the screened in porch. There is an existing screened porch on the main level directly below the proposed addition. The home currently sits forward of the average lakeshore setback. There would be no changes to any other setbacks, hardcover or structural coverage. The applicant received a hardcover variance for a home addition in July 2019. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-330 - Setbacks: DISTRICT LR -1B Required Existing Street 30' 50' Side (north) 7.5' 31.6' Side 7.5' 7.9' Lakeshore 75' 8.9' Average Lakeshore Not Met No Change lection 78-1403- Structural Building Coverage: No Change Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 9, 389 s.f. (0.21 acre) Allowed: 2,000 s.f. Proposed: 1,997 s.f. Section 78-1700 - Hardcover Calculations: No Change Stormwater Total Area in Allowed Existing Proposed Overlay District Zone Hardcover Hardcover Hardcover Tier 2,346.75 s.f. 3,235 s.f. 3,233 s.f. Tier 1 9, 389 s.f (25 %) (34.45%) (34.43%) LA19-000090 November 18, 2019 Page 2 of 4 Applicable Regulations: Average Lakeshore Setback Variance (Section 78-1279) The subject property is currently existing forward of the neighboring properties. The home is set back roughly 89' feet from the OHWL. The first level screen porch is already existing and is included as part of those calculations. The proposed addition for a new roofline would be roughly 9 feet forward of the average lakeshore setback over an existing 2nd story deck that the family is currently using. 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 proposed location of the home additions do not block lake views of the adjacent property owners, and therefore is harmonious with the intent of the Ordinance. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The average lakeshore setback variance is consistent with the goals in the comprehensive plan to protect lake views. 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 variance requests are residential in nature and are reasonable considering the unique nature of the property as a large peninsula on the lake. The relatively large flood hazard area and existing improvements on the property creates difficulties in locating a conforming structure. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; ; The location of the structures on the property and configuration of the lot were not created by the property owner; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The visual impacts resulting from the additions proposed within the average lakeshore setback will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Rather, the home will not impact views from the lake nor will it appear to be more visually obtrusive than the existing buildings on the property. LA19-000090 November 18, 2019 Page 3 of 4 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 have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 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 a residential home is an allowed conditional use in the LR -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. The existing home footprint is not set to change. The applicant I looking to include the 2nd story of the home over an existing main level. The home currently sits within the setback and the addition is not going to change the setback from the lake. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The proposed addition will not change the current setbacks from the lake or property lines. The location of the existing home is unique. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. The existing home can be re -built in kind, the proposed addition is necessary to permit the property owners continued enjoyment of their property. The addition is located in a location which serves the intent and goals of the ordinance by minimizing visual impacts to the lake. 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 proposed project will not impair the health, safety, comfort, or morals of the public. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Granting of the variance will resolve and alleviate a demonstrated practical difficulty. 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 Staff finds practical difficulty in the existing location of the current home. In order to have reasonable use of the second floor deck for year round use the roof must be extended over the existing deck footprint. The applicant is not creating any new or increasing the current setbacks from the lake. The proposed addition or a screened porch is entirely over the current home LA19-000090 November 18, 2019 Page 4 of 4 footprint. Public Comments 567 Park, the neighbor to the North, has submitted a letter of support for the project. 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 Planning Staff recommends approval of the average lakeshore setback variance. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Survey/Site Plan Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Annotated Survey Exhibit F. Neighbor Acknowledgement Signature/Letter Exhibit G. Property Owners List and Map Teele Residence 577 Park Lane Attention: Laura Oakden City Planner City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway, Orono Mn. 55356 Adjacent Resident: Darrell S. & Sandra M. Alden 567 Park Lane Orono Mn. 55356 Dear Ms. Oakden, This short letter is in response to the proposed Deck Addition to 577 Park Lane. After reviewing the survey and the drawings provided to my wife and I by Mr. Teele we thought we should also look out our windows and go out on our own deck to see if there would be any impact to our privacy or view of the lake. It is our conclusion the proposed addition will not obscure our view or cause any possible damage to our property and there for are in favor of the proposed deck addition. Sincerely, Scot & Sandi Alden 567 Park Ln. ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM I (we) of [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. ********************************************************************************************************************************* I (we) ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM [print name(s)] of [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. Variance Application — January 2017 Page 15 fC-°III a ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM (we) LjInvot i [print name(s)] [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at f I k 1 also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. �-- Date U�.�� � 0 IV'z )q rty Owner I (we) Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM [print name(s)] of [print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Use Application No. (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. Variance Application — January 2017 Page 15 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 19 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: LA19-000094 — David Burda, 1966 Shadywood Rd, Variances — Resolution Presenter: Laura Oakden Agenda Consent Agenda Planner Section: 1. Purpose. The applicant is requesting variances to allow structure and hardcover in the lake yard, rear yard, and hardcover in excess of 25% to allow for a breezeway and patio addition to the home. 2. Background. The home is located on a channel of Lake Minnetonka, the entire lot is within 75 feet of the lake. There is no conforming building envelope. The applicant is proposing to add a 46 sq.ft (5.7 x 8 feet) breezeway to the home connecting the existing home and garage. The breezeway connecting the home and garage creates one larger principal building, so a rear setback variance is required. The applicant is also converting the existing windows into sliding doors on the east side of the home and is proposed to add a steps and a paver patio (hardcover) on the lake yard on that side of the house. The applicant has proposed to remove hardcover throughout the property which will allow for a slight decrease (7 sq ft) in overall hardcover for the property. 3. 15.99 Deadline. The applicant made a complete application on October 30, 2019. Following the 60 - day rule the application review period expires December 30, 2019. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment Commissioners discussed the project at their meeting on November 18. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 on a motion to recommend approval for the requested variances. 5. Public Comment To date, No public comments were received. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt or amend the approval resolution. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. Proposed Survey and Plans C. Draft PC Minutes D. PC Staff Report E. Hardcover exhibit References PC Exhibits Exhibit A. Exhibit B. Exhibit C. Exhibit D. Exhibit E. Exhibit F. Exhibit G. Exhibit H. Exhibit I. Prepared By: LLO Application Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Existing & Proposed Survey Proposed Plans and Elevations Submitted Hardcover Calculations Narrative Neighbor Acknowledgement Signature Photos Property Owners List and Map Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By -T)a CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1680, 78-1700, 78-350 FILE NO. LA19-000094 WHEREAS, on October 30, 2019, David Burda ("Applicant"), applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 1966 Shadywood Road and legally described as: Lot 36, "SHADY -WOOD" (hereinafter the "Property"); WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1680 to allow building and hardcover within the 75 -foot lakeyard; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1700 to allow hardcover to exceed 25%; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-350 to allow a rear setback, and WHEREAS, on November 18, 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 November 18, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 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 variance as described above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning the Property: FINDINGS OF FACT: CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #LA19-000094. 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 LR -1C Zoning District. 3. The Property contains 0.18 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 54 feet. 4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25 % according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. 5. Applicant has applied for the following variance[s]: a. Building and hardcover within the 75 -foot lakeyard b. Hardcover to exceed 25% to 40.13% c. Rear yard setback to 17.4' 6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and 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. ANALYSIS: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance The proposed variances are in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Ordinance. The small lot includes difficulties in its double lake frontage, small size, and width. The additions will have no visual or massing impact on adjacent lots. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variances to improve this nonconforming lot 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; The request to permit the additions to the home on the substandard lot, in the proposed location within the setbacks, appears to be somewhat reasonable as the property's reduced size and orientation with respect to the dual frontage lakeshore creates difficulties. The hardcover level, and encroachments proposed within the side yard, street yard, and lakeyard appear to be reasonable. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The uniquely small size, location with respect to the lake and roadway, and CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. required setbacks prevent a residential footprint consistent with the neighborhood. The proposed hardcover level and setbacks are unique to the property; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances are requested in order to permit construction of additions to the home which are designed to fit the character of the neighborhood according to the submitted information. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 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 a single family home is an allowed use in the LR -1C 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. The property's substandard size, depth and orientation with respect to the lakeshore creates difficulties which also apply to many of the properties in the same neighborhood. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The property unique with its dual frontage abutting a channel on Lake Minnetonka. It is substandard to size and depth eliminating a building envelope. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Granting the requested variances are necessary for the preservation of the property right of the applicant. 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. Granting the requested variances in this unique situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty.. The variances do not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant. The variances are necessary as the property has considerable practical difficulties affecting development. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1680, 78-1700 and 78-350 to allow a breezeway and patio addition to the existing home, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. 2. The approved project shall conform to the survey dated 10/30/2019 and plans submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. 3. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (12/9/2020). 5. 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. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this day of 20_ ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor 19-290A 1966 Shadywood Road; 3 -Season Breezeway Addition Between House & Garage Current View Looking South Towards Neighbor Current View Looking North Toward Channel 1966 Shadywood Road; 3 -Season Breezeway Addition Between House & Garage Remodeled View North Wall 7' Remodeled View South Wall 1966 Shadywood Road 3 -Season Breezeway Addition Between House & Garage Step Set -Up Currently Hous Wall Door Base Hous, m Door Base Garage Wall Door Base garage Va I )oor Base IF _4W 19-290 19-290A 1966 Shadywood Road; 3 -Season Breezeway Addition Between House & Garage Current View Looking South Towards Neighbor Current View Looking North Toward Channel 1966 Shadywood Road; 3 -Season Breezeway Addition Between House & Garage Remodeled View North Wall 7' Remodeled View South Wall 1966 Shadywood Road 3 -Season Breezeway Addition Between House & Garage Step Set -Up Currently Hous Wall Door Base Hous, m Door Base Garage Wall Door Base garage Va I )oor Base IF _4W MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. . LA19-000094 DAVID BURDA, 1966 SHADYWOOD ROAD, VARIANCES, 9:26 P.M. - 9:45 P.M. The applicants, David and Cindy Burda, were present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting variances to allow structure and hardcover in the lake yard, a rear yard setback variance, and hardcover in excess of 25 percent to allow for an addition to the home. The property is located on a channel; lakeshore is on two sides. The home sits entirely within the 75 -foot setback, eliminating a conforming building envelope. The applicant is proposing to add a 46 -square -foot breezeway to the home, connecting the existing home and the existing garage and creating one large principal building, so a rear setback variance is required. The house is currently set 42 feet from the rear where 30 feet is required. With the addition of the breezeway connecting the garage, the new rear yard setback would become 17.4 feet. The applicant is also proposing to convert windows into patio doors and will need a few steps down that will lead to a new patio surface on the east side which is considered hardcover. The applicant will be removing hardcover in other areas of the property, including part of the existing deck that's on the channel side, concrete walkways around the property, and some retaining walls. The overall hardcover of the property would decrease by about 7 square feet with this project. Staff finds a number of the property characteristics are practical difficulties, making the development and improvements impossible. The substandard size and dual lakeshore frontage on the lake and abutting the channel eliminates any building envelope and any opportunities for property improvements without variances. No public comments have been received. A neighbor -acknowledgment signature has been submitted. Staff recommends approval of the proposed project for the breezeway addition and the patio. Mr. David Burda and Ms. Cindy Burda, 1966 Shadywood Road, stated they bought the home in September 2019. This house sits inside the 75 -foot setback and they know this house would never be approved to be built today. The distance between his house and his neighbor's house is roughly 2 feet. They are requesting two improvements. One is for safety; the other is for more privacy. The first request is for a breezeway. It's 6 feet between the garage and the house and it is a pretty narrow space, and in that narrow space you're traversing three steps and two doors, which can be challenging. Also, the main service power lines run right across the corner of the garage over the roof of the entrance to the back of the house. He referenced pictures he created with PowerPoint to show what the roof line would look like. His second request would be to take out the bay window, put in a door, opening it up with sliders and windows, and adding a couple of steps going down to a patio that would be both flagstone and grass. This would give them direct access to their boat docks. The only other access is through the side of the house where they basically step out the door and they're pretty much 10 feet from the channel. Adding the new access point would give them a little more privacy in moving from house to the dock area as well as just sitting in an area that would remove themselves somewhat from the channel traffic. They are planning to remove a good amount of hardcover to offset any hardcover impact from the proposed patio, including reducing the size of the deck and a few other things. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. In response to questions by Libby about the breezeway being under roof and cover and whether it would also have footings, Mr. Burda said he wanted to make sure that it was not built yet. It would be a 3 - season, so there would not be any heating out there. The garage is slab -on -grade, so they'll dig footings right off the garage, it will be built, connected permanently to the house. There is something called a slip joint that allows for the breezeway to remain stable while the garage can move up and down with the frost. As he looks at the cracked concrete which sits between the house and garage, you know there's movement going on. He understands from an engineering standpoint there's a way to construct it to allow for that movement without permanently attaching the breezeway to the garage. Mr. Burda said the main house was built in the 1940s, there was an add-on in the 1980s, the garage was part of a variance granted in the early 2000s, and in that amount of time you can see the amount of movement that's taken place over the winters. McCutcheon said he understands the practical difficulties. In Minnesota a garage being connected to the house is a big deal. He also agrees with the privacy concern. Mr. Burda wanted to comment on the record and tell the Commissioners how awesome the staff is, especially Laura, and the Commissioners are fortunate to have them on their team. Ressler said the Commissioners tend to agree. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 9:38 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 9:38 p.m. Libby stated he would tend to agree with Staff on this. There are some practical difficulties, a very small lot surrounded by water. The additions that are proposed and the way they are articulated make for attractive improvements, and it is worthy of giving them the guidance that's already been given and granting the application. Gettman said the proposed breezeway makes sense. He is not sure he is reaching that difficulty/hardship with respect to the hardcovers and what they are swapping out. Privacy is part of it, but it's the struggle of the slippery slope of authorizing basically an improvement without any justification beyond the privacy question. The applicant already has the view with the bay window, but it's expanding and trading that hardcover which is what he is struggling with. Thiesse stated he had the same concern but he has never lived on a property in this location. He doesn't know if anyone has experienced the practical difficulty because it is a busy area and privacy is important. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. The Commission has gone through many applications where it was a reduction in hardcover and the Commission was happy with it, so he is leaning that way for that reason. Ressler asked whether he is for or opposed. Thiesse stated he is for it. He understands the applicant's practical difficulty and he has voted many times for a reduction in hardcover. Ressler said the practical difficulties are identified, but on the small envelopes what the Commission usually asks for is a reduction in structure or hardcover or both as a compensating factor. Where he is conflicted is, he thinks what is right for this property is a whole new garage built attached to the house. That way you're not adding structure to an already really tight lot. He is not going to formally say he is opposed to it, but that is what he goes back to. Thiesse noted they are not over on the structure coverage; they are within the structure coverage. Ressler stated the total lot structure is 2,000 feet. Thiesse said they are at 1,817. The hardcover is the struggle, and they reduced it. Gettman commented the applicant already has it and they're moving it. Ressler stated he can appreciate that. The proposal is 1,817. They're going up from 1,771, which is not a great amount. Gettman noted he is not opposed to it. Erickson said, given the constraints of the lot and the uniqueness of its location and the applicant's willingness to reduce the hardcover, it is worthy of his support. Ressler clarified his initial concern and said it is not exceeding the allowable structure, so that seems reasonable to him. Libby moved, Bollis seconded, acceptance of Application LA19-000094, David Burda, 1966 Shadywood Road, Variances. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Date Application Received: 10.21.2019 Date Application Considered as Complete: 10.30.2019 60 -Day Review Period Expires: 12.30.2019 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Laura Oakden Planner Date: November 18, 2019 Subject: LA#19-000094, David Burda, 1966 Shadywood Rd, Variances, Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting variances to allow structure and hardcover in the lake yard, side and rear yard, and hardcover in excess of 25% to allow for an addition to the home Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. Background The home is located on a channel of Lake Minnetonka, the entire lot is within 75 feet of the lake, eliminating a conforming building envelope. The applicant is proposing to add a 46 sq.ft (5.7 x 8 feet) breezeway to the home connecting the existing home and garage. The breezeway connecting the home and garage creates one larger principle building, so a side and rear setback variances are required. The applicant is also converting windows into sliding doors on the east side of the home and is proposed to add a steps and a paver patio (hardcover) on the lake yard. The applicant has proposed to remove hardcover throughout the property which will allow for a slight decrease in overall hardcover for the property. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-350 - Setbacks: LR -1C Required Existing Proposed Lake (North) 75' 16.5' 16.5' (No Change) Lake (East) 75' 38' 38' (House) 29' (Proposed Patio) Street (West) 30' 42.4 (House) 17.4 17.4' (Garage) Interior Side (South) 7.5' 11' (House) 10.8' 10' (Garage) Average Lakeshore No Change Section 78-1403- Structural Building Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 8,014 s.f. (0.18 acre) Allowed: 2,000 sq.ft. Existing: 1,771 sq.ft. Proposed: 1,817 sq.ft. Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 - Hardcover Calculations: LA19-000094 November 18, 2019 Page 2 of 4 Stormwater Total Area Allowed Proposed Overlay Existing Hardcover in Zone Hardcover Hardcover District Tier 2,003.5 s.f. 3223 sq.ft. (40.22%) 3216 sq.ft (40.13%) Tier 1 8,014 s.f. (25 %) w/in 75' w/in 75' Applicable Regulations: Variance (78-1680 and 78-1700) hardcover in the 75 -foot setback and hardcover over 25% The property is located on the lake limiting the hardcover to 25%. However, the entire property is located within the 75' lake yard setback prohibiting hardcover. The zoning regulations eliminate a building envelope for the property. The applicant is proposing to add a 46 sq.ft breezeway addition connecting the garage to the home. The applicant is also proposing to add a 14x16 stairs and paver patio as hardcover. As part of the project the applicant will be removing hardcover in other areas of the property including part of an existing deck, concrete walkways and cone retaining walls. The overall hardcover of the property will decrease by 7 sq.ft. Variance (78-350) Rear yard setback The breezeway addition connecting the home and the detached garage eliminates the accessory building requirements. The garage is will now be considered part of the principle structure and those setbacks will apply. The house is currently set 42.4 feet where 30 feet is required. With the addition of the breezeway connecting the garage, the new rear yard setback is 17.4 feet where 30 feet is required. 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 proposed variances are in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Ordinance. The small lot includes difficulties in its double lake frontage, small size, and width. The additions will have no visual or massing impact on adjacent lots. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variances to improve this nonconforming lot are consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. LA19-000094 November 18, 2019 Page 3 of 4 a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The request to permit the additions to the home on the substandard lot, in the proposed location within the setbacks, appears to be somewhat reasonable as the property's reduced size and orientation with respect to the dual frontage lakeshore creates difficulties. The hardcover level, and encroachments proposed within the side yard, street yard, and lakeyard appear to be reasonable. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The uniquely small size, location with respect to the lake and roadway, and required setbacks prevent a residential footprint consistent with the neighborhood. The proposed hardcover level and setbacks are unique to the property; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances are requested in order to permit construction of additions to the home which are designed to fit the character of the neighborhood according to the submitted information. 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 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, as the use for a single family home is an allowed use in the LR -1C 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. The property's substandard size, depth and orientation with respect to the lakeshore creates difficulties which also apply to many of the properties in the same neighborhood. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The property unique with its dual frontage abutting a channel on Lake Minnetonka. It is substandard to size and depth eliminating a building envelope. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Granting the requested variances are necessary for the preservation of the property right of the applicant. 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. Granting the requested variances in this unique situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty.. The variances do not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant. The variances are necessary as the property has considerable practical difficulties affecting development. LA19-000094 November 18, 2019 Page 4 of 4 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 Staff finds that a number of the property characteristics are practical difficulties making development and improvement impossible. The substandard size and dual lakeshore frontage on the lake and abutting the channel eliminate any building envelope and any opportunities for property improvements without variances. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. 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 Planning Staff recommend approval. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Existing & Proposed Survey Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations Exhibit F. Narrative Exhibit G. Neighbor Acknowledgement Signature Exhibit H. Photos Exhibit 1. Property Owners List and Map City of Orono �No Hardcover Calculation Worksheet sR Property Address: 12C.. J'.S/ADYGu�;i? R 0AD 0�9v�0 Bu�OA) S140 Prepared by: Date: G R o,•tiD E�1 G y4 � � `u• C i A 7-F j-, o.c-'('_ 12 Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) 6r 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 1:1F.XISTING HARDCOVEiD In the following to a identify all items of existing hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict existing hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Survey Total (Square Feet (Example) (Garage) (24'x 30' 720 S.F. A &PewscS.F. B CA A A G9 S.F. C r S.F. D r 27 S.F. E S.F. F S.F. G S S.F. H to I / S.F. I *Alrle AaAeeA 23 S.F. i oNE rf'ps' S.F. K IE aA f S.F. L it E J,.r W -f44. S.F. Ni I C P4 D S.F. N CGRFIX U.1,444. S.F. O CPAIC - T7,6"PS S.F. P A ESC CiAc4-e S.F. Q S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. U S.F. V S.F. W S.F. X S.F. Y S.F. Z S.F. 1 Total Existing Hardcover 2 S.F. Excludable Hardcover See City Code Sec 78-1684): S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2 Total Excludable Hardcover O S.F. 3 Net Existing Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 Z 23 S.F. 4 Total Lot Area ,gL 29_ IA Cc E' W 0/y S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage 1(3)+(4)] yp_ 2 2 % (Proposed Hardcover next page) This is an information packet regarding Hardcover. Every effort has been made to insure the accuracy of the information contained herein; however, if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code, the Code provisions will prevail. Page 8 of 9 City of Orono �oNo Hardcover Calculation Worksheet Property Address: y -E/'/A D KW000 ROAD (04VtO 46C(ROA) fSHOf'F' Prepared by: Date: GRON8CAG i A.S'.i'oCIA 7,, IA-'C./O-/7-/9 Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 2:11ROPOSED HARDCOVER In the following table, identify allmems of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key to Hardcover Item (Describe) -Survey(Square Length x Width Total Feet -(Example) (Garage) (24'x 30' 720 S.F. A OU S 1313 S.F. B GAAACC // YSR S.F. C P / CYV S.F. D /i T iC f,&f o7 S.F. E ��399 -11 280 S.F. F V 0/A/6: 16 S.F. G R s10 S.F. H 'I S.F. 41i - EI AIC X IFM cv6D jR S.F. S.F. K Cre Ac' AirgugvU) S.F. L S.F. M l �� S.F. N O ii IS S.F. S.F. P &,PB R M aVF'# S.F. Q PAOPOPF4 ,e// AU.K S.F. R RA G 1' S.F. S o t!fj O S.F. T S.F. U S.F. V S.F. W S.F. X S.F. Y S.F. Z S.F. 1 Total Proposed Hardcover 3 S.F. Excludable Hardcover See City Code Sec 78-1684): S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2 Total Excludable Hardcover S.F. 3 Net Proposed Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1)] 3ZI6 S.F. 4 Total Lot Area O S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [ (3) +(4)] y0. �,� % Subdivision Application - January 2016 This is an information packet regarding Hardcover. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained herein; however, if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code, the Code provisions will prevail. Page 19 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 20 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: LA19-000095 — Gordon James, 2927 Casco Point Road, Variances and IUP — Resolution Presenter: Laura Oakden, City Planner Agenda Consent Agenda LLO Section: 1. Purpose. The applicant is requesting lot width and average lakeshore setback variance and an IUP for hauling over 500 cubic yards of material. 2. Background. The applicant is proposing to construct a new home forward of the average lakeshore setback on a substandard narrow lot. The average lakeshore setback is unique for this property due to the neighboring lot to the north, the home on that lot is setback from the lake over 200 feet. This distance creates an average lakeshore setback line that cuts through the subject parcel at a sharp angle. The applicant is proposing a new home that will extend over the ALS 41 feet (13 on the narrow end) The existing home encroaches 43/35 feet, respectively. The new home will be roughly set 10 feet farther away from the lake then the current home. The applicant is also requesting an Interim Use Permit to haul roughly 600 cubic yards of material to and from the site to better serve the proposed home. The applicant has indicated that the home on the neighboring property to the north will be removed, effectively altering the average lake shore setback line and reducing or eliminating the need for an average lake shore setback variance. However, this has not been formally verified. 3. 15.99 Deadline. The applicant made a complete application on November 7, 2019. Following the 60 - day rule the application review period will expire January 6, 2019. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. Commissioners discussed the project at their meeting on November 18, 2019. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval for the requested variance. 5. Public Comment. The northern neighbor submitted an email in support of the project and is included in Exhibit C. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt or amend the approval resolution. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. Proposed Survey and Plans C. Neighbor's Comments D. Draft PC Minutes E. PC Staff Report References PC Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B. Exhibit C. Exhibit D. Prepared By: LLO Application Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan Proposed Plans and Elevations Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By -T)a Exhibit E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations Exhibit F. Photos Exhibit G. Property Owners List and Map CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE AND AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1279, 78-350, AND 78-1726 FILE NO. LA19-000095 WHEREAS, on November 7, 2019, Gordon James o/b/o Michael Barry ("Applicant"), applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 2927 Casco Point Road and legally described as: Lots Ninety-five (95) and One Hundred Six (106), and including that part of Lake Shore Avenue vacated lying across said Lot Ninety-five (95), Spring Park, according to the map or plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorded in and for said County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota. (hereinafter the "Property"); WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow an average lakeshore setback; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-350 to from the lot width requirement and WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for an interim use permit to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1726 to allow for hauling over 500 cubic yard of material; and WHEREAS, on November 7, 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 November 18, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 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 variances and interim use permit as described above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning the Property: FINDINGS OF FACT: CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #LA19-000095. 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 LR -1 C Zoning District. 3. The Property contains 0.57 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 51 feet 4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25 % according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. 5. Applicant has applied for the following variances and an interim use permit: a. Average lakeshore setback b. Lot width 6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and 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. VARIANCE ANALYSIS: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The proposed variances are in harmony with the purpose of the Ordinance. The lot includes difficulties in its substandard width and location of the adjacent homes. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variances to develop of nonconforming lot of record 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; The request to permit construction of a new home on a substandard lot forward of the ALS appears to be reasonable based on the neighboring home's orientation with respect to the lakeshore. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The nonconforming lot width and neighboring home location were not created by the homeowner; and CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances are requested in order to permit construction of a home designed to fit the character of the neighborhood. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 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 a single family home is an allowed use in the LR -1C 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. The property's substandard size and orientation and the setback from the lake of the adjacent homes creates difficulties for the Owners in redeveloping the property consistent with the homes in their neighborhood. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The property's nonconforming size and the relationship between the existing home and the setback of the adjacent properties create difficulties for the owners. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Granting lot width and average lakeshore variances are necessary for the preservation of the property right of the applicant. 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. Granting the requested lot width and average lakeshore setback variances in this unique situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The requested variances for lot width and average lakeshore set setback are necessary, and do not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant. INTERIM USE PERMIT ANALYSIS: 1) The use will meet the general performance standards in section 78-916 of this chapter; the proposed grading will conform to the standards within Section 78- 916 of the Zoning Code. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2) The use is allowed as an interim use in the applicable zoning district; this statement is true. 3) The use will not delay anticipated development or redevelopment of the site; the proposed grading activity will be conducted in conjunction with the development of the new single family home on the property. This statement is true. 4) The use will not be in conflict with any provisions of the city code on an ongoing basis; the proposed grading activity will not be in conflict with the Code. 5) The use will not adversely affect the adjacent property, the surrounding neighborhood, or other uses on the property where the use will be located; this standard requires that the proposed grading and improvements must not substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the properties in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses. The result of the proposed grading will not change the intended residential use of the Property so there should be no change in the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties resulting from the export of fill materials. However, activity of exporting approximately 600 cubic yards of fill and active grading of the Property during construction can have a temporary adverse impact on neighbors. The grading work on the Property as well as the forthcoming construction of the proposed home could result in additional noise, dust, vibration and traffic on the haul routes and immediate neighbors. To the degree possible, negative impacts should be limited and mitigated. Trucks hauling material shall observe the speed and traffic laws and provide on site traffic control to improve safety. 6) The use will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public; the property owner, builder, and contractors will be responsible for keeping debris off of the public roadways. The noise resulting from the trucks hauling and equipment moving the material in and around the site should be minimized to the extent possible. 7) The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty; the conclusion of the grading activity will coincide with the finalization of the construction of the proposed home on the property. An as -built survey will be submitted to confirm conformance with the approved grading plan at the closing of the permits. 8) And the applicant agrees in writing to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for the use, including a requirement for a financial security to ensure removal of all evidence of the use upon termination, and restoration of the site to prior or better conditions. The conditions shall be set forth in a development agreement between the property owner and the city, which agreement shall be recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Deeds. The conditions of approval will be documented as required. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance and interim use permit to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section78-1279, 78-350, 78- 1726 to allow for a new home construction, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. 2. The approved project shall conform to the survey dated 8/14/2019 and building plans submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibits A. 3. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (12/9/2020). 5. 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. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this day of 20 ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor LAKE ELEVATION 11111 1111111 1111111 ILI�"`_"_"_'J IL'�'J IL=�J I I LIII 1 II II I II h ; SCALE I /811 = 1'-01' 1------� III III 11 II I II III I III 11111 IIIA III LJ L___- -___- �___� LJ 1 L_____1 i IL���J IL���JI 114���J � 6 �iim f mi hum LAKE ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8° = I1-011 ==71 II ----------- 12 ---- ----- 12 III ------- 12 �12 12 --- 8_,, --- — — — — —— 611 IL a 4�� X12 I9 IF- I 2 11�!_ 124 117111 77 71 RIGHT ELEVATION ILLWJILL =_JILL_= J 56ALE : 1 /S° = I'-011 L-----------� ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- H16HE5T RID6E ------------------------------------------------------------ I I I I I I I I I I � I I � I I I 12 i ' I I I6 I I I TOP OF H16HE5T WINDOW @ I — — — — — — — — — — -- REAR --- i�'iNi'i'�i�'i1 :::T=❑�EZ= �❑oa �C�❑�� ❑c�C�� 111111 111 - N O m Im \\\II/I �■'�'' '� mi\ miLE ME ii'i'�ii'1 1�i i�i1�i til EXIST. AVERAGE GRADE FIRST FLOOR GEIL. FIRST FLOOR BA5EMENT GEIL. SCALE; 1/4° = I1-011 15T FLOOR 2,293 50. FT. BASEMENT 2,166 50. FT. TOTAL 4,459 50. FT. co BASEMENT FLOOR m :5 It0 It U 117 z n L7 (D 0 C')CD z w I 200 0_ CO w I, - w 0 z Ig r� rZ a 0 V J z .. 0] — x v 0 J IJ_ �-a ww 2 � w 0 � oet w w z 0 Uy - V Z O � 0_U O w N 00 Z2�oa O d 00 L N Zp�; a am �� I:�j0� 0 m 0 Qarnww 7-00 z n w z �s 1L O z w O I— z n F--- v z �QQ o OQ� o �zv nl zd� w �A �O QC) z w az � o� r�n o cf) o � C\2o Qm DATE: 10-15-19 REVISIONS: DRAWN BY: JJ COMM. NO. 219237 SHEET NO. I � II ' 2$ II - II L INEN EEPROOM 14 GABT r--------------------------------------------- 161-2" i UNEXCAVATED OzoW V i o W Q, �N~ --------------------------------------------------------------- -� UNEXCAVATED GARAGE FOUNPATION PLAN - SCALE: 1/04-011 I'-0" it I N v N HI -EFF WH �� HI -EFF FURN 60" G.T. 0624 � a '-6" a� REG ROOM 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 STAIRS ? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ----------J LOWER PATIO F- L -- ------------------- BEDROOM 12 - ---------------------------- 2 -----22 16'-3" L-----JII I I (0" W.I.C. STORAGE - � -1 F- 7 24 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — - - -I - - O � — J L WET BAR U.G. REF F—� K I I MEGH //7/7/ IT, T/T/Ti',T a 28 UNEXCAVATED 6LA55 2471 I v a ❑F __ Q I � 2x8 J5T5 16" O.0 II � i i II ' i II i W.I,C. i i 2 I II � II II � ii BEDROOM '3 -------------------- II I I ii II 16'-6" F 4-- 4 -- --z:z C) v I I �tflc-4E — I V 5EALED SUMP UNEXCAVATED CL Z) 5EE ENGINEERING PAGE5 51-5X Lo z Ln �00 �0, z w p a00 w p ZQO� V!!RR J W X a � J w O Q w W ~ W N oeW wt z o v� z o � (D o w Eo co Zoo o a co Zgar` p aQ L m L j O C o m 0 DaT)Wa aao� 7 -Co) z � W � o � 0 z �o�-v z �QQ � W0� fl oQ� o �zv FOUNPAT ION PLAN SCALE; 1/4"d-011 I'-0" EXTERIOR DIMENSION ARE FROM EXTERIOR OF FOUNDATION WALLS AT FULL BASEMENT AREAS AND A5 NOTED AT FRAMED WALLS AT LOOKOUT AND WALKOUT AREAS BASEMENT FINI5HED 2,166 50. FT. BASEMENT UNFINISHED XXXX 50. FT. WINDOW & DOOR NOTES • •• MARVIN INTEGRITY WINDOWS CODE MIN. U VALUE = 0.32 MIN. 5THC = 0.35 • ALL WINDOWS SET AT W-0" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • BUILDER TO PROVIDE WINDOW ORDER L15T WITH U FACTOR, 56HC, & 5TC RATING FOR EACH WINDOW & EXTERIOR DOOR • BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL WINDOW, DOOR & OPENING HDR. HT5. • WINDOW WELLS WITH A VERTICAL DEPTH OF MORE THAN 44" MUST BE EQUIPPED WITH AN APPROVED LADDER GUARDRAIL NOTE5 • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN 5112E OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LESS THAN 4" AT ALL GUARDRAILS FLOOR 5Y5TEM NOTE5 • ALL FLOORS TO BE L/480 • FLOOR TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY FRAMING BELOW GRANITE TOPS, TUBS & TILE AREAS ABOVE • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & RETURN CHASE IN TRUSSES • BUILDER TO PROVIDE CITY WITH TRU55 LAYOUT PLANS FOUNDATION WALL & FOUNDATION IN5ULATION NOTES • 9'-0" POURED FOUNDATION WALLS W/ 51N6LE PLATE • BA5EMENT FLOOR RA15EP TO TOP OF WALKOUT STEM WALL • A55UME12 SOIL BEARING CAPACITY 2,000 LBS • MAINTAIN 42" MIN. GRADE ABOVE FOOTING • BOTTOM OF DECK & PORCH FOOTIN65 TO BE 42" BELOW GRADE • MA50NRY CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WALL & FOOTING REQUIREMENTS WITH SITE CONPITION5 • MA50NRY CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL WALL AND FOOTING REQUIREMENTS AT ALL UNBALANCED BACKFILL LOCATIONS FX 5EE FOUNDATION WALL DETAIL ON PAGE DI N X INPICATE5 D15TANCE FOUNDATION 15 HELD IN FROM SHEATHING ABOVE • FOUNDATION WALLS HELD IN FROM SHEATHING ABOVE AS INDICATED BY FOUNDATION WALL DETAIL • SILL PLATE OVERHAN65 FOUNDATION I I" MAXIMUM SEE FOUNDATION WALL DETAILS (WHEN TRTD 2X8 PLATE 15 USED) • SEE FOUNDATION WALL DETAILS FOR FOUNDATION WALL INSULATION (R-10 EXTERIOR/ R-5 INTERIOR) 5HEETROCK & INSULATION NOTE5 • 6YP. 1312. REQUIRED AT ENTIRE GE IL IN6 (EXCEPT 80 SQ.FT. MAXIMUM AT MECHANICAL) • P GYP. 1312, AT WALLS & CEILING BELOW STAIRS • ALL SPRAY FOAM INSULATION MUST BE COVERED BY MIN." GYP. BD. AT HABITABLE AREAS FRAM IN6 NOTES • 8'-9 1/2" PLATE HE 16HT UNLE55 NOTED OTHF-RW15E • 2X6 TIMBERSTRAND STUDS @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE STUDS AT ALL WINDOW &PATIO DDDR HEADERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/L5L SOLID BLOCK IN6 AT ALL POINT LOAD5, SUPPORT BEAMS, M ICROLAMS, & 61RDER TRUSSES TO FOUN12AT ION • PROVIDE FIRE BLOCKING VERTICALLY @ CEILIN65 & FLOORS & HORIZONTALLY @ INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 10'-0" (CONGEALED SPACES @ SOFFITS, DROPPED GEILING5, BETWEEN STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN STORIES) • PROVIDE DRAFT 5TOPPIN6 BETWEEN STORIES DIVIDED INTO APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SOFT. SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS • PROVIDE SMOKE ALARM IN EVERY BEDROOM & THE CORRIDOR GIVING AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING THE BASEMENT, & IN ANY ROOM THAT HAS A GE IL INC HEIGHT MORE THAN 24" H16HER THAN A CORRIDOR 61VIN6 AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOMS. • PROVIDE CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM WITHIN 10'-0" OF ALL BEDROOM5 w 2$ COII II II �O COUNTER 25- LAUNDRY Qb z w 0 � o� co 41-7" 10'-1" �o W. LC. 24 SINK D W Q� - - ---- - - - 28 II 112$ II II GO LINEN BEDROOM #4 CABT r 16'-2" UNEXCAVATED 6LA55 2471 I v a ❑F __ Q I � 2x8 J5T5 16" O.0 II � i i II ' i II i W.I,C. i i 2 I II � II II � ii BEDROOM '3 -------------------- II I I ii II 16'-6" F 4-- 4 -- --z:z C) v I I �tflc-4E — I V 5EALED SUMP UNEXCAVATED CL Z) 5EE ENGINEERING PAGE5 51-5X Lo z Ln �00 �0, z w p a00 w p ZQO� V!!RR J W X a � J w O Q w W ~ W N oeW wt z o v� z o � (D o w Eo co Zoo o a co Zgar` p aQ L m L j O C o m 0 DaT)Wa aao� 7 -Co) z � W � o � 0 z �o�-v z �QQ � W0� fl oQ� o �zv FOUNPAT ION PLAN SCALE; 1/4"d-011 I'-0" EXTERIOR DIMENSION ARE FROM EXTERIOR OF FOUNDATION WALLS AT FULL BASEMENT AREAS AND A5 NOTED AT FRAMED WALLS AT LOOKOUT AND WALKOUT AREAS BASEMENT FINI5HED 2,166 50. FT. BASEMENT UNFINISHED XXXX 50. FT. WINDOW & DOOR NOTES • •• MARVIN INTEGRITY WINDOWS CODE MIN. U VALUE = 0.32 MIN. 5THC = 0.35 • ALL WINDOWS SET AT W-0" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • BUILDER TO PROVIDE WINDOW ORDER L15T WITH U FACTOR, 56HC, & 5TC RATING FOR EACH WINDOW & EXTERIOR DOOR • BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL WINDOW, DOOR & OPENING HDR. HT5. • WINDOW WELLS WITH A VERTICAL DEPTH OF MORE THAN 44" MUST BE EQUIPPED WITH AN APPROVED LADDER GUARDRAIL NOTE5 • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN 5112E OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LESS THAN 4" AT ALL GUARDRAILS FLOOR 5Y5TEM NOTE5 • ALL FLOORS TO BE L/480 • FLOOR TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY FRAMING BELOW GRANITE TOPS, TUBS & TILE AREAS ABOVE • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & RETURN CHASE IN TRUSSES • BUILDER TO PROVIDE CITY WITH TRU55 LAYOUT PLANS FOUNDATION WALL & FOUNDATION IN5ULATION NOTES • 9'-0" POURED FOUNDATION WALLS W/ 51N6LE PLATE • BA5EMENT FLOOR RA15EP TO TOP OF WALKOUT STEM WALL • A55UME12 SOIL BEARING CAPACITY 2,000 LBS • MAINTAIN 42" MIN. GRADE ABOVE FOOTING • BOTTOM OF DECK & PORCH FOOTIN65 TO BE 42" BELOW GRADE • MA50NRY CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WALL & FOOTING REQUIREMENTS WITH SITE CONPITION5 • MA50NRY CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL WALL AND FOOTING REQUIREMENTS AT ALL UNBALANCED BACKFILL LOCATIONS FX 5EE FOUNDATION WALL DETAIL ON PAGE DI N X INPICATE5 D15TANCE FOUNDATION 15 HELD IN FROM SHEATHING ABOVE • FOUNDATION WALLS HELD IN FROM SHEATHING ABOVE AS INDICATED BY FOUNDATION WALL DETAIL • SILL PLATE OVERHAN65 FOUNDATION I I" MAXIMUM SEE FOUNDATION WALL DETAILS (WHEN TRTD 2X8 PLATE 15 USED) • SEE FOUNDATION WALL DETAILS FOR FOUNDATION WALL INSULATION (R-10 EXTERIOR/ R-5 INTERIOR) 5HEETROCK & INSULATION NOTE5 • 6YP. 1312. REQUIRED AT ENTIRE GE IL IN6 (EXCEPT 80 SQ.FT. MAXIMUM AT MECHANICAL) • P GYP. 1312, AT WALLS & CEILING BELOW STAIRS • ALL SPRAY FOAM INSULATION MUST BE COVERED BY MIN." GYP. BD. AT HABITABLE AREAS FRAM IN6 NOTES • 8'-9 1/2" PLATE HE 16HT UNLE55 NOTED OTHF-RW15E • 2X6 TIMBERSTRAND STUDS @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE STUDS AT ALL WINDOW &PATIO DDDR HEADERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/L5L SOLID BLOCK IN6 AT ALL POINT LOAD5, SUPPORT BEAMS, M ICROLAMS, & 61RDER TRUSSES TO FOUN12AT ION • PROVIDE FIRE BLOCKING VERTICALLY @ CEILIN65 & FLOORS & HORIZONTALLY @ INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 10'-0" (CONGEALED SPACES @ SOFFITS, DROPPED GEILING5, BETWEEN STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN STORIES) • PROVIDE DRAFT 5TOPPIN6 BETWEEN STORIES DIVIDED INTO APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SOFT. SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS • PROVIDE SMOKE ALARM IN EVERY BEDROOM & THE CORRIDOR GIVING AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING THE BASEMENT, & IN ANY ROOM THAT HAS A GE IL INC HEIGHT MORE THAN 24" H16HER THAN A CORRIDOR 61VIN6 AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOMS. • PROVIDE CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM WITHIN 10'-0" OF ALL BEDROOM5 w �A �O Qb z w az � o� r�n o � �o � C\2o Q� DATE: 10-15-19 REVISIONS: DRAWN BY: JJ COMM. NO. 219237 SHEET NO. 2 11111 o :III __- - -- -- __ -_ _ _ _ -REAR ____ z m ENTRY 26 F- - J m I W. I.C. I i 2$ 20 M IN DR 0 N 5'-0" I I m 54" G.T. I I LI - - - - - 1/2" GYP. BD. AT WALLS & 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. @ CEILING COMMON TO LIVING AREA. GARAGE 4" GONG. FLOOR W/ FIBERME5H 16'-0" L F 0 0 p W Q Q 0 a co x a rn PORCH -------- 3'-0" I I i I i RAISED CEILING j L----- I I L — — - --- - ------------- - - - AREA o -1I 41-6" 151-0" 41-6" 24'-0" GARAGE FLOOR PLAN SCALE. 1/4"4-011 -44 PATIO 16'-0" 4'-0" 47'-6" 11'-6° 4'-0" 12'-0" III liilil I I I C-4 I C'4 LAKE ROOM illi p� j I II IIII I I � II IIII I � I II 19'-9" IIII I III IIII I I III liilil I I I III IIII I I I I Iii liilii I I I Iii iiii I I I III IIII I I II IIII I I 10' LII ----- Iu ---- III —J 9'-1" Cl II r � III AREA o j III II a O II 13'-1" GLC. I IIII III �r 12'-0�--� a IIII III 113'-1" GLG. II I II u M F-1 — I — -III 60MMON TO LIVING AREA. IIII — II 4" GONG. FLOOR o — — — — — I I I w I O M GRANITE TOPS, TU155 & TILE AREAS ABOVE I I • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & II RETURN CHA56 IN TRU55E5 IID • BUILDER TO PROVIDE CITY WITH TRUSS LAYOUT PLANS ,IIII I; IIS, FRAMING NOTE5 • 91-1 P PLATE HEIGHT UNLE55 NOTED OTHERW15E • 2X6 TIMBER5TRAND 5TUD5 @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLE55 DATE: III \ NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE 5TU125 AT ALL WINDOW & PATIO DOOR HEADER5 UNLE55 NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/L5L 501 BLOCKING AT ALL POINT LOA05, BEAMS CENTERED III FOUN12AT ION II L I III 11III III ON TABLE NOT RAI5E1?CEILING I --1 -- --1�, (CONGEALED 5PAGE5 @ SOFFITS, DROPPED GEILING5, BETWEEN ------J II IIIL=�_== STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN 5TORIF-5 -JIII I II I APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SOFT. I ��, GYP. BD AT HABITABLE AREAS • TIMBERSTRANO 5TUD5 @ KITCHEN WALLS DRAWN BY: I I it JJ IIII iil I I I SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS I IIII - lii MA5TER I I I ii NO. GIVING AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING III liilil I I I C-4 I C'4 LAKE ROOM illi p� j I II IIII I I � II IIII I � I II 19'-9" IIII I III IIII I I III liilil I I I III IIII I I I I Iii liilii I I I Iii iiii I I I III IIII I I II IIII I I 10' LII ----- Iu ---- III —J 9'-1" Cl BEDROOM I IIII I I II L------ ------ ----- I iJ IIII 15'-9" II , I I I IIII II IIII II 2x6 ili � I II x 26 2 II C-4 Q0 $ ili > ili I 5OFF IT l l @ 8'-6" I 10'- I" GLC. x 24 --- — J -------- -- --------- I I PD -- -------- Cl --- ii uj �i 3 iii I I li _ wI I$SQ l i 36x5Q l °i I III ENERGY HEEL I I G.O. 8i_Ou III 3'-6" TRU55E5 I I cnI 24" 0.6 4(1 4 1= IIII IT 2x6SOFFIT @ 8'-6" V- 42 GRILL ---�---9'-I" GLG----� xiio 24 6 II56" PD o °W K ITGHEN ilii _ I 5TEPPEO " ENERGY TRUSSES u- EL pv III 48 RANGE IIII w W/ WOOD III I 24" O.0 I III II 0 0 iii I II illI W.I.G, j�11 288Q C.O."v �j _-- 2x6 I� ❑F 131-7" 6'-3" PANTRY I 2$8Q III 0 r H x II z G.O. > _= REAR z .N ENTRY 26 � I W.I.G. I I 2$ -__J 20 MIN DR ii 54" G.T. I I --- T 7'-10" FOYER I I I 24 I II I Q I I GO j j I 3Qx8 — � I IIII III III u III 17'- 10 L--------- IIII--------------------JII III II ii I li p III II i I li I I III II 26 III II III II III N III � II i PORCH-------------------- � I ------------------- 5 5'-0" 1 161-0" 1 1 3'-0" 50'-6" O I 9'x 12' C o _ AREA o j v I I I a O ------- ------ I cf) W P4 �r 12'-0�--� a 1 1/2" GYP. BD. L ON u M I DINING , GYP. BD. @ CEILING — GUARDRAIL NOTE5 • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN 51DE OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LE55 THAN 4" AT ALL 6UARDRAIL5 60MMON TO LIVING AREA. GARAGE FLOOR 5Y5TEM NOTE5 4" GONG. FLOOR o — — — — — I W/ FIBERMESH C, I w I O M GRANITE TOPS, TU155 & TILE AREAS ABOVE L 16'-2" GLG.— __j • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & BEDROOM I IIII I I II L------ ------ ----- I iJ IIII 15'-9" II , I I I IIII II IIII II 2x6 ili � I II x 26 2 II C-4 Q0 $ ili > ili I 5OFF IT l l @ 8'-6" I 10'- I" GLC. x 24 --- — J -------- -- --------- I I PD -- -------- Cl --- ii uj �i 3 iii I I li _ wI I$SQ l i 36x5Q l °i I III ENERGY HEEL I I G.O. 8i_Ou III 3'-6" TRU55E5 I I cnI 24" 0.6 4(1 4 1= IIII IT 2x6SOFFIT @ 8'-6" V- 42 GRILL ---�---9'-I" GLG----� xiio 24 6 II56" PD o °W K ITGHEN ilii _ I 5TEPPEO " ENERGY TRUSSES u- EL pv III 48 RANGE IIII w W/ WOOD III I 24" O.0 I III II 0 0 iii I II illI W.I.G, j�11 288Q C.O."v �j _-- 2x6 I� ❑F 131-7" 6'-3" PANTRY I 2$8Q III 0 r H x II z G.O. > _= REAR z .N ENTRY 26 � I W.I.G. I I 2$ -__J 20 MIN DR ii 54" G.T. I I --- T 7'-10" FOYER I I I 24 I II I Q I I GO j j I 3Qx8 — � I IIII III III u III 17'- 10 L--------- IIII--------------------JII III II ii I li p III II i I li I I III II 26 III II III II III N III � II i PORCH-------------------- � I ------------------- 5 5'-0" 1 161-0" 1 1 3'-0" 50'-6" O I C w O j Q I a O a I cf) W P4 i a 1 1/2" GYP. BD. L ON u AT WALLS & 5/8" TYPE "X" c GYP. BD. @ CEILING — GUARDRAIL NOTE5 • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN 51DE OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LE55 THAN 4" AT ALL 6UARDRAIL5 60MMON TO LIVING AREA. GARAGE FLOOR 5Y5TEM NOTE5 4" GONG. FLOOR o — — — — — I W/ FIBERMESH C, I w I O I C O 26'-6" co v 5EE ENGINEERING PAGE5 51-5X W W goy� w N F I R 5T FLOOR PLAN SCALE I/4"4-0" EXTERIOR DIMEN51ON5 ARE SHEATHING TO SHEATHING FIRST FLOOR FINI5HED 2,293 50. FT. GARAGE 925 50. FT. cf) W P4 a Z M --I O WINDOW & POOR NOTE5 • MARVIN INTEGRITY WINDOWS •• CODE MIN. U VALUE = 0.32 MIN. 5THC = 0.35 • ALL WINDOWS SET 8'-0" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • ALL MAIN LEVEL DOOR HGT5. 8'-0" u • BUILDER TO PROVIDE WINDOW ORDER L15T WITH U FACTOR, 5611C, & 5TC RATING FOR EACH WINDOW & EXTERIOR DOOR • BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL WINDOW, DOOR & OPENING HDR. HTS. • FP = PROVIDE FALL PROTECTION @ OPERATING WINDOWS c U) O z o N o GUARDRAIL NOTE5 • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN 51DE OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LE55 THAN 4" AT ALL 6UARDRAIL5 FLOOR 5Y5TEM NOTE5 • ALL FLOORS TO BE L/480 • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY FRAMING BELOW GRANITE TOPS, TU155 & TILE AREAS ABOVE • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & RETURN CHA56 IN TRU55E5 • BUILDER TO PROVIDE CITY WITH TRUSS LAYOUT PLANS FRAMING NOTE5 • 91-1 P PLATE HEIGHT UNLE55 NOTED OTHERW15E • 2X6 TIMBER5TRAND 5TUD5 @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLE55 DATE: 10-15-19 REVISIONS: NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE 5TU125 AT ALL WINDOW & PATIO DOOR HEADER5 UNLE55 NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/L5L 501 BLOCKING AT ALL POINT LOA05, SUPPORT 13EAM5, MICROLAMS, AND GIRDER TRUSSES TO FOUN12AT ION • PROVIDE FIREBLOGKING VERTICALLY @ GEILING5 & FLOORS & HORIZONTALLY @ INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 10'-0" (CONGEALED 5PAGE5 @ SOFFITS, DROPPED GEILING5, BETWEEN STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN 5TORIF-5 • PROVIDE DRAFT 5TOPPINC BETWEEN 5TORIF-5 DIVIDED INTO APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SOFT. • ALL SPRAY FOAM INSULATION MUST BE COVERED BY MIN." GYP. BD AT HABITABLE AREAS • TIMBERSTRANO 5TUD5 @ KITCHEN WALLS DRAWN BY: JJ SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS • PROVIDE SMOKE ALARM IN EVERY BEDROOM & THE CORRIDOR COMM. NO. GIVING AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING 219237 THE BASEMENT, & IN ANY ROOM THAT HAS A CEILING HE IGHT MORE THAN 24" HIGHER THAN A CORRIDOR GIVING AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOMS. SHEET NO. • PROVIDE CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM WITHIN 10'-0" OF ALL 3 BEDROOM5 5EE ENGINEERING PAGES 51-5X It O L zLn 1O o z w 0 a-00 LL w o ZQ0� V!!RR � w — X 0 � -.j IL �-a wW:� w N oet w :5w z O Z O � cD o w Eoco Zoo _oam w� Z a Qm O 0 o ci m L >w 7 -Co) z � w �s� o �3 oz z w o F -- z z �QQ Q OLOa� = � O �zv N Q Q I ° w Q) al�ll 0 n 4 0 Z 4m Z lb m w ° VALLEY JACK a TRU55E5 24" O.C. CONT. RIDGE VENT (TYP) Z ROOF w TIMBERLINE ARCH. SHINGLES N RFELTI w 7/16" 0 5.13. 5HEATHIN6 ROOF TRUSSES @ VENT 1,ZOOF 1 -200 24" O.C. (BY MFG) 550%S OFFIT ROOF :- 19L ICE W ICE SHIELD OR EQUAL 0 R-49 INSUL TO 24" IN51DE WALL W VENT BAFFLES AT 24" O.C. E-4 Li LiEl El ~ ZW LP FA561A V L 0 ZA I LP SOFFIT 0-4 VAPOR DARR IER �, W/ VENTS w a 5/8 5HEETROCK DINING EXTERIOR WALL DO O PORCH 51DIN67 (SEE ELEV)�n 4 z FOYER - HOUSE WRAP v ` O 7/16' 050 SHE ATHING N Ll 2x6 STUD5 @ 16" O.C. F+-1 R-21 INSULATION Q VAPOR 13ARR IER 1/2" SHEETROCK 3/4" ADVANTECH 5UBFLOOR ® r� GLUE & NAIL 5UBFLOOR MID CHORD BEARING 20" FLOOR TRU55E5 @ 19.2" O.C. SPRAY IN5UL. RIM (TYP) 2x8 TREATED PLATE *TIMBERSTRAND I/2" GYP. BD, 1 /2"x 12" A.B. @ 32" O.C. 5TUD5 @ STAIR W/ SILL 56ALF-R WALLS 2x4 FURRED WALL STAIRWAY NOTES: R-5 IN5UL. - STAIRWAY HEADROOM TO BE 7'-0" MIN. REG ROOM R-10 IN5UL, HANDRAIL HEIGHT TO BE CONT. 34" TO 38" FOUNDATION WALL co ABOVE NOSING, OPNG'S TO BE LF -55 THAN 4" DATE: WATCHDOG 3-2x12 TIMBERSTRAND STRINGERS 10-15-19 WATER PROOFING II TREADS REVISIONS: 8" OF 6" POURED LOWER 112" OF 10" POURED 20"x8" CONC. FTG. 3 1/2" GONG. FLOOR W/ PATIO POLY UNDER 01 " DRAIN TILE A5 REQ. 41 -0 O I ON 2" MIN. OF WASHED GRAVEL - OR CRU5HED ROCK, AND R-10 IN5UL. ?� COVERED WITH 6" MINIMUM''All- I nA I I R-5 IN5UL-.----,— OF SAME MATERIAL. G R O 5 5 5E6TIO.N FOUNDATION WALL 5CALE e 1/4" = 1'-0" WATERPROOFING 4 OF 6 POURED 44" OF 8" POURED DRAWN BY: 20"x8" CONC. FTG. JJ COMM. NO. 219237 SHEET NO. 4 � �� � \ � �� � �� � � � � I �-� � ���' � 1�� ��� L LAKE ELEVATION 11111 1111111 1111111 ILI�"`_"_"_'J IL'�'J IL=�J I I LIII 1 II II I II h ; SCALE I /811 = 1'-01' 1------� III III 11 II I II III I III 11111 IIIA III LJ L___- -___- �___� LJ 1 L_____1 i IL���J IL���JI 114���J � 6 �iim f mi hum LAKE ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8° = I1-011 ==71 II ----------- 12 ---- ----- 12 III ------- 12 �12 12 --- 8_,, --- — — — — —— 611 IL a 4�� X12 I9 IF- I 2 11�!_ 124 117111 77 71 RIGHT ELEVATION ILLWJILL =_JILL_= J 56ALE : 1 /S° = I'-011 L-----------� ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- H16HE5T RID6E ------------------------------------------------------------ I I I I I I I I I I � I I � I I I 12 i ' I I I6 I I I TOP OF H16HE5T WINDOW @ I — — — — — — — — — — -- REAR --- i�'iNi'i'�i�'i1 :::T=❑�EZ= �❑oa �C�❑�� ❑c�C�� 111111 111 - N O m Im \\\II/I �■'�'' '� mi\ miLE ME ii'i'�ii'1 1�i i�i1�i til EXIST. AVERAGE GRADE FIRST FLOOR GEIL. FIRST FLOOR BA5EMENT GEIL. SCALE; 1/4° = I1-011 15T FLOOR 2,293 50. FT. BASEMENT 2,166 50. FT. TOTAL 4,459 50. FT. co BASEMENT FLOOR m :5 It0 It U 117 z n L7 (D 0 C')CD z w I 200 0_ CO w I, - w 0 z Ig r� rZ a 0 V J z .. 0] — x v 0 J IJ_ �-a ww 2 � w 0 � oet w w z 0 Uy - V Z O � 0_U O w N 00 Z2�oa O d 00 L N Zp�; a am �� I:�j0� 0 m 0 Qarnww 7-00 z n w z �s 1L O z w O I— z n F--- v z �QQ o OQ� o �zv nl zd� w �A �O QC) z w az � o� r�n o cf) o � C\2o Qm DATE: 10-15-19 REVISIONS: DRAWN BY: JJ COMM. NO. 219237 SHEET NO. I � II ' 2$ II - II L INEN EEPROOM 14 GABT r--------------------------------------------- 161-2" i UNEXCAVATED OzoW V i o W Q, �N~ --------------------------------------------------------------- -� UNEXCAVATED GARAGE FOUNPATION PLAN - SCALE: 1/04-011 I'-0" it I N v N HI -EFF WH �� HI -EFF FURN 60" G.T. 0624 � a '-6" a� REG ROOM 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 STAIRS ? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ----------J LOWER PATIO F- L -- ------------------- BEDROOM 12 - ---------------------------- 2 -----22 16'-3" L-----JII I I (0" W.I.C. STORAGE - � -1 F- 7 24 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — - - -I - - O � — J L WET BAR U.G. REF F—� K I I MEGH //7/7/ IT, T/T/Ti',T a 28 UNEXCAVATED 6LA55 2471 I v a ❑F __ Q I � 2x8 J5T5 16" O.0 II � i i II ' i II i W.I,C. i i 2 I II � II II � ii BEDROOM '3 -------------------- II I I ii II 16'-6" F 4-- 4 -- --z:z C) v I I �tflc-4E — I V 5EALED SUMP UNEXCAVATED CL Z) 5EE ENGINEERING PAGE5 51-5X Lo z Ln �00 �0, z w p a00 w p ZQO� V!!RR J W X a � J w O Q w W ~ W N oeW wt z o v� z o � (D o w Eo co Zoo o a co Zgar` p aQ L m L j O C o m 0 DaT)Wa aao� 7 -Co) z � W � o � 0 z �o�-v z �QQ � W0� fl oQ� o �zv FOUNPAT ION PLAN SCALE; 1/4"d-011 I'-0" EXTERIOR DIMENSION ARE FROM EXTERIOR OF FOUNDATION WALLS AT FULL BASEMENT AREAS AND A5 NOTED AT FRAMED WALLS AT LOOKOUT AND WALKOUT AREAS BASEMENT FINI5HED 2,166 50. FT. BASEMENT UNFINISHED XXXX 50. FT. WINDOW & DOOR NOTES • •• MARVIN INTEGRITY WINDOWS CODE MIN. U VALUE = 0.32 MIN. 5THC = 0.35 • ALL WINDOWS SET AT W-0" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • BUILDER TO PROVIDE WINDOW ORDER L15T WITH U FACTOR, 56HC, & 5TC RATING FOR EACH WINDOW & EXTERIOR DOOR • BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL WINDOW, DOOR & OPENING HDR. HT5. • WINDOW WELLS WITH A VERTICAL DEPTH OF MORE THAN 44" MUST BE EQUIPPED WITH AN APPROVED LADDER GUARDRAIL NOTE5 • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN 5112E OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LESS THAN 4" AT ALL GUARDRAILS FLOOR 5Y5TEM NOTE5 • ALL FLOORS TO BE L/480 • FLOOR TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY FRAMING BELOW GRANITE TOPS, TUBS & TILE AREAS ABOVE • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & RETURN CHASE IN TRUSSES • BUILDER TO PROVIDE CITY WITH TRU55 LAYOUT PLANS FOUNDATION WALL & FOUNDATION IN5ULATION NOTES • 9'-0" POURED FOUNDATION WALLS W/ 51N6LE PLATE • BA5EMENT FLOOR RA15EP TO TOP OF WALKOUT STEM WALL • A55UME12 SOIL BEARING CAPACITY 2,000 LBS • MAINTAIN 42" MIN. GRADE ABOVE FOOTING • BOTTOM OF DECK & PORCH FOOTIN65 TO BE 42" BELOW GRADE • MA50NRY CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WALL & FOOTING REQUIREMENTS WITH SITE CONPITION5 • MA50NRY CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL WALL AND FOOTING REQUIREMENTS AT ALL UNBALANCED BACKFILL LOCATIONS FX 5EE FOUNDATION WALL DETAIL ON PAGE DI N X INPICATE5 D15TANCE FOUNDATION 15 HELD IN FROM SHEATHING ABOVE • FOUNDATION WALLS HELD IN FROM SHEATHING ABOVE AS INDICATED BY FOUNDATION WALL DETAIL • SILL PLATE OVERHAN65 FOUNDATION I I" MAXIMUM SEE FOUNDATION WALL DETAILS (WHEN TRTD 2X8 PLATE 15 USED) • SEE FOUNDATION WALL DETAILS FOR FOUNDATION WALL INSULATION (R-10 EXTERIOR/ R-5 INTERIOR) 5HEETROCK & INSULATION NOTE5 • 6YP. 1312. REQUIRED AT ENTIRE GE IL IN6 (EXCEPT 80 SQ.FT. MAXIMUM AT MECHANICAL) • P GYP. 1312, AT WALLS & CEILING BELOW STAIRS • ALL SPRAY FOAM INSULATION MUST BE COVERED BY MIN." GYP. BD. AT HABITABLE AREAS FRAM IN6 NOTES • 8'-9 1/2" PLATE HE 16HT UNLE55 NOTED OTHF-RW15E • 2X6 TIMBERSTRAND STUDS @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE STUDS AT ALL WINDOW &PATIO DDDR HEADERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/L5L SOLID BLOCK IN6 AT ALL POINT LOAD5, SUPPORT BEAMS, M ICROLAMS, & 61RDER TRUSSES TO FOUN12AT ION • PROVIDE FIRE BLOCKING VERTICALLY @ CEILIN65 & FLOORS & HORIZONTALLY @ INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 10'-0" (CONGEALED SPACES @ SOFFITS, DROPPED GEILING5, BETWEEN STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN STORIES) • PROVIDE DRAFT 5TOPPIN6 BETWEEN STORIES DIVIDED INTO APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SOFT. SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS • PROVIDE SMOKE ALARM IN EVERY BEDROOM & THE CORRIDOR GIVING AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING THE BASEMENT, & IN ANY ROOM THAT HAS A GE IL INC HEIGHT MORE THAN 24" H16HER THAN A CORRIDOR 61VIN6 AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOMS. • PROVIDE CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM WITHIN 10'-0" OF ALL BEDROOM5 w 2$ COII II II �O COUNTER 25- LAUNDRY Qb z w 0 � o� co 41-7" 10'-1" �o W. LC. 24 SINK D W Q� - - ---- - - - 28 II 112$ II II GO LINEN BEDROOM #4 CABT r 16'-2" UNEXCAVATED 6LA55 2471 I v a ❑F __ Q I � 2x8 J5T5 16" O.0 II � i i II ' i II i W.I,C. i i 2 I II � II II � ii BEDROOM '3 -------------------- II I I ii II 16'-6" F 4-- 4 -- --z:z C) v I I �tflc-4E — I V 5EALED SUMP UNEXCAVATED CL Z) 5EE ENGINEERING PAGE5 51-5X Lo z Ln �00 �0, z w p a00 w p ZQO� V!!RR J W X a � J w O Q w W ~ W N oeW wt z o v� z o � (D o w Eo co Zoo o a co Zgar` p aQ L m L j O C o m 0 DaT)Wa aao� 7 -Co) z � W � o � 0 z �o�-v z �QQ � W0� fl oQ� o �zv FOUNPAT ION PLAN SCALE; 1/4"d-011 I'-0" EXTERIOR DIMENSION ARE FROM EXTERIOR OF FOUNDATION WALLS AT FULL BASEMENT AREAS AND A5 NOTED AT FRAMED WALLS AT LOOKOUT AND WALKOUT AREAS BASEMENT FINI5HED 2,166 50. FT. BASEMENT UNFINISHED XXXX 50. FT. WINDOW & DOOR NOTES • •• MARVIN INTEGRITY WINDOWS CODE MIN. U VALUE = 0.32 MIN. 5THC = 0.35 • ALL WINDOWS SET AT W-0" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • BUILDER TO PROVIDE WINDOW ORDER L15T WITH U FACTOR, 56HC, & 5TC RATING FOR EACH WINDOW & EXTERIOR DOOR • BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL WINDOW, DOOR & OPENING HDR. HT5. • WINDOW WELLS WITH A VERTICAL DEPTH OF MORE THAN 44" MUST BE EQUIPPED WITH AN APPROVED LADDER GUARDRAIL NOTE5 • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN 5112E OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LESS THAN 4" AT ALL GUARDRAILS FLOOR 5Y5TEM NOTE5 • ALL FLOORS TO BE L/480 • FLOOR TRUSS MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY FRAMING BELOW GRANITE TOPS, TUBS & TILE AREAS ABOVE • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & RETURN CHASE IN TRUSSES • BUILDER TO PROVIDE CITY WITH TRU55 LAYOUT PLANS FOUNDATION WALL & FOUNDATION IN5ULATION NOTES • 9'-0" POURED FOUNDATION WALLS W/ 51N6LE PLATE • BA5EMENT FLOOR RA15EP TO TOP OF WALKOUT STEM WALL • A55UME12 SOIL BEARING CAPACITY 2,000 LBS • MAINTAIN 42" MIN. GRADE ABOVE FOOTING • BOTTOM OF DECK & PORCH FOOTIN65 TO BE 42" BELOW GRADE • MA50NRY CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY WALL & FOOTING REQUIREMENTS WITH SITE CONPITION5 • MA50NRY CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL WALL AND FOOTING REQUIREMENTS AT ALL UNBALANCED BACKFILL LOCATIONS FX 5EE FOUNDATION WALL DETAIL ON PAGE DI N X INPICATE5 D15TANCE FOUNDATION 15 HELD IN FROM SHEATHING ABOVE • FOUNDATION WALLS HELD IN FROM SHEATHING ABOVE AS INDICATED BY FOUNDATION WALL DETAIL • SILL PLATE OVERHAN65 FOUNDATION I I" MAXIMUM SEE FOUNDATION WALL DETAILS (WHEN TRTD 2X8 PLATE 15 USED) • SEE FOUNDATION WALL DETAILS FOR FOUNDATION WALL INSULATION (R-10 EXTERIOR/ R-5 INTERIOR) 5HEETROCK & INSULATION NOTE5 • 6YP. 1312. REQUIRED AT ENTIRE GE IL IN6 (EXCEPT 80 SQ.FT. MAXIMUM AT MECHANICAL) • P GYP. 1312, AT WALLS & CEILING BELOW STAIRS • ALL SPRAY FOAM INSULATION MUST BE COVERED BY MIN." GYP. BD. AT HABITABLE AREAS FRAM IN6 NOTES • 8'-9 1/2" PLATE HE 16HT UNLE55 NOTED OTHF-RW15E • 2X6 TIMBERSTRAND STUDS @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE STUDS AT ALL WINDOW &PATIO DDDR HEADERS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/L5L SOLID BLOCK IN6 AT ALL POINT LOAD5, SUPPORT BEAMS, M ICROLAMS, & 61RDER TRUSSES TO FOUN12AT ION • PROVIDE FIRE BLOCKING VERTICALLY @ CEILIN65 & FLOORS & HORIZONTALLY @ INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 10'-0" (CONGEALED SPACES @ SOFFITS, DROPPED GEILING5, BETWEEN STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN STORIES) • PROVIDE DRAFT 5TOPPIN6 BETWEEN STORIES DIVIDED INTO APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SOFT. SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS • PROVIDE SMOKE ALARM IN EVERY BEDROOM & THE CORRIDOR GIVING AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING THE BASEMENT, & IN ANY ROOM THAT HAS A GE IL INC HEIGHT MORE THAN 24" H16HER THAN A CORRIDOR 61VIN6 AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOMS. • PROVIDE CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM WITHIN 10'-0" OF ALL BEDROOM5 w �A �O Qb z w az � o� r�n o � �o � C\2o Q� DATE: 10-15-19 REVISIONS: DRAWN BY: JJ COMM. NO. 219237 SHEET NO. 2 11111 o :III __- - -- -- __ -_ _ _ _ -REAR ____ z m ENTRY 26 F- - J m I W. I.C. I i 2$ 20 M IN DR 0 N 5'-0" I I m 54" G.T. I I LI - - - - - 1/2" GYP. BD. AT WALLS & 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. BD. @ CEILING COMMON TO LIVING AREA. GARAGE 4" GONG. FLOOR W/ FIBERME5H 16'-0" L F 0 0 p W Q Q 0 a co x a rn PORCH -------- 3'-0" I I i I i RAISED CEILING j L----- I I L — — - --- - ------------- - - - AREA o -1I 41-6" 151-0" 41-6" 24'-0" GARAGE FLOOR PLAN SCALE. 1/4"4-011 -44 PATIO 16'-0" 4'-0" 47'-6" 11'-6° 4'-0" 12'-0" III liilil I I I C-4 I C'4 LAKE ROOM illi p� j I II IIII I I � II IIII I � I II 19'-9" IIII I III IIII I I III liilil I I I III IIII I I I I Iii liilii I I I Iii iiii I I I III IIII I I II IIII I I 10' LII ----- Iu ---- III —J 9'-1" Cl II r � III AREA o j III II a O II 13'-1" GLC. I IIII III �r 12'-0�--� a IIII III 113'-1" GLG. II I II u M F-1 — I — -III 60MMON TO LIVING AREA. IIII — II 4" GONG. FLOOR o — — — — — I I I w I O M GRANITE TOPS, TU155 & TILE AREAS ABOVE I I • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & II RETURN CHA56 IN TRU55E5 IID • BUILDER TO PROVIDE CITY WITH TRUSS LAYOUT PLANS ,IIII I; IIS, FRAMING NOTE5 • 91-1 P PLATE HEIGHT UNLE55 NOTED OTHERW15E • 2X6 TIMBER5TRAND 5TUD5 @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLE55 DATE: III \ NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE 5TU125 AT ALL WINDOW & PATIO DOOR HEADER5 UNLE55 NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/L5L 501 BLOCKING AT ALL POINT LOA05, BEAMS CENTERED III FOUN12AT ION II L I III 11III III ON TABLE NOT RAI5E1?CEILING I --1 -- --1�, (CONGEALED 5PAGE5 @ SOFFITS, DROPPED GEILING5, BETWEEN ------J II IIIL=�_== STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN 5TORIF-5 -JIII I II I APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SOFT. I ��, GYP. BD AT HABITABLE AREAS • TIMBERSTRANO 5TUD5 @ KITCHEN WALLS DRAWN BY: I I it JJ IIII iil I I I SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS I IIII - lii MA5TER I I I ii NO. GIVING AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING III liilil I I I C-4 I C'4 LAKE ROOM illi p� j I II IIII I I � II IIII I � I II 19'-9" IIII I III IIII I I III liilil I I I III IIII I I I I Iii liilii I I I Iii iiii I I I III IIII I I II IIII I I 10' LII ----- Iu ---- III —J 9'-1" Cl BEDROOM I IIII I I II L------ ------ ----- I iJ IIII 15'-9" II , I I I IIII II IIII II 2x6 ili � I II x 26 2 II C-4 Q0 $ ili > ili I 5OFF IT l l @ 8'-6" I 10'- I" GLC. x 24 --- — J -------- -- --------- I I PD -- -------- Cl --- ii uj �i 3 iii I I li _ wI I$SQ l i 36x5Q l °i I III ENERGY HEEL I I G.O. 8i_Ou III 3'-6" TRU55E5 I I cnI 24" 0.6 4(1 4 1= IIII IT 2x6SOFFIT @ 8'-6" V- 42 GRILL ---�---9'-I" GLG----� xiio 24 6 II56" PD o °W K ITGHEN ilii _ I 5TEPPEO " ENERGY TRUSSES u- EL pv III 48 RANGE IIII w W/ WOOD III I 24" O.0 I III II 0 0 iii I II illI W.I.G, j�11 288Q C.O."v �j _-- 2x6 I� ❑F 131-7" 6'-3" PANTRY I 2$8Q III 0 r H x II z G.O. > _= REAR z .N ENTRY 26 � I W.I.G. I I 2$ -__J 20 MIN DR ii 54" G.T. I I --- T 7'-10" FOYER I I I 24 I II I Q I I GO j j I 3Qx8 — � I IIII III III u III 17'- 10 L--------- IIII--------------------JII III II ii I li p III II i I li I I III II 26 III II III II III N III � II i PORCH-------------------- � I ------------------- 5 5'-0" 1 161-0" 1 1 3'-0" 50'-6" O I 9'x 12' C o _ AREA o j v I I I a O ------- ------ I cf) W P4 �r 12'-0�--� a 1 1/2" GYP. BD. L ON u M I DINING , GYP. BD. @ CEILING — GUARDRAIL NOTE5 • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN 51DE OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LE55 THAN 4" AT ALL 6UARDRAIL5 60MMON TO LIVING AREA. GARAGE FLOOR 5Y5TEM NOTE5 4" GONG. FLOOR o — — — — — I W/ FIBERMESH C, I w I O M GRANITE TOPS, TU155 & TILE AREAS ABOVE L 16'-2" GLG.— __j • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & BEDROOM I IIII I I II L------ ------ ----- I iJ IIII 15'-9" II , I I I IIII II IIII II 2x6 ili � I II x 26 2 II C-4 Q0 $ ili > ili I 5OFF IT l l @ 8'-6" I 10'- I" GLC. x 24 --- — J -------- -- --------- I I PD -- -------- Cl --- ii uj �i 3 iii I I li _ wI I$SQ l i 36x5Q l °i I III ENERGY HEEL I I G.O. 8i_Ou III 3'-6" TRU55E5 I I cnI 24" 0.6 4(1 4 1= IIII IT 2x6SOFFIT @ 8'-6" V- 42 GRILL ---�---9'-I" GLG----� xiio 24 6 II56" PD o °W K ITGHEN ilii _ I 5TEPPEO " ENERGY TRUSSES u- EL pv III 48 RANGE IIII w W/ WOOD III I 24" O.0 I III II 0 0 iii I II illI W.I.G, j�11 288Q C.O."v �j _-- 2x6 I� ❑F 131-7" 6'-3" PANTRY I 2$8Q III 0 r H x II z G.O. > _= REAR z .N ENTRY 26 � I W.I.G. I I 2$ -__J 20 MIN DR ii 54" G.T. I I --- T 7'-10" FOYER I I I 24 I II I Q I I GO j j I 3Qx8 — � I IIII III III u III 17'- 10 L--------- IIII--------------------JII III II ii I li p III II i I li I I III II 26 III II III II III N III � II i PORCH-------------------- � I ------------------- 5 5'-0" 1 161-0" 1 1 3'-0" 50'-6" O I C w O j Q I a O a I cf) W P4 i a 1 1/2" GYP. BD. L ON u AT WALLS & 5/8" TYPE "X" c GYP. BD. @ CEILING — GUARDRAIL NOTE5 • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN 51DE OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LE55 THAN 4" AT ALL 6UARDRAIL5 60MMON TO LIVING AREA. GARAGE FLOOR 5Y5TEM NOTE5 4" GONG. FLOOR o — — — — — I W/ FIBERMESH C, I w I O I C O 26'-6" co v 5EE ENGINEERING PAGE5 51-5X W W goy� w N F I R 5T FLOOR PLAN SCALE I/4"4-0" EXTERIOR DIMEN51ON5 ARE SHEATHING TO SHEATHING FIRST FLOOR FINI5HED 2,293 50. FT. GARAGE 925 50. FT. cf) W P4 a Z M --I O WINDOW & POOR NOTE5 • MARVIN INTEGRITY WINDOWS •• CODE MIN. U VALUE = 0.32 MIN. 5THC = 0.35 • ALL WINDOWS SET 8'-0" UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE • ALL MAIN LEVEL DOOR HGT5. 8'-0" u • BUILDER TO PROVIDE WINDOW ORDER L15T WITH U FACTOR, 5611C, & 5TC RATING FOR EACH WINDOW & EXTERIOR DOOR • BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL WINDOW, DOOR & OPENING HDR. HTS. • FP = PROVIDE FALL PROTECTION @ OPERATING WINDOWS c U) O z o N o GUARDRAIL NOTE5 • GUARDRAIL REQUIRED ON OPEN 51DE OF ANY STAIR MORE THAN 30" ABOVE FLOOR • ALL OPENINGS LE55 THAN 4" AT ALL 6UARDRAIL5 FLOOR 5Y5TEM NOTE5 • ALL FLOORS TO BE L/480 • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO VERIFY FRAMING BELOW GRANITE TOPS, TU155 & TILE AREAS ABOVE • FLOOR TRU55 MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE HEAT SUPPLY & RETURN CHA56 IN TRU55E5 • BUILDER TO PROVIDE CITY WITH TRUSS LAYOUT PLANS FRAMING NOTE5 • 91-1 P PLATE HEIGHT UNLE55 NOTED OTHERW15E • 2X6 TIMBER5TRAND 5TUD5 @ POCKET DOOR WALLS UNLE55 DATE: 10-15-19 REVISIONS: NOTED OTHERWISE • DOUBLE 5TU125 AT ALL WINDOW & PATIO DOOR HEADER5 UNLE55 NOTED OTHERWISE • PROVIDE LVL/L5L 501 BLOCKING AT ALL POINT LOA05, SUPPORT 13EAM5, MICROLAMS, AND GIRDER TRUSSES TO FOUN12AT ION • PROVIDE FIREBLOGKING VERTICALLY @ GEILING5 & FLOORS & HORIZONTALLY @ INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 10'-0" (CONGEALED 5PAGE5 @ SOFFITS, DROPPED GEILING5, BETWEEN STAIR STRINGERS & BETWEEN 5TORIF-5 • PROVIDE DRAFT 5TOPPINC BETWEEN 5TORIF-5 DIVIDED INTO APPROXIMATELY EQUAL SPACES NOT EXCEEDING 1,000 SOFT. • ALL SPRAY FOAM INSULATION MUST BE COVERED BY MIN." GYP. BD AT HABITABLE AREAS • TIMBERSTRANO 5TUD5 @ KITCHEN WALLS DRAWN BY: JJ SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS • PROVIDE SMOKE ALARM IN EVERY BEDROOM & THE CORRIDOR COMM. NO. GIVING AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOM ON EACH FLOOR INCLUDING 219237 THE BASEMENT, & IN ANY ROOM THAT HAS A CEILING HE IGHT MORE THAN 24" HIGHER THAN A CORRIDOR GIVING AGGE55 TO THE BEDROOMS. SHEET NO. • PROVIDE CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM WITHIN 10'-0" OF ALL 3 BEDROOM5 5EE ENGINEERING PAGES 51-5X It O L zLn 1O o z w 0 a-00 LL w o ZQ0� V!!RR � w — X 0 � -.j IL �-a wW:� w N oet w :5w z O Z O � cD o w Eoco Zoo _oam w� Z a Qm O 0 o ci m L >w 7 -Co) z � w �s� o �3 oz z w o F -- z z �QQ Q OLOa� = � O �zv N Q Q I ° w Q) al�ll 0 n 4 0 Z 4m Z lb m w ° VALLEY JACK a TRU55E5 24" O.C. CONT. RIDGE VENT (TYP) Z ROOF w TIMBERLINE ARCH. SHINGLES N RFELTI w 7/16" 0 5.13. 5HEATHIN6 ROOF TRUSSES @ VENT 1,ZOOF 1 -200 24" O.C. (BY MFG) 550%S OFFIT ROOF :- 19L ICE W ICE SHIELD OR EQUAL 0 R-49 INSUL TO 24" IN51DE WALL W VENT BAFFLES AT 24" O.C. E-4 Li LiEl El ~ ZW LP FA561A V L 0 ZA I LP SOFFIT 0-4 VAPOR DARR IER �, W/ VENTS w a 5/8 5HEETROCK DINING EXTERIOR WALL DO O PORCH 51DIN67 (SEE ELEV)�n 4 z FOYER - HOUSE WRAP v ` O 7/16' 050 SHE ATHING N Ll 2x6 STUD5 @ 16" O.C. F+-1 R-21 INSULATION Q VAPOR 13ARR IER 1/2" SHEETROCK 3/4" ADVANTECH 5UBFLOOR ® r� GLUE & NAIL 5UBFLOOR MID CHORD BEARING 20" FLOOR TRU55E5 @ 19.2" O.C. SPRAY IN5UL. RIM (TYP) 2x8 TREATED PLATE *TIMBERSTRAND I/2" GYP. BD, 1 /2"x 12" A.B. @ 32" O.C. 5TUD5 @ STAIR W/ SILL 56ALF-R WALLS 2x4 FURRED WALL STAIRWAY NOTES: R-5 IN5UL. - STAIRWAY HEADROOM TO BE 7'-0" MIN. REG ROOM R-10 IN5UL, HANDRAIL HEIGHT TO BE CONT. 34" TO 38" FOUNDATION WALL co ABOVE NOSING, OPNG'S TO BE LF -55 THAN 4" DATE: WATCHDOG 3-2x12 TIMBERSTRAND STRINGERS 10-15-19 WATER PROOFING II TREADS REVISIONS: 8" OF 6" POURED LOWER 112" OF 10" POURED 20"x8" CONC. FTG. 3 1/2" GONG. FLOOR W/ PATIO POLY UNDER 01 " DRAIN TILE A5 REQ. 41 -0 O I ON 2" MIN. OF WASHED GRAVEL - OR CRU5HED ROCK, AND R-10 IN5UL. ?� COVERED WITH 6" MINIMUM''All- I nA I I R-5 IN5UL-.----,— OF SAME MATERIAL. G R O 5 5 5E6TIO.N FOUNDATION WALL 5CALE e 1/4" = 1'-0" WATERPROOFING 4 OF 6 POURED 44" OF 8" POURED DRAWN BY: 20"x8" CONC. FTG. JJ COMM. NO. 219237 SHEET NO. 4 From: John Ouinlivan To:Laura Oakden Subject: FW: Casco Date:Monday, December 2, 2019 10:14:56 AM Attachments: rn-001.one Imaaeoo2.ona Imaae003.ono maae004.ono aoe00s.ono maoe006.ono Here you go Laura! I'm working on a better email from him for the meeting. Thank you, �ordon John Quinlivan / Founder amen Office: 763.479.3117 Mobile: 612.418.1002 „ r ,m„ PO Box 306 / 5159 Main Street E 9200 / Maple Plain, MN / 55359 / MN Lie: BC531961 001100 The information contained in this electronic mail message is confidential information intended only for We use of the individual or entity named above, and may be privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited From: Terry Petersen <terry.petersen@att.net- Sent: Monday, November 18, 2019 4:05 PM To: John Quinlivan <john@gordon-james.com> Subject: John - I won't be able to make the planning meeting tonight. If there is a way for you to let them know that I am in support of the average lakeshore variance that you are requesting, I would appreciate it. As you know, I plan to remove the structures on 2925 Casco Point Road soon so I wouldn't want the current house to be used to determine your setback in any way. Terry Petersen President Salo Manufacturing 612-414-0593 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. 10. LA19-000095 JOHN QUINLIVAN, 2927 CASCO POINT ROAD, VARIANCES, 9:45 P.M. - 9:54 P.M. John Quinlivan, Gordon James Construction, was present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting a lot width and an average lakeshore setback variance and an IUP for hauling over 500 cubic yards of material. The applicant is proposing to construct a new home forward of the average lakeshore setback on a substandard narrow lot. The average lakeshore setback is unique for this property due to the neighboring lot to the north. The home on that lot is set back from the lake over 200 feet. This distance creates an average lakeshore setback line that cuts through the subject property parcel at a rather sharp angle. There are two neighboring properties that are set roughly 150 feet back from the ordinary high water. The applicant is proposing to build the home roughly 151 feet from the ordinary high water. The existing home today sits 138 feet from the lake, so the proposed home would roughly move the house back about 10 feet from the lake, which would be closer to conforming. Ressler stated it would be improving the condition. Oakden agreed that it would be improving the condition and said the applicant is also requesting an IUP for hauling roughly 600 cubic yards of material to and from the site during construction. Staff finds, due to the nature of the lot and the applied setbacks, there are practical difficulties supporting granting the lot width variance, average lakeshore setback variance, and IUP for construction of a new home. No public comment has been received on the application and Staff recommends approval. Mr. John Quinlivan, Gordon James Construction, 5159 Main Street, Maple Plain, said he got a letter from the adjacent property owner to the south and the property owner to the north sent an email. If the Commissioners had a wider look at the property, it shows there's approximately 12 properties all at the same distance. There's one property that is set back. The house that is set back is coming down. They have talked to the City about condemning the house because it is in terrible shape. They're conforming to side yard setbacks; they're conforming to the rear yard. If the house next door was down, the measurement they used for this variance is exactly the measurement they would use for the lakeshore setback. Thiesse asked if Staff would confirm that the house is in bad shape and may be coming down shortly. Oakden stated she did not believe it would be from activities from the City. She believes John has been working with the homeowner. Mr. Quinlivan said they reached out to the City, so the water has been cut off to the house. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse clarified that it's the neighbor's house that's set back and asked if the applicant was in control of it. Mr. Quinlivan indicated that was right and Terry Peterson, Brainerd, is in control of it. It was noted the Commission had a letter from him. Mr. Quinlivan said Terry Peterson owns the adjacent property to the north that is set back. Almost every property in the area is at roughly 150 feet. That particular property is set back farther. It's old, it's dilapidated. His son lived there for a while. He moved his son out and had the City shut the water off to the property. He noted the letter is a support letter. Gettman asked if there was a buyer already for the proposed building. Mr. Quinlivan answered that his customer is present. He does not own either piece. He is supporting Mr. and Mrs. Adams, who bought the property. Gettman stated he does not see any deck or anything else and asked if the applicant contemplated any additions to it. Mr. Quinlivan answered the house was coming down and it will be a new build. It will have a patio but there won't be a deck. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 9:51 p.m. Penny Saiki, 2874 Casco Point Road, asked where the fill is going, where the fill is being removed, or what is with the application for the fill. Mr. Quinlivan stated most of the time it is taken off-site for other projects that need fill. Ms. Saiki asked whether it was removal for the foundation. Mr. Quinlivan said it was the removal of the dirt. Thiesse asked if the removal of earth was mainly foundation excavation or if he was grading a bunch. Mr. Quinlivan said it's a pretty small footprint today. They are taking the garage and stuff back. That's what was determined they would be removing. The driveway today is on the property line. Visually when he is out there, it looks like it is over the property line. Oakden stated it is over the property line. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Mr. Quinlivan said the new owner wants to move that driveway back into conformity. They will be moving some dirt around there to bring the driveway to conformity. He thinks hardcover is coming down quite a bit over what is there because there's a lot of asphalt and a detached garage today. The homeowner that owns the house that's in the back is who wrote the letter of support. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 9:53 p.m. Ressler said he appreciates the improvement of the condition that the Commission is dealing with, which is generally what the Commission is after when they're entertaining a variance. He suggested, if the Commission recommends approval, to get a more firmly written letter by the neighbor that says that his intention is to tear down that structure. Not considering that, knowing the layout of the entire neighborhood, that is the only reason why this is becoming a lakeshore setback, is the neighboring property. It's not outside of the norm for the neighborhood and it also is improving that setback from what it is today. He is in support of it based on that. Bollis moved, Gettman seconded, to approve Application LA19-000095, John Quinlivan, 2927 Casco Point Road, Variances. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Date Application Received: 10.21.2019 Date Application Considered as Complete: 11.7.2019 60 -Day Review Period Expires: 1.6.2020 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Laura Oakden, Planner Date: November 18, 2019 Subject: LA19-000095, Gordon James, 2927 Casco Point Road, Variances and IUP, Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting lot width and average lakeshore setback variance and an IUP for hauling over 500 cubic yards of material. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. Background The applicant is proposing to construct a new home forward of the average lakeshore setback on a substandard narrow lot. The average lakeshore setback is unique for this property due to the neighboring lot to the north, the home on that lot is setback from the lake over 200 feet. This distance creates an average lakeshore setback line that cuts through the subject parcel at a sharp angle. The applicant is proposing the new home that will extend over the ALS 41 feet (13 on the narrow end) The existing home encroaches 43/35, respectively). The new home will be roughly set 10 feet farther away from the lake then the current home. The applicant is also requesting an Interim Use Permit to haul roughly 600 cubic yards of material to and from the site to better serve the proposed home. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-350 - Setbacks: LR -1C Required Existing Proposed Street 30' 75' 161' Side (north) 7.5' 9.7' 7.5' Side (south 7.5' 17.5' 7.5' Lakeshore 75' 138.4' 151' Average Lakeshore Not Met* Section 78- 350 - Lot Area/Width: DISTRICT Lot Area Lot Width Required 21,780 s.f. (0.5 acres) 100' Actual 25,152 s.f. (0.57 acre) 53' @ 75'/ 51' @ OHWL Section 78-1403- Structural Building Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 25,152 s.f. (0.57 acre Allowed: 5,030.4 s.f. (20%) Proposed: 3,281 s.f. (13%) LA19-000095 November 18, 2019 Page 2 of 6 Section 78-1680 and 78-1700 - Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Total Area Allowed Proposed Overlay District Existing Hardcover in Zone Hardcover Hardcover Tier 6,288 s.f. 7178 s.f. 342 6,288 342 Tier 1 25,152 s.f. w/in s.f. w/in (25 %) (28.5%) 75' (24.97%) 75' *328 sq.ft of riprap was removed from the submitted hardcover calculations. Applicable Regulations: Variance (78-1279) Average Lakeshore Setback The applicant is proposed new home forward of the setback line. The current home encroaches into the setback due to the location of the home on the abutting northern property which creates an extreme setback line. The property to the north is set back from the lake 210 feet from the OHWL. Neighboring properties in the area are set roughly 150 feet back from the OHWL. The applicant is proposing to build the home roughly 151 feet from the OHWL. The proposed home will be roughly 10 feet back from the OHWL (138.4'), improving the average lakeshore setback and getting closer to conforming to the unique setback. Variance (78-350 and 78-72) Lot Width Zoning Code Section 78-72 provides options for the redevelopment of lots which do not meet the minimum area or width requirements for the respective zoning district. Substandard properties within the Shoreland Overlay District, like the subject lot, are able to be redeveloped without variances if specific standards are met; such as: 1. All setback requirements can be met; A Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer; and The impervious surface coverage meets all hardcover location and square footage restrictions of this chapter and the total square footage of hardcover does not exceed 25 percent of the entire lot area. 4. All other zoning district standards can be met. The applicant's request for average lakeshore setback variance results in the property's inability to conform to all of the standards above. Therefore, lot width variances are required in order to redevelop the property. The ability to develop the property consistent with other existing developed properties in the neighborhood would be limited if the area and width variances are not granted. 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 LA19-000095 November 18, 2019 Page 3 of 6 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 proposed variances are in harmony with the purpose of the Ordinance. The lot includes difficulties in its substandard width and location of the adjacent homes. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variances to develop of nonconforming lot of record 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; The request to permit construction of a new home on a substandard lot forward of the ALS appears to be reasonable based on the neighboring home's orientation with respect to the lakeshore. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The nonconforming lot width and neighboring home location were not created by the homeowner; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances are requested in order to permit construction of a home designed to fit the character of the neighborhood. 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 have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 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 a single family home is an allowed use in the LR -1C 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. The property's substandard size and orientation and the setback from the lake of the adjacent homes creates difficulties for the Owners in redeveloping the property consistent with the homes in their neighborhood. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The property's nonconforming size and the relationship between the existing home and the setback of the adjacent properties create difficulties for the owners. LA19-000095 November 18, 2019 Page 4 of 6 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Granting lot width and average lakeshore variances are necessary for the preservation of the property right of the applicant. 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. Granting the requested lot width and average lakeshore setback variances in this unique situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The requested variances for lot width and average lakeshore set setback are necessary, and do not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant. 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. Applicable Regulation: Interim Use Permit (Section 78-1726) The Planning Commission may recommend and the Council may grant an Interim Use Permit (IUP). On the basis of the application and the evidence submitted, the city council determines that the use will comply with the following: 1) The use will meet the general performance standards in section 78-916 of this chapter; the proposed grading will conform to the standards within Section 78-916 of the Zoning Code. 2) The use is allowed as an interim use in the applicable zoning district; this statement is true. 3) The use will not delay anticipated development or redevelopment of the site; the proposed grading activity will be conducted in conjunction with the development of the new single family home on the property. This statement is true. 4) The use will not be in conflict with any provisions of the city code on an ongoing basis; the proposed grading activity will not be in conflict with the Code. 5) The use will not adversely affect the adjacent property, the surrounding neighborhood, or other uses on the property where the use will be located; this standard requires that the proposed grading and improvements must not substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the properties in the area when compared to the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses. The result of the proposed grading will not change the intended residential use of the Property so there should be no change in the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties resulting from the export of fill materials. However, activity of exporting approximately 600 cubic yards of fill and active grading of the Property during construction can have a temporary adverse impact on neighbors. The grading work on the Property as well as the forthcoming construction of the proposed home could result in additional noise, dust, vibration and traffic on the haul routes and immediate neighbors. To the degree possible, negative impacts should be limited and mitigated. Trucks hauling material shall observe the speed and traffic laws and provide on site traffic control to improve safety. 6) The use will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public; the property owner, builder, and contractors will be responsible for keeping debris off of the LA19-000095 November 18, 2019 Page 5 of 6 public roadways. The noise resulting from the trucks hauling and equipment moving the material in and around the site should be minimized to the extent possible. 7) The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty; the conclusion of the grading activity will coincide with the finalization of the construction of the proposed home on the property. An as -built survey will be submitted to confirm conformance with the approved grading plan at the closing of the permits. 8) And the applicant agrees in writing to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for the use, including a requirement for a financial security to ensure removal of all evidence of the use upon termination, and restoration of the site to prior or better conditions. The conditions shall be set forth in a development agreement between the property owner and the city, which agreement shall be recorded with the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Deeds. The conditions of approval will be documented as required. 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 due to the nature of the lot and the applied setbacks there are practical difficulties supporting granting the lot width variance, average lakeshore setback variance and IUP for construction of a new home. Public Comments To date, no public comments have been received. 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 Planning Staff recommends approval. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations Exhibit F. Photos Exhibit G. Property Owners List and Map LA19-000095 November 18, 2019 Page 6 of 6 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 21 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: Approval of Rental Licenses Presenter: Marge Beard, Agenda Presentation Three Rivers Park District Section: Commissioner 1. Purpose. Marge Beard will be presenting this item. AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 22 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: Adopt 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Presenter: Ron Olson, Agenda City Administrator's Finance Director Section: Report 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to consider the 2020 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). 2. Background. The City updates its CIP annually. The draft CIP was presented to the Council at the work session on October 28. The document is being presented for approval. Approval of the CIP does not authorize any expenditures. It is a planning document only. 3. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the CIP as presented. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Consider a motion to approve the 2020 CIP. Exhibits Exhibit A. 2020 Capital Improvement Plan Prepared By: A (P—u Reviewed By: J2j(I Approved By: -TV Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Summary of Costs 2020 5 -Year CIP Planning Period CIP 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Parks (A-1) $469,300 $30,000 $225,042 $380,000 $10,000 $234,946 $180,000 $235,890 $214,700 $567,000 Equipment (A -2a) $293,600 $306,000 $285,300 $168,000 $151,500 $450,000 $185,800 $124,500 $90,461 $60,000 Building (A -2b) $275,000 $57,000 $820,320 $75,000 $320,000 $209,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 IT (A -2c) $0 $15,000 $115,000 $0 $0 $12,000 $22,000 $43,000 $15,000 $0 Long Lake Fire (A-3) $9,350 $110,500 $46,750 $0 $0 $114,750 $0 $51,000 $488,750 $76,500 Community Investment (A-4) $0 $0 $568,970 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Public Works - Streets - PMF & MSA (A-5) $1,236,583 $1,964,123 $961,367 $1,541,700 $838,400 $1,550,000 $1,581,000 $1,612,620 $1,644,872 $1,677,770 Public Works - Water (A-6) $233,855 $390,760 $379,131 $420,094 $375,308 $422,833 $488,528 $484,544 $348,973 $306,742 Public Works - Sanitary Sewer (A-7) $815,000 $764,000 $658,250 $545,550 $449,480 $1,086,000 $656,700 $663,534 $670,505 $677,615 Public Works- Storm Sewer (A-8) $404,140 $480,570 $417,515 $272,610 $279,605 $325,000 $327,800 $303,641 $333,569 $336,541 Police (A-9) $170,391 $171,883 $202,389 $207,911 $182,448 $198,002 $187,572 $190,159 $163,264 $248,386 Totals $3,907,219 $4,289,836 $4,680,034 $3,610,865 $2,606,741 $4,602,530 $3,789,400 $3,868,887 $4,130,093 $4,110,554 Debt Service Levy Debt Issue 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2010 Street Reconstruction Bonds $134,825 $131,520 $133,325 $134,530 $130,000 $130,725 $0 $0 $0 $0 2014 Garage, Water, Refunding Bonds $162,900 $166,700 $161,000 $282,000 $277,000 $277,000 $278,857 $278,000 $278,000 $278,000 2016 GO Refunding $413,275 $412,780 $416,675 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Current Debt Levy $711,000 $711,000 $711,000 $416,530 $407,000 $407,725 $278,857 $278,000 $278,000 $278,000 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Parks CIP Table A-1 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Trail Construction along CSAH 19 (Livingston to Dakota) $160,000 East Long Lake Road to Trail $134,000 Summit Beach Improvements (paved parking and playground) $95,300 Big Island ADA Trails, amenities, restroom $80,000 Lurton gravel trails $20,000 Basket Ball Court Surfacing - Crystal Bay $10,000 CSAH 112 PH 3 Trail (School to CSAH 6) 1 $188,640 CR 6 Trail (OCB - Willow) Improvement $36,402 Trail construction along North Arm drive to Lakeview Legacy Park $80,000 Hackberry Improvements $300,000 Dock Replacement (15 year life) $10,000 $10,000 Trail Construction along CCB and North Shore (Luce Line to Dakota) $567,000 Trail Construction along Hunter or Ferndale Roads connection lace line to northern boundary $133,890 Park Equipment (Navarre, Hackberry, Bederwood, Crystal Bay, Fagerness) $64,946 Trail Access to Lowry Woods $100,000 GC Wetland and Fairway #4 Improvements $160,000 GC Lawn Bowling $80,000 GC Tow Rope $102,000 GC Perimeter Trail $214,700 Totals $469,300 $30,000 $225,042 $380,000 $10,000 $234,946 $180,000 $235,890 $214,700 $567,000 Capital Improvement Plan. ON of Orono Equipment CIP Table A -2a 5 Year CIP Planning Period Equipment Description 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Truck, 1 Ton Dump Truck w/Plow and Sander (new Engine) $15,000 Anti Icing Tank and Pump $27,600 Televising equipment $100,000 Tractor (ROW Mower) $53,000 Flail Mower $35,000 Aerator $24,000 Brine Tank/Distributor $20,000 Broom $12,000 Mower (Parks) $7,000 Jet Rodder $300,000 Utility Service Truck with hoist $63,000 Fertilizer Spreader $6,000 Hot Patch Truck $188,000 Sprayer $34,300 Skid loader $53,500 Truck, 3/4 Ton Pickup w/Plow $50,000 Tee Mower $38,000 Top Dresser $16,800 Greens Mower $9,700 Chipper $40,500 Chevy 3/4 Ton Pickup w/Plow $37,000 Trailer $9,000 Crack Sealing Equipment $65,000 Vactor Truck $450,000 Rough Mower $65,500 Mower (Big island) $8,961 Greens / Turf Roller $13,000 Building Inspection Vehicle $40,300 Tractor Loader Backhoe $145,500 Ford 3/4 Ton Pickup $37,000 Skid loader 70,000 Trailer 9,000 Truck, 3/4 Ton Pickup w/Plow (Sign Truck) $60,000 Snow blower I 1 $11,500 Totals $ 293,600 $ 306,000 $ 285,300 $ 168,000 $ 151,500 $ 450,000 $ 185,800 $ 124,500 $ 90,461 $ 60,000 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Building CIP Table A -2b 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Council Chambers Remodel $70,000 Park and Ride (striping) $12,000 Park and Ride Overlay $25,000 PW Cold Storage $30,000 City Hall Carpet $20,000 Public Works Parking Lot Repave $119,560 Emergency Generator $175,000 City Hall Parking Lot chip Seal (7years) $35,000 Public Works Roof Replacement $665,760 PW Air Handling System Refurbish $75,000 City Hall Roof Replacement $320,000 Police Department Roof Replacement $209,000 Future Facilities Improvements $160,000 $160,000 1 $160,000 $160,000 Totals $275,000 $57,000 $820,320 $75,000 $320,000 $209,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono IT CIP Table A -2c 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Wireless Access Points - City Hall & PW $15,000 $18,000 File Servers X 2 (5 Years) $12,000 Switch (Every 6 Years - 6 Switches) $15,000 $22,000 $15,000 Phone Replacement (10 Years) $100,000 Web Site Upgrade $25,000 Totals $0 $15,000 $115,000 $0 $0 $12,000 $22,000 $43,000 $15,000 $0 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Long Lake Fire CIP Table A-3 Purchase Year Expected Life (yrs) 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Upgrade LDH Discharges 10 $11,000 Replace U11 with New Utility Vehicle 1999 10 $130,000 Replace CMD2 with New CMD1 2011 10 $55,000 Replace U11 with New Utility Truck 2000 20 $135,000 Replace CMD2 with New CMD1 2013 15 $60,000 Replace 611 and Trailer 15 $90,000 Replace E21 with New Rescue Pumper 2003 15 $575,000 Totals: $11,000 $130,000 $55,000 $0 $0 $135,000 $0 $60,000 $575,000 $90,000 City of Orono's Portion (85%) $9,350 $110,500 $46,750 $0 $0 $114,750 $0 $51,000 $488,750 $76,500 Totals $9,350 $110,500 $46,750 $0 $0 $114,750 $0 $51,000 $488,750 $76,500 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Community Investment CIP Table A-4 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 County Road 112 Turn Back (Lighting/Sidewalks) * $568,970 Totals $0 $0 $568,970 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 * The scope of the County Road 112 Turn Back Project is yet to be determined. Therefore, the cost estimate for the project is subject to change and refinement as the project development process proceeds. The City's final share of the project will be established by the County's cost sharing policy and the final scope of the project as developed by the City of Orono and Hennepin County. Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Public Works - Streets CIP Table A-5 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project Type 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 1 2029 Smith and Lyman Avenues Reclaim $221,500 Livingston & Navarre Aves Reclaim $294,630 Windjammer (North Arm to End) Reclaim $60,810 Casco Circle Reclaim $431,670 Rest Point Lane Mill & Overlay $45,966 Dickenson & Russel Street Reclaim $420,386 Togo Road Reclaim $357,300 Briar Street Mill & Overlay $67,410 Park Lane & Elm Street Mill & Overlay $111,200 Fox Street - Orono Orchard to East End Pave $117,100 Fox Street- Brown -Orono Orchard Reconstruct $1,040,200 Orchard Park Road Mill & Overlay $184,400 Ferndale Road West Mill & Overlay $168,300 Glendale Drive Mill & Overlay $43,700 Kelley Parkway - OCB Rd to Stone Bay Mill & Overlay $88,600 Willow Drive - Fox St- Brown Road Mill & Overlay $293,300 Townline Road Reconstruct $365,600 Navarre East Roads (Kenwood Way, Navarre Lane, Olive Avenue, Bayview place, Lafayette Ridge Ct) Mill & Overlay $314,100 North Arm Drive Mill & Overlay $365,300 Forest Lake Drive Mill & Overlay $75,900 Eileen Street Mill & Overlay $26,600 Crestview Avenue Mill & Overlay $59,200 Livingston Avenue - CR15 to Blaine Mill & Overlay $150,600 Old Long Lake Road Mill & Overlay $385,200 Orono Lane Mill & Overlay $48,100 Crystal Bay Roads (Briar*, Arbor, Prospect, Crystal, Spates) Mill & Overlay $254,500 Future road reconstructions/ M&O and Reclaims (per Year) $1,150,000 $1,173,000 $1,196,460 $1,220,389 $1,244,797 Total - Pavement Management Fund 1 $1,164,716 $1,892,256 $889,500 $1,206,700 $838,400 $1,150,000 $1,173,000 $1,196,460 $1,220,389 $1,244,797 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Public Works - Streets CIP Table A-5 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project Type 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 MSA Streets: Ferndale Road North (Shared with Plymouth) Mill & Overlay $71,867 $71,867 $71,867 Brown Road North Mill & Overlay $335,000 Future MSA road projects (per year) Mill & Overlay 1 $400,000 1 $408,000 $416,160 $424,483 $432,973 Total MSA Streets: $71,867 $71,867 $71,867 $335,000 $0 $400,000 $408,000 $416,160 $424,483 $432,973 MSA Debt Service $143,111 $139,661 $141,061 $141,945 $137,468 $137,687 $142,625 Totals Streets $1,236,583 $1,964,123 1 $961,367 1 $1,541,700 1 $838,400 $1,550,000 1 $1,581,000 1 $1,612,620 1 $1,644,872 $1,677,770 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Public Works - Water CIP Table A-6 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Water Valve replacement Togo Road $18,000 Water Valve replacement Livingston Road $18,000 Water Valve replacement Casco Circle $36,000 Water Main Replacement (CSAH15/19) W/Road $169,855 South Tower Repaint and Rehabilitation $350,000 Water Main replacement CSAH 19 South of CSAH 15 $181,000 North Distribution Extension (West of OCB) $120,000 Navarre Plant Control Upgrade $55,200 Water Main Loop Concordia $230,000 Water Main replacement E. Navarre Streets W/Road $327,880 North Water Tower Maintenance $62,500 $69,000 Well #4 Inspection & Maintenance (every 10 yrs) $20,000 North Water Plant Painting $30,000 South Water Plant Painting $60,000 Navarre Plant Salt Brine Tank Rehab. $350,000 Well #1 Inspection and Maintenance (every 10 yrs) $20,000 Well #2 Inspection and Maintenance(every 10 yrs) $20,000 Well #3 Inspection & Maintenance (every 10 yrs) $20,000 Water Valve Replacements (4 /Year) $28,000 $28,560 $29,131 $29,714 $30,308 $27,833 $28,528 $29,242 $29,973 $30,722 Water Meter Replacement $90,000 $95,000 $170,000 Water Main Replacement/Rehab (per Year) $250,000 $255,000 $265,302 $276,020 Totals $233,855 $390,760 $379,131 $420,094 $375,308 $422,833 $488,528 $484,544 $348,973 $306,742 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Public Works - Sanitary Sewer CIP Table A-7 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Sewer Rehabilitation $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 Lift Station #3 Generator $75,000 Lift Station #13 Generator $75,000 Lift Station #15 Generator $75,000 Grinder Station #10 $20,000 Lift Station #19 Rehab $60,000 Lift Station #30 Rehab $60,000 Lift Station #11 Rehab $62,000 Lift Station #3 Rehab $62,000 Lift Station #5 Rehab $64,000 Lift Station #4 Rehab $64,000 Lift Station #16 Rehab $25,000 Lift Station #28 Rehab $65,600 Grinder Station #8 Rehab $67,240 Lift Station #10 Rehab $67,240 Lift Station Rehab (2 per year) $135,000 $137,700 $140,454 $143,263 $146,128 Road Project Sanitary Adjustment $55,000 $20,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 Force Main replacement with CSAH 19/15 Project $180,000 Force main Replacement Tonkawa PH2 $225,000 Sewer Meter installation (into Long Lake) $30,000 Northern Utilities Expansion $436,000 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Public Works - Sanitary Sewer CIP Table A-7 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Force Main Replacement Tonkawa PH3 $215,250 Force Main Replacement Tonkawa PH4 $139,950 Sewer Main Replacements $200,000 $204,000 $208,080 $212,242 $216,486 Totals $815,000 1 $764,000 1 $658,250 1 $545,550 1 $449,480 1 $1,086,000 1 $656,700 1 $663,534 1 $670,505 $677,615 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Public Works - Storm Sewer CIP Table A-8 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Smith and Lyman Avenues $25,575 Livingston & Navarre Aves $20,000 Windjammer (North Arm to End) $7,000 Casco Circle $42,000 Rest Point Lane $5,565 Dickenson & Russel Street $39,000 Togo Road $91,000 Park Lane & Elm Street $11,355 Fox Street - Orono Orchard to East End $28,000 Fox Street - Brown -Orono Orchard $150,570 Orchard Park Road $27,660 Ferndale Road West $25,245 Glendale Drive $6,555 Kelley Parkway - OCB Rd to StoneBay $13,290 Willow Drive - Fox St- Brown Road $46,410 Navarre East Roads (Kenwood Way, Navare Lane, Olive Avenue, Bayview place, Lafayette Ridge Ct) $47,115 North Arm Drive $54,795 Forest Lake Drive $11,385 Eileen Street $3,990 Crestview Avenue $8,880 Townline Road $23,445 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Public Works - Storm Sewer CIP Table A-8 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Livingston Avenue - CR15 to Blaine $22,590 Old Long Lake Road $57,780 Orono Lane $7,215 Crystal Bay Roads (Briar*, Arbor, Prospect, Crystal,Spates) $38,175 Street Stormwater Improvements (per year) $140,000 $142,800 $145,656 $148,569 $151,541 Casco Point Park Outlet (SWMP 0-1) $58,000 Casco Cove Outlet (SWMP 0-2) $80,000 Casco Point Park Bioretention Basin (SWMP CB -1) $55,000 South Casco Point Road Sump (SWMP CB -2) $36,000 Casco Cove Bioretention Basin (CB -3) $57,000 East Long Lake Road N Improvements (SWMP LL -1) $127,000 Cherry Place Ravine Improvement (SWMP NA -1) $23,000 Surface Water Management Projects, Unnamed (Per Year) $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 Pond Cleaning/Maintenance (1/year) $50,000 $53,845 $57,985 Storm Sewer Improvements/Replacements (Per Year) $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Totals $404,140 $480,570 $417,515 $272,610 $279,605 $325,000 $327,800 $303,641 $333,569 $336,541 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Police CIP Table A-9 Project Purchase Year Expected 5 -Year CIP Planning Period Life (yrs) 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Squad 242 (Ford SUV) CSO 2015 4 $38,500 $41,000 $42,500 Squad 244 (AWD Charger) 2016 4 $38,500 $41,000 $42,500 Squad 246 (AWC Charger) 2017 4 $38,500 $41,000 $42,500 Squad 248 (Ford SUV) 2017 4 $38,500 $41,000 $43,000 Squad 249 (Ford SUV) 2017 4 $40,000 1 $41,000 1 $43,000 Squad 250 (Ford SUV) 2017 4 $40,000 $41,000 $43,000 Squad 251 (Ford SUV) 2017 4 $40,000 $42,000 Squad 253 (AWD Charger) 2018 4 $40,000 $42,000 Squad 254 (Ford SUV) 2018 4 $40,000 $42,000 Squad 258 (Dodge Durango) 2019 4 $40,000 $42,500 Squad 259 (Dodge Durango) 2019 4 $40,000 $42,500 Squad 260 (Dodge Durango) 2019 4 $40,000 $42,500 Squad 261 (Dodge Durango) Chief 2019 6 $42,000 Squad 843 (Tahoe -Mound) SRO 2010 12 $40,000 Squad 255 (Dodge Durango) SRO 2018 6 $42,500 Squad 247 (Dodge Ram) Investigations 2016 6 $40,000 $43,000 Squad 257 (Dodge Jouney) Deputy Chief 2018 6 $41,000 Squad 256 (Dodge Journey) Investigations 2018 6 $41,000 Technology Replacement $10,927 $11,255 $11,593 $11,941 $12,299 $12,668 $13,048 $13,439 $13,842 $14,258 Weapons - Rifles $10,000 $5,000 Weapons - Handguns $20,000 Supported or Partially Funded through Police Account in the PIR Fund Mobile Radios $50,000 $50,000 Squad/Body Video Cameras $35,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Mobile Data Computer $5,464 $5,628 $5,796 $5,970 $6,149 $6,334 $6,524 $6,720 $6,921 $7,129 Totals $170,391 $171,883 $202,389 $207,911 $182,448 $198,002 $187,572 $190,159 $163,264 $248,386 NOTES: *Funding for the Police CIP is accounted for in the General Fund to accurately charge our contract cities for the cost of policing. Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Park Fund Current Balance: Current Balance: $492,220 Current Balance: $115,857 Table B-2 Table B-1 Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 1 2025 2026 2027 2028 Project 2020 2021 Project 1 2020 1 2021 1 2022 1 2023 12024 2025 1 2026 1 2027 1 2028 1 2029 Operation and Maintenance (1) 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1$0 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 CIP Expenditures 1 $469,300 1 $30,000 1 $225,042 1 $380,000 1 $10,000 1 $74,946 1 $0 1 $133,890 1 $0 1 $567,000 Total Expenses 1 $469,300 1 $30,000 1 $225,042 1 $380,000 1 $10,000 1 $74,946 1 $0 1 $133,890 1 $0 1 $567,000 $180,000 $102,000 $214,700 $0 Total Expenses $568,600 $378,000 $1,220,620 $243,000 $471,500 $831,000 $547,800 Revenues(2) $10,500 $334 $38 ($2,213) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Annual Balance ($458,800) ($29,666) ($225,004) ($382,213) ($10,000) ($74,946) $0 ($133,890) $0 ($567,000) Year End Cash Balance $33,420 $3,754 ($221,250) ($603,463) ($613,463) ($688,409) ($688,409) ($822,299) ($822,299) ($1,389,299) Improvement/Equipment Outlay Fund Current Balance: Current Balance: $150,633 Current Balance: $115,857 Table B-2 Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 1 2025 2026 2027 2028 Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 1 2026 1 2027 1 2028 1 2029 Equipment, CIP $293,600 $306,000 $285,300 $168,000 $151,500 $450,000 1 $185,800 1 $124,500 1 $90,461 1 $60,000 Building CIP $275,000 $57,000 $820,320 $75,000 $320,000 $209,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 IT, CIP $0 $15,000 $115,000 $0 $0 $12,000 $22,000 $43,000 $15,000 $0 Golf, CIP $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $160,000 $180,000 $102,000 $214,700 $0 Total Expenses $568,600 $378,000 $1,220,620 $243,000 $471,500 $831,000 $547,800 $429,500 $480,161 $220,000 Revenues (interest) 1 $5,000 1 $5,000 1 $5,000 1 $1,178 1 $1,190 1 $1,202 1 $1,214 1 $1,226 1 $1,238 1 $1,250 Revenues (Transfer) $215,000 $255,000 $315,000 $315,000 $315,000 $315,000 $315,000 $315,000 $315,000 $315,000 Transfer from Enterprise Funds $100,000 $300,000 $63,000 $0 $37,000 $450,000 $145,500 $0 $0 $0 Annual Balance ($253,600) $177,000 ($842,620) $72,000 ($119,500) ($66,000) ($87,300) ($114,500) ($165,161) $95,000 Year End Cash Balance ($137,743) $39,257 ($803,363) ($731,363) ($850,863) ($916,863) ($1,004,163) ($1,118,663) ($1,283,824) ($1,188,824) Improvement/Equipment Outlay Fund - Long Lake Fire Account Current Balance: Current Balance: $150,633 Table B-3 Table B-4 Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 1 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Long Lake Fire CIP $9,350 $110,500 $46,750 $0 $0 1 $114,750 $0 $51,000 $488,750 $76,500 Total Expenses $9,350 $110,500 $46,750 $0 $0 $114,750 $0 $51,000 $488,750 $76,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Community Improvement CIP $0 $0 Revenue- General Fund Transfer (2) $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 Revenues - Interest (2) $5,000 $2;313 $2,081 $2,484 $3;359 $4,243 $3,988 $4,878 $5,266 $1,281 Annual Balance $80,650 ($23,187) $40,331 $87,484 $88,359 ($25,507) $88,988 $38,878 ($398,484) $9,781 Year End Cash Balance $231,283 $208,096 $248,427 $335,911 $424,270 $398,763 $487,750 $526,628 $128,144 $137,926 Community Investment Fund Current Balance: $671,755 Table B-4 Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Annual Expenditures $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Community Improvement CIP $0 $0 $568,970 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses 1 $0 1 $0 1 $568,970 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 Revenues (interest) 1 $5,000 1 $5,000 1 $5,000 1 $1,178 1 $1,190 1 $1,202 1 $1,214 1 $1,226 1 $1,238 1 $1,250 Year End Cash Balance 1 $676,755 1 $681,755 1 $117,785 1 $118,963 1 $120,152 1 $121,354 1 $122,568 1 $123,793 1 $125,031 1 $126,281 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono MSA Fund Current Balance: Current Fund Balance: $0 State MSA Construction Balance = $550,000 Table 13-5b Table 13-5a Project 1 2020 2021 Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Annual Expenditures (MSA CIP) $71,867 $71,867 $71,867 $335,000 $0 $400,000 $408,000 $416,160 $424,483 $432,973 Annual MSA Maintenance Payment to the City $39,438 $39,438 $39,438 $39,438 $39,438 $39,438 $39,438 $39,438 $39,438 $39,438 Debt Service (interest) -from MSA maintenance account. 1 $28,113 1 $24,663 1 $21,063 1 $17,000 1 $12,469 1 $7,688 $2,625 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 Debt Service (Principal) -from MSA Construction Account $115,000 $115,000 $120,000 $125,000 $125,000 $130,000 $140,000 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses $254,417 $250,967 $252,367 $516,438 $176,906 $577,125 $590,063 $455,598 $463,921 $472,410 $900,000 $900,000 Annual Balance ($547,266) ($1,142,256) ($39,500) ($6,700) $361,600 $50,000 $27,000 $3,540 ($20,389) Yearly Allocation - MSA Maintenance $123,833 $123,833 $123,833 $123,833 $123,833 $123,833 $123,833 $123,833 $123,833 $123,833 Yearly Allocation - MSA Construction $201,751 $201,751 $201,751 $201,751 $201,751 $201,751 $201,751 $201,751 $201,751 $201,751 Annual Balance $71,167 $74,617 $73,217 ($190,854) $148,678 ($251,541) ($264,479) ($130,014) ($138,337) ($146,826) Year End Cash Balance $71,167 $145,784 $219,001 $28,148 $176,825 ($74,716) ($339,194) ($469,208) ($607,544) ($754,371) Pavement Management Fund Current Balance: -$61,122 $182,900 Table 13-5b Table B-6 Project 1 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 1 2026 2027 2028 2029 Annual Operation and Maintenance (1) 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 1 $0 CIP Expenditures $1,164,716 $1,892,256 $889,500 $1,206,700 $838,400 $1,150,000 $1,173,000 $1,196,460 $1,220,389 $1,244,797 Total Expenses $1,164,716 $1,892,256 $889,500 $1,206,700 $838,400 $1,150,000 $1,173,000 $1,196,460 $1,220,389 $1,244,797 $375,308 $422,833 $488,528 $484,544 $348,973 $306,742 Total Expenses $1,322,535 $1,557,329 $1,575,959 Revenues(1) $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 Pavement Management Levy $617,450 $750,000 $850,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 Annual Balance ($547,266) ($1,142,256) ($39,500) ($6,700) $361,600 $50,000 $27,000 $3,540 ($20,389) ($44,797) Year End Cash Balance ($608,388) ($1,750,644) ($1,790,144) ($1,796,844) ($1,435,244) ($1,385,244) ($1,358,244) ($1,354,704) ($1,375,094) ($1,419,891) Water Fund Current Balance: $182,900 Table B-6 Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Annual Operation and Maintenance (1) $933,250 $1,009,388.98 $1,039,998 $1,080,749 $1,115,001 $1,142,408 $1,170,969 $1,200,243 $1,230,249 $1,261,005 Debt Service $155,430 $157,180 $156,830 $100,430 $98,570 $101,550 $100,500 $104,000 $100,600 $103,000 CIP Expenditures $233,855 $390,760 $379,131 $420,094 $375,308 $422,833 $488,528 $484,544 $348,973 $306,742 Total Expenses $1,322,535 $1,557,329 $1,575,959 $1,601,273 $1,588,879 $1,666,791 $1,759,997 $1,788,786 $1,679,822 $1,670,747 Revenues (1) $1,134,237 $1,276,818 $1,317,278 $1,338,317 $1,359,776 $1,381,665 $1,423,115 $1,465,809 $1,509,783 $1,555,076 Add back Depreciation $225,800 $231,385 $245,889 $269,805 $287,271 $297,544 $304,983 $312,607 $320,422 $328,433 Assessments $10,387 $10,387 $10,387 $10,387 $10,387 $10,387 $10,387 $0 $0 $0 Annual Balance $47,889 ($38,739) ($2,405) $17,236 $68,555 $22,805 ($21,512) ($10,371) $150,384 $212,762 Year End Cash Balance $230,789 $192,051 $189,646 $206,882 $275,437 $298,242 $276,729 $266,359 $416,742 $629,504 Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono Sewer Fund Improvement Revolving (PIR) Fund Current Balance: $1,387,422 $879,102 Amount Available for Police Purchases= $268,823 Table B-9 Table B-7 Project 2020 2021 2022 Project 1 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 1 2026 1 2027 1 2028 1 2029 Operation and Maintenance (1) $1,791,200 $1,844,027.04 $1,894,399.43 $1,939,171.03 $1,981,278 $2,023,797 $2,074,392 $2,126,252 $2,179,408 $2,233,893 Debt Service $110,000 $110,000 $110,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CIP Expenditures $815,000 $764,000 $658,250 $545,550 $449,480 $1,086,000 $656,700 $663,534 $670,505 $677,615 Transfer to Equipment Fund for Sewer Equip $115,000 $31,500 $0 $450,000 $0 $35,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses $2,831,200 $2,749,527 $2,662,649 $2,934,721 $2,430,758 $3,144,797 $2,731,092 $2,789,786 $2,849,913 $2,911,508 Revenues(1) $569,936 $712,420 $755,165 $770,268 $785,673 $801,387 $817,415 $833,763 $850,438 $867,447 Revenues (1) $1,889,629 $2,173,073 $2,216,535 $2,260,865 $2,306,083 $2,352,204 $2,399,249 $2,447,233 $2,496,178 $2,546,102 Add back Depreciation $353,600 $377,100 $397,107 $410,136 $420,592 $430,805 $441,575 $452,615 $463,930 $475,528 Assessments $35,349 $30,368 $26,934 $24,902 $17,569 $17,569 $10,939 $2,000 $0 $0 Annual Balance ($552,622) ($168,986) ($22,074) ($238,818) $313,486 ($344,219) $120,670 $112,062 $110,195 $110,122 Year End Cash Balance $834,800 $665,814 $643,741 $404,923 $718,409 $374,190 $494,860 $606,922 $717,117 $827,239 Storm Water Fund Improvement Revolving (PIR) Fund Current Balance: $613,288 $879,102 Amount Available for Police Purchases= $268,823 Table B-9 Table B-8 Project 2020 2021 2022 Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Operation and Maintenance (1) $373,000 $388,798.40 $402,048.43 $417,187.39 $430,298 $445,620 $456,761 $468,180 $479,884 $491,882 CIP Expenditures $404,140 $480,570 $417,515 $272,610 $279,605 $325,000 $327,800 $303,641 $333,569 $336,541 Transfer to Equipment Fund for Storm Equip $100,000 $0 $75,000 $0 $0 $12,000 $600,000 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenses $877,140 $869,368 $894,563 $689,797 $709,902 $782,620 $1,384,561 $771,821 $813,454 $828,422 ($14,069) ($49,417) Year End Cash Balance $885,934 $854,166 $841,911 $794,360 $796,154 $782,782 $784,086 $785,207 $771,138 Revenues(1) $569,936 $712,420 $755,165 $770,268 $785,673 $801,387 $817,415 $833,763 $850,438 $867,447 Add back depreciation $62,000 $71,454 $78,135 $86,407 $92,670 $101,004 $103,529 $106,117 $108,770 $111,490 Annual Balance ($245,204) ($85,495) ($61,264) $166,878 $168,441 $119,771 ($463,617) $168,060 $145,755 $150,514 Year End Cash Balance $368,084 $282,589 $221,325 $388,203 $556,644 $676,415 $212,798 $380,857 $526,612 $677,127 Permanent Improvement Revolving (PIR) Fund Current Balance: $879,102 Amount Available for Police Purchases= $268,823 Table B-9 Project 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 1 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Police Expenses $5,464 $40,628 $20,796 $55,970 $6,149 1 $21,334 $6,524 $6,720 $21,921 $57,129 Total Expenses $5,464 $40,628 $20,796 $55,970 $6,149 $21,334 $6,524 $6,720 $21,921 $57,129 Revenues $12,296 $8,859 $8,542 $8,419 $7,944 $7,962 $7,828 $7,841 $7,852 $7,711 Annual Balance $6,832 ($31,768) ($12,255) ($47,551) $1,794 ($13,372) $1,304 $1,121 ($14,069) ($49,417) Year End Cash Balance $885,934 $854,166 $841,911 $794,360 $796,154 $782,782 $784,086 $785,207 $771,138 $721,721 NOTES: (1) Expenses and Revenues are based on the City's 2020 budget. For Planning purposes a 2.5% annual inflation factor has been used to project future costs. (2) Revenues are based on a 1.5% increased contribution starting in 2019 and adding a 1% interest earned on the previous year's balance. AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 23 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: LAI 9-000074 — William Griffith o/b/o Theodore Bonnett, 40 & 45 Smith Avenue, Request for street vacation Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart, AICP Agenda Planning Department Community Development Director Section: Report Purpose. To consider a request to vacate a portion of Smith Avenue and nearby unimproved rights of way. 2. Background. The City Council reviewed the request initially at the meeting on November 12, 2019. At that time, the Council tabled action, allowing the applicant to work on developing a plan supportable by staff to facilitate the desires of the applicant, neighborhood, and City. During the Council review of the request, the following items/ issues were noted: Cul de sac location. Staff can support the proposed location of the cul de sac as shown as it affords a fairly flat location for the cul de sac and retains the incentive for the property owner to install a cul de sac. Shifting it further to the north introduces grading requirements that impact the tree line at the end of the road, some of which may impact DNR property, provides marginal benefit from a trail proximity standpoint, and negates any benefit to the vacation for the applicant. Route of the trail. The original plan showed a trail to Orono Orchard Road to the DNR right of way (ROW), down and steep grades. The revised plan shows a new trail easement over the existing path, connected to the cul de sac. Analysis. The proposed layout achieves the goals of the applicant, neighborhood, and City. A cul de sac is provided, and access to the trail is retained. To effect the changes, the following will be necessary prior to formal adoption: a. A trail easement (Staff recommends a 20 feet wide easement to support future maintenance activities). b. An easement for the portion of the cul de sac falling outside of the Smith Ave right of way. c. A utility easement, suggested to be 10 feet wide on each side of the existing right of way. There has been some discussion regarding responsibility for the improvements. Trail: The City attorney advises that placement of a permanent easement requires the city maintain the trail; the current pathway does not meet city standards for width, surface material, or grade (slope). Cul de sac. The developer proposes providing the easement, the city would construct the cul de sac with the 2020 street project. Smith Avenue removal. The applicant proposes to remove the unused portion of Smith Avenue at some point in the future. 4. Public Comment. A number of written comments for and against the vacation have been received after the November 12' City Council meeting. These are attached as Exhibit C. 5. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends that public interest can be maintained with the following, as illustrated on Exhibit B: a. Easement for portion of the cul de sac on 45 Smith property. b. Easement for trail (20 feet wide) Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: -Tja Approved By: n�GZ AGENDA ITEM c. Easement for utilities, 10 feet each along the property lines on either side of the Smith Ave ROW. d. Security necessary to guarantee completion of trail work. Alternatively, the council could deny the vacation request, and install a turn -around (not a cul de sac) within the existing right of way, and create a new trail connection within existing right of way. Staff has prepared a resolution of denial (Exhibit D) for this option. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED City Council should direct staff to prepare a resolution for approval or denial. Exhibits A. City Council minutes Nov 12, 2019 B. Plan revised December 5, 2019 C. Public comment received AFTER November 12, 2019 D. Resolution for denial - draft References PC Staff Report & Exhibits 10-21-19 City Council Staff Report and Exhibits November 12, 2019 Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: -Tja Approved By: 1V MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:00 o'clock p.m. 20. LA19-000074 — WILLIAM GRIFFITH OB/O THEODORE BONNETT, 40 AND 45 SMITH AVENUE, REQUEST FOR STREET VACATION Barnhart stated the City received a request to vacate a portion of Smith Avenue and some unimproved rights-of-way adjacent to the Luce Line. The Planning Commission reviewed and recommended denial of the request but recommended the applicant provide responses to some of the issues raised in the review. Using a map, he indicated the property location and the right-of-way to be vacated. The applicant proposed an additional easement or right-of-way to build a cul-de-sac at the southern edge of the property. A portion of Smith Avenue and the unimproved rights-of-way would be vacated north of that area. The proposal addresses two issues raised: 1) retaining right-of-way over the sanitary sewer manhole would retain that public interest; 2) improves a circulation issue for motorists in the area because there is no way to turn around at the end of Smith Avenue. Currently people use private driveways to turn around, and Staff is looking for a way to do that outside of private improvements. The proposal shows an additional right-of-way/easement for the City to build a cul-de-sac which is sized according to City Code. If the property is not vacated, a turnaround would likely be created within the existing easement but is not ideal nor consistent with City Code. Barnhart said the Planning Commission also raised the need to connect Smith Avenue and the neighborhood beyond to the Luce Line, a public state trail. Currently people seem to cut through a corner of private property to access the trail, so there is a need to improve that access. The applicant also proposed an easement along the south side of 45 Smith to get from Smith Avenue to Orono Orchard Road. He indicated on a map the path users take to access the trail. He said Staff, in their review of this response, can support the vacation. The barrier the Planning Commission/City Council has to have, is there a public interest in the property. With the cul-de-sac and with an easement connecting Smith to the road, Staff can't support the vacation of the balance of the right-of-way because it does not serve a huge purpose at this point. The item has raised quite a bit of interest raised in the neighborhood. The Planning Commission recommended denial; Staff, reviewing the response to the Planning Commission comments, can support a vacation request subject to a couple of tweaks as mentioned in the report. Walsh said there are a lot of old street easements in Orono, and the goal is to clean them up and they have done the ones that have made sense. He has met with the applicant and some neighbors and walked the property. The current easements that go to the trail are incredibly steep, which is why people are cutting through the applicant's property, which is a nice, easy trail. He appreciates the applicant in his emails said he would keep the trail open if people wanted to use it. His opinion is there needs to be a turnaround and it needs to meet City Codes and something Staff would support. He does not have a problem with vacating all the different easements but does not think the extra easement to get to Orono Orchard Road is needed. He would like to create a permanent easement where that path is in now in exchange for doing the other stuff. Right now, there is direct access to Luce Line Trail and he does not want to give up direct access, so it would be swapping out some things to make it better for everybody and make it official so it can't ever leave. Crosby asked if any improvements would be made on the easement. Walsh thought, since it would be a permanent easement, the City would be able to make improvements such as gravel because presently it is a trail with big logs all the way there and is pretty worn. He would want to keep that trail by giving up the other stuff to continue to have direct access for neighbors, etc. Page 1 of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:00 o'clock p.m. Printup noted it would be City property to access the trail so it could not be touched. Walsh concurred it would be a City easement and a permanent easement of record on the title. Right now, technically the applicant could close the trail; then the only way through there is to go through buckthorns and it is really steep, not something people would want to go through, which is why he thinks people are not using that path. The City would have to do some major work to improve that path. Crosby stated it would be a City easement, not City property. Walsh said it would be a right that would not go away and so basically City property. He clarified it would be a swap -out to keep the direct access. The other vacations help clean up everything. It gets everything together, a cul-de-sac and a turnaround, and direct access to the Luce Line is kept. Printup commented there would not be future disruption to the neighborhood because once the access is there, it's there. Walsh said he knows there are a lot of people present but wanted to give direction of what his common sense tells him would make the most sense for the neighborhood, because it solves a lot of issues. Johnson asked if the zoning district was a 2 -acre zone. Barnhart answered it was a 2 -acre zone. Johnson asked, with the easement and two parcels, if that would bring the total to six acres. Barnhart did not believe it would. Johnson wondered if there would be a real risk of being a redevelopment there. Barnhart did not think so. Walsh offered that it would be two parcels but they would have a little extra width and depth. Johnson asked, that being the case, what the benefit was of having the cul-de-sac in that location versus pushing it farther into the back end of the easement and then having a trail coming off the cul-de-sac. Barnhart stated there was no incentive for the applicant to do that and the City would have to acquire additional land. Johnson stated a hammerhead would be another choice that would fit there. Barnhart agreed a hammerhead would be another choice. Johnson asked whether the cul-de-sac was a City expense. Barnhart said the plan would be to pave this section as part of next year's project, and used the map to indicate the portion that would be paved if the Council grants a vacation. Page 2 of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:00 o'clock p.m. Johnson clarified that the City would also create a cul-de-sac. Barnhart confirmed that a cul-de-sac would be created. Johnson asked if creating a cul-de-sac was an increase of expense as opposed to paving more. Rief responded, square footage -wise, with the development at the end of the hammerhead, it would be pretty much an even wash or even less cost to the City. Crosby asked what the connection would be to the trail. Barnhart stated it would depend on what the Council decided but thought there would be an easement. Walsh said that would be determined, but there needs to be a trail to connect to where the existing log trail is currently. That would have to get plotted out. Johnson said what is being proposed is pretty unreasonable for two reasons: 1) Going over to Orono Orchard, you're going on a busier road; 2) A new property owner, whomever that is, now has a trail going by their house. Walsh agreed and said to get rid of the one being proposed there, it is not needed. Crosby clarified he was talking about the one to the Luce Line. Johnson stated he was bringing a fact to light, that the one that is there is not reasonable. Walsh agreed, stating it is steep going up and down. Rief pointed out if the City decides not to vacate anything or come to an agreement with the easement or the current path that goes across the private property, an option would be to, at the end, go to the right- of - way down the left side, which is a 10-15 foot drop in elevation rather than 20-25 as it is currently. Johnson commented that would bring you onto the DNR land. Rief agreed and pointed out the up -trail on the map, which would bring people to the DNR land. Walsh asked whether anyone from the public would like to comment. Mr. Bill Griffith, representing the applicants, said the issue comes up as a result of concerns about public safety at the end of the road and other places when people discover they have to turn around and there is no place to turn around. In meeting with City officials onsite, given the 2020 project, it made sense to bring forward the opportunity to vacate some of the right-of-way, obtain right-of-way, and maybe resolve some of the issues on a permanent basis. One of the reasons Mr. Bonnett proposed the alignment of the trail at the location is because it creates the most flexibility in the future in terms of the property being potentially subdivided. Mr. Bonnett is willing to look at other options. For example, an option would be to run along Orono Orchard Road within the edge of the property and straight back to the Luce Line. As the Mayor suggested, sometimes the benefit is cleaning up titles and issues that have existed for decades. And the defining is, if there is no public use/benefit of the right-of-way, the City essentially vacates it and Page 3 of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:00 o'clock p.m. it goes back to the adjoining property owners. There is a public benefit to the vacation application because it results in additional right-of-way in exchange to provide the cul-de-sac. The Bonnetts view this as doubling potential access, so they offered to continue the access over his property and also provide this potential permanent right. He and the applicant have not had a chance to discuss the Mayor's suggestion, but Mr. Bonnett will give the Council his perspective as the property owner. The applicant has agreed to the City's conditions, it provides a public benefit, a public safety benefit, and an even exchange in providing the right-of-way. They believe it will be a benefit to the private owner and the City, and they are present to work through the issues. Mr. T.J. Bonnet, 40/45 Smith Avenue, stated he is not here to block anyone from accessing the Luce Line. He thinks if the issue was important to everyone on the block, it would probably have been addressed in the last 20 years. He believes the big concern is all of the turnarounds because of the 6 Smith Restaurant. There are five places of access from the golf course corner to the Palmers' house to the Luce Line, most of which are on private property like his. All the residents are fine with this. If the vacation goes through, there will be six places of access. Initially when this was discussed, the City wanted his land to solve this issue and suggested giving him, in exchange, the end of the street, which is about 23 paces to the end of the pavement. He thinks Almo got thrown in because the Whiteley's said if 45 Smith Avenue is developed, that house could move a little bit away from the property. Whiteley's called and asked their name not to be used, but that is the only reason Bonnett's asked for Almo. He said they do not need the unimproved spot. Mr. Bonnett said there are a number of emotional appeals about the Luce Line access but most are from people who don't live at the end of the Smith cul-de-sac. The safety from the vehicles is the issue, not the path. The former residents of 40 and 45 Smith all support this plan, and he named several people. Several people offered to write a letter because they feel it is a nightmare living there. Two of the three most affected property owners also support the plan, other than Whiteleys. He mentioned that people at the last meeting stated there was no extra traffic from 6 Smith. He relayed a story about a former resident who was outside when a convertible stopped to ask directions to 6 Smith, hit some potholes that were filled with rainwater from a construction project on Smith, and splashed all the occupants. He said the public safety solution is good for the people; it has nothing to do with the path access. He repeated there are five access points and six after this, which is as many people who do not live on the street who do not support the plan. He encouraged property owners who have path access to approach the City and ask for a permanent easement if they wished to do so. He is more than willing to work with the City. There are eight people who have lived on the street and dealt with the issues who support the plan. The arguments are great but it doesn't hold water when you talk about all the people who have direct access to the Luce Line but they must use his path, a lot of whom do not live in the neighborhood. Mr. Bonnett understands a vacation is common in this type of circumstance, where there is no benefit for the end of that road spur existing. He is giving up land for the cul-de-sac; the City is getting land at the end of the street and does not have to repave that road next year. He believes it is a prudent taxpayer - focused decision. Since 6 Smith has opened, there are 8-10 cars a day going by extremely fast looking at their GPS. They have two small children and he doesn't want to see any accidents happen. They approached the City with the cul-de-sac six years ago; they weren't interested at that point. He wants to get something done on the issue and not kick the can down the road. The issue is, if the path went directly through their property and they want to put a garage there, which is why they're getting more property, so the garage can have water, they want 4.1 acres to get an accessory dwelling unit, they would be hamstrung, or if they would want to move the house on the lot. Page 4 of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:00 o'clock p.m. Mr. Bonnett is reluctant to say, "Let's plow it through direct access" because nobody else in the neighborhood has done it. He understands at the end of the street it touches DNR property and Xcel Energy property and then it goes to the Luce Line. The path has been across private property for 20 years, it's never been an issue, and it's not going to be an issue in the future. He gave names of several people he called or emailed before the meeting to let them know they could use the path. After tonight's meeting they'll be able to use the path no matter what happens. If he builds a barn in the middle of an easement, he would want Luce Line access and would create it at that point across his property for people to use, but running a permanent easement through it clouds the process of solving the issue at the end of the street. He thanked the Council and hopes something can be done tonight. Ms. Stacey Quinn, 125 Smith, said 6 Smith did open and T.J. mentioned a lot of names, but he did not mention her or her husband's names, nor did he speak to them about the potential cul-de-sac. They are not opposed to a cul-de-sac at the end of the street. It is a busy street, and redevelopment/more homes at the end of the street would make it busier. It is a dead-end/short street and T.J. wants to make it shorter. It's a worn path because it's on Smith Avenue. The reason they purchased their home 12 years ago is so they had direct access to the Luce Line which they use quite a bit and have had no issues for several years. The path did cut into a little corner of T.J.'s property; it is very far from the front of his property. They were never asked not to take that path. The path was groomed by the previous homeowner, it used to be very well taken care of, because the neighborhood uses it and will continue to use it. She is opposed to the vacation being granted. She doesn't know what a hammerhead or City easement would look like: how big, how long, how wide. She is very disheartened this is happening in her neighborhood from a neighbor that never approached them, and he cannot get to his home unless he crosses by her home. There is no way 8- 9 people are lost going to 6 Smith. You cannot go 50 miles an hour down the street, especially now, because the street is in complete disrepair. She is requesting a cul-de-sac at the end of the street, access on Smith to the Luce Line at the end of the street, and don't make the street shorter. If there is talk of a City easement, she would like to see what it looks like. Mr. Doug Whiteley, 60 Orono Orchard Road, said he has never seen an issue that caused an uproar like this other than a proposal to put a cell tower on the Orono Public Golf Course. There is an overwhelming negative response to the proposal. He thinks a permanent easement from Smith Avenue to Luce Line is a very viable solution, but putting one on Orono Orchard Road would be a tragic mistake. He walks to Luce Line 5-6 times a week with his dog, noting as you walk south around the curve from Woodhill Avenue, there's a straightaway and the Luce Line bridge going south, there is a blind spot and you cannot see cars going around the curve. It is dangerous; there's no shoulder and it is not safe. The topography of the proposed easement from Smith Avenue to Orono Orchard is very steep and makes no sense. He agrees with the previous speaker that the cul-de-sac should be by the dead end. He is not opposed to the cul-de- sac but is opposed to the Smith to Orono Orchard Road proposal. He never spoke to T.J. about swapping land. Mr. Sean Benson, 1220 Lyman Avenue, opposes the plan proposed by the Bonnetts. He referenced the Planning Staff's comment that they could not support the proposal unless, among other requests, there is "an inclusion of a trail easement from Smith to the Luce Line." He said this plan does not include that but is an easement that goes to Orono Orchard Road which does not make sense and is also a safety issue. He referenced an email from Mr. Bonnett which stated, "We will maintain the path that is currently available to all neighbors as invitees. This hopefully should not affect anyone too much. The permanent easement cannot be run directly through our property at this point in time as the property line will change if the vacation is granted." He said the plan appears to allow no direct access from Smith to the Luce Line. However, Mr. Bonnett is indicating neighbors can use the current trail but at his discretion. He does not Page 5 of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:00 o'clock p.m. feel that is an appropriate solution because a future property owner could decide not to allow trail access. He wanted to know if a resident of Orono, who doesn't live in the neighborhood, would be prevented from accessing the Luce Line from Smith Avenue. He believes it is better for the City Council to make an explicit decision about allowing community -wide access from Smith directly to the Luce Line. Mr. Benson also questioned the fundamental equity of this plan and said there's a lot of talk about cleanup as though it is normal that residents get free land, which he feels sets a dangerous precedent. He understands the City would give up .66 acres of land with the vacation and the Bonnetts would give up .06 acres of land for the cul-de-sac, so the Bonnetts would receive .6 acres of land at no cost. He does not think it is a benefit for any residents to receive City land at no cost. It also sets an inappropriate precedent for residents to request similar vacations in the future. He would propose an alternative plan whereby the City would move the cul-de-sac north to the end of Smith Avenue, and that way it would lead directly to the DNR -owned trail that leads to the Luce Line. In return for the cul-de-sac, the City could allow the Bonnetts to receive a similarly sized piece of land, .06 acres or something that is equitable. If the Bonnetts do not want to trade property, the City could consider putting in a hammerhead turnaround which should not require any exchange of land. The residents would get the turnaround, direct access from Smith to the Luce Line, the Bonnetts don't have to contend with people on their property, the City does not have to contend with any permanent easements while addressing safety concerns, and it is fair. Mr. Matt Hopping, 95 Smith Avenue, stated as far as traffic, it's UPS trucks and a few strange cars. The path was supposed to go straight to the Luce Line, not to Orono Orchard. If you walk along the ditch, there are culverts with water and other things. It should go straight at the end and the cul-de-sac should be right where the end of the road is now, or a hammerhead. A turnaround is not needed. People back in the driveways. Repave the road and make the road decent because it is a pretty rough road. He does not see people speeding. It's the end of the road; people are slowing down. When people back into your driveway it can get frustrating at times but that's what happens when the road is narrow. He thinks a hammerhead would work; a cul-de-sac is not needed. Mr. Merritt Jackley, 80 Smith Avenue, knows there was an issue when people put 6 Smith in Google Maps, that people went to their location; but they have worked with Google Maps and it should now have people going to the restaurant. T.J. gave him verbal approval to use the path for friends and family which he appreciates, but he feels it's in the community's best interests to make it a permanent easement. He agreed with Mayor Walsh's proposal and plan but suggested the plan be put into writing so the citizens can see it and vote and decide from there. Mr. Ash Stoesz, 1170 Lyman Avenue, does not want to stop anyone specifically but referenced the Alamo place and asked, before anything is vacated, the City explore whether that is something that is viable in that if a tree falls over at the end of Smith Avenue, everyone is landlocked in, and to the extent there's an opportunity to evaluate a second point of exit, it would be interesting to think about. Ms. Pam Cariveau, 60 Smith Avenue, does not feel the plan submitted meets the Planning Commission's recommendations, citing lack of an equitable access to Luce Line Trail. The newly proposed easement does not provide access to Luce Line Trail; it provides access to Orono Orchard Road. She feels routing the easement down a steep embankment and onto Orono Orchard is not safe or equitable in comparison to a direct -access path at the end of Smith. Ms. Cariveau noted the City -owned land at the end of Smith Avenue is the nearest and only non -private property access point to the trail in the neighborhood. The next nearest public access point is on Orono Orchard Road, which is not the safest access point. Currently the trail at the end of Smith Avenue has been routed through private property with Private Property signs. Page 6 of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:00 o'clock p.m. There is much public interest in retaining City -owned land at the end of Smith Avenue so everyone can enjoy safe and unfettered access to the Luce Line Trail via City- and DNR -owned land without the need for an easement. Ms. Cariveau stated the DNR has given permission for a simple footpath or a more formal path should the City decide to coordinate with the DNR. The DNR is working to remove trails that cut through private property. Future access points will only be allowed through City and DNR land according to a letter from the DNR. If the City decides a cul-de-sac is inevitable, she suggested an equitable exchange of land with the Bonnetts might be to give them the City land that runs parallels to the Luce Line Trail while maintaining the original length of Smith and the City -owned land to access the trail via DNR land. Ms. Cariveau noted the Bonnett's are asking for 28,750 square feet of land when only 2,600 square feet of land is needed to effectively make a cul-de-sac. If the City vacates the land parallel to the Luce Line Trail, both sides, the Bonnetts will still receive more land in exchange than what is required for a cul-de-sac, which she stated was reasonable. Ms. Alisa Benson, 1220 Lyman, said their family has taken up the sport of geocaching, which is not permitted on private land, the caches must be placed on City or DNR land, so this type of cleaning up prevents that activity. Mr. David Klema, 40 Orono Orchard, stated T.J. has less than 3 acres and the vacation would total .6 acres but referenced Mr. Bonnett's comment about building an accessory dwelling unit that required 4.1 acres and asked how the math comes out if he is under 3 and the total vacation is .6. Walsh stated that would not be part of the decision-making process either way. Mr. Klema asked whether the smaller lot could be resized so Mr. Bonnett could take acreage from that to make his other lot bigger, in theory, he could subdivide that lot. Walsh stated these are 2 -acre minimums so there would only be two lots there no matter what. Mr. Klema wasn't sure whether the small lot could be made smaller because it is already less than 2 acres. Walsh stated you cannot subdivide something unless it meets the zoning requirement. Mr. Klema asked how you would be able to have an accessory dwelling unit, if it was possible. Printup stated he had no idea. Ms. Angie Hopping, 95 Smith Avenue, believes the vacation of the property is not to the benefit of everyone in the neighborhood and City of Orono. If a cul-de-sac is needed, it should be at the north end of Smith and allow the City property to be the direct access to the Luce Line. She referenced an email T.J. sent which stated he gives access through his property to his discretion and everybody has access with the exception of one person. She asked how in the future they would know they still have access through the property and said T.J. should not have the discretion to cut people off if there is a permanent access. She asked, if the cul-de-sac goes in where it is now and there is a permanent easement, does that go from the Smith Avenue cul-de-sac all the way through to the Luce Line. Walsh stated it would. Page 7of10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:00 o'clock p.m. Ms. Hopping asked who would patrol that to make sure everyone still had access if there are Private Property signs set up, how would you get access. Walsh stated there could not be Private Property signs up if it was an easement. Ms. Hopping said the current access is not very inviting because of the Private Property signs. Mr. Bonnett says he gives access, but it's to his discretion, which she does not believe is fair. She also does not believe it would be fair to give that much property in return for the small amount of the cul-de-sac. Mr. T.J. Bonnett, 40/45 Smith Avenue, felt if there were a hammerhead at the end, people would continue using driveways and a cul-de-sac is more desirable. Regarding the path, his intention would be to rip up the end of Smith, beautify it, make it better, get rid of hard space, put some green space in, and landscape it. He would eventually like to build a garage somewhere, but it's probably five years from now so he can't really say what the plan is. Early on they talked about could it be three lots, what developments are going to go on there, is it going to be a bunch of condos, an office building. That is not his intention, and he feels he has communicated that. The neighbor that is not allowed to access the path destroyed his property, there was a lawsuit, the judge sided with Mr. Bonnett, and he thinks any reasonable person would not allow that person to cross the property. That's the only exception for people using the path. Mr. Robert Miller, 60 Smith Avenue, stated he is the excluded neighbor, which he is fine with. The plan as proposed does not meet the requirements put forward by the Planning Commission as well as City Staff. He is not opposed to a cul-de-sac; he feels it should be at the end of the street. He is not entirely opposed to vacating some property to the Bonnetts to allow for the cul-de-sac. Mr. Bonnett is giving up some land so he should get something out of it. He thinks it would be more appropriate to take land parallel to the Luce Line than shortening the street and eliminating the direct access to Luce Line Trail and the DNR property. Mayor Walsh closed the public comment section at 6:52 p.m. Printup thought this winter neighbors might get together and make sure there's some sort of footpath on public property so private property is not touched, nor should it be. The cul-de-sac would be nice and convenient in timing because of the upcoming road project. He said the City could also repave it and leave things as -is and then designate the path going to the Luce Line on City property and there is no private property affected. He would deny the proposal as presented until a plan is brought up to grant the public access to the Luce Line Trail. From a bureaucratic standpoint it sounds kind of small because it should be about vacations and roadways and road improvements, but he is okay with not having a hammerhead or cul-de-sac and leaving the road the way it is after it gets paved. His two takes are to either leave it alone and dedicate a path, or do some sort of improvement but have a dedicated path. Walsh stated the goal for the City is to do the best long-term solution which, in the end, is a cul-de-sac because it's the best way to turn around, although where the cul-de-sac goes is up for debate. The City has direct access and he did not feel the City would give that up. He also would not approve the plan as presented. An option would be to ask the applicant if they would like to table it and come back with a plan based on comments they've heard, and then everyone could see it on paper and then stake it out. The trail through the Bonnetts' land is a very calm, easygoing trail. It would not be the best solution to go through City land because it is so steep, but it could be done. Not everybody is going to be happy. If the City is going to clean things up, they want to come up with the best solution for the citizens long-term. Page 8 of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:00 o'clock p.m. Crosby said it makes sense to have the cul-de-sac at the end of the road and some type of connection from the end of the cul-de-sac to the trail leading to Luce Line. If the Bonnett property's elevation is better for the path, a swap may be a good idea to make it more accessible. He is not in favor of the proposed plan. He agrees a cul-de-sac is going to be needed, but the question is placement. There is a better place, which is down the road. There should be an equitable land swap to make things better for everybody. The neighbors should work together and the applicant should come up with a better proposal from what he is hearing. It can be a win-win for everybody safety -wise and a permanent access to the trail for everyone. He is not an advocate of the trail going to Orono Orchard. Johnson agreed with the previous comments. It would make sense to him to move the cul-de-sac to the end of the street, which removes any question about people's continued rights to gain access to the trail. Historically, the City has done a good job keeping people's access to parks and trails. There may be an opportunity to vacate some of that once the cul-de-sac is in the right spot. The City needs the property owner's cooperation to put a cul-de-sac there, and there has to be something in it for the property owner. There needs to be a good, usable road; and the City will find a way to continue the access people have come to enjoy. The safety side of it is important as far as emergency vehicles. If it was a new development, a cul-de-sac would be put in. It is also reasonable for citizens to see the final plan before it gets approved, so it needs to be brought before the Council. He noted he does not know if putting the cul- de-sac there would create nonconformity with the required setbacks from the houses. Walsh asked if the applicant would like the Council to vote on the plan as proposed or if he would like it tabled and go back to the drawing board a little bit. Mr. Bonnett said he would like to know where the path has to be because eventually, they would like to build on some flat ground. He reiterated that he has to get something if he is giving something. Walsh stated the City would like the best path, easy walking. The path that is there now is very walkable. He suggested working with Staff, and if there were a better route that makes sense that can be put in without a lot of difficulty, that would be fine. If the City were to do an entire huge grading project, the City might as well put in the hammerhead and deal with what the City has. Mr. Bonnett said putting in the hammerhead would be expensive, paving the end of the land would be expensive, and grading the path to put a path in would be a lot of money. Walsh commented the existing path is really good. Everything else, once you get to the hill, is steep. At the end of the street, if you go left, it's a non -working solution. Mr. Bonnett, using a map, suggested a route which would curve down into the path and thought the confusion might be over the wording of "direct" or "indirect." Crosby asked why the City wouldn't just be able to move the cul-de-sac to the end of the road. Mr. Bonnett responded with why would you just want to drive farther for the fun of it. He added that also does not get him what he wants, which means the City will not get the cul-de-sac that everybody would want. He stated he wants to work with the City. Mr. Bonnett asked where the City wanted the cul-de-sac to move. Page 9of10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, November 12, 2019 6:00 o'clock p.m. Crosby said down to the end. Mr. Bonnett asked if he should amend that part of the plan and pointed to the map. Walsh stated the applicant and Staff needs to figure out what makes the most sense, but the existing pathway is the best pathway. Mr. Bonnett commented that the Engineer said that's where it should go because that's where the manhole cover is, which the City wants access to with their big trucks. Walsh reiterated the applicant should work with Staff because he is not here to plan the road, that's what Jeremy and Adam do, and if they can bring back a recommendation knowing what's been said tonight as to the most logical and best place, and then the applicant can talk to them about the pathway. Mr. Bonnett said he is in favor of that and he understands that and the easements. He said if everything has to be voted on and waited out, with all due respect to Mr. Johnson, he would be back after the road gets repaved, which is what he wants to avoid. Mr. Bonnett indicated he just heard about the easement today or yesterday. Barnhart indicated he thought it was Friday. Mr. Bonnett said he is trying to get it as complete as he can and appease everybody. Walsh noted it's a process starting with the Planning Commission, neighbors have reached out, Council members have talked about it and have been to the site and the City Council is trying to make sure the right thing is done for the long-term, not just whether the neighbors like it or not. Mr. Bonnett agreed with Walsh. Walsh stated the City needs cooperation from Bonnett and if he is willing to take direction from Staff and figure out the best spot and then the pathway from there, it could be tabled. He could meet with them and then come back with a new plan for everybody to look at again. Crosby agreed that would be the way to go. Mr. Bonnett agreed to table the matter. Printup moved, Crosby seconded, to table the matter. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Page 10 of 10 ORMATION FROM ADVANCED SURVEYING AND ENGINEERING. -11C INFORMATION FROM MNTOPO. _ 40&45 SMITH AVENUE F I IIII � / /i� �► \ I I � 40 & 45 SMITH AVENUE - / ORONO MINNESOTA 55391 r -- _ I / / I I I II I ,/ :• /. I I --//j � j/// !iii///i!i/ij� /� / 1 \�'% / //i //iii//moi/ T.J . BONN ETT ZZ tet' 40 & 45 SMITH AVENUE ORONO, MINNESOTA 55391 • II �1 \ Y 978\979 , .0001� 10 FT. PROPOSED 0 - TRAIL EASEMENT ROUTEoll \ \ \ EXISTING POWER POLES \ EXISTING POWER LINE I ••• ..• • \ \\ \ 1 / / / h - -' I \\ I / \\�MALullsPROPOSED CUL-DE-SAC PAVEMENT • .1 I 1 k \ CADD QUALIFICATION SUBMITTAUREVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL SHEET INDEX SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN X1.1 From: Aaron H. Printuo To: Dustin Rief; Jeremy Barnhart Subject: FW: Orono 40 & 45 Smith Ave Project/Luce Line Date: Sunday, December 1, 2019 6:47:19 PM From: Leimomi Davison [ohana.leid@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2019 3:02 PM To: Denny Walsh; Aaron H. Printup; Victoria Seals; Richard Crosby; Matt Johnson Subject: Orono 40 & 45 Smith Ave Project/Luce Line Dear Orono City Council Members and Mayor, We would like to address a comment that was made by Theodore Bonnett at the city meeting on November 12, 2019 at 6pm. The subject line on agenda is item #20 LAI 9-00074 William Griffith o/b/o Theodore Bonnett, 40 & 45 Smith Ave request for street vacation. Theodore Bonnett had spoke at this meeting (22:47 min -23:10 min) about his former residences/renters at 45 Smith. He had mentioned that all former residence support the plan with multiple names including us - Matt & Lei Davison. He mentioned that we were contacted and that all former residences said that they would love to write a letter because it was a nightmare to live there. The only truth is that yes we were residence at 45 Smith. We were never contacted nor are we in support for or against this issue. Finally, we did not say we were willing to write a letter that this home was a nightmare to live in. We wanted to make clear that Theodore Bonnett's comments were not true and did not represent our opinions.. We have no inquiries or comments to add other than Theodore Bonnett completely misrepresented our name. Thank you, Matt and Lei Davison From: Robert Miller To: Jeremy Barnhart Cc: Pamela Cariveau Subject: Re: 40/45 Smith Ave Vacation Date: Wednesday, December 4, 2019 4:03:33 PM Hello Jeremy, Thank you for sending over the updated plans. Pam and I will not be able to attend the Dec 9th City Council Meeting but would like to include the below for the Council's consideration. - We do not feel that it is an equitable exchange of land for the addition of a cul de sac. I understand that the cul de sac requires approximately 2600 sq ft of the Bonnett's property and the City will be giving up 28,750 sq ft of land (more than l OX the amount necessary for the cul de sac) - The City is creating no public benefit by shortening the length of Smith Avenue and this only benefits the Bonnetts. - We do not feel it is necessary and proper for the City to give up direct access to the Luce Line Trail and put in an easement through private property. We believe that the current length of Smith Avenue should be maintained which will allow continued direct access to the Luce Line Trail. - We are not opposed to a reasonable exchange of land to put in a cul de sac at the end of Smith Ave. Perhaps the strip of land bordering 40 Smith and the Luce Line would be appropriate. This provides the Bonnetts with greater than the 2600 sq ft necessary for the cul de sac and maintains the option for the City to connect Smith Ave with Orono Orchard Rd. We greatly appreciate your consideration of the above. Sincere regards, Rob Miller & Pamela Cariveau 60 Smith Ave Orono, MN 55391 > Dec 3, 2019, at 2:37 PM, Jeremy Barnhart <jbarnhart@ci.orono.mn.us> wrote: > Hi Rob, > Attached is the plan they have provided. This will be on the City Council agenda for Monday, December 9th at 6:30 pm. > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Miller [mailto:robertlmmiller&u outlook.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 1:55 PM > To: Jeremy Barnhart <jbarnhart@ci.orono.mn.us> > Subject: 40/45 Smith Ave Vacation > Hello Jeremy, > I hope you had a great Thanksgiving Holiday. Was there an updated plan filed by the Bonnets? > Best regards, > Rob Miller > <19 12-02 X1-1 SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN.PDF> A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPLICATIUON TO VACATE A PORTION OF SMITH AVENUE AND ALMO LANE AND LANE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA FILE NO. LA19-000074 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on August 28, 2019 William Griffith o/b/o Theodore J and Allison B Bonnett, (hereinafter the "Applicant"), applied for vacation of the rights of way of a portion of Smith Avenue and Almo Place and Lane, as illustrated on the attached Exhibit A, hereinafter the "Property"); WHEREAS, on October 21, 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 October 21, 2019, the Planning Commission voted 6 in favor of and 1 against a motion to deny the requested vacation; and WHEREAS, on November 12, 2019, the City Council reviewed the application and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff; and WHEREAS, on November 12, 2019, the City Council tabled action on the application, at the request of the applicant, to allow time to adjust the plan to better preserve the public interest; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 2019, the City Council reviewed the revised plan; and 1. The City Council finds that it is not in the interest of the public to vacate Smith Avenue, Almo Place and Lane because of existing street and public improvements in Smith Avenue, and present and future public access to the Luce Line Trail and perimeter areas via Almo Place and Lane. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the vacation of the rights of way of Smith Avenue and Almo Place and Lane as described above is hereby denied by the City Council of the City of Orono by a vote of in favor and against, on this 9th day of December, 2019. Page 1 of 3 ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor Page 2 of 3 Page 3 of 3 AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 24 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: LA19-000086 — J. Marie Fieger, 580 & 590 Big Island Permit for Dock on City ROW Presenter: Melanie Curtis Agenda Planning Department Planner Section: Report 1. Purpose. This application is regarding a permit for placement of a private dock on City right-of- way. 2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was received on September 21, and considered to be complete on September 25. The 60 -Day review period has been extended by the applicant and now expires on March 31, 2020. 3. Background/ Summary. The applicant is seeking a permanent solution for access to her land locked parcels, the applicant made a request to install a seasonal dock on this right-of-way, pursuant to City Code Section 78-657. This code provision provides a mechanism for an off -lake property owner on Big Island to request a permit to install or construct private improvements on public rights-of-way. This provision only exists within the RS District. Currently the applicant accesses her property via an informal "easement" over the Robb property (570 Big Island). According to City Code section 82-225, creation of an easement which grants access to the lake to any person for any uses, including but not limited to docking, mooring, swimming and launching of boats is prohibited. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. On November 18, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. Following the public hearing the Planning Commission voted 6 to 1 on a motion to deny the requested permit. Commissioners voiced concerns with width of the right of way, location of power lines, and construction and emergency vehicle access. During the public hearing the Planning Commission heard from a number of Big Island residents, including the applicant, who were imploring the City to find an alternate solution. The Commission felt that a change in ordinance was appropriate. 5. Public Comment. Comments from the neighbors were received and are attached as Exhibit E. Neighbors were generally in opposition to the request. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends the Council table action on the request and direct staff to prepare an ordinance amendment that allows for the provision of an easement for docking for in the RS zoning district. Denial at this time essentially eliminates any legal right to dock access for the applicant; and requires the applicant to agree to the terms a private third party deems appropriate. Prepared By: YY1GG Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: -Sb)X AGENDA ITEM COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council should discuss this request and the alternatives. If appropriate, direct Staff to explore a text amendment to the RS district which would provide alternate access to off lake properties on Big Island. Exhibits A. Plans B. Draft PC Minutes C. PC Staff Report D. Dock Permits E. Public Comment References PC Exhibits 11/18/19 A. Application B. Narrative C. Site Plan D. Map/Aerial Photo E. City Code Sections F. Public Comment G. Property Owners List H. Plat Map Prepared By: YY1GG Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: -Sb)X Gery Lydi, Dee 1 Jamie Willi, Cindy Lydia Jeff P Janie i-� 9S0 9 1 72*- �1 2433 r-- ✓ _ .r I O 9524 - � Ln 1 �i �--.-- JW 61 p `Z D ;p rT•l , o m o�� I Y 4 nil S$�Y ° s'SO, I$ F 1 S4 o.s p� r' \Ql � 154 0'13 r S %5°3®®®' W 94q 5 94 oSp,00' -E945 Y s S 7'RE 0 �. N 2f.00. 4617 r-- UTIR'41NAe� v - ` 94V1 l _Iry egc�ai o s. i $ 76°3 9 9sJ, g W 1w I N�EV'f Q, f m p 6p 01 --116,85 o r• turnrri ^' o ; jr U4 "-1 41 h+o P ? VU-4. m7$ r4{ nWxm 29uo %o I o I a1- --- two V7 10 04 W N �{I I JJ� I I � I � , I J --9 ' S �� 11,% - I-j -- A 3 N ' I L-p ' ornW o 17.0 y�N I oo a M� I v 6) mE r3, Ni A I rn - sr+l N 11 NATZS 30' m W 41 CD I _ �✓ m 6�'t N w N o '1 I N w LTI o Ol r N� w I � \ 932 aw DECK I I N CJ w QJ410 930 -1 r- / --- ekISTc INo -a 1 `Z1 [Ti WE o �m I p0 o -e _ 11 -11 NG o a� � N � o r ♦ 3 N �� ( N f N n 1 C-1 n rK w rrT 1 931 '7 r I � t ✓ A r S � n 1 I -7 t--_ - °, ur ot0 5 L7�E I 5 ��. _929„4 RVE.Y LINE) m ' 929 4 `S H 0 92- RELINE SEMBtR T992:' A KE `' M I N NETON KA �� i 11 ex s'ft , c ,�. F Eli k > r !� r u a } pl fs' Y- is {4.N :r I' o � tir w;, 1 27� MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. 4. LA19-000086 J. MARIE FIEGER, 580 BIG ISLAND, PERMIT FOR DOCK ON RIGHT-OF- WAY, 7:31 P.M. - 8:28 P.M. The applicant, J. Marie Fieger, was present. Curtis noted the applicant owns 580 and 590 Big Island and oriented the location on a map. The applicant's properties are adjacent to the platted 30 -foot -wide right-of-way between 570 and 600 Big Island. The applicant is requesting approval to install a seasonal dock on the right-of-way. The Code provides a mechanism for an off -lake property owner on Big Island to request a permit to install or construct private improvements on public rights-of-way. The proposed dock would allow access to their property. There are no roads on Big Island. Curtis said Staff finds the request meets the criteria outlined in Section 78-567 for approval. The section is in the SR district only, which governs Big Island and Deering Island. Staff understands until this time the applicant has been informally sharing a dock with neighboring lakeshore property owners. This arrangement cannot be legally formalized, as Code prohibits establishment or creation of an Easement which grants access to the lake for any person for any use. Public Works Director Edwards stated that should a dock be installed as proposed, a suggested condition of approval is the City would have a right to use the dock for the purposes of accessing City property or is a wide right-of-way the City maintains and has for open space in the area. The condition was discussed with the applicant, which she agreed to. Curtis said comments received from the public were included in the Commissioners' packets and one comment was emailed to Commissioners today. There are a number of people in the audience in addition to the applicant. Curtis stated Staff recommends approval of the permit with the following conditions: 1) the location of the installed dock shall meet the LMCD's requirements and be approved by Public Works Director Edwards; 2) the dock shall be removed for the winter season; 3) the permit issued shall be valid for one year and shall be subject to change, alteration, or revocation for cause by the Council at any time and shall be automatically renewable on the anniversary date of issuance except upon written notice by the City to the permittee at least 30 days prior to the anniversary date; 4) the dock shall be permitted one boat slip for use by the owner of this property exclusively; 5) no canopy shall be erected; 6) dock sections shall not exceed 6 feet in width. McCutcheon asked if the other lots have access to a dock and clarified he was referring to the docks adjacent to it. Curtis noted all the other lots on that side of the island are lakeshore. He said they have the ability to install a dock. McCutcheon asked where they could do that. Curtis said on the lake and asked McCutcheon to clarify his question. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. McCutcheon said he was referring to the lot above the blue one on the map. Curtis stated that lot is attached to another lakeshore lot. Gettman asked if Staff wanted to add, in Condition 4, that the City can use the dock. Curtis said if the Commission wished to add that, it could be added. Thiesse asked if the dock precluded citizens from using that property. Curtis said it did not. Thiesse stated they just can't use the dock. Curtis said they can't dock at the dock and use it. The right-of-way is 30 feet in width. The applicant would be afforded a 6 -foot dock width which would not encumber use. Thiesse said it would probably need to be centered so the setbacks are met for the lake. Curtis agreed and said if there is some accommodation to be made for setbacks with the LMCD and the City and adjacent property owners, that could be entertained as well. Thiesse asked if the dock would be removed from the Easement or removed from just the lake when it would be removed in the winter. qft. Curtis stated she did not know. Thiesse noted if snowmobilers use the area, the City wouldn't want a dock on it. Curtis said that's why they would want it removed. She believes there are things stored on the property presently such as a boat and some other storage -type items. Thiesse said another citizen would not be allowed to get a permit for a dock there, that this is the only property that can ask for a permit for a dock. Curtis stated he was correct for that side of Big Island, in order to meet all the conditions. Ressler stated the 6 -foot width is wider than most docks and asked if there was any reason for the 6 feet. Ressler also asked if there were any contingencies that would revoke the yearly automatic renewal. Curtis said she used the guidance from the other permit issued in the past on the other side of the island. If the Commission felt it was excessive, Staff would make a modification. With regard to contingencies that MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. would revoke the yearly automatic renewal, Curtis said the code is very liberal to the Council's discretion and it would be automatically renewable unless the City provides written notice to the permit holder 30 days in advance of the anniversary date. Ressler commented it's revocable, it does not have to be reviewed, but if Staff does not like something that's going on or it's not exactly what they agreed to, they can have that amended so it is not nearly as permanent as some others. Curtis noted it says "at any time," which she took directly from the Code. Bollis said Curtis referenced the other side of the island and asked if this has been done before. Curtis answered she found a record of one other. Ressler asked if the City has run into any issues with the previous permit. Curtis said there have been no issues. Ms. J. Marie Fieger said she is the owner of the two landlocked properties. 40 years ago, her dad and Mr. Robb's dad agreed where to move the dock for easier access. She said that leaves things more open for all the kids to play. She indicated her neighbor has agreed to sell a permanent Easement of 10 feet so it would stay exactly as it has been for 40 years. She knows it's not exactly what's permitted, but it would be best for all parties involved to stay with the agreement as it exists and leave the dock where it's been. Ressler said the request complicates things a little bit. Ms. Fieger suggested the Commission listen to her neighbors' comments. Ressler said during the public hearing they could maybe help explain things, but he'd like the Commission to ask some questions and he may bring the applicant back up after the public comments to help clarify. Ressler stated it is critical, because if they give the applicant access but see that the dock is placed in the wrong place and then pull it, the Commission has to do it over again in a year. He is not sure the way the applicant is wanting to do it works. He appreciates the applicant's comment because intention is helpful for the Commission. McCutcheon, referencing the red arrow on the map, said he understands the applicant would not want the dock there because it is a swimming beach and it's not easy to get to because there's a lot of trees. Ms. Fieger stated there is a ravine, so walking there is difficult. By having the shared dock to the far -right side, it doesn't infringe on anything else. As a landowner, walking up it's a fairly steep hill, but it's a direct shot. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse stated in a perfect world the applicant would be purchasing an Easement along that property line. Ms. Fieger indicated he was correct. Thiesse asked what would happen if the City were to purchase that Easement and go through the same process. Gettman clarified that Thiesse was not proposing for her to purchase the Easement. Thiesse said right now the Commission is allowing her to be on a City Easement. If the City buys the Easement it is a City Easement, and she could put her dock over there and it's the same process. Ressler stated he would defer to Staff. Barnhart said that would imply the City is interested in buying additional land, whether it's Easement or right-of-way rights, which he does not believe the City is. It is important to respond to the request that's in front of the Commission, and if the Commission feels there's a different way to get to where they want to go that involves an Ordinance Amendment, they could add that to their recommendation. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:44 p.m. Mr. Selden Robb, 570 Big Island, said he owns the large lot in discussion. He used the map to show the locations of the docks. He stated if another dock went in the area, it's one more dock in the line cutting all the beaches down so there are smaller spaces. He asked if a dock is put on public property, can anybody on the lake who happens to know it's a public access come in and use the dock, or are the Fiegers going to be able to say, "No, it's my dock, you can't use it," even though it's on City property. Mr. Robb said he'd like to sell Ms. Fieger a 10 -foot Easement along that side which would give her an access. He understands there's a rule against that and he understands the rule but feels that doesn't necessarily apply to an island because it's not a piece of property that you can drive your car to and then have access to the lake. Ms. Fieger is completely landlocked; there are no roads to get to her place. She has to either use the street or go across his property. He asked that they be allowed to sell 10 feet of the property, sell an Easement, or a better situation than putting another dock on the shore. Ressler stated he appreciates the effort to try to get this to work. The Commission can't govern the lake; the Commission has to govern the land. He does not know if the dock would be protected from public use or if it only could be used by government or county officials. Curtis said Staff is asking for occasional City use of the dock and exclusive use for Ms. Fieger. Ressler noted that would eliminate a public right to use the dock regardless of it being placed there or otherwise. He indicated he understood Mr. Robb's point. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Mr. Robb explained that you can't drive to the other side, park your car, go through your house, get into your bathing suit, and walk down to the dock. The lake is the street to get to the island. It's not like it is on the mainland; it's a completely different environment. Ressler agreed that it is unique. Mr. Robb brought a copy of an 1856 plot map of Big Island, indicating Ms. Fieger's and his lots, and said with all the docks it gets tight so they are trying to keep things more open for everyone. Libby said he doubted the plot map is a document of public record and asked if Mr. Robb would be willing to give the Commission a copy of it. Curtis noted she thinks Staff has one. Libby mentioned he is a real estate broker and thinks in real property asset and value all the time because he was an appraiser, too. He asked if there was an offer of remuneration or exchange of dollars between the two parties for the Easement. Mr. Robb said they are looking at something but nothing too much. He just wants it official. He is doing it for ease of access. He indicated an area on the map and said if the dock would go there and J. Marie sells her property, Mr. Robb has strangers walking past his house. The property line is 2 feet off the side of his house. Libby noted Mr. Robb would probably be one of the best sources for the proper pronunciation of the First Nation's name of this island and asked him to pronounce it. Mr. Robb stated there is a thing called Mapiyata but that is not the Big Island. He pointed out Morris Island, Big Island, and Mapiyata on a map and said it used to be a separate island. The channel was built because the O'Searles, who had lavish estates on one end, and the Morrises, at the other end, didn't get along. O'Searles brought some people in to dig the channel to define the property line. Libby commented there is really no launch access for the residents that are on the island. Libby asked whether there was any common launch anywhere for someone who was landlocked to actually launch a boat even as a day dock. Mr. Robb stated Ms. Fieger is the only place on that half of the island that's completely landlocked. There was no common launch. Erickson asked how a boat would get there. Mr. Robb said one would have to have a car or a truck permanently stationed on the island in order to do that, which nobody does. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Mr. Web Hill, 620 Big Island, said his understanding of the Easement is for fire, safety, police, barges, those types of things. If there is a dock there, a big barge can't come in. Firemen can't come up there with their boats and their equipment or trucks from barges. It really brings an element of safety as well, putting the dock in the Easement that was really stipulated for public utilities, fire and police type of things. Also, 12-13 people agree that the right solution is a variance and to allow an Easement from Tom Robb to Ms. Fieger. Mr. Hill noted that variances happen all the time. He asked why the City would not allow a variance here when the community that lives here are all supporting that variance and it enables the safety that everyone is looking for. Ressler stated an emergency vehicle could commandeer anybody's dock for putting out a fire and they do. The other application is a little bit different because they own the land already; it's just placement of the dock. Regarding emergency vehicles, it appears that the right-of-way where the dock was going to be and now is not going to be does not seem easily traversed to access anything to extinguish a fire, which could be a difficulty as well. He hears Mr. Hill is in support of it and the Commission appreciates that. The Commission has to come up with reasons to approve other than the general public in the immediate area/surrounding area support it. Mr. Eric Adams, 600 Big Island, said he wrote the Commission a letter. He said he could show the Commission multiple pictures of construction vehicles which come by barge that are dropped off and placed in that right-of-way. Mr. Erickson was talking about a slippery slope. He has concerns about putting a dock in there and somebody buys this property and then it's restricted to this many feet and then they want to make it a slip and then they want to make it a little bit longer. If the dock is 6 feet wide and the right-of-way is 30 feet, that's going to put 12 feet on either side, so any boat wider than 7 feet would be encroaching on what he believed is a 5 -foot setback for a property that is 50 feet or less, which is what he believes the Code is. Affik Curtis stated that is LMCD's rule. Mr. Adams said many boats are larger than that on Lake Minnetonka, especially for somebody that is buying property on that island, so you're already talking about encroaching on Mr. Robb's property or his own. This isn't us versus Ms. Fieger. She is against this permit as well. He thinks the solution is to allow the right-of-way. He said all the people along the western shore have a very steep shore, and those people have used that right-of-way as a place to drop off construction vehicles. Ressler asked whether it is a City right-of-way. Curtis indicated that it is. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Ressler asked if people are going through the City right-of-way, noting that it seems wooded and wondered how they are getting through there. Mr. Adams stated they can go right up. The power lines run the length of the right-of-way as well so there is space there. Because it is wooded there are branches coming down, and there have been two cases where the lines were live and in leaves and it's dangerous, which is why the fire issue was brought up. The people on Lafayette Bay have lakeshore access but the property is a very steep hill, and you couldn't get a construction vehicle up one of those. The only access is through the right-of-way and you come by barge. He realizes a seasonal dock is not considered permanent, but he finds it hard to believe that somebody is going to remove their dock every time somebody wants to have a construction barge come out. They are arguing to maintain the system that's been in place for 40-60 years that everyone has gotten along with. This would be a permanent solution that allows the City to maintain its Easement. Because Mr. Barnhart indicated the City probably doesn't want to buy any land, another solution would be to swap pieces of the right-of-way over to the side and maintain a 20 -foot right-of-way, swapping 10 feet of property with Mr. Robb, and that would allow the Easement to go up the side. It seems like there could be a solution without taking the public's right and the property owners' all along the west side, approximately seven, that would need access to this right-of-way. Ressler stated he was also going to bring up a land swap or relocation. He was discouraged to hear there are power lines on that side and it's already accessible. Mayor Dennis Walsh, 1354 Rest Point Circle, said he is always amazed with all the unbelievable things to deal with in Orono with all the shoreline. He noted the Commission has an item in front of them that they need to address. Solving a different problem is not in front of the Commission right now. He thinks if there's anything that lends itself to an exception for a very specific piece of ground, that they could work with the City Attorney to come up with an Easement that has not yet been created, has not been sold, has not been agreed to. The Commission could make a recommendation to forward something for the consideration of the Council to figure out what is the solution. He thinks this is something that can be solved, but he would defer to the City Attorney regarding how to create that. Ms. Penny Saiki, 2874 Casco Point, said she lives across from the public access on Casco. They removed the dock 3-5 years ago because of legal liability. If you put a dock on City land again, you're opening yourself up to liability. Whether that has private use or not, it's a dock on the water. She said all the people that live there are cooperating, bringing up a solution. Regarding the access, at Casco where they did the land restoration, that sewer manhole was in water so they restored it with dirt. That's not a road Easement and that's on the water. So, if you're going to have emergency vehicles going out there, that is not built as a road so you will have erosion of that very quickly and, you've got a road right on the water. There's also no turnaround for an emergency vehicle. Ressler agreed there is definitely not, nor is there a use for an emergency vehicle. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Mr. Robb said the electrical power and the phone lines for the entire island come up that Easement. If you put a dock out in that waterway, how are you going to guarantee you don't put a dock post down and hit that high powerline. Ressler stated that was not helping the case of the application. Mr. Robb said that is another reason to move the dock, because otherwise you might hit a 12,000 -volt buried cable in the water. Ressler noted Mayor Walsh is encouraged that the Commission could find a way to make it work and it might not be how it is proposed right now. Motioning one way or the other gets the Commission to move along and allows them to work together and try to find a way that might make it work. As it is applied does not work with what the applicant would like to use it for, so he thought it would be prudent to motion and deny the application and allow the applicant to go in front of the City Council and start working on a way to make it work. Gettman stated he would move in that direction with one caveat, which is to amend Section 82-255, to allow the private Easement on the RS -only properties to allow landlocked RS property direct access to the lake. That's a suggestion to be considered by the City Council but separate from the movement to then have this application be denied. Ressler suggested to make a recommendation as such and see if that can head off some of the public discussion, close the public hearing, have a discussion, and make a motion to allow this to find a solution on another date. 10 Ms. Saiki noted all of those accesses that were on Casco, the landlocked lanes, were abandoned because there were Easements on property that had access. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. Gettman moved, Erickson seconded, to deny Application LA19-000086, J. Marie Fieger, 580 Big Island, Permit for Dock on Right -of -Way. Libby said the Casco resident brought up an issue that supports the Mayor's recommendation. There are aspects of liability for the City if a dock were to be installed there, and the Commission should condition that this should be brought to the attention of the City Attorney. Ressler noted what is in front of the Commission does not work for the application. Libby indicated it is very perplexing because there is a citizen's group of residents who are advocating more for a City issue and Staff is advocating more for an approval to the applicant to use the City right- of-way. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse noted the request was to have a dock on the City right-of-way so that's what's been brought forward. Whether or not the applicant or the community wants that, that is what is in front of the Commission. If it is not going to be used, does the Commission deny or approve it. Ressler said approving it would not do any good because it is not going to suit what the intended use is. Denying it and allowing the Council to start working on a solution that works is prudent, and that allows Staff to work with the Council on something that might be agreeable. Barnhart noted there are two issues: one, responding to the request in front of the City; two, perhaps there are other options to address the issue that might be more palatable to the neighborhood and the City. If the Commission elects to deny the application, reasons must be given. There's no other written Easement, nor can there be, so an Ordinance needs to be amended. He is somewhat cautious of recommending denial on an application that conforms to the City Code standards. He does not want to put the applicant in a position where those two things have to happen for them to have dock access. Ressler said he is not sure the space can be used for what the applicant would like to use it for. Also, one of the public comments was the concern of blocking use for a barge or other vehicle to get access to power lines, among other things. Another concern, perhaps not having enough information as to what that terrain looks like. For instance, it looked like a heavily wooded area that was not even passable but now he knows that there are power lines there, which tells him he doesn't have enough information to make a decision to approve it. He also thought there may be a better placement for all parties involved for the dock. McCutcheon stated there's precedence of doing it for a landlocked lot on the other side of the island, so he supports approving it, and maybe between now and when it goes to the City Council something else will happen. The Commission needs to respond to what is in front of them today. Thiesse stated he agrees with McCutcheon. Ressler said the tables have turned and the Commission appears to be in support of the application even though it does not work for the applicant. Curtis stated there is a motion and a second on the floor. Ms. Katie Adams, 600 Big Island, asked if J. Marie could pull her application since there are other potential solutions. Curtis stated she should not. Ms. Adams said one of the things she sees as a problem is the safety. There is a significant cable there. Anyone who has kids and any boaters that come, they tell them to stay away from that area. By the MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Commission approving that, they are going to put the general public in safety's harm by providing it as an access point. McCutcheon noted it will still go to the City Council. The challenge the Commission has is, a lot of the information being talked about is not in the application. Understanding the practical difficulties and precedence set before, the applicant will get a dock to get access to her property. Right now, the only way that's feasible is through that lot. Ms. Adams asked if it is on public record that the Commission is approving this as a potential option and there is a resolution after the fact in the other meeting, isn't some sort of precedence being created that it is an option that is viable on the table that could be brought forth again. She does not want that. Ressler indicated the previous application that was placed was the precedence the Commission is facing that helps close the loop on what the Commission was discussing on the application that we started out on and heavily deliberated earlier in the day. There are two things: One, yes, it does; two, this does not make it so, for lack of a better term. The Commission provides feedback to the City Council, and then they make their decision. What often happens is that the applicant is able to change gears and either provide more information or a better solution that might work, regardless of the Commission's feedback. Saying this fits into the application as proposed does not mean it will be approved by the City Council, nor does it mean that the Commission is ignoring that it's the best place or not the best area to be placed. It is a difficult application. He does not remember having an applicant say that where they applied to put it does not work for them. Ms. Adams said if this isn't a good fit, there is public consensus that is in agreement with another alternative, it makes the most sense to deny it. Ressler said the Commission appreciates the feedback and they were about to vote. Ms. Adams said she just wanted to be sure, as she heard some people choosing differently. McCutcheon noted that the neighbor who is offering might change his mind when he walks out the door and how would that help the applicant. That is probably not going to happen, but people can't predict the future so the Commission has to deal with what they have today. That's why the Commission sticks with the rules. Ms. Adams said she was confused, because there were so many arguments against it, that it would even be a plausible suggestion. Ressler noted that's the beauty of the vote. There may be a couple people saying this is probably not how it's going to end, but the Commission has to come up with a ruling to get it to the next place. Erickson stated he believes there is a motion on the table to deny. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Gettman asked if he could amend the motion. Mr. Robb asked if the Easement on the other end has a power line coming up. Ressler said the Commission does not know. Mr. Robb stated he can tell the Commission it does not, because the power line goes behind their property, splits, goes across, goes under the channel, feeds the other half of the island, and goes under the lake and feeds Gale Island. Ressler said everyone needs to understand that it is going to be different tomorrow than it is today. The motion can be amended, but he needs to get feedback from Staff as to whether the Commission needs to vote on it as proposed or if the motion can be amended and reseconded. Curtis stated it can be amended and then reseconded. Gettman moved to amend the motion to approve with condition changes to the Staff recommendations. The first one would be item number 2, that the dock shall be removed for the winter season and not be placed anywhere on the Easement; item number 4, that the permitted use is not exclusively for the applicant but also for City use as the Public Works Director deems appropriate. And add a number 7, that it in no way impact the utility and public Easement usage that's on the current public Easement. Gettman requested item number 7 also include a change of the allowed dock width to 4 feet from 6 feet. vl&� Ressler asked if there was a second. Curtis stated the second had to come from Erickson. Erickson stated he would not second the amended motion and planned to deny the application. The Commission and staff discussed who made and seconded the motion on the floor. Curtis indicated the Commission would have to vote on the first motion since the motion to amend was not accepted. Ressler stated there is a motion to deny the application and it has been seconded and the Commission has to vote on it. Erickson said he would like to comment before the vote. He recognized Adams wrote a very good letter and spoke to the Commission earlier. He was impressed by his letter pointing out that the right-of-way is the point of entry for power lines that serve the entire island and that it is also used for construction MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. vehicles, used by barges and emergency vehicles and access for watercraft, which, even without a dock, other residents could use it for canoes or pontoon boats or paddle boards, etc. A number of residents have spoken in favor of leaving the access the way it is. Two reasons that impressed him most are the power lines both overhead and underwater, and also the construction barges which are not going to come in the winter, they can only be there in the summer, which is when a dock would be there. That would cut off all the construction activity in the area. He thinks the public has a strong interest and the Commission should leave it the way it is. If some other solution can be found, then the Commission can vote on that, but it is not philosophically honest for the Commission to vote in favor of something the Commission knows isn't wanted, can't work, and causes problems. Ressler noted there is a motion and a second on the table to deny the application. McCutcheon stated he felt the Commission could deny on the grounds of safety. He was looking at it that Ms. Fieger needs access to the island. He can't predict the future, but if the Commission denies for safety reasons, it doesn't mean she won't get access to her property. There's got to be another way. Bollis asked what the other way would be. Erickson commented her family hasn't had a dock since 1974. Then they made a deal with the neighbor. They haven't used a right-of-way for dock purposes; no one has. Libby said there seems to be an elephant in the room, which is the fact that there is at least hearsay from people who have lived on the island for a long time and have been served by the underwater electrical that there would be a hazardous condition established by granting. He asked if Staff has engineering reports or utility service surveys that would disprove that. Ressler indicated not in the application. Curtis stated that was correct and noted it would be something that Staff could obtain but it is not information Staff has right now. Ressler reminded everyone that the application will go to City Council before anything becomes finalized. The discussion is appreciated, but there is probably a lot more preparation required. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 1 (Bollis). Date Application Received: 09/21/19 Date Application Considered as Complete: 9/25/19 60 -Day Review Period Extension Expires: 01/23/20 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Melanie Curtis, Planner h'1GG Date: 18 November 2019 Subject: #LA19-000086, J. Marie Fieger, 580 & 590 Big Island Permit for Dock on City ROW Public Hearing W _>_11 \1rSH Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a permit to install a dock on City right-of- way to access their non-lakeshore, interior property on Big Island. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval. Background The applicant owns 580 and 590 Big Island, two non-lakeshore properties on Mahpiyata Island, the western portion of Big Island. The applicant's properties are adjacent to the platted 30 -foot wide right-of-way between 570 & 600 Big Island. The applicant is requesting approval to install a seasonal dock on this right-of-way, pursuant to City Code Section 78-657. This code provision provides a mechanism for an off -lake property owner to request a permit to install or construct private improvements on public rights-of-way. The dock allows access to their property. There are no roads on big island. This provision only exists within the RS District (Big Island and Deering Island), however not on the mainland. Applicable Regulations: Permit for Private Improvements within Public Rights -of -Way (Section 78-567) This section states that "it is unlawful for any person to alter, improve or use for private purposes in any RS district any platted public right-of-way... without first obtaining a permit from the council, as follows"(The following section has been abbreviated for analysis, the entire section is attached as Exhibit E): 1. Inland property access, persons desiring access to property located inland and not abutting the shoreline may apply for a permit to privately use and/or improve platted public right-of-way for such purpose. The permit applicant shall demonstrate and the council shall find: That there is no reasonable alternative access available. The applicant's property does not abut the lake or a public dock access. That the proposed improvements and/or type of use would not unreasonably affect other properties abutting the right-of-way. The installation of a seasonal dock on the right-of-way as proposed should not adversely impact the other properties on this side of the island as all but the applicant's properties are lakeshore properties. FILE # LA19-000086 18 Nov 19 Page 2 of 3 The council may approve, deny or place restrictions on any such permit based upon public health, safety and welfare considerations, including without limitation the configuration of adjoining record lots, the location, width, topography, drainage and vegetation on the right-of-way and the number of existing or future property owners who may require access at the same location. Any land alterations or improvements approved shall be the minimum amount necessary to provide reasonable inland access. 2. Land alterations. Grading or physical alteration of any platted public right-of-way for any purpose, including inland property access, is prohibited except when such work has been specifically authorized as part of a permit issued by the council... 3. Dockage on right-of-way. Installing, maintaining, keeping or using a private dock on any platted public right-of-way for any purpose, including inland property access, is prohibited except when such dock has been specifically authorized as part of a permit issued by the council... The council may establish reasonable standards or requirements in approving any such dock permit. 4. Encroachments prohibited. No private property, buildings, structures, fences, boats, vehicles, dock parts, junk or debris shall be built, stored, parked or kept at any time within any platted public right-of-way, within any platted public park, or on any other property owned by the city except as specifically authorized by a permit issued under this section. 5. Permit exceptions. No permit shall be required for any person to walk on or over any platted public right-of-way or any platted public park when such use is made without altering the natural state of the land... 6. Public use limited. Any permit issued under this section shall be deemed to open the platted public right-of-way only to the extent necessary as established in the permit, and for the limited use of the permittee and his invitees. 7. Permit limitations. A permit issued under this section shall not grant or vest any property rights to use of the public right-of-way or other public property, or in any improvements. Permits issued under this section shall be valid for one year, shall be subject to change, alteration or revocation for cause by the council at any time, and shall be automatically renewable on the anniversary of the date of issuance except upon written notice from the city to the permittee at least 30 days prior to the anniversary date. Hold harmless... As a condition of issuance of any permit, the applicant shall in writing release, indemnify and hold harmless the city from any and all claims or causes of action arising out of the use or alteration of the platted right-of-way by applicant or his invitees. Permit hearing and notice. The planning commission or the council shall hold a public hearing or hearings on each application for a permit... Analysis Staff finds the request meets the criteria outlined in Section 78-567 for approval. Up until this time, staff understands that the applicant has been informally sharing a dock with neighboring lakeshore property owners. This arrangement cannot be legally formalized as Orono City Code prohibits establishment or creation of an easement which grants access to the lake to any person for any uses, including but not limited to docking, mooring, swimming and launching of boats (Code Section 82-225). FILE # LA19-000086 18 Nov 19 Page 3 of 3 Engineer Comments The City's Public Works Director, Adam Edwards notes that the right-of-way in question leads to Pleasant View Park. Should a dock be installed as proposed, the city should request the right to use the dock for the purposes of accessing the site for any required maintenance or inspections. This was discussed with the applicant and she has agreed to this condition. Public Comments Comments from the public have been received; comments are attached as Exhibit F. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested permit? 2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Planning Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the permit. Further, staff recommends the Planning Commission consider applying the following conditions: 1. The location of the installed dock shall meet the LMCD's requirements, and shall be approved by the Public Works Director. 2. The dock shall be removed for the winter season. 3. The permit issued shall be valid for one year, and shall be subject to change, alteration or revocation for cause by the council at any time, and shall be automatically renewable on the anniversary of the date of issuance except upon written notice from the city to the permittee at least 30 days prior to the anniversary date. 4. The dock shall be permitted one boat slip for use by the owner of 580 & 590 Big Island exclusively. 5. Dock sections shall not exceed 6 -feet in width. 6. No canopy shall be erected. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Narrative Exhibit C. Site Plan Exhibit D. Map/Aerial Photo Exhibit E. City Code Sections Exhibit F. Public Comment Exhibit G. Property Owners List Exhibit H. Plat Map op \kESI3 // CITYof ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 44, A RESOLUTION PERMITTING A PRIVATE DOCK ON PLATTED UNIMPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY BETWEEN LOTS 38 AND 39 MORSE ISLAND PARK BIG ISLAND -FILE #2549 WHEREAS, the City of Orono has received a request by David Lovelace (the "applicant") for a private dock on platted unimproved right -of way located between Lots 38 and 39, Morse Island Park on Big Island to serve as access to inland property located at 220 Big Island (also known as Big Island Record Lot 48) and legally described as follows: (Exhibit A attached); Also described as: PINS #23-117-23 23 0028 (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, Section 10.3 1, Subdivision 5 of the Orono Zoning Code allows owners of inland properties to request approval of a permit for the installation of a private dock on unimproved platted right-of-way on Big Island to serve as access for said inland properties; and WHEREAS, the City Council is authorized to approve, deny or place restrictions on such permit based upon public health, safety and welfare considerations. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that a private seasonal dock is permitted on platted unimproved right-of-way located between Lots 38 and 39, Morse Island Park to serve the property, with the following conditions: 1. Length of installed dock extended from the shoreline shall not exceed 100'. 2. Setback from the extended right-of-way boundary lines: a. 0-50' from shoreline: 10' minimum b. 50-100' from shoreline: 15' minimum c. Final location subject to approval of Public Services Director. 3. Dock sections not to exceed 6' in width. 4. One boat slip only, allowed for applicant's use only. Page 1 of 3 CITY or ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4A 5. A lateral dock section at the shoreline may be installed to facilitate pedestrian access over/around the existing ice ridge at the shoreline. 6. The owner of the adjacent inland lot at 130 Big Island (Record Lot #10) may also share in the use of said dock (one boat slip only for 130 Big Island) as long as such use is acceptable to the applicant. At such future time that the owner of 130 Big Island requests that the City Council approve a separate dock to serve said 130 Big Island independently from the dock serving 220 Big Island, it is the intent of this City Council to allow a second dock at this same location between said Lots 38 and 39 to serve 130 Big Island. 7. No dock canopy shall be erected over said dock. The permittee agrees to maintain the area in a neat and presentable manner at all times and agrees to hold the City harmless forever from any and all claims resulting from actions as a result of the issuance of this permit, use of the right-of-way, or use of the dock while this permit is in force. Should there be any other requests from inland property owners to use this site for the installation of a dock to serve their properties, this permit is subject to review and or revocation at the discretion of the City Council. Further, this permit may be revoked by the City any time for any reason in the future upon review and revocation by the Orono City Council. The City of Orono further reserves the right to review this permit for any reason as deemed appropriate. The applicant agrees to remove all structures within 30 days of permit revocation or termination and if no removal occurs, agrees to an assessment of the costs of removal against the property. This permit runs with the property, not with the owner, subject to all conditions and restrictions noted herein. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 2 of 3 ATTEST: CITY or ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Q fa fw Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 24th day of April, 2000. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Gabn 1 Jabbour, Mayor The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of April, 2000, by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. KCIAROLE �SEMANMINNcSOTAs Jan. S, 200 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Notary Public On this =f"` day of/,. , , 2000 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared l���Ir l� rnv ed known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. 1�AA�'7 .i✓si✓_S • �/� • . . •IC ��Exp, s Jan. 31 D lJ J1JJlI.J� • • yof RESOLUTION #4456 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION That part of Lot B, Morse Island Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying south of a line running from a point on the west line thereof a distance of 554 feet south of the northwest corner thereof, to the northwest corner of Lot 38, Morse Island Park 4932149 x 2 City of ORON RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1531 APPROVING A LOT AREA VARIANCE PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO.246, FOR RECORD LOT NO S4 SECTION 34.366 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. That owner (s) located City: 2 /taxpayer(s) or record within the RS Seasonal is (are) the of the following described property Recreational Zoning District of the Lots 19 and 20, Morse Island Park, Herinepin County, Minnesota 2. That in adoption of Ordinance No. 246, the City Council reviewed ownership, development and use patterns on the islands and has determined that all the above described property combined is and shall hereinafter and henceforth be one "RECORD LOT" as defined in Section 34.366 of said ordinance. 3. That all the above described property when combined as one RECORD LOT is still less than the minimum lot size required for new lots in the RS District, but that this RECORD LOT -is being used and/or may be used in the future for any permitted use in the RS District without adverse affect upon public health, safety, or welfare. CONCLUSION The City Council of Orono hereby grants a lot area variance to the above described RECORD LOT based on the above findings and subject to the following Conditions: 1. This RECORD LOT including all the above described property combined shall henceforth be continued in common ownership by the same person or persons even if recorded as separate lots or tax parcels, and it shall not be subdivided, sold in parts, reduced in area or otherwise separated without application for and approval of a subdivision by the City.. This condition shall not preclude future sale or transfer of the complete "RECORD LOT" as a single unit. 2. Granting this variance means this RECORD LOT may be used for one - family seasonal recreational use without a structure; or a single new seasonal dwelling may be built; or an existing seasonal dwelling may be used, improved, added -onto or replaced; all without requiring further City Council review of lot size, but subject to strict comp- liance with all building permit, setback, hardcover, on-site sewage treatment and other performance standards for development in the RS District. PAGE 2; RECORD LOT NO.:F-,4 : RESOLUTION NO. 3. Granting this variance shall not vest any rights in the property other than as specifically provided in Ordinance No. 246, and shall not preclude a future City Council from amending, modifying or other- wise limiting development rights and/or performance standards in the RS District. 4. The undersigned has read and understood the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, agrees that the above described property constitutes a single RECORD LOT; agrees that the RECORD LOT use may be so limited by the City; and agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted `by �tfipe Orono City Council ATTEST,: City, Clerk a Pr ap.e rMt y Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) on the day of4dld , 1983. (2) CITY OF ORON-U- %" G Mayor On this day of j.e_ , 19 jrJ , before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared Ma, -,''r_- C art.9®—I known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) utedthe same as his (their free act and deed. This instrument City Of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Mn. 473-7357 was drafted by: 55323 My C OMM I S S �p�lt;��BLIC-MINNESOTA • COUNTY This document is being recorded for the benefit fl��ltCf�n�+`iorExpiresMay23VvVvVVV,1984vvWVVVvVV. WV City f 0 o,.o r n ota Statutes vvvWNENNEPIN 386.77. °' � zTeslie i e City Attorney State Deed Ta Due Hereon: Exempt This instrument City Of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Mn. 473-7357 was drafted by: 55323 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTLY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. CITY OF OR0140 ) I, Alberta M. Strom, City Clerk of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing coPy of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Orono with the original record of such resolution in the Minutes of the proceedings of said City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on September 26 , 1983 and that the same is a true and correct copy of said original record and that said resolution was duly adopted by said City Council at said meeting. In Witness Vhereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 5 day of October 19 83 Alberta P4. Strom, City Clerk 4=1 f:l N Co N MII1UUUZS 07 M13 RZGUHAR ®ItsOZO CO UNCHLIZHZG EMLD IUGUST50 1133(6 12.8671 coof Larry Cook was present and submitted the ,� etter of approval from the Butterfield's. MA GIS ° 5 CABLE Acting Mayor Adams stated that he wa comfortable with the Planning Commission recomme ation subject to applicant being put on notice tha he is only allowed a maximum of three horses on the opertyo Councilmember Frahm asked Aplicant if he proposed a riding ring. He also no ed that a conditional use permit is required for a9l training done. Mr. Cook stated that/he planned to have a riding ring which would bet�A tedapproximately 501 from the property line° uncilmember rahm questioned whether the original pr Deal of i ' from the semi -commercial use property woul be mo a from in order to maintain more distan f m the strictly residential area. Mr. Coo n ed that there is also a natural screening of mature/tree between his property and the Butterfield propty o 1 was moved by Co cilmember Grabek, seconded by Acting Mayor Adams, to a t Rsolution #2037 approving a variance to construct F:r n 50' from the property lime (per Planning Commissio recommendation) subject to a 3 horse limit. Motion, Ay 4, Nays 0. There was no report from the Acting Mayor Adams stated the at t e last Cable TV meeting the budget was approved not inthe philosophy in which Cable TV budgets their monies -a also noted that approximately 1/3 of the households!n n Orono are being hooked up to Cable TV. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a dock permit on a parcel of laud (an interior lot) that has had a dock on the City right-of-way for the past many years which is currently undergoing a change of ownership. Since the City does require a permit to allow them to have a dock on City right-of-way, staff 7 recommends that this be permitted subject to the owner being liable to any use related, that the dock be maintained appropriately, and effective until such time as there are other requests from other inland properties requesting a dock at the same location. It was moved by Acting Mayor Adams, seconded by Councilmember Grabek, to adopt Resolution #2038 approving a dock permit on a platted unimproved right- of-way known as Bay Place on Big Island to serve Lots 19 and 20, P.I.D No. 23-117-23 23 0033, until such time as there are other requests from other inland properties requesting the installation of a dock at this location. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 5YAZU Boma ®T Ga DIRS City Administrator Bernhardson explained t the Big Island Board of Governors made a letter re st in early August to be put on the agenda, in which aff responded by letter requesting that they contastaff ahead of time to no avail. Present for this matter were: Donald A. Miller, Stuart Gorney, Alan Wiedorf, Joe B40kus, and Lance Bartlett. Don ller explained that Xhe Chairman of the Board of Trust s, Leonard Car on, has been out of town therefo was unable o respond to staff's letter. As former airman of he Board and friend, Mr. Miller was asked to eak o ehalf of Chairman Carlton and the Board of Gover rs Mr. Miller rev' w the process that was undertaken in order for th vets o retain possession of the Vets camp. He ex ained th areas of concern while trying to rebuild t camp notin that most of these problems existed or many years rior to possession of the propert , less than a ye r ago, by the Board of Govern so 1 City has issued 3 citat ns for the storage of �ish houses on the island, ,ting that the fish houses have been stored on the i and previous years and this is the first year the B and of Governors has had any control. Be stated t t the issue is now tied up in the court system betwe the city and the owner of fish houses and the Boar of Governors is caught in the middle of the issue. E o RESOLUTMN OF THE MTV COUNCIL No, 2038 1� IMS®LUTION PERM ITTHNG X PRIVATE IIIDOCI Oki( PLATTED UZ IIPIR®VED IRIIGET-017-KAY BAY PLACE, ZXG ISLID WIEZRZAS, the City of Orono has received a request for a private dock on platted unimproved right-of-way known as Bay Place on Big Island to serve as access to inland property; and WEMRMAS, as per Section 10.31, Subdivision 3 of the Orono City Code allows for the installation of a private dock on unimproved platted right-of-way on Big Island to serve as access for inland properties. ZOW, TERRMF®RM, BE IT RESOLVED that a private dock is permitted on platted unimproved right-of-way known as Bay Place on Big Island to serve inland -property to Lots 19 & 20, P.I.D. No. 23-117-23 23 0033, with the following conditions-. 1. The installation of the dock length not to exceed 100 feet 2. Setback from extended lot lines° 0-50 feet in length 10' 51100 feet in length 15' 3. Dock sections not to exceed 6® in width 4. One boat per dock for residential use only (LMCD regulations) The permittee agrees to maintain the area in a neat and presentable manner at all times and agrees .to hold the City harmless for- ever from any and all claims resulting from actions as a result of the issuance of this permit, use of the right-of-way, or use of the dock while this permit is in force. Should there be any other requests from inland property owners to use this site for the installation of a dock to their properties, this permit is automatically revoked. This permit may be revoked by the City at any time for any reason in the future upon review and revocation by the Orono Council. The property owners agree to remove all structures within 30 days of permit revocation or termination and if no removal, agree to an assessment of the cost against Lots 19 and 20 of Big island. The City of Orono further reserves the right to review this permit for any -reason as deemed appropriate. Adopted- by,, the City Council of the City of Orono on the 25th day of Ougust, 1936. /D6r,6thy M.=alliri, City Clerk Cl/"'- If CA'A �`� . dc&� Tim Adams, Acting Mayor From: whaleblazers . To: Melanie Curtis Cc: Mom; Brett; Jam; Katie Subject: Re: FW: LA19-000086 / dock request for 580 Big Island Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 10:26:25 PM To Whom it May Concern: My name is Eric Adams and I am writing on behalf of my family, which has owned the property at 600 Big Island since 1977. We are writing to oppose the permit application for the city of Orono to grant a private dock on the public right-of-way between 600 and 570 Big Island. It is important to note that having a clear right-of-way serves an important access point for the public, all property owners on Big Island as well as emergency, utility and construction crews. Setting up a private dock would infringe upon the rights of all of the above parties. We are also writing with an alternative solution to provide lake access for the property owners of 580 Big Island. We oppose granting the permit for the following reasons: • The right-of-way provides critical access to the point of entry for power lines which serve all the residents of Big Island. By building a private dock, utility crews would lose their public access to work on the lines especially when repairs are needed due to branches falling on power lines after storms. • The right-of-way is used byproperty owners to bring construction vehicles to the island by barge. Having a dock on the right-of-way would prevent the ability of a barge to land on the beach and deliver construction equipment. • Having a dock would also prevent a barge from bringing emergency vehiclesand firefighters in the event of a fire on the island, which has happened in the past. • The right-of-way sits in a primary drainage area of Big Island. Construction of a dock will disrupt the flow of water from the island into the lake and disturb the sensitive wetland ecosystem nearby. • A private dock will impact vegetation around the drainage, which will increase erosion and impact water quality as runoff drains into the lake. • Allowing a private dock would block the public from being able to land their watercraft and access Pleasant View Park on Big Island. Living on the island creates a unique living environment, one that our family has cherished for over 40 years. However, the uniqueness of the island also forces the necessity to create modifications to regulations when necessary. An example of this is a shared septic system our property has with the property for sale, or the well system we share with our neighbor. Not ideal circumstances, but we worked together as neighbors to come up with the best possible solution for all parties. Our island community works very hard to maintain cordiality and work cohesively to support each other. It is important for the City of Orono to consider the uniqueness of property owners on Big Island to ensure we can continue to foster our small community in a highly interrelated system. When the current question about lake access arose, the property owners of 600, 570 and 580 Big Island came together to explore the best possible solution for all parties. For over 40 years the Fieger property has utilized the eastern border of the Robb property as their boat access point. We understand the need for a new property owner to have this access legally declared to assure them access, which is why the three parties proposed a sale of land, from the Robb property to the Fiegers, to provide permanent access along the eastern property border of 570 Big Island. All parties were in accord and each member satisfied with this plan of accommodation. There is precedent for sale of land to adjoining property owners on Big Island including the purchase of land from (610 Big Island to 600 Big Island in 1993). Also, land was divided between the property owners at 670 Big Island and 650 Big Island as they divided and purchased the property in between them. It is our sincerest hope the council will recognize the benefits of having neighbors who resolve challenges together with a plan that works for all parties. We look forward to the council working diligently to retain this high level of consideration and accommodation we have built life-long relationships upon in this special island environment. In summary, it is important for the city of Orono to protect its public access locations on Lake Minnetonka as they serve specific purposes to ensure safety and allow the public the right to use city property. We feel that the solution agreed upon by the three property owners is the best path forward to preserve the right-of-way, protect the environment and provide access to the lake for the inland residents. Best regards, Donna, Brett, Jay and Eric Adams From: brian botham To: Melanie Curtis Subject: 580 Big Island dock access Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 11:34:57 AM Regarding: LA19-000086 J. Marie Fieger, 580 Big Island dock request It is my opinion that the City right -of way should not be blocked by a private boat dock. This access needs to be kept available for both public utility companies and the Fire and Police departments, the same as a Fire Lane on the main land. It is also the access point for construction materials and large deliveries for most of the island residences along the west shoreline. While I am sympathetic to J. Marie's situation, as this would be the easiest solution to her access problem, the City right-of-way is not the correct solution. Thank you. Brian Botham Recreation Point LLC 700 Big Island Orono, MN 55323 Brian Botham 387 Margaret Cr. Wayzata, MN 55391 612-490-7753 From: Thelma Bryson To: Melanie Curtis Cc: Donna Adams; whaleblazersCalhotmail.com; Willie Bryson Subject: Current Big Island Right of Way Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 11:12:29 AM We ( Brysons) are in agreement of the proposal for J Marie Fieger to accept Tom Robb's offer of an easememt/strip of land East of Robb's property at 570 Big Island, Orono to build a dock and have access to the Fieger property at 580 Big Island, Orono. William (Bill) and Thelma Bryson 670 Big Island, Orono From: Web Hill To: Melanie Curtis Subject: LA19-000086 J. Marie Fieger, 580 Big Island dock request Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 1:30:25 PM I am writing you to express our concern and objection of the above referenced permit request to install a dock on the city right-of-way on the southwest side of Big Island. This right-of- way was established to provide access to the island for fire/police, public utility companies and barge deliveries. This access needs to be kept available for these services not a private dock. While I am sympathetic to the situation, I do not believe this is the right solution. Thank you Web Hill 620 Big Island Orono, Mn. 612-991-9387 From: Tim Peterson To: Jeremy Barnhart; Melanie Curtis Subject: Fieger property Big Island Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 11:29:24 AM To whom it may concern, I am writing to address an issue that was brought forth at the Monday, November 18, 2019 planning commission meeting. The issue is Janet Fiegers' application for a dock to be placed out in front of the city easement between Thom Robb's place and the Adams' family property. I didn't attend at the meeting due to my prior conversation with Janet Fieger about her request to the city to place a dock on the west side of Thom Robb's property aligned with the easement zone. She said the city had told her that they wouldn't allow an easement nor would the codes allow for her to buy property from Thom Robb to create a dock and pathway to her property next to my property. The conversation led me to believe that it was pretty much a "slam dunk" that the city would approve her doe and passage over the easement area to her property. Someone I know was at the meeting and called me Tuesday morning to inform me of the distinctive change in direction concerning her doe. It appears to me like my neighbors "threwme under the bus". The only reason I can think of why they wouldn't want her dock to be placed in the obvious location that it should be for her to use the easement to her land is because they don't want another dock and/or canopy in their right of way. Obviously, neither would I like another doe and especially not a canopy next to our property as my dock and Thom Robb's is only a few feet apart (I5ish), not to mention the view from our lakehouse being blocked to the lake. I am writing to request that Janet Fieger receives a permit to dock in front of the easement and usage of the easement to go to her property. This is quite important to the value of her property which she has up for sale at this time as a dock and easement is quite important to the value of her property. It is the only option that makes sense to anyone that doesn't have a personal interest in the situation. (Unless I am missing something.) I am out of the country for your next meeting which I understand will take place on Monday night, December 9, with the city Council. I will have my 31 -year-old son attend in my place and anyone else that may be deemed necessary to protect the value of my property. Please advise. Also, please advise me of anything further that I need to know. Sincerely and kindly, Dr. Tim Peterson 560 Big Island AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 25 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: LA19-000096 — Denali Custom Homes o/b/o Drew Hueler, 1398 Rest Point Road, Variances Presenter: Melanie Curtis Agenda Planning Department Planner Section: Report 1. Purpose. Consider lot width, lot area, rear yard, and hardcover variances to redevelop the property. 2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was received and considered to be complete on October 23rd. The 60 -Day review period was extended and expires on February 20, 2020. 3. Background/ Summary. The applicant is requesting lot width, lot area, rear yard setback, and hardcover variances in order to construct a new home on a nonconforming property. Initially, the applicant also requested a structural coverage variance to allow 22% structure where 20% is the limit (and an accompanying hardcover variance to permit 30.1% hardcover where 25% is permitted). Based on Planning Commission feedback, the applicant has redesigned and reduced structural coverage to meet 20%; they have shown a slightly larger lakeside patio which results in 4 square feet more hardcover than previously proposed for 30.17%. Based on the revised plans, the following are currently requested as part of the redevelopment with a new home: • A rear yard setback variance for 26.4' feet where a 30 -foot setback is required; • A hardcover variance to permit 30.17% hardcover where 25% is allowed; And lot width and lot area variances. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. On November 18, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. Following the public hearing the Planning Commission voted 7 to 0 on a motion to approve the requested lot area, lot width, rear yard setback, and hardcover variances; and to deny the requested structural coverage variance. 5. Public Comment. Comments from the neighbors were received and are attached as Exhibit D. 6. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the variances based on the revised plans. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt or amend the approval resolution. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution Prepared By: YY1GG Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: -Sb)X AGENDA ITEM B. Revised Plans C. Draft PC Minutes D. Public Comment E. PC Staff Report References PC Exhibits 11/18/19 A. Application B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form C. Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan D. Proposed Plans and Elevations E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations F. Property Owners List G. Plat Map H. Aerial Photo I. Neighbor Comments Prepared By: VIIGG Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: -Sb)X F CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING VARIANCES FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-330; and 78-1700 FILE NO. LA19-000096 WHEREAS, on October 23, 2019, Gregory Andrew Hueler (hereinafter the "Applicant"), applied for variances from the City Code for the property addressed 1398 Rest Point Road and legally described as: Lot 3, Subdivision of Lot 14, Rest Point Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "Property"); WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-330 to allow redevelopment of a substandard lot having 0.24 acres in area where 1.0 acre is required; and with 69 feet in width where 140 feet is required; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-330 to allow a rear yard setback of 26.4 feet where a 30 -foot setback is required; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1403 to permit redevelopment at 22% structural coverage where 20% is the maximum allowed; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1700 to allow 30.14% hardcover where 25% is allowed; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 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 November 18, 2019, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the structural coverage variance, however recommended approval of the remaining variances. The Applicant was directed to redesign to meet 20% structural coverage; and CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. WHEREAS, on December 2, 2019, the Applicant submitted revised plans showing conformance with the 20% structural coverage maximum; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 2019, the City Council reviewed the revised 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 variances for the revised plan 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 #LA19-000096. 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 LR -1 B One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Property contains 0.24 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 69 feet. 4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25% according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. 5. Applicant has applied for the following variances: a. Lot Area Variance b. Lot Width Variance c. Rear Yard Setback Variance d. Hardcover Variance 6. In considering this application for variances, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variances 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. ANALYSIS: 1. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance ...." The proposed variances are in harmony with the purpose of the Ordinance. The small, shallow lot does include difficulties in its small size and depth, CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. and proximity to the lake to permit redevelopment. The average lakeshore setback is proposed to be met protecting views of the lake for adjacent properties. 2. "Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan." The type of variances proposed to develop a nonconforming lot of record are consistent with the comprehensive plan: lot area, rear setback, and hardcover variance. 3. "Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. `Practical difficulties,' as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that: a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls. The request to permit construction of the home on the substandard lot, in the proposed location within the required rear yard setback, is reasonable as the property's reduced size and orientation with respect to the lakeshore creates difficulties. The requested variances are supported by practical difficulties. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The uniquely small lot size, location with respect to the lake and roadway, and required setbacks prevent a residential footprint consistent with the neighborhood. There should be consideration for variance approvals from the hardcover limitation, street/rear setback and the lot width and area requirements; c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. " The variances are requested in order to permit construction of a home which is reasonable, and as designed the home and improvements will fit the character of the neighborhood. 4. "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 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. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 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." A single family residence is permitted in the LR -1 B district; 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 Property's substandard size and depth with respect to the lakeshore and adjacent properties creates difficulties which also apply to many of the properties in the same neighborhood. 9. "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located." The Property's substandard size and applied setbacks create difficulties which also apply to many of the properties in the same neighborhood. 10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." Granting lot area, lot width, hardcover and rear yard variances are necessary for the preservation of the property right of the Applicant. 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." Granting a hardcover variance, the lot width and area, and rear yard setback variances in this unique situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. 12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty." The variances are necessary, and do not merely serve as a convenience to the Applicant. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-330 to allow redevelopment of a substandard lot having 0.24 acres in area where 1.0 acre is required; and with 69 feet in width where 140 feet is required; and Section 78-330 to allow a rear yard setback of 26.4 feet where a 30 -foot setback is required; and Section 78-1700 to allow 30.17% or 3,229 square footage hardcover where 25% is allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2. The City does not grant variance approval to increase the structural coverage over 20%. 3. The approved project shall conform to the survey dated 12/05/19 and building plans submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibits A & B. 4. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (December 9, 2020). 6. 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. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 91h day of December, 2019. ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR DREW HUELER OF LOT 3, SUBDIVISION OF LOT 14 REST POINT PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA �........... PaIE '� pq' 0 tip • �-' #a � sem. p a'� S�� tC EN'AY ` �• (ess.s (D) EXISTING O f4fr. / POSED Op': 3kg 9325 HOUSE --- SILT FENCEB i $1390 SE78 P0.aPO5Ea �N SETBACK qb G✓v _y,\�� LINES ` • d'" (C} ` TOP OF FOUNDATION EFERENGE, CE, POINT l PROPOSED 833.0 \\ 9 HOUSE \ 5\ #1398 \ • awes• '.•°�'N' �� ' .00ATIO / MILEVER \\% EXISTING 95 ! ' 75' ./ \ HOUSE "�I / LINE ACK O #1400 AVERAGE R W� S;E�TBACK LINE SILT PROP ENCE EXISTING HIOUSE Jt: \\ \\�(9 !�•} (asu) // j /1 / / OORIPRAP .ter.. •. \\ f j�/�(q..,grt•Sgi� LINE4(O.H.CONTOUR ) UR po, j LAKE MINNETONKA WEST ARM LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES Lot 3, SUBDIVISION OF LOT 14, REST POINT PARK • : denotes iron marker found (908.3): denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum 910.8: denotes proposed spot elevation —917--: denotes existing contour line, mean sea level datum PROPOSED ELEVATIONS (verify) denotes proposed contour line 1) Garage = 934.5 Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. 2) Top of foundation This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location 3) Main floor of an existing house and garage, to be removed, spot elevations and topography, and the proposed location of a proposed house, driveway and grades thereon. It does not purport 4) Crawl space to show any other improvements or encroachments. ODDATEt I hereby certif that this Ian, specification. or t scA� G R 0 N B E R G AND Pti spar d �a duly L tensed Landdirect supervision, on, 1,,=20' ;o,�,s renuccPAro.Nu¢wALxPwcfBE ASSOCIATES INC. t '-this rmeoss ac uar LoaA1m the laws of the State of Minnesota. '14-3-rB ravlsFo PROPaStD HOIff f DATE 1-1, — P -o CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LAND 5-28-19 SURVEYORS & SITE PLANNERS 445 1,10ki-I WILLOW DRIVE It,. JOB No. LONG LAKE, MN. 55356 19-1618 952-473-4141 Mark S. Gronberg Minnesota License <u Zr 12755 City of Orono �oNo Hardcover Calculation Worksheet Property Address: l3 9 �, c rr `'t sHo�E Prepared by: Date: GRorve9FRG 1 A.FI'oCZ.f7'FS', IA/C. ,9X2_3-�9 20 -X91 f-9- Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 2: ROPOSED HARDCOVER In the following table, identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Survey Total (Square Feet (Example) (Garage) 24' x 30' 720 S.F. A L<' / S.F. B 55 S.F. C L i06kMf-A#LV* O 1/6)t F— aPTc/aalF fosr O S.F. D i LIF wA Y 7/♦ S.F. E K it B64G e2 S.F. FPA rt 07 S.F. G S.F. H S.F. I S.F. J S.F. K S.F. L S.F. M S.F. N S.F. O S.F. P S.F. Q S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. U S.F. V S.F. W S.F. X S.F. Y S.F. Z S.F. 1 Total Proposed Hardcover 2 S.F. Excludable Hardcover See City Code Sec 78-1684): S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2 Total Excludable Hardcover O S.F. 3 Net Proposed Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 22 S.F. 4 Total Lot Area lo0 S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [ (3) + (4) ] 30-17% Subdivision Application - January 2016 This is an information packet regarding Hardcover. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained herein; however, if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code, the Code provisions will prevail. Page 19 Hueler Residence 1398 Rest Point Rd, Orono, MN 55364 L oo Ll 11 TP > 0 O PEI O 8 1 4 o 6 IOU GG Q L SIMON MINES 0 oo 0 0 > pof 0 L G L Hueler Residence 1398 Rest Point Rd, Orono, MN 55364 �u �u . m WIN C] I 1011 = �1 I•-,�--�—�_--111 � I NI�uu C] �uu 1 1MOMEN NOW LM� �l II�u ..■■■■INHE uu ■■M■ ■■i ���� ►•�� or1111 IhHE on — ■■I — III■�IlnMEN ®I�IIIII ■■■■■■■■I u■■■■■■■■i i■■■■■■■■h - i■■■■■■■■� ��■ L■-iiii ..-" Ir■Li— �■ 11111 iilliil��■.— I.-� ■■■■■■■ Ijpillll,�-,a��� �� 6 �- — 7ff I5 I I I I I I I I I �p I I P � I I I I I I I I y Hueler Residence N o 1398 Rest Point Rd, Q— Orono, MN 55364 TMeFP,na ,,.Pao e o me,M Ne°I le ti,e�d m :..------------------------------------------------------- , sr"� ❑ j rJ ,'.i ++ I II 1 I I I ¢ IDI tll =Tp 11 1 I I - T O I e'-rr9' is-esm' � I I Z----------------- 0 ______ O 9 Z `------------- TTS ti j F ,, , Iii F L4+" itti g ;l+;; II _ L19; II a,'i _Sc;N LII II " II I I I I I I J"I _________________________—_____________ d S T 0 H O Z 0 D r N D = Hueler Residence JAMESu.eoes .4 J o 1398 Rest Point Rd, — Orono, MN 55364 TMeFP, a ,,.Pao lel a °mgM Ne°I le ti,e�d m D = Hueler Residence JAMESu.eoes .4 J o 1398 Rest Point Rd, N— Orono, MN 55364 TMeFP,na ,,.Pao e a °mgM Ne° a ti,e�d m e s I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I � I I r� I I k A I I I I Qm I I r D Z I I r— y I I I I I � I iJ j I � I I I I I I I I I I� xove I we F I I I I I � I I I I I I I I I L ----- ---------------T---1 — ---� a D = Hueler Residence JAMESu.eoes .4 J o 1398 Rest Point Rd, N— Orono, MN 55364 TMeFP,na ,,.Pao e a °mgM Ne° a ti,e�d m n > n ------------ 0 n 0 n 0 0 0 \7/7/ 7/ 1 Hueler Residence 1398 Rest Point Rd, Orono, MN 55364 D =116"1 Hueler Residence J AMESu.e oea .4 W o 1398 Rest Point Rd, Q— Orono, MN 55364 TMeFP,na ,,.Pao e ° am M Neal le ti,eA d m 1'-O 3/4" 413/16" 1 I/T 2'-13/4" T-1. 112 L 9'-41/2" 9'-I 1/2" 18 4 I I� 4S � m Q Y IT # V Im § Im 19 D N JN m O Z 7-M.- ' �Ra .gym-�_ ��w �=v.=. ge�z.���E,F ®� 5 "3 �� -mi ju RR..cB �° gym. - A a s,ogs $s$- m soo"$t� ab 4-�� Q „2 ag F °6 s� a3 �m 8i Fs span o - Y-tP 7-1-1115 I i.O. HANDRAIL � I O - D � � f A m n_=: �_•, �{ O A 3{Y I I I�I I I g IL4�11 4'-4 7/16" 70 MMN LEVEL CLO. W C II' -5 1/4" 16 EQUAL RISERS e ^Z^ V/ m n ti m O Z I I I I I I I o R I I I m l l I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I D =116"1 Hueler Residence J AMESu.e oea .4 W o 1398 Rest Point Rd, Q— Orono, MN 55364 TMeFP,na ,,.Pao e ° am M Neal le ti,eA d m CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR DREW HUELER OF LOT 3, SUBDIVISION OF LOT 14 REST POINT PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA \\ #1398 \ p 1 \ (A) x'19 ,. e e� `b \ 3ANTILEVER �\.QP�\O ATIO \\ 7i EXISTING g�y6`' (F� 1 \ HOUSE \ �° \ ts� # 1400 9y6 \\ C1* \� PROPOSE SILT FEIN EXISTING \ \ HOUSE (933.5) / \ WOOD \ / PATIO \ \ ......................(932 / Q `9�2a1/ LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES Lot 3, SUBDIVISION OF LOT 14, REST POINT PARK • : denotes iron marker found (908.3) : denotes existing spot elevation, mean sea level datum 910.8: denotes proposed spot elevation 917- denotes existing contour line, mean sea level datum 930 denotes proposed contour line Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. This survey intends to show the boundaries of the above described property, the location of an existing house and garage, to be removed, spot elevations and topography, and the proposed location of a proposed house, driveway and grades thereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. (933.2) 929.4 CONTOUR LINE (O.H.W.) LAKE MINNETONKA WEST ARM PROPOSED ELEVATIONS : (verify) 1) Garage = 934.5 2) Top of foundation 3) Main floor = 938.6 4) Crawl space V ^" 10-15-19 PROPOSED HOUSE, HARDCOVER AND GRADES "v" G R O N B E R G AND ASSOCIATES,12-3-19 INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, & SITE PLANNERS 445 NORTH WILLOW DRIVE LONG LAKE, MN. 55356 952-473-4141 I hereby certify that this plan, specification, 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. SCALE 1 " =20' 1 REDUCE PATIO, MAKE WALK PERMEABLE 1-18-19 -1419 NEIGHBORS A/C UNIT LOCATED DATE 5-28-19 REVISED PROPOSED HOUSE 12-5-19 ADDED PATIO JOB NO. 19-161B Mark S. Gronberg Minnesota License NuASer 12755 19-161B City of Orono �oNo Hardcover Calculation Worksheet Property Address: 13 9 Jr X r r `'t sHo�E Prepared by: Date: GAOA-ldFAC ,4 AITOCt`R7'FSM,�d / C. 7—X91 f-9- Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5 Step 2: 3ROPOSED HARDCOVER In the following table, identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion. Key Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Survey Total (Square Feet (Example) (Garage) 24' x 30' 720 S.F. A 2/3/ S.F. B 55 S.F. C Y04;kMf-A#LV' O 116It F— aP7cA90fC fosr O S.F. U Oe i LIF wA Y 7/♦ S.F. E K it jf64G l2 S.F. F Z, 07 S.F. G S.F. H S.F. I S.F. J S.F. K S.F. L S.F. M S.F. N S.F. O S.F. P S.F. Q S.F. R S.F. S S.F. T S.F. U S.F. V S.F. W S.F. X S.F. Y S.F. Z S.F. 1 Total Proposed Hardcover 3227 S.F. Excludable Hardcover See City Code Sec 78-1684): S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 2 Total Excludable Hardcover O S.F. 3 Net Proposed Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 22 S.F. 4 Total Lot Area o o S.F. Proposed Hardcover Percentage [ (3) + (4) ] 30-17% Subdivision Application - January 2016 This is an information packet regarding Hardcover. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained herein; however, if any information is not consistent with provisions of the City Code, the Code provisions will prevail. Page 19 UPI HDI UPI MAI CRAWL SPACE FRONT ELEVATION 12 8� I 8:12 SLOPE DECORATIVE COLLIM 2 A4.0 STON VENEER 12 8 RIGHT ELEVATION METAL ROOF 12 8 X8:12 SLOPE �CL.VIC /111 V C \.LJLUIVIIV 5 S3 -SHIPLAP SIDING STONE VENEER REAR ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4"=V-0" '-0" � � I I � � � ♦ / % I I V I SCALE: 1/4"=Y-0" ISSUE: 10/25/2019 REVIEW SET www o0 U E 04 I o I O O 2 Q w N W w �J0-w0CL N� 06� I- I _ U 06Qi-0w�=w =�°�ZO z m Zp,w=)r=- F- �-OOQi CL 2 2 A3.0 A3.0 54'-0" 8 3/4" 56'-1 1" 12'-0" 2'-9 3/16" 38'-6 1/16" 12'-5" 4'-1 1/2" 34'-117/16" 2'-61/16" 2'-6" 31/2" 9" 1'-53/16' 91, 2'-b" 1'- 5/16" 1'-9 5/16" 6-7 CANTILEVER 5 2'-7 9/16" 3'-4 1/2" 3'-4 1/2" 2'-7 9/16" 9'-1 3/4" 16'-7 15/16" 9'-1 3/4" CANTILEVER 11 3'-0" 6'-0" 6' 0" 6' 1 1 /2" 6' 1 1 /2" 6'-1 1 /2" 6'-1 1 /2" 6' C" 5„ - CANTILEVER — — — — — — — — Lu Lu ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ coL CL o z O OI O ' DECK 1 o A3. N O UTRANSOMJOTRANSOM TRANSO A3.0 10 NoFt3x3 METAL POST 3x3 METAL POST ❑ O O ❑ 'DO 00 O — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — WALL LINE ABOVE _ _ _ _ 8_6"SOFFIT _ _ _ _ — — M — —� — CLACL — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — "� = 00 0o NXx 12'-4" LI -3'-8" 2'-9' 13-2 1/2" 15-31 2" 5'-10" co POWDER ,� 51/2" 6" 31/2" �? 31/2" 31/2" jCl4L F 'IT Et CIL ROOM D �i�N00` LOCKERS 10 C'4 I I W _ C _ +o BEDROOM 1 ,� 00 X O 00 N M N x0 F 10 L o OWNER'S o MUD ROOM N I Q +o D 1 CLOSET x LIN co N °A' KITCHEN DINING ROOM LIVIN ROOM O N ° "' N G� AUNDRY _°� OWNER'S BEDROOM � / 3-0x7-0 PKT I Ln CLG @19'-4" �� J� 2-8x7-0 O UTILI SINK 2' 2 3/16''[ TIL O4D WOOD' TILE 8'-1" i� 7'-6 1 /2" 3'-9" N N ao ao 1'-1" 11 2-8x7-0 '� _ BATHROOM °° �, "'00 u� u� o I 9'-4" CLG CL PANTRY X — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — �� o - 5'-9 1/2" CO Lo o \ 8'-6"SOFFIT :�o 1 3-0x7-0 BARN DOOR - `? Eo co LoGREAT ROOM o io N 0 3 1/2" 3 1/2" U 8„ 3 1/2 31/2 " N U 3 1/2" �Q ° X) 1' REF REF o / 2'-1" 5'-1" 2'-1" 10'-81/2" � L�+� 0 `l� 0 N DO N Lo M co o o JO S W F YER N 3 `� 4-2x7-0 BARN DOOR 3 3-0x7-0 PKT "' ao 2X6 w IF 2X6 Ll UP A3.0 1'-1 3/4" o A3.0 04 4 RISERS 3-0X7-0 5 1/2" 04 5 1 /2" 5 1 /2" 5 1 /2" 5 1 /2" 7 3 1 /2" U p ° 16 RISERS ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ DN 2-8x7- _ 0 r` 4'-3" 3'-10 1/2" 4'-9 3/16" 18'-2 13/16" 4'-2 8" 0 3'-10 5/8" 1' 7" 6'-11" L. 2'-6 3/ 5°+ �°� �04 o ❑ <> N 3-0x7-0 ° 16 RISERS + N ❑ SHELV S ' O ° BATHROOM ° \ 31'-11" ❑ 0 00 3'-0" CO 2X6 co ❑ ❑ o O °1 ° ❑ v `�' ❑ ❑ N c� `L ❑ 2X6 (N ° ° ❑ / ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ® 10 I \\ � ❑ 5-11" 3'-6 7/16" 3 -CAR GARAGE �o ° o 3 1/2" 3 1 /2" N ❑ N M ^ ❑ \O - ° x ❑ N °? 2'-51 0 0 0 N o � ❑ — — — —XCLI-NA — o — — — 3-ox7-o BEDROOM 2 SHELVES OWNER'S BATH 00 � � N 2 8x7 o 2-8x7-0 OFFICE C.C. o FD � FD � +00 q0 `�o� �, � - _� M CARP. � TILE HALL TILE wooD _ N 00 0 "' 6'-11 1/2" CO ---� — 10 ENTRY O G G G O O O Lo o 10 — — ❑ ❑ x 10 CV (V 10 c') M ❑ ❑ © o 0 DECK JOTRANSOM JOTRANSOM OTRANSOM `o o 4'-8 1 / 16" 10'-9 3/4" 10'-9 3/4" 4'-8 1 / 16" 2'-3 1 /2" -8" 3'-4 3/4" 3'-4 3/4" 3'-8" 9-0x8-0 9-0x8-0 9-0x8-0 0o ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 30'-11 1/2" 6-7" 14'-1 1/2" 2'-0" 8" CANTILEVER 54'-0" 2 2'-7 1/2" 4'-8 3/4" 2 Ir 11 A3.0 A3.0 2'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 9'-5 1 /2" 2'-0" 117 3/4" 1'-7 3/4" 34'-3 1/2" 5-3" 13'-5 1/2" 54'-0" UPPER FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4"=Y-0" CL MAIN FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1 /4"=1-0" WINDOWSAND DOORS MODELAI INTEGRITY AND CONTEMPORARY GRLLES37/8L (TYP?U NTYO) U.N.O.) MARK UNIT FRAME SIZE R. 0. NOTES wZ�O N H U'Q�o U p O Q�LuEm B UCA1632 1-4 x 2-7 1/8 1-5 x 2-7 5/8 °� C UCA2872 2-4 x 5-11 1/8 2-5 x 5-11 5/8 U D -------------- 12-0 x 8-0 u w J i _ ~ > E UCA3648 3-0 x 3-11 1/8 3-1 x 3-11 5/8 F UCA3240 2-8 x 3-3 1/8 2-9 x 3-3 5/8 0 2 vv� vQ=C J w�U2o�Lu H UCAP4896 4-0 x 7-11 1/8 4-1 x 7-11 5/8 I UCA3272 2-8 x 5-11 1/8 2-9 x 5-11 5/8 J UCA3220 2-8 x 1-7 1/8 2-9 x 1-7 5/8 K USFD9070 9-2 x 7-0 L ------------- 3-0 x 7-0 ISSUE: 10/25/2019 PERMIT SET W Lu 00 U J ��O Nw Lu z~ N o 04 wZ�O N H U'Q�o U p O Q�LuEm D w� ZLu 20 U °� -el z m Lr - 2 0 =) � U u w J i _ ~ > Q UwZ� �?0�� QN U�UQ�3n Z w 0 w d �w>ww¢Q 0 2 vv� vQ=C J w�U2o�Lu U, O � Z Q N 0 Lu U OLu UUFQJpU0 w W O`nQ >�,o� U ,tea �}� 04 O E � N Q * 21 U a� 3 3 W Lu 00 U J ��O Nw Lu z~ N o 04 wZ�O N H U'Q�o U p Q�LuEm D w� ZLu 20 a °� u o m Lr - 2 0 =) � U u w J i _ ~ > Q UwZ� �?0�� QN U�UQ�3n Z w 0 w d �w>ww¢Q 0 2 vv� vQ=C J w�U2o�Lu Q�X(n,z w wZwwQ>= 0 Lu U OLu UUFQJpU0 W U �o Q) cy-) 0 4) PROJECT NO: 165 SHEET: Al • N v 53'-7 15/16" ARCHITECTURAL FOUNDATION KEY SCALE: 1/4"=V-0" '-0" A B FOUNDATION DETAILS SCALE: 1/4"=V-0" '-0" ISSUE: 10/25/2019 PERMIT SET W W O: U E wZW()< 0 O o 06 W Q=wWZ�o ~mow::D U W ZOW,>>-E) co z •Nn1 �Z(�wW W _ w _ > — J=�~U Z � ww0WP-QN O UU-JN - W��, Z P-W>wwaQ 0 U�ZW U=� UPJ UQ O W w u, 120 w 0 Q < xV) �w W V) W w Q_ O Z (1) O wW Lr) Q} > u a ,o� }off U 0 04 cEom CC o- r U N E 3 W W O: U CW W < � Oo W 0 Z F- V) wZW()< O o 06 W Q=wWZ�o ~mow::D Q O W ZOW,>>-E) co U •Nn1 �Z(�wW W _ w _ > — J=�~U Z � ww0WP-QN O UU-JN - W��, Z P-W>wwaQ Ln1 U�ZW U=� UPJ UQ O W w u, 120 w 0 W < xV) �w W V) W w Q_ O wZ wF- LU0W U0W O —UJUO W U ry M Lo •Nn1 0 W � Z � O � Ln1 00 O W C)r., c � 0 W PROJECT NO: 165 SHEET: Al 0 • 2'-0" W 2'-0" w E o 04 i -- o< p 2'-0" O V>-, QW W Q 0 N m ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ U ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ — — — — — — — — — — — — OHoL — a_Lu = U Lu J<� U HEI 11 Q 0 Q 0 CJ as LL, t � Z 0 U = ~ V) z o f- J UJ U< CL U D Z q N W -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — a�0` U 8:12 8:12 O IN E OC) SLOPE SLOPE O U Ln N IL Q O U 3 r w 3 Lu � Z �l 0 lF� J U Q CLLU d O w Ln RIDGE VENT RIDGE Lu N C w0 Q 8:12 8:12 SLOPE SLOPE C`1 N d O - — 00 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 2'-0" 2'_0" ROOF PLAN SCALE: 1/4"=F-0" ISSUE: 10/25/2019 PERMIT SET W W Op w E o 04 i -- o< p O V>-, QW W Q 0 N m 0 _ Lu � Lu L=o U 06 Q 0 z OLuuz 0 Lu IL — — m Q u a_Lu = U Lu J<� U Q 0 Q 0 CJ as LL, t � Z 0 U = ~ V) z o f- J UJ U< CL U D Z q N W w ~ L0 Q Z } U >:2,o� a�0` U O IN E OC) Q O U Ln N O 3 3 W W Op w Lu CL O w OQ Z N o 04 i -- o< p LD)w V>-, QW W Q 0 N m 0 _ Lu � Lu L=o 06 Q 0 0 OLuuz 0 Lu IL — — m Q u a_Lu = U Lu J<� U Q 0 Q 0 U�v-,a�3C� z L:w >_ w W J Q 0 U = ~ V) z o f- J UJ U< CL U N E Q — � zz w Lu Ln Q> - C/,= zw2 I� O= Q J O w O = -U���UO W U 00o Q) cy-) 0 4) PROJECT NO: 165 SHEET: Al • ISSUE: 10/25/2019 PERMIT SET Lu F-4 7/8" J O wo OzN�Z�� l'-4 5/8" amu, wZ UI 0 O O l'-3 7/16" 0 pwO� moo_ l'-2 3/4" 06 <�oL O z v �Z0wOzU N Q CIL Ow C Q Uw U C 3 z Lw: 'Q� Qz �,,>�,wJQ N U � 4" 6 3/8" l'-2 1/4" < U 0 w E CV w Z w w ~ <-, 0 LL - D Z N V N � W � Lo z 61 N U N V - a Q 0 0, U DECORATIVE COLUMN 1 I N I WOOD CAP � TRIM N 21 U r U 7- STONE CAP N N 00 I 2" STONE VENEER I 1 I 1 I 1 rn 1 3 I 1 1 1� I I I l'-1 5/8" � 1 F-2" l'-3 1/8" DECORATIVE COLUMN DETAIL 2 COLUMN DETAIL 3 WINDOW/ DOOR TRIM DETAIL A2.1 A2.1 1 A I SCALE.. V= SCALE: 1"=1'-0" SCALE: 1"=1'-0" 36-4 11/16" 2x10 RAFTERS CUT TO DESIGN SHAPE 34'-3 1/2" 1 l'-0 5/8" 5 1/2'' 1 1/2" 1-0 1/ 16" RAFTERS 6x10 BEAM CUT OTO DESIGN SHAPE 1 1/2" "v v a WOOD TRIM COLUMNS 3'-0 13/16'' 04 2'-8 1 /8" 411/16" 2'-0 7/8" 00 CV `o CV �b 0 V(O N l- o S S, n CN n Ln 4 PERGOLA/ DECK RAILING DETAIL A2.1 SCALE: 1''=1'-0" ISSUE: 10/25/2019 PERMIT SET W Lu 00ao J O wo OzN�Z�� L amu, wZ UI 0 O O C/') Q 0 N m 0 pwO� moo_ U 06 <�oL O z WLn �Z0wOzU Q CIL Ow C Q Uw U C 3 z Lw: 'Q� Qz �,,>�,wJQ 0 U � Lu < U 0 w E Lu www Q>-= w Z w w ~ <-, 0 LL - D Z N W W � Lo z � U < � i a Q 0 0, U 04 O o � QE * 21 U r U N N 3 3 3 W Lu 00ao J O wo OzN�Z�� L amu, wZ UI 0 O C/') Q 0 N m 0 pwO� moo_ 06 <�oL O O N �Z0wOzU Q CIL Ow C Q Uw U C 3 z Lw: 'Q� Qz �,,>�,wJQ 0 U � U= Z � - J UJ c�Q=w < U 0 w E Lu www Q>-= w Z w w ~ <-, 0 LL - O =0 —U--) --iUO W U 00o cy-) 0 4) PROJECT NO: 165 SHEET: A400 O m N \ TOP PLATE TOP OF SUBFLOOR 2 TOP OF MAIN LEVEL WALL PLATE MAIN LEVEL SUBFLOOR TOP OF SILL PLATE TOP OF FOUI TOP OF SLAB - CRAWLSPAC_E TOP OF FOOTING (-_i� WALL SECTION 3.O SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" TYPICAL ROOF VENTILATION AND INSULATION • -16 OZ METAL FLASHING • ICE AND WATER PROTECTION MEMBRANE UNDERLAYMENT ALONG ALL ROOF EDGES, 2' INSIDE WALL PLANE, RIDGES, AND ALONG ALL VALLEYS BELOW FLASHINGS • 3-0# (GRADE 'D') FELT PAPER • USE CONTINUOUSLY VENTED SOFFITS, 2" AIR CHUTES, AND RIDGE VENTS TO PROVIDE CONTINUOUS AIR FLOW • R-49 INSULATION OVER ALL HEATED SPACE (INCLUDING GARAGE) • METAL DRIP EDGE @ ROOF EDGES )RRUGATED, GALVANIZED TAIL ROOFING DSB DPED ROOF, TYPICAL) IF EDGE I"xC MIRATEC TRIM 10" MIRATEC FASCIA 2x6 SUBFASCIA ,R -A -VENT o RAFTER TAIL DOTH CEDAR, STAINED TYPICAL CEILING: • R-49 FIBERGLASS BATT INSUL • W/ 4 MIL. POLY VAPOR • RETARDER ON THE WARM SIDE • 5/8" GYP. BOARD • SOFFITS & CEILING HEIGHTS AS SHOWN ON ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS • GARAGE CEILINGS SHALL BE 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP. BD., TAPED, MUDDED, SANDED, PRIMED AND PAINTED TYPICAL SIDING: • SHIPLAP SIDING • INSTALL TYVEK OR EQUAL TYPICAL EXTERIOR FRAMED WALL • 1/2" CDX PLYWOOD SHEATHING • 2X6 STUDS @ 16"O.C. U.N.O. • R-21 (MIN.) INSULATION • 4 MIL POLY VAPOR RETARDER ("MEMBRAIN" BY "CERTAINTEED" OR SIM IN ANY AREAS WHERE CLOSED -CELL INSULATION IS NOT USED) • 1/2" GYPSUM BOARD TYPICAL FRAMED FLOOR 3/4" ADVANTECH SUBFLOOR GLUED 12'' FLOOR FRAMING PER STRUCT DRAWINGS FULL CAVITY "NET AND BLOW" ACOUSTIC INSULATION -VERIFY 2x8 SILL PLATE TYPICAL FOUNDATION WALL 8" CONC. FDN. WALL W/ WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE TUFF -N -DRI WATCH DOG WITH W/2" POLYSTYRENE SHEET METAL PROTECTION 6" MINIMUM BELOW GRADE 3ACKFILL FOUNDATION WITH FREE -DRAINING, :�OMPACTED BACKFILL & CAP WITH POSITIVELY SLOPED CLAY (UNDER TOPSOIL) TYPICAL CONCRETE FLOOR • 3 1/2" CONC. FLOOR SLAB • 1 LAYER 6 MIL POLY VAPOR BARRIER W/ TAPED AND LAPPED JOINTS • 8" MIN. RIVER ROCK- DRAIN TO INTERIOR DRAIN TILE • 4" EXTERIOR DRAIN TILE 4" PERFORATED POLYETHYLENE DRAIN TILE IN PEA ROCK BED W/ SILT CLOTH COVER -SLOPE TO SUMP BASKET OR DAYLIGHT A B C BUILDING SECTION SCALE: 1/4"=l' -O" 11 '-311 6 IzUU/-\L I Kt/iUJ (-_3STAIR SECTION �-o SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0" 2x10 RAFTERS CUT TO DESIGN SHAPE 6x10 BEAM ISSUE: 10/25/2019 PERMIT SET W www o0 U ��ONUJ OQ} ZDV o N wz�pF- O O 2 Q w N V) W w ZLu D!f fl U 06 -el z 20w=)>-=1LU F- co Q i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. 11. LA19-000096 DREW HUELER,1398 REST POINT ROAD, VARIANCES, 9:54 P.M. -10:25 P.M. David Bieker, Denali Custom Homes, and Drew Hueler, the applicant, were present. Curtis said the applicant is requesting variances to redevelop the property and construct a new home. It has substandard area and width. Additionally requested are a structural coverage variance to allow 22 percent structure where 20 percent is the limit and a hardcover variance to permit 30.1 percent hardcover where 25 percent is permitted, a rear setback variance for a 26.4 -foot setback from the road where a 30 - foot setback is required. The applicant's request for structural hardcover and setback variances results in the property's inability to conform to the lot -of -record standards, resulting in the need for the lot area and the lot width variances. The ability to develop the property consistent with other existing developed properties in the neighborhood would be limited if the area and width variances were not granted. The property is relatively shallow, with a 75 -foot setback. The applicant is requesting a 3.6 -foot variance on the rear to accommodate the house with a 21 by 31 -foot 3 -stall garage. The structural overage is 222 square feet. If the proposed building footprint were to be reduced to 20 percent, the resulting proposed overall hardcover variance would be also lessened to 28 percent. Staff finds the practical difficulties inherent to the size and shape of the lot and shallow depth of the lot between Rest Point Road and the lake, justifying variances for development. The proposed plan for structural coverage at 22 percent exceeds the reasonable flexibility allowed by variance. Public comments have been received and are included in the packet to Commissioners. Staff recommends approval of the lot width, lot area, rear setback, and some level of hardcover variance provided the plan is revised to a structural level conforming at 20 percent. Ressler clarified Staffs recommendation would be to get the total structural coverage down to 20 percent. Curtis stated that was true. The resulting hardcover and potentially the rear yard setback variance would be reduced/eliminated in that case. She stated she is not here to redesign but to recommend. Ressler asked if Staff would be agreeable and provide support if that were eliminated. He also asked if it is currently proposed at 22 percent. Curtis confirmed his statement and indicated 22 percent was correct. Mr. David Bieker, Denali Custom Homes, 18352 Minnetonka Boulevard, Deephaven, said he is representing the applicant. He is the proposed builder of the property and has worked with the architect and applicant to design the home. They are meeting the 75 -foot setback and meeting the side yard setbacks. The proposed house was designed as efficiently as possible to accommodate everything possible that a home would have on the main floor. There cannot be a basement, so the only options are to fit everything on the main floor and upstairs. Because of the lot size, you run up against structural hardcover and regular hardcover. They looked at ways to shrink the house, but the only real way to shrink it is to shrink the garage which then is a garage that is not deep enough to use. If you compress the house, the MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. rooms start getting tight inside and aren't really functional. If you pull the garage in, that creates a longer driveway to get to the garage, which doesn't improve the overall hardcover. He thinks the applicant is proposing to do the best he can with what he has and mitigate all the negative effects of the house. They are also removing a garage which is in the corner of the property that actually sits on the road. The setback for the road for the existing garage is about one foot, and the proposal is increasing the setback by more than 25 feet. There are other homes that are either on the street or very close to the street, so that situation has been improved as far as setback. He thinks the only objection that Staff brought was the structural hardcover, and he thinks if the house is shrunk, they'll have the same overall hardcover because the driveway would have to grow to meet the house. Libby asked what the difference is between the 22 and 20 percent, square footage -wise. Curtis stated it is 222 square feet. Mr. Bieker said if you study the plan, there's nothing extravagant or that doesn't need to be there. Ressler asked for the dimensions of the garage, whether it was 24 x 30. Curtis said she thought it was 21 by 31 unless she measured wrong. Mr. Bieker stated it is 31 feet wide. He believed it is 31 feet deep to the curb inside the garage. Mr. Drew Hueler stated this is his proposed new house at 1398 Rest Point Road. The garage dimensions are 21 feet deep. Curtis stated she thought that is what she measured it to and would double check the inside measurement. Mr. Hueler said he and the architect were looking at the front of the garage and there is an inset on the door, so for structural hardcover it is not inside but it's the piece that sticks out from the garage so the door is not flush. Mr. Bicker clarified there is a slight amount of calculated structural that probably was not there. Mr. Hueler stated the structural hardcover was calculated to the end of the garage. His neighbors' homes are 20 feet from the street and this will be 26.4 feet from the street. On the lake side, one of his neighbors is 68 feet on the side that has the 3 -foot lot line, and the Walsh home is around 70. He is 75 feet in, well within the visual setback. If he was trying to go for the sight -line setback, the street side of the home would comply. Gettman asked if the neighbors' garages were all 3 -car garages. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Mr. Hueler stated they are not. On the 35 -foot lot they were able to fit a 2 -car garage. The Walshes have a 2 -car garage with a 3 -car parking area in front of it. His lot is wider than both of his neighbors' lots. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 10:06 p.m. Patrick Walsh, 1390 Rest Point Road, said they have lived there 41 years and this is what they've been waiting for. Somehow the previous owner built the garage and the house a foot off the property line. This will change the neighborhood. He understands the Commission is debating whether it should be a 3 -car or 2 -car and it's easy to say make it a 2 -car, but he does not think so. He has seen Hueler's plans; it is a tuck - under garage. He needs the storage. He asked that there not be a grade build-up so there would not be drainage in his yard. He is asking the Commission to vote for it at 22 percent. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 10:08 p.m. McCutcheon asked if the water would go onto the front and back of the lot from the gables. Mr. Hueler indicated it would. McCutcheon noted that was well thought out, that it wasn't dumping water onto the neighbors' properties. Mr. Hueler said they designed the home partially with the neighbors' feedback in mind. They will be dealing with the water onsite as opposed to running on neighbors' properties. Ressler said he was looking at the example in the hardcover calculation worksheet when he thought the garage was 24 by 30. He apologized if he made it more confusing. McCutcheon said people love shallow lots, it is an average house. He asked if there was any variance that wasn't included and if the lakeshore setback was good. Ressler indicated the lakeshore setback. Curtis confirmed that they are conforming to the 75 foot setback, conforming to the average setback, conforming on the sides. McCutcheon said since there is limited parking, a 3 -car garage is almost a necessity because the driveway can't be increased without impacting the hardcover as well. He asked how much the City was asking for it to be reduced. Curtis responded it was 222 square feet. McCutcheon asked the applicant if he had played around with the design. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Mr. Hueler asked the Commission to look at the main floor, which is what would need to be shrunk. The garage is a pretty standard size. The architect is opinionated about what can be shrunk and what can't because of massing and making the house look architecturally correct, but if certain components of the house are shrunk, it will look to him like the garage is eating the house. If they shrunk the family room, dining room, and kitchen from the lake side, he would end up with a room that, according to the architect, is not a good size room. These are not large spaces. The ceiling height is 2 feet below the height restriction, and they did not want to raise the house up, so they are pretty close to the ground on the main floor. That's part of the reason he wanted additional storage in the back hall, because he has no room to put additional items in a basement. McCutcheon asked what is over the second floor of the foyer in the entryway. Mr. Hueler said it was a master bathroom and that none of the bedrooms are large. It is a challenging site. Thiesse noted a couple years ago it was 15 percent. It was raised to 20 percent on the likelihood that people could stay within 20 percent. Thiesse brought up a comment made by a previous Commissioner who said, "It's a clean slate. You can make it work." He agrees with that. Ressler said he tends to agree that as much as it would be nice to have a 3 -car garage, it could easily be amended to a 2 -car garage and fit that 20 percentile, understanding that the hardcover would still be there but that also provides more parking instead of a garage and structure. Thiesse suggested a 2 1/2 car garage and then there would be storage. Ressler stated he is in agreement with Staff, he would like to see it down to 20 percent, also based on Thiesse's comments that it was 15 percent and that's something the Commission is already more flexible on. He feels like that flexibility is supposed to be put in place with the idea that that's what the Commission wants to see. 4%, INW Erickson said he is in total agreement with that line of thought. The givens are the lot size and the ordinances. Then it becomes the challenge of the applicant to design a house that fits within the ordinances as much as possible. He thinks Staffs recommendation of 20 percent is appropriate. Mr. Hueler asked if he is able to work with the architect and get the house to 20 percent, would he have the Commission's support. Ressler said he can't speak for everyone and he is not sure it would not pass as applied. The feedback that he is hearing is that the Commission appreciates the things the applicant is doing to bring the structure away from the lot lines, improving the conditions. It sounds like some of the feedback is that the Commission feels it is not unreasonable to try to get to 20 percent. Thiesse said that would bring it in to the Staff recommendation and that is where he would like it to be. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Ressler asked the applicant if that would be agreeable, and then the Commission could provide an amendment that says they are in support of the plan as long as it could get down to 20 percent. Mr. Hueler said it is something he would consider if he is not able to build what he proposed. Ressler stated if there is a motion to pass as applied and it passes, then it moves on. If nobody makes a motion to pass it as applied, then someone can make a motion to fail or a motion to approve based on some amendments, which he feels is the discussion on the table. Thiesse said if it comes to a denial and we say as we're denying it because of this and he takes it to the Council with that change, that kind of takes care of it. Ressler agreed with Thiesse and said maybe they would have an alternative drawn up, prepared in the event that they would not support it. Curtis stated if that is the route the Commission took, she would expect the applicant to bring that plan. Ressler said if the Commission moves to deny as applied, it does not stop the applicant from being heard in front of the City Council. The Commission would deny it based on the fact they would like it to be at 20 percent. It allows the applicant to be heard on the 22 percent as applied at the City Council despite the fact that the Commission failed the motion. Then the City Council could decide whether it's reasonable to stay at 22 percent. Maybe it would behoove the applicant to be prepared with alternative plans at 20 percent in the event the City Council is not supportive of it. He asked if that made sense to the applicant. 'Pikk ! Mr. Hueler stated it made perfect sense. He had the architect pinch the house and come up with a plan that is very close to conformity. Ressler said the Commission's intent by the feedback is to give the applicant hope. We're saying we don't support it at 22, but it gives the City Council the opportunity to approve it at 22 percent. Thiesse stated the type of motion he would be most comfortable with mimics the staff recommendation which is, Planning Staff recommends approval of lot width, lot area, rear setback, and some level of hardcover variance should the plan be reduced so the structural level is conforming at 20 percent. Ressler said the applicant has stated he is generally agreeable if that is what it takes. Bollis suggested approving it with that Staff recommendation rather than deny it. Ressler said the only reason why is, by doing so, we're asking him to bring it at 20 percent in front of the City Council where, right now it could still go in front of the City Council at 22 percent, and he could be prepared with a 20 percent sketch in the event it does not pass. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, November 18, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Curtis stated if the Commission is not comfortable with the 22 percent, Staff recommends denying the 22 percent with the reasons stated. Denying is not a negative; it's conditioned on those other conditions. She felt that gives the applicant more clarity from the Commission's perspective. She said that's what she is hearing, and she does not want to be ambiguous for the applicant because there are not a lot of meetings left this year. Ressler said the Commission would encourage the applicant to bring it to the City Council and see if 22 percent would be agreeable but to be prepared with something that could be amended and approved at 20. He stated Curtis was right, if the Commission makes it very specific as to why the Commission is not approving, that gives direction to the Council. Erickson stated that he likes what is on the staff report, that Staff recommends approval of lot width, and so on, should the plan be reduced to 20 percent. Ressler stated that is not how it is applied, is the problem. Curtis suggested the Commission could do it in one denial of the whole as proposed, or the Commission could approve the other variances and deny the structural coverage variance. Thiesse said the Commission could deny it solely on the fact that he is over the structure cover by 2 percent. Erickson stated he would like to keep it positive and approve it with a 20 percent structural canopy. The applicant still has the option to go to the City Council with something else. Gettman moved, Bollis seconded, to approve Application LA19-000096, Drew Hueler, 1398 Rest Point Road, on all variances except for the structural coverage variance which should be denied based on the fact that it's 22 percent and that it fall back down to the 20 percent based on Staff recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0. ELM From: Collins. Tara GRE -MG To: Melanie Curtis Cc: bcollins(-Odyamx.com Subject: Support for Drew Hueler Home Build - 1398 Rest Point Road Date: Monday, October 28, 2019 8:30:32 AM Good morning, Melanie. My name is Tara Collins and my husband Brent and I would like to email our support of Drew's home build plan at 1398 Rest Point Road. We know Drew will do an amazing job with the build and that he has support from other neighbors as well. Please let us know if there is anything additional you would need from us — but again, Drew has our full support. Sincerely, Tara and Brent Collins 1406 Rest Point Road NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: The information contained in this message from Great River Energy and any attachments are confidential and intended only for the named recipient(s). If you have received this message in error, you are prohibited from copying, distributing or using the information. Please contact the sender immediately by return email and delete the original message. From: Bruce Fohr To: Melanie Curtis Cc: Janet Bredeson Fohr Subject: 1398 Rest Point Road Variance Request Input Date: Thursday, October 24, 2019 3:26:39 PM Dear Melanie, My wife, Janet Bredeson Fohr, and I own the home at the end of Rest Point Road, Mound, MN -4410. We are aware that our neighbor, Drew Hueler, who owns the property on 1398 Rest Point Road, has submitted plans for his home remodel and construction project on the property. We understand that his plan contains a variance request on hard cover and set -backs in order for him to build his new home as per his design plan. We have known Drew for nearly six years and we know his commitment to the neighborhood, Lake Minnetonka, and quality workmanship in his home and property. He previously owned the home immediately next to ours (1406). His remodeling and upgrading of that property has been remarkable and highly appreciated by the entire neighborhood. We strongly endorse his plan for 1398, including his variance requests. We have no complaint regarding his plans-- which he has shown and explained to us. We hope that the City agrees and grants his variance request. Sincerely, Bruce & Janet Bredeson Fohr 1410 Rest Point Road, Mound, MN 55364 Bruce Fohr President FMR Associates, Inc. 6045 E. Grant Road Tucson, AZ 85712 520-886-5548 (office) 520-886-9307(Fax) www.FMRassociates.com From: Patrick To: Melanie Curtis Cc: Drew Hueler Subject: Drew Hueler - New construction at 1406 Rest Point Road Date: Tuesday, October 22, 2019 4:35:51 PM Hi Melanie, Please be advised that I have seen Drew's plan for his new home. Based on everything that Drew has shown me, I believe that the house will fit well into our neighborhood. I have just one stipulation. The grade of the house should be consistent with our home. If you have any questions please call me. Sincerely, Patrick Walsh 952-476-8732 ®❑ Virus -free. www.avast.com From: DAVID L WILLIAMS To: Melanie Curtis Subject: Drew Hueler Application Date: Thursday, November 14, 2019 4:06:00 PM Melanie, After receiving the notice from the City of Orono concerning the planning commission meeting scheduled for next Monday 11/18, 1 contacted your office with concerns about the new construction, and a possible new fence going up as part of that project, and its effect on the placement of the air conditioner on our property. We have had a summer residence at our location since 1938, replaced with a year-round home constructed in 1973. Since its construction, our outdoor appliances have always been in their current location. I understand the city does not get involved in property line disputes, but the current plans as they now stand will affect our property. I have talked with Drew, and hope this situation can be reasonable resolved, but would ask that this concern be made part of the record. Sincerely, David L. Williams Sent from Mail for Windows 10 Date Application Received: 10/23/19 Date Application Considered as Complete: 10/23/19 60 -Day Review Period Extension Expires: 02/20/20 W&_ >_11 To: Chair Ressler and Planning Commission Members�1 11 Dustin Rief, City AdministratorIly';0 SHQ From: Melanie Curtis, Planner h'1GG Date: 18 November 2019 Subject: #LA19-000096, Denali Custom Homes o/b/o Drew Hueler, 1398 Rest Point Road Variances Public Hearing Application Summary: The applicant is requesting lot width, lot area, structural coverage, hardcover, and rear yard setback variances in order to redevelop the property. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommendation is detailed on page 5. Background The applicant is requesting variances in order to construct a new home on a property with substandard area and width. Additionally requested are a structural coverage variance to allow 22% structure where 20% is the limit, hardcover variance to permit 30.1% hardcover where 25% is permitted, and a rear setback variance for a 26.4 foot setback from the road where a 30 -foot setback is required. LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Section 78-330 - Setbacks: LR -1B Required Proposed Rear/Street 30' 26.4' East Side* 7.5' 8' West Side* 7.5' 8' Lakeshore 75' 75' Average Lakeshore The average lakeshore setback will be met. * 78-330(b)(1) Side yard setback. For lots that are non -conforming as to their width, the interior side yard setback for the principal building... shall be the lessor of ten feet or equal to ten percent of the lot width as defined. However, in no case shall the side yard setback be less than 7.5 feet. Section 78- 330 - Lot Area/Width: LR -1B Lot Area Lot Width Required 43,560 s.f. (1.0 acres) 140' Actual 10,701 s.f. (0.24 acre) 69' @ 75'/ 69' @ OHWL FILE # LA19-000096 18 Nov 2019 Page 2 of 5 Section 78-1403- Structural Building Coverage: Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 10,701 s.f. (0.24 acre) Allowed: 2,140 s.f. (20%) Proposed: 2,362 s.f. (22%) Section 78-1700 - Hardcover Calculations: Stormwater Total Area in Overlay District Allowed Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Tier Zone 2,675 s.f. 3,225 s.f. Tier 1 10,701 s.f. (25%) (314%� 0 w/in 75' (30.1%) Applicable Regulations: Lot Area and Lot Width Variances (Section 78-330 Zoning Code Section 78-72 provides options for the redevelopment of lots which do not meet the minimum area or width requirements for the respective zoning district. Substandard properties within the Shoreland Overlay District, like the subject lot, are able to be redeveloped without variances if specific standards are met; such as: 1. All setback requirements can be met; 2. A Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer; and 3. The impervious surface coverage meets all hardcover location and square footage restrictions of this chapter and the total square footage of hardcover does not exceed 25 percent of the entire lot area. 4. All other zoning district standards can be met. The applicant's request for structural, hardcover, and setback variances results in the property's inability to conform to all of the standards above. Therefore, lot area and lot width variances are required in order to redevelop the property. The ability to develop the property consistent with other existing developed properties in the neighborhood would be limited if the area and width variances are not granted. Rear Yard Setback Variance (Section 78-330) The property is relatively shallow; the 75 -foot setback is more restrictive than the average lakeshore setback which is common on similarly shallow properties on the lake. There is an approximate 45 -foot deep buildable area on the property. The applicant is requesting a 3.6' variance on the rear (street) to accommodate the 21' x 31' three car garage and so that the home and property lines can be squared off. Hardcover Variance (Section 78-1700) The applicant is proposing 30.1% total site hardcover (3,225 square feet) where 25% is permitted; 600 feet greater than the limit. Structural Coverage Variance (Section 78-1403) The applicant is proposing 2,362 square feet, or 22%, of building coverage. As proposed, the property exceeds the permitted structural limit by 2% or 222 square feet. If the proposed FILE # LA19-000096 18 Nov 2019 Page 3 of 5 building footprint were to be reduced to be more in keeping with the character of the neighborhood e.g. 20% (2,140 square foot footprint), the resulting proposed overall hardcover variance requested would be lessened to 28%. 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 §462.357 Subd. 6(2) variances shall only be permitted when: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Due to the scope, some of the proposed variances are not in harmony with the purpose of the Ordinance. However, the small, shallow lot does include difficulties in its small size and depth, and proximity to the lake to permit redevelopment. The average lakeshore setback is proposed to be met protecting views of the lake for adjacent properties. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. A number of the type of variances proposed to develop a nonconforming lot of record are consistent with the comprehensive plan, such as lot area, rear setback, and some level of hardcover variance. However the hardcover and structural coverage levels proposed are be inconsistent 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 request to permit construction of the home on the substandard lot, in the proposed location within the required rear yard setback, appears to be somewhat reasonable as the property's reduced size and orientation with respect to the lakeshore creates difficulties. However, the requested structural level and subsequently the hardcover level, appears to be unreasonable and are not supported by practical difficulties. b. here are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The uniquely small lot size, location with respect to the lake and roadway, and required setbacks prevent a residential footprint consistent with the neighborhood. There should be consideration for variance approvals from the hardcover limitation, street/rear setback and the lot width and area requirements. Nevertheless, the proposed hardcover and structural levels are above and beyond that which would be supported by practical difficulty; and FILE # LA19-000096 18 Nov 2019 Page 4 of 5 c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances are requested in order to permit construction of a home which is reasonable, however as designed the home and improvements may not fit the character of the neighborhood according to the submitted calculations and information. 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 have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 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 a residential home is an allowed use in the LR -16 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. The property's substandard size and depth with respect to the lakeshore and adjacent properties creates difficulties which also apply to many of the properties in the same neighborhood. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The property's substandard size and applied setbacks create difficulties which also apply to many of the properties in the same neighborhood. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Granting lot area, rear yard variances are necessary for the preservation of the property right of the applicant. The variances for the hardcover and structural coverage levels proposed are a request beyond preservation of a basic property right. 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. Granting some level of hardcover variance, the lot width and area, and rear yard setback variances in this unique situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. However the proposed level of structure is not supported by practical difficulty and is contrary to the intent of the zoning chapter. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The variances for lot area, lot width, rear setback including some more appropriately scaled level of hardcover variances are necessary, and do not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant. The additional variance for structure as proposed would be strictly for the convenience of the property owner and unsupported by practical difficulties 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 FILE # LA19-000096 18 Nov 2019 Page 5 of 5 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 The City adopted ordinances over the past few years to address inadequacies in the small, and/or narrow existing properties, and disproportionate distribution of lot area within the 75 - foot setback for hardcover on Tier 1 lots. In this neighborhood, Staff finds practical difficulties inherent to the size and shape of the lot, and shallow depth of the lot between Rest Point Road and lake affecting the property which justify the variances allowing development and redevelopment. However, the applicant is proposing redevelopment on this property at a scale which is unsupported by practical difficulties, and is beyond what is reasonable for the property and neighborhood to support. In particular, the proposed plan for 22% structural coverage exceeds the reasonable flexibility allowed by variance from a staff perspective. In fact, staff finds the proposed structure level and corresponding proposed hardcover level do not reflect sensitivity to the neighborhood character or community goals established by ordinance. Engineer Comments The City Engineer will provide a comprehensive review at the time of the building permit request. Public Comments Public comments have been received and are attached as Exhibit I. 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 Planning Staff recommends approval of the lot width, lot area, rear setback, and some level of hardcover variance should the plan be reduced so that the structural level is conforming at 20%. List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan Exhibit D. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit E. Submitted Hardcover Calculations Exhibit F. Property Owners List Exhibit G. Plat Map Exhibit H. Aerial Photo Exhibit 1. Neighbor Comments AGENDA ITEM Item No.: 26 Date: December 9, 2019 Item Description: LAI 9-000063 — City of Orono Text Amendment Related to Special Event Permitting Presenter: Jeremy Barnhart, AICP Agenda Planning Department Community Development Director Section: Report 1. Purpose. To consider changes to the Special Event regulations. 2. Background. At their workshop on August 12, 2019, the City Council authorized a review of the Special Event ordinance, which provides for the review, standards, and enforcement of special event permits in the City. Common special events are builders open houses, estate sales, parties with amplified music, and fireworks displays. Since then staff, including the clerk's office, Police Department, and City Attorney have been reviewing the ordinance with the following objectives. A. Clarify what is a special event: Special Event means any Road Race or Tour, Fireworks, Private Event, any non -city event using city property, open house held as part of a home tour, Estate Sale, or use of outdoor amplified music for a period of 1 hour or longer. Amplified music to include disk jockey or live music. B. Clarify what special event requires a permit: A permit shall be obtained from the city by any person who will be holding or sponsoring a Special Event on City property, or the owner or their agent for any Special Event on private property. The permit requirements set forth in chapter 38, article V, apply in addition to all licensing requirements. C. Clarify who reviews the special event permit: Section 66-224 The City Administrator or designee (Police Chief) reviews all applicants and can refer any to the Council if deemed appropriate. The City Council will review all requests for Fireworks, or those involving the use of City property. (Section 66-224 (d)) D. Improve the standards by which a permit may be denied. E. Clarify penalties for noncompliance or violations of the code or permit. The amendment includes an escalating rate for multiple infractions, similar to violations of liquor and tobacco licenses. The Ordinance does not limit the number of parties or special events any property may host in a given time period. 3. Public Comment. No public comments have been received in support or opposition to the proposal. 4. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends the Council review the ordinance and provide Staff feedback on any changes desired. Staff intends the Council to approve the ordinance in January. Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: _Sb)R Approved By: -TV AGENDA ITEM COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED City Council should review the ordinance and provide feedback as appropriate. Exhibits A. Draft Ordinance showing changes. B. Draft Resolution for Administrative Fines Prepared By: J. Barnhart Reviewed By: -Sb)R Approved By: -TV CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 4 ORDINANCE NO. 7 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE VI SPECIAL EVENTS AND ARTICLE VIII 8 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSES AND PENALTIES 9 OF THE ORONO CITY CODE 10 11 12 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO ORDAINS: 13 14 SECTION 1. Article VI of the Orono City Code is amended as follows: 15 16 ARTICLE VI. - SPECIAL EVENTS 17 18 Sec. 66-191. - Definitions. 19 The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings 20 ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: 21 Road Race or Tours means any organized event that requests alterations to the traffic control 22 features of public roads, including, but not limited to alteration of stop, yield, or merge signs, or 23 requests of dedicated use of traffic lanes. 24 Fireworks means the display of any substance or combination of 25 substances or article prepared for the purpose of producing a visible or an audible effect by 26 combustion, explosion, deflagration, or detonation, and includes blank cartrid e�y cannons, 27 and toy canes in which explosives are used, the type of balloons which require fire underneath to 28 propel them, firecrackers, torpedoes, skyrockets, Roman candles, daygo bombs, or other 29 fireworks of like construction, and any fireworks containing any explosive or inflammable 30 compound, or any tablets or other device containing any explosive substance and commonly 31 used as fireworks as defined by Minn. Stat. § 624.20. 32 Special Service in this chapter means traffic control, crowd control, or the display o�y of 33 Orono or Long Lake, including police, fire, or public works resources. 34 ParadeParade means any movement of vehicles, persons or animals, in any combination, 35 which either moves together or as a body so as to impede or affect the 36 free and unobstructed flow of vehicular or pedestrian traffic, or which moves so that some part is 37 in violation of one or more traffic laws or regulations. 38 Private event means any private function ^r speei ' o..hat 39 requires Sspecial Sservice from city departments and/or mutual -aid 40 agreements or requires 20 or more on street parking spaces at the same time.. 41 rr^^ial ^ ^n*ecial Event means any Road Race or Tour, Fireworks, Private Event, any 42 non -city event using city property, mar -at e fun, bloek pal4y, fishing ^ ntest eh +^ 43 hot aif ball a event, eafniva , open house held as part of a home tour, EWstate Sale, or use of 44 outdoor amplified music for a period of I hour or longer, ^r any other- aetivityor- event whiei. in �6 genefates par -king needs fef mefe than 20 vehieles off the site at any one time on r-esidential i uuss�c..pis..aa��._�c_�sz��za.:�....��i�c.L�=_�s:�a�.as..��� _ •inclivie disk 49 iockev or live music. 50 51 (Code 1984 § 6.08(i). Ora.o 4933rd series, i, Q 25 2008; nra— r0. 57 s, § i, 4 27 52 20 54 Sec. 66-192. - Impeding prohibited. 55 It is unlawful for any person to hamper, obstruct, or impede or interfere with any 56 paradeParade, par-ad€Parade assembly, speeial eventSpecial Event or any person, animal or 57 vehicle participating in a paradeParade or special eventSpecial Event. 58 60 Sec. 66-193. - Driving vehicles between pafad -Parade units. 61 It is unlawful for any person to drive a vehicle between the vehicles or persons comprising a 62 para IeParade or special eventSpecial Event when such par-adeParade or speeial eventSpecial 63 Event is in motion, except by direction of police officers directing traffic. 64 ••, ••WAS 66 Sec. 66-194. - Unauthorized entering. 67 It is unlawful for any person to enter into a paradeParade or special eventSpecial Event 68 without prior authorization from the person in charge of the event. 69 71 Sec. 66-195. - Removal of obstructions of traffic. 72 In any case where vehicles or parking by an activity obstructs traffic, regardless of whether 73 or not the activity required a permit. The City may ticket that person and all the cars that 74 constitute the traffic hazard. Vehicles that constitute a hazard may be towed at the owner's 75 expense if so ordered by the police officer. 76 Secs. 66-196-66-220. - Reserved. 1 2 3 Sec. 66-221. - Required. 4 A permit shall be obtained from the city by any person who will be holding or sponsoring a 5 Sspecial Eevent on City property, or the owner or their agent for any 6 Special Event on private propeerty. The permit requirements set forth in chapter 38, article V, 7 apply in addition to all licensing requirements. 9 10 Sec. 66-222. - Exceptions. 11 The following are not required to apply for permits under this division: 12 (1) Funeral processions; 13 (2) A governmental agency acting within the scope of its functions; 14 (3) An occasional private party that is held on private residential lots that does not require 15 special service from a city department. 17 18 Sec. 66-223. - Application. 19 (a) Application for a pafade of s�Special Eevent permit shall be made to the city at least 44-21 20 days in advance of the date on which the Special Event is to occur 21 unless waived by the city administrator or designee if, after due consideration of the date, 22 time, place, and nature of the puede or-sSpecial Eevent, the anticipated number of 23 participants, and the city services required in connection with the event, the city administrator 24 or designee determines that the waiver will not present a hazard to public safety. 25 (b) The applicant shall complete an application f'" out a f ,,„ as offered fevided by the city 26 administrator or designee, and may include the followin ,state. 27 (1) Applicant's name, address, and telephone number (including the telephone number(s) 28 in which the applicant can be reached on the day of the paradeParade or spee-ial 29 even Special Event); 30 (2) Proposed parade route or location of spee ,' eventSpecial Event; 31 (3) Time of commencement and termination and date when the pai7ade of speeiftl 32 even Special Event is to occur; 33 (4) Anticipated number of participants; 34 (5) Shuttle bus plan for participants and location of off-site parking for open houses; 35 (6) Site plan locating buildings, driveways, local streets, parking location, temporary 36 structures (tents) (including size), temporary restrooms, stage and location of speakers, 37 or any cordoned off area(s) for Special Events; 38 (7) Signature of the owner of the property on which the speeial eventSpecial Event is to be 39 held; 40 (8) -Proof of written notiee to all pr-epeAy owners within 350 feet of the leeation on Whieh 41 a speeial event is to be held at least ten days prior to the speeial event. The flotiee Mi 42 eontain the da4e, time, and loemion of the speeiai v=ei#; and - 43 (L89) Proof of possession of any license or permit which, under federal, state or local laws 44 or regulations, the applicant is required to have in order to conduct the par -ad, -:Parade or speeial 45 event �ecial Event, or which, under any such law or regulation, would exempt the applicant 46 from the licensing requirements of this article. 47 (c) The application shall be executed by the individual applying for the permit or the duly 48 authorized agent or representative of the sponsoring organization. The permit requirements 49 set forth in this section apply in addition to all requirements in section 38-802. 50 51 (Code 1984, § 6.08(2); Ord. No. 57 3rd series, § 2, 4-27-2009) 52 Sec. 66-224. - Application review and issuance. 53 (a) The city administrator or designee shall forthwith refer all applications for par -ad, -Parades 54 and special eventSpecial Events to the police chief or designee and to other city departments 55 as deemed necessary. 56 (b) —The police chief or designee shall review each application to determine whether and to what 57 extent additional police protection is reasonably necessary and to what extent the 58 parade -Parade or special eventSpecial Event will interfere with the safe and orderly movement 59 of vehicular and pedestrian movement on public streets. 60 (c) The city administrator or designee shall issue the permit as provided for herein, unless 61 grounds exist for denying the permit under section 66-225. 62 (d) The City Council shall review all special events requesting the use of city property or 63 employing fireworks. The City administrator or their designee may refer any Special Event 64 Permit to the City Council for their review. 65 66 (e) A notice of the date and time and contact information for the Special Event shall be provided 67 to all property owners within 500 feet of the property hosting a Special Event, unless an 68 alternative notification method has been approved by the City Administrator. 69 (Code 1984,§ 6.08{0 OrdNo. 7 Rd series, § 2, 4 27 2009) 70 71 Sec. 66-225. - Denial of permit. 72 (a) The city administrator or designee may refuse to issue a parade or- speeial eve4#Special Event 73 permit to the applicant for any of the following reasons: 74 (1) The conduct of the parade of speeial eventSpecial Event will substantially interrupt the 75 safe and orderly movement of other pedestrian or vehicular traffic contiguous to its route 76 or location. 77 (2) The conduct of the Special Event will require the diversion of an 78 amount of city resources necessary to maintain adequate city function, in the sole 79 discretion of the City Administrator or their designee. 80 (3) The Special Event paradeParade or road race or tour is not scheduled to move from its 81 point of origin to its point of termination expeditiously and without unreasonable delays 82 en route. 83 (4) Adequate sanitation and other required health facilities are or will not be available. 84 (5) Sufficient parking near the site of the parad-Parade or speeial eventSpecial Event has 85 not been provided to accommodate the number of vehicles reasonably expected, or the 86 applicant has not provided a plan that is sufficient to shuttle visitors to and from a speed 87 even Special Event. 88 (6) The application fails to comply with relevant provisions of section 38-802. 89 (7) An investigation fevealed that theThe applicant falsified information on the application. 90 (8) Failure of the applicant to pay the required fee. 91 (10) Failure of the applicant or the owner of the property on which the speei ' e entSpecial 92 Event is to be held to sign the application. 93 (11). The completed application was not received 210 or more days before the event. 94 95 (b) The city administrator or designee shall act promptly upon a timely filed application for a 96 par-ade-Parade or special e entSpecial Event permit, but in no event shall grant or deny a permit 97 less than 48 hours prior to the paratleParade or speeial eventSpecial Event and shall include 98 reasons for denial. 99 > 10 100 1n, 2016) 101 Sec. 66-226. - Payment of expenses. 102 The applicant for a parade-, a speeial-eve*tSpecial Event, shall pay 103 an application fee as determined from time to time for by the City Councilser-vicecharge f r the 104 ital seFvieespr-evided to en fa this at4ie e; and the city may, as a condition of 105 approval of the permit, require that the applicant deposit money with the city in a sum equal to 106 the estimated service charge to be incurred by the city. Service charges include all city staff time 107 or city consultant time necessary. The city may certify to the county auditor any unpaid service 108 charges which shall be collected together with property taxes levied against the property. 1109 110 Sec. 66-227. - Fees. 111 All permits provided for in this division shall be issued only upon payment in full of permit 112 fees and other costs fixed and determined by resolution. 113 , 114 Sec. 66-228. - Prohibitions. 115 The following prohibitions shall apply to all parades and speeial evewSpecial Events: 116 (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to stage, present, or conduct any 117 even Special Event without first having obtained a permit as herein provided. 118 (2) It shall be unlawful for any person in charge of, or responsible for the conduct of, a duly 1119 licensed pefadeParade or speeial eventSpecial Event to Mail to comply with 120 any condition of the permit. 121 (3) It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in any per-adeParade or speeial eventSpecial 122 Event that would constitute a substantial hazard to the public safety or that would 123 materially interfere with or endanger the public peace or rights of residents to the quiet 124 and peaceful enjoyment of their property. 125 (4) The following Special Events shall be prohibited: 126 a. Closed Road Races 127 b. Events using Trunk Highways 128 c. Events on Big Island. 129 , . 130 Sec. 66-229. - Revocation of permit. 131 The city administrator or designee shall have the authority to revoke a par-a¶de or 132 special eventSRecial Event permit instantly upon violation of the conditions or standards for 133 issuance as set forth in this article or when a public emergency arises where the police resources 134 required for that emergency are so great that deployment of police services for the parad-Parade 135 or speeial eventSpecial Event would have an immediate and adverse effect upon the welfare and 136 safety of persons or property. 137 Sec. 66-230. — Penalties 138 (a) On a findi g ha f an applicant, permit holder, or any person licensee _lifts-failse-d to 139 comply with any provision of an applieahlestatute, ride d:. allee elating to aleoholie 140 bevesArticle VI Special Events, the city may_ impose an administrative penalty as s set 141 forth in the chart in clause (c) of this Section. revoke the nee-nse, stispendthe lieen I in . 142 a eivil penalty of ttp to $2,000.00 f0f each vielation, or- ifflpose any eoffibination of these 143,,,. -Conviction of a violation in a court of law is not required in order for the eetineil to 144 impose the eivil penaltYimposition of an administrative penalty. Appeals of an administrative 145 penalty issued pursuant to this section shall be heard in accordance with the procedure set 146 forth in Article VII Administrative Offenses and Penalties. 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 Exeept in eases of lapse of pr-eof of finaneial responsibility, no stispen- 3ation shall t to the Administfative -Pr-oeedtir-es Aet, Minn. Stat. § § 14.57 to 14.70, as it maybe amended ffofn time to time. The eouneial may act as the hearing body undef that aet, of it fflay eon et witL the offiee of hearing examiners for- a hearing offieer-. Non payment of the penalty is gfounds f0f suspension Or- F-evoeation of the lieense. (b) Multiple violations are computed by checking the time period of the three (hyears immediately prior to the date of the most current violation. (c) The presum tp weed_ penalties for violations are as follows: 1-st violation $250.00 pltts eests 2-ndviolation $500.00 plus costs 3rd violation $1,000.00 Pluses SECTION 2. Article VIII of the Orono City Code is amended as follows: -ARTICLE VIII. - ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSES AND PENALTIES DIVISION 1. - IN GENERAL Sec. 66-250. - Administrative offenses. The Orono City Council has determined to enforce certain offenses within the City of Orono as administrative offenses. Those offenses to be enforced as administrative offenses shall be determined by resolution of the city council as recommended by the chief of police. These administrative penalty procedures in this section are intended to provide the public and the citv with an informal, cost effective, and expeditious alternative to traditional criminal charges violations of certain provisions of this code. The procedures are intended to be voluntary on the part of those who have been charged with those offenses. (Ord. No. 121 3rd series, § 1, 12-9-2013) 171 Sec. 66-251. - Violation/penalty. 172 Any person violating one of the administrative offenses within the City of Orono shall be 173 subject to the scheduled administrative penalty. The city council shall determine the 174 administrative penalties and both the administrative offenses and the penalty amount may be 175 amended, from time to time, by resolution of the city council. 176 (Ord. No. 121 3rd series, § 1, 12-9-2013) 177 Sec. 66-252. - Enforcement. 178 Any member of the police department or any other person employed by the city with 179 authority to enforce the city Code may issue administrative violations under this article. 180 Notice shall be given to the violator setting forth the nature of the offenses, the date, time of 181 the violation, the name of the official issuing the citation and the amount of the scheduled 182 penalty. 183 (Ord. No. 121 3rd series, § 1, 12-9-2013) 184 Sec. 66-253. - Payment. 185 Once notice of an administrative violation is given, the person responsible for the violation shall, 186 within 14 calendar days of issuance of the notice, pay the stated violation penalty to the City. At 187 any time before the payment of the administrative penalty is due, the person who has beenig ven 188 notice of an alleged violation may request to appear before the city council to contest the request 189 for payment of the penalty. After a hearing before the council, the council may determine to 190 withdraw the request for payment or to renew the request for payment. Because the payment of 191 the administrative penalty is voluntary, there shall be no appeal from the decision of the council. 192 (Ord. No. 121 3rd series, § 1, 12-9-2013) 193 Sec. 66-254. - Failure to pay. 194 If a violator fails to pay the penalty imposed by this administrative citation, or if the viol *�r 195 wishes to ^^n*es* the citation or the situation that created the violation remains uncorrected, then 196 197 County District r^„,t System the City may issue a petty misdemeanor or misdemeanor citation 198 for the violation of the ordinance. A person convicted of a violation of this Ordinance shall be 199 guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine of not more than $1,000.00, imprisonment for a 200 term not exceeding 90 days, or any combination thereof, provided, however, that if the violation 201 is declared to be a petty misdemeanor, the penalty shall be a fine not to exceed $300.00. 202 Additionally, a person convicted of a violation of this article shall pay the costs of prosecution. 203 The city, in its discretion, may bring criminal charges in the first instance, rather than requesting 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 the payment of an administrative penalty, even if a penalty for the particular violation has been established by Council resolution. If the administrative penalty is paid, or if any requested correction of the situation resulting in the violation is completed, no criminal charges shall be initiated by the city for the alleged violation. (Ord. No. 57 3rd series, § 3, 4-27-2009) SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be effective ADOPTED this day of Orono. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk 2019, by the City Council of the City of CITY OF ORONO Dennis Walsh, Mayor CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA FILE NO. RESOLUTION TO ADOPT ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTY FOR ORONO CITY CODE ARTICLE VI: SPECIAL EVENTS WHEREAS, the City Council has enacted Orono City Code §§ 66-250 and 66-251, establishing a procedure for requesting the voluntary payment of administrative penalties for certain violations of the code; and WHEREAS, the provisions of Orono City Code §§ 66-250 and 66-251 authorize the City Council, by a resolution adopted by a majority of its members, to identify administrative offenses and establish penalties for these offenses; NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council as follows: Any person who violates any provision of Article VI of Orono City Code shall face a presumptive administrative civil penalty of $250 for a first violation, $500 for second violation, and $1000 for a third violation or each violation thereafter as defined by Orono City Code § 66- 230(b). EFFECTIVE DATE: This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage according to law. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor