Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-14-2009 Council Work Session Packet Council Work Session Monday, September 14, 2009, Following Council Meeting Orono City Council Chambers AGENDA 1. Tom Kaul Presentation—Proposed Group Home for Seniors at an Existing Residence— Mike Gaffron (15 minutes) 2. Resident Requests—Various Staff(1 S minutes) • Consider Program for City Docks • Consider"No Parking" Signage for Trails in Navarre Area • Consider Establishment of Energy and Environment Commission • Consider Installation of Automatic Doors at City Hall for Handicap Accessibility • Consider Installation of Pet Waste Stations Along City Trails 3. Comp Plan Update—Mike Gaffron (30 minutes) • Continue Discussion of Met Council's Initial Response • Set Date for Open House and Public Hearing 4. Comments Regarding Information Updates (5 minutes) Previous Work Session Topics August 25, 2009 o Striping Watertown Road o Police Service Contracts o Budget - Current Information - Decision Package o Police Labor Negotiations August 11, 2009 o Transition Process o Trail Crossings Update o Discussion Regarding Consideration to Become LGU for Wetland Conservation Act and other MCWD Jurisdictional Areas o Casco Point Reconstruction Project Update - Schedule for Mill and Overlay - Insurance Claims Discussion - Other o Narrows Dock Lots Update—Position Statement o Budget �o� o ,� o � � � � �� � ��.� � � G �9kESH��'� CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING Notice is hereby given that the regularly scheduled Orono City Council work session of Tucsday, Scptember 15. 2009 at 6:15 p.m. has bccn reschcdulcd to Monday, Scplember 1�, 2009 Iollowing t�ie Ciry Council mecting in t�ic Orono Ciry Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, Minnesota. This meeting is open to the public. /s/Linda S. Vee City Clerk Posted at: City Hall Crystal Bay Post Office Long Lake Post Office Navarre Post Office i I P , Orono City Council Committee of the Whole September 14, 2009, Following Council Meeting(8:14 p.m.) Orono City Council Chambers Present: Mayor Jim White, Council Members Cynthia Bremer, Doug Franchot, Lili McMillan and Jim Murphy; Police Chief Correy Farniok, Finance Director Ron Olson, Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategy Mike Gaffron, City Clerk Lin Vee, City Attorney Soren Mattick and City Engineer Tom Kellogg 1. Tom Kaul Presentation—Proposed Group Home for Seniors at an Existing Residence—Mike Gaffron • Tom Kaul-Team Leader; Helen Kaul-RN; Dr. Milton Seifert-On Call MD; and Bill Ask-Project Manager presented information regarding the proposed senior housing residence facility for ForgetMeNot Home Care. • If there is Council support for the project,the facility would operate under a Class F state license with 6 residents allowed. The team is also looking for direction as to what would be required if there were 8 residents. • The potential location is at 3400 North Shore Drive. The house has 2 levels, would have an elevator chair and could accommodate wheelchairs. There would be 24-hour staff with a need for 2 employee parking spaces. Residents would most likely not have cars. • The facility provides "White House" service to meet daily personal and homecare needs for elderly people who are unable to stay in their own home. The goal is provide high quality care with many healthy activities. • Although the intent is not to be a memory care facility, it may graduate to that level. If a resident would no longer be safe in the facility, it would be a consideration for the resident to leave the facility. • The concept is private pay with no insurance involvement. This would be the first facility of this type that they own. Market research has not been completed but they expect residents to be from the Wayzata-Orono-Mound area. • The property is zoned single family. State statutes allow up to 6 residents in a residential zone. With more than 6 residents, the city could require a CUP. The city doesn't have an institutional district and may not want to create one for this property. • Major hurdles appear to be neighborhood acceptance and granting of hardcover variances for additional parking. • With only 6 residents, there would be no city issues. The team was advised to discuss the project with the state to be sure this property meets state standards. The city will look for proof of an approved state license to operate this type of facility. • Council supported the concept and suggested starting with 6 residents, if it is financially viable, to see how it works. The city has talked about ways to keep elderly in their homes or in the area many times. Addressing the many details involved in this type of project will be a challenge. 2. Resident Requests—Various Staff • Consider Program for City Docks o The Printup request for city dock space was discussed and it was determined there is no rationale for the city to pursue this request. o Gaffron will respond incorporating points that include: - sites that might be considered are limited in width and could not meet LMCD standards for public docks - impact on adjoining property owners - parking availability Page 1 of 3 ilii - limited number of non-lakeshore residents that would benefit - cost of purchasing private land to create public dockage would be prohibitive, and - availability of two public landings that already serve the general public. • Consider"No Parking" Signage for Trails in Navarre Area o A letter was distributed to Council a few weeks ago with a petition signed by the neighborhood requesting a "no parking" zone in the Bayview Place area. o The police chief noted a major problem is the very narrow area. If it was posted "no parking" it would also apply to the area residents and they couldn't use the street for parking their guests either. An option couid be to post the south side of Bayview Place "no parking" and do a betterjob of cutting grass and marking the north side for parking. o Since it is a city street, paid for by the city, it can't be restricted to residents only. o Boe Carlson,Three Rivers Park District, had indicated to Mayor White that they could install a parking area. o Many trail users are looking for a convenient, quick spot to park. o Met Council is using all of the property they control for the lift station. o There is right-of-way that could potentially be used for parking along Northern Avenue. o A trail head was going to be located in Spring Park but didn't happen. It seems like the Three Rivers Park District reacts to one city and assumes others are in agreement. o Residents are looking for a formal response from Council. o Council directed staff to invite a representative of the Three Rivers Park District to a Council meeting to discuss the trail parking plan, potentially the first Council meeting in November. Neighbors should be notified and invited to attend the Council meeting. o Orono Orchard Road and Brown Road trail areas are other site-specific areas to Orono. Residents from these areas may also want to attend the Council meeting to express their concerns. o Three Rivers Park District should be responsible for providing a master parking plan for trail users for all cities along the Dakota Rail trail. • Consider Establishment of Energy and Environment Commission o Concerns about establishing an environmental-type commission at this time include limited staff and budget. The purpose and clarity of mission also needs to be determined. o Council directed staff to invite Amelia Kroeger to an upcoming Council work session in October or November to share her thoughts regarding some type of environmental commission or task force. • Consider Installation of Automatic Doors at City Hall for Handicap Accessibility o Council directed staff to pursue available HAVA grant funds for automatic door openers for polling places located at City Hall and the Council Chambers. • Consider Installation of Pet Waste Stations Along City Trails o The request was brought up at a National Night Out party in the Willow View neighborhood. o Council indicated the Public Works Supervisors should explore options, i.e. bag dispensers, and set up a demonstration area before establishing a program. 3. Comp Plan Update—Mike Gaffron • Continue Discussion of Met Council's Initial Response o Gaffron distributed an inventory of developable properties remaining in the city. o Population forecasts are based on Orono's zoning; Met Council's forecast is based on what they want. Page 2 of 3 � I��� o A meeting was held with Bob McFarlin. McFarlin listened to the City's concerns and will discuss further in his office. o The fundamental issue is that Met Council changed their rules and had several opportunities to inform the city but didn't. Orono understood that septic areas could be brought into the MUSA when failing. Minnetrista, Medina and other lakeshore cities are having similar issues with the Met Council. Cities have been told they can't connect homes that have been included in the MUSA and/or can't connect because of low density. The Met Council shouldn't be applying rules to individual properties. o The city has been informed that the Comforts of Home property will not count toward higher density. The Met Council uses the census definition of a dwelling unit where common kitchen facilities count as one unit o Council commented that the Met Council is not cognizant of the city's environment which is almost fully developed with many wetlands and watershed areas. o Gaffron noted the inventory list that was distributed finds very few potential properties for high density development. o Staff will continue to provide details to Met Council regarding the difficulties in Orono to meet their goals, and discuss with Met Council how they think Orono can meet their goals. o It may take all the cities in the lakeshore area with common issues to unify and bring their case to the Met Council. o The city can't formally submit the Comp Plan Update until December 10. o The city needs to determine if Met Council staff can resolve any of the issues or if the city will need to work with the commissioners. • Set Date for Open House and Public Hearing o Gaffron will determine when the Comp Plan Update is ready for a public hearing. 4. Comments Regarding Information Updates • Council indicated there is some benefit to reviewing the Information Updates and should be included as an item on future work session agendas. • Staff commented that it is their preference to take direction from the entire council. • McMillan noted that she is familiar with the owner of the Chevy Chase property with neighborhood complaints. She also requested that Council be informed when residents connect to the Myrtlewood water project. 5. Miscellaneous • Ted Capra parking issue o Capra placed gravel in the city's right-of-way after receiving approval from staff. He was later informed that the gravel needed to be removed because it didn't comply with city codes. Capra had already modified an underground water system and spent money to make the changes. It is also difficult for him to maneuver in and out of the garage. o A Public Services Director would have had authority over this issue. A city permit is required to do a curb cut with a fee and application. Capra asked Curtis many times in many ways if he could create additional parking and was told it would not be allowed by city codes. o This street is scheduled for a mill and overlay next year. The city will look at road improvements as part of the project. o Council determined that Capra will not need to remove the gravel at this time and the issue will be addressed as the city makes decisions on the upcoming mill and overlay road project. Page 3 of 3 0 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor& Council From: Mike Gaffron, Asst. City Admin. - Long Term Strategy Date: September 10, 2009 Subject: Presentation by Tom Kaul Tom Kaul of "ForgetMeNot Home Care" will be in attendance to make a short presentation regarding his proposal to operate a managed care group home for as many as 6-10 elderly tenants within an existing Orono residence. ii � l� ,, `�,'i �9;,� For et1VleNot � HOME CARE Areas af Services •Nursing�Housc:hold •Profeasional�Companionship�Health Preservation ❖ MEETI NG H UMAIV NEEDS OF PEOPLE IN TH EI R HOME ❖ Orono City Council Work Session Agenda- September 14t'' 2009 Team Present• Dr Milton Seifert MD-651-610-0847 Helen Miltich Kaul -RN 952-688-2292 William Ask - Project Manager 612-910-2925 Tom Kaul -Team Leader 952-688-2280 Meetin� Objective: Seek Council's support for this concept at 3400 Northshore Drive Can this site operate under a Class F Minnesota State License Chapter 144D Determine obstacles of being approved for 8 residents Could it be or should it be 6 or 8 Condominiums For�et Me Not Potential Residence Orono Address: 3400 North Shore Drive Orono Minnesota • .65 Acres Plus 114 Feet of Lake Shore across County Road 51 on Crystal Bay • 7824 I�inished Sq Ft. 7 Bed rooms 7 Baths 6 Garage Sta11s 5 Fireplaces, 3 (�'ommunity Rooms, 2 Kitchens • Built in 1955 added on 2002-2003 Our company goal is to keep aging people in their own home by providing "W11ite I�ouse" Concierge service, meeting every daily personal and homecare need. W1ien it's unsafe for elderly peo� to stay in their own home we want to provide a unique group home that keeps people alive as long as they live. This home will be welcoming to Family and Friends and �vill have amenities and healthy activities, many of which are old fashioned. "My Butler for Health" Management System cares for all health issues, including eyes, ears, feet, orthopcdics, rehabilitation, therapy, etc and manages payment and insurance. KEEPING AGING PEOPLF, IN THEIR OWN COMMUNITIF_•,S , • Regularly scheduled I�octor and 1ZN visits with whom residents can form personal relationships • Gardens to work in, and outside activities like shuffleboard, horseshoes, crochet, etc.. • Graup coaliin�, yuilting bee, sewing, small music events, card games, exercise, yoga events, book club, and any other activities requested by residents. • Car and Driver will be provided on a regular and reserved basis. • Boat rides, nature hikes, fishing, lunch at the club day, family gatherings, etc.. Immediate Improvements • Remove 75% of current driveway surface leaving 2 parking spaces for reception area • Change entry of property to rear of lot and add �arl�ing in rear • l��ence and Landscape Back yard • Paint and decorate each room as residence move in • Add elevator chair lift on stairway • Install monitoring cameras for all home residents security and employee training ; ,.„,. : � Forget Me�ot Home Care 191��Easton Road Suite 10(10 Deepha�-en 11'linnesota 77391 KEEPING AGING PEOPLE IN 'I'HEIR OWN COMMUNITIFS � � J � � ;,s ' * ... . . , ... . . ;, ,��� " NURSING HOUSEHOLD� _ PROFESSIONAL .. } RN's Management Handyman LPN's Gardening Electrical Aides . Landscaping Plumbing Specialized: House Keeping Therapy of all kinds - — --. __-=�Izh�imer`s-- ---�Feaning�Eaundry_ ---{�rir�oprae�ie--- - , - Dementia Pet Care Comp.uter S�rvices • . - • . . • . . . COMPANIONSHIP HFALTH - . . (Any personality) Stimulate N�ental Awareness Security/Safety Design Dieu ' � Regular Look-ins Me�l Prep/Drop-off Event Planning Fitness/Exercise Calendars Medication System Management � � Travel&Shopping Grooming/Bathing _ _ _ _ P�. • _ Archiving Family History r ' r I . C�e�uur�e �:<Gre — /-�/ra�r�,t Yow �-; ,� � . �� For e� e ot � .. .: g / '._.-, H O�(g C A�j E ' �./C'/ll(UlL' �ilUi' �-�(rl�l(f �[`tl �. / ;.. ` Forget Me Not Home Care — Keeps You in Your Community_ ,. . - __ _ _ _—_ __ __ _ _ , �' A personalized,secure,in-home service designed by the client,loved ones and care manager so that everyone feels completely comfortable with the caze given in their home. • Regularly scheduled care givers are managed on a monthly cyde • Clients and Loved Ones call one number or use email �,'�' ' � f*+y, � � , • FMN will respond to all inquiries within two hours - , ,�;� E • Qient requests the service;FMN coordinates and places service order - � � � � � • Client is contacted to confrm time,provider,introdudion and est.cost �,�`� i �'~ � � ' � � � • Provider confrms completed service and costs with FMN � " ��; � • � � � � � � • FMN contacts dient to check satisfaction with service provider '� x . • FMN bilis dient once a month and indudes copies of all invoices ���� L ` = At Home Services We Provide — ___ __ � ,�; �•, _ ___ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ -- r °PHONE: ' � � 4'�" �� I. All levels of in home nursing services,RN's 7. Home Systems,security,and computer set 952�113 2209 � : � and LPN's Aides up and servicing ' 2. Individual care plans for dementia and 8. Physical Home care:gardening,landscaping, - Alzheimer's clients cleaning,laundry,mowing,snow plowing, EMAIL: "�� 3. Trans ortation,a ointments,sho in � p pp pp g� window washing,construction,Handyman, info'U:fc�rgetrr�enomomecare.com � events,library,luncheons electrician,plumbing,etc. ��; 4. "ClientVisits" regularly scheduled or as needed 9. Home and animal caretaking while tra�eling or VISIT US A7: �`' S. Nutritional design and coordination of ineal 10. Event coordination and planning `�vww.forgetmenoihc,�r r<,are corii � drop-off delivery or prep I 1. Chiropractic,physical therapy,massages,etc. 6. Physical Fitness Planning& Practice 12. Personal Assistant&T� Preparation ; All providers are committed to Minnesou Home Care ACT. D MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: STAFF SUBJECT: RESIDENT REQUESTS DATE: SEPTEMBER 10, 2009 Staff has received a variety of requests from Orono residents and is looking for direction on how the Council wants to respond to these requests. Following is a short description of each topic for discussion. Consider Program for City Docks (Mike Gaffron) Monte Printup has requested that the Council consider providing dock space for Orono residents who don't own lakeshore, similar to the program in Mound. See attached email and Mound commons docks info. Unlike Mound, Orono does not have linear strips of publicly-owned lakeshore "commons" property. The only place in Orono where land was platted in this way was along the southeast shore of Forest Lake. Most of that land was vacated in the 1970s and 80s. Orono does have a number of narrow lakeshare access lanes dedicated in plats many decades ago, that serve a variety of purposes, including summer or winter vehicular or pedestrian lake access, swimming, boat launching, etc. Most of these sites are limited in width and could not meet LMCD standards for establishment of new public docks with appropriate setbacks. Further, the potential impact on adjoining property owners must be considered; there is no parking availability at most of these sites; and the ability to serve no more than a handful of non-lakeshore residents would likely result in fairness questions. Additionally, the cost of purchasing private land for creation of new public dockage would be prohibitive, especially considering the limited number of potential slips possible per linear foot of lakeshore under LMCD rules. Finally, I would note that Orono is home to two public landings (one provided by Hennepin County, the other by the MnDNR) that provide a total of 130 car-trailer parking stalls - these are open to the general public on a first-come, first-served basis. Unless Council has additional comments to add, I will respond to Mr. Printup in writing incorporating the above points. Consider "No Parkin�" Signage for Trails in Navarre Area (Mike Gaffron/Correy Farniok) Correy will update the Council on our response to the Bayview Place neighborhood petition asking to meet with the Council about trail parking issues. Consider Establishment of Ener�v and Environment Commission (Lin Vee) Amelia Kroeger, resident at 65 Stubbs Bay Road and former West Hennepin Recycling Commission Coordinator, would like an opportunity to attend an upcoming work session to share ;. li1 Resident Requests Memo SeptembeY 10, 2009 Page 2 her thoughts for establishing an Energy and Environment Commission and get Council's input regarding the concept of some type of environmental commission or task force. Amelia first requested consideration last summer but was asked to wait until a new city administrator was hired before pursuing the idea of an environmental commission. She has recently renewed her request to attend a work session. Consider Installation of Automatic Doors at City Hall for Handicap Accessibilitv (Lin Vee) A Comment Card was recently received suggesting power doors on all city entrances for wheelchair-bound people. The Help America Vote Act (HAVA)provides funds far improving the accessibility and quality of polling places. The Secretary of State's Office has federal grant funds available to city, township, and county government for polling place accessibility improvements. If Council is interested, the City could apply for grant funds for automatic door openers on the Council Chambers and City Hall doors as both of these entrances are used to access polling places. Staff would also recommend an automatic door opener for the police department entrance. Grant applications must be submitted by November 2, 2009 with awards in early December. Typical grant amounts have ranged from $100 up to $6,000 in previous years. Some projects have received partial funding, with the local jurisdiction responsible for the balance of the funds. Consider Installation of Pet Waste Stations Alon� City Trails (Mayor White) Mayor White received a request to consider setting up pet waste stations along some of the City trails, i.e. Willow Drive between Hwy 6, Hwy 12 & Old Crystal Bay Road, similar to those provided on trails maintained by the Three Rivers Park District. � i From: montepr(a�juno.com To: �white(c�ci.orono.mn.us ; jmurphy(a�qoldengate.net ; cbremer(a�ci.orono.mn.us ; Imcmillan(a�ci.orono.mn.us ; dfranchot(a�ci.orono.mn.us Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 2:08 PM Subject: City dock in Orono? Hello, my name is Monte Printup and I am a resident in the Crystal Bay neighborhood. My family has lived here for over 30 years and my father Gary Printup has been a community leader for this City in the past. My daughter, brother and myself are all Orono High School alumni and I am proud to be a citizen from Orono! However, it has been bothering me that since the City bought the "Big Island" property that their has been no planning of city dock space to allow inland residents to enjoy what their tax dollars are paying for. It seems quite discriminating to the lower and middle class people of this city. My question is are you willing to bring this up as a valid proposal at a council meeting? If you are, I can give you my ideas and let you take it from there. I believe it would be a win win for the residents and the city economically for both parties. I suggest looking at the dock program that the City of Mound has for their residents?? I have called around the area marinas and the cost is absurd and not affordable for most people. Plus, the dock space is rented out mostly by non-residents of Orono? Even the public landings are dominated by people from outside the city? I appreciate you taking the time to read this and look forward to hearing back from you in the near future. Attached is information regarding Mounds "dock program". Thank you. - Monte Printup CITY OF MOUND DOCK PROGRAM OVERVIEW The City of Mound operates a very unique program —the Mound Docks and Commons Program. It is the largest municipally owned dock program in the state, permitting up to 627 boats annually on Lake Minnetonka. Thanks go to the developers who platted Commons in those neighborhoods between the years 1906-1911. They created linear parkways, or Commons, on the shores as they platted the new subdivisions. It was their desire to dedicate the shorelines of Mound,just as parks are dedicated for public use, so that all Mound residents could enjoy the use of the Lake, not just those whose property faces (abutts)the lake. Currently, inland Mound residents have an opportunity to have access to Lake Minnetonka through the approximately 144 dock sites and 100 slip sites. In many cases, these sites are a short walking distance from the residents' homes. These sites are not transferable with the property and there is a waiting list to receive one of these sites. In addition, there are approximately 167 abutting sites on Commons lakeshore property. These dock sites are transferable with the property. The residents of these properties must complete the dock application, pay their fees and provide and maintain their own docks. A recent addition to the dock program are the slips at the Villas on Lost Lake. Through a new plat by MHR Development and a separate license with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, the City will operate 37 slip sites for residents of these Villas. For 2009, 31 of the 37 slips are available for non-Villa residents on a year to year basis. Twenty-four(24)transient (day use) docks are provided by the City at the new Lost Lake Greenway and Pier in the future new downtown. A second transient dock is also located at Mound Bay Park. A City-owned fishing pier is located on Centerview Road on Harrisons Bay. The Mound Dock Program is unique to most cities in Minnesota and offers a privileged lifestyle that might not otherwise be attained. It is one to be appreciated and safeguarded as a special quality of life feature only our community can offer. I �� I � 3 . � MEMORANDUM 9-14-09 Work Session To: Mayor and City Council �From: Mike Gaffron, Asst. City Administrator ;.�f�`��- Date: September 11, 2009 Subject: Comprehensive Plan Update & Met Council Issues 1 - Review of Initial Met Council Comments (staff inemo 8-28-09) 2 - Review of Meeting with Bob McFarlin 3 - Consider Scheduling Comp Plan Open House and Public Hearing Attachments: A - Staff Memo and Exhibits of 8-28-09 B - MPG Background Notes for 9-1-09 Meeting w/McFarlin C - September/October Calendar Council initially received Exhibi�A with your August 28 Friday Update - we need to discuss how we move forward. Councilmember Murphy and I will provide you with a recap of our meeting with Bob McFarlin. A calendar with potential dates for a combined Open House and Public Hearing on the Comp Plan is attached. Questions to consider include date/time, location, and whether we want to determine a course of action for addressing Met Council's expressed concerns before or after that open house & hearing. I � i �� MEMORAND UM To: Mayor and City Council From: Mike Gaffron, Asst. City Administrator Date: Au�ust 28, 2009 Subject: Review of Met Council Initial Response to Comp Plan Update Submittal Attachments: A - August 12, 2009 Met Council Letter to Orono B - Met Council Rural Area Guidelines - August 2008 C - Met Council MUSA Implementation Guidelines -November 2007 D - Excerpts from Minnesota Statutes Comp Plan Process. Orono's Draft 2008-2030 Comprehensive Plan Update was forwarded to the Metropolitan Council on July 24. The Plan was submitted in order to meet the July 30 extended deadline established last December, although the Plan technically will not be ready for final submittal until 1) the 6-month adjacent jurisdiction review period is completed on December 10, 2009, and 2) the City holds a public hearing on the Plan and the Council adopts a Resolution approving it for submission. These process issues will be resolved as a matter of course in due time. We do need to plan for an open house & public hearing on the Plan sometime in September or October. Comp Plan Content. The August 12 letter from Met Council (MC) indicates that the Plan is "incomplete and inconsistent with Council policy, and rrzay be found to have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure fi�om metropolitan system plans. " It goes on to say that review will be suspended until the process and content completeness issues are addressed. The content completeness issues in most cases can be rectified with additional submittals of easily generated information or text changes. Summary of Consistency Issues. There are a few critical areas in which the City's planned land use is inconsistent with Metropolitan Council's regional policies and inconsistent with various elements of Met Council's 2005 System Statement for Orono. These issues go directly to the core of Orono's philosophical disconnect with Metropolitan Council's goals regarding residential development and efficient use of the metro sewer system. While not unexpected, these inconsistencies are not easily resolved. They include: 1. Population & Household Forecasts. Orono's future development in sewered areas (within the existing and proposed MUSA) is planned to be primarily low-density and will result in the City not meeting the Met Council's overall new development density requirement of an average of 3 units per net acre for sanitary sewer service areas. The lower densities produce households and population outcomes that fall short of the Met Council's forecasts. Those forecasts are based on Met Council's desired outcome for Orono, not on Orono's intended Plan. Met Council indicates "The City needs to revise the Update and base its comprehensive planning on the System Statement forecasts of population and households." Review of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page 1 of 17 August Z8, 2009 2. Housin�. While the Met Council has not yet stated our Housing Plan is inconsistent with regional policies, they are asking for additional detailed information which, when provided, will likely lead them to conclude we are not intending to make provisions for the levels of affordable housing that they desire Orono to develop. I expect their conclusion will be based on Orono's lack of planning to accommodate 311 units of high density housing. High density is one of the few ways we would have available to make affordable housing feasible. 3. Land Use. Met Council has indicated that Orono's sewered area density policies appear to be inconsistent with regional policy and may be considered a "system departure" unless the City can ensure that new residential development served by regional sanitary sewer will achieve an overall minimum net density of 3.0 units per acre. We already know that this is not likely under our current plan. They also indicate the City needs to use a number other than "zero" as a lowest allowed density for sanitary sewered development; the implications of doing this are discussed elsewhere in this memo. Additionally, Met Council has indicated that Orono's unsewered area density policies appear to be inconsistent with their recently adopted (August 2008) Flexible Residential Development Guidelines. Met Council's 2030 Water Resources Management Policy Plan designates all of Orono's non-MUSA area as a "Long-Term Service Area for the Regional Wastewater System", in which they expect development to be limited �o no more than 1 unit per 10 acres. The Guidelines suggest that all new non-MUSA development should be planned and developed on an interim basis as "staging areas for future urbanization". This is diametrically opposite Orono's philosophy of permanent low-density development in our Rural area. Met Council does note that much of this area has already been subdivided at densities greater than 1-per-10 and is therefore inconsistent with the Flexible Residential Development Guidelines. They want to talk to us about how this might be addressed ANALYSIS OF MET COUNCIL COMMENTS This memo will address each of the issues in the order they appear in the August 12 letter, with the text of the MC letter in italics followed by my analysis of the issues described. 1. FORECASTS "The Update is incomplete with respect to forecasts. It is inconsistent with System Statement,forecasts and regional policy. The Update indicates that Orono's future development is planned to be ve�y low-densiry and with sanitary sewer service in some areas, due to wetlands and other environmental sensitivities. The Update proposes residential parcels of a size that fail to meeC the Council's densiry requirements (3 units/net acre, average)for sanitary sewer service a��eas. The lower densities produce households and population outcomes that fall short of the Council's forecasts. City pi•eferred foi°ecasts are shown below compared with the Council's System Statement forecasts. Review of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page 2 of 17 August 28, 2009 Council staff finds the Ciry preferred forecasts are inconsistent with System Statement forecasts and regional policy. The City needs to revise the Update and base its comprehensive planning on the System Statement forecasts of population and households. As proposed, the City's forecasts range from 6 to 17 percent below Council forecasts for 2020 and,from 6-13% below Council fo��ecasts for 2030. Com arison of Council S sterrc Statement and City's LI date Forecasts Census Council City Council City Council ' Ciry �Unsewered 2000 010 2010 020 2020 030 2030 Population ��� N/A �2�00 ���2450 �2�00 � 2070 �2500 22�0 �Nouseholds � N/A j9;t� !9�0 '1000 � 865 11080 I 93� ' IEm lo ment N/A 0 ,35 !0 I �0 i0 ' 40 P Y ' _� - - - —_ —__ _ - -- - -- -.—I �— Census Council City Council City Councll City Sewered _ 000 '2010 2010 2020 2020 �2030 2030 - - '1'opulatior� NA �800 ��800 � 7000 6�80 7300 ' 67�0 �F-louseholds A 2256 224J 29�0 ; 2745 3020 2825 IEmployment A 1230 _ i,1335 1420 � 1 SI S 1500 I 1595 Census _ Council City Councrl City Council City � �Total 2000 2010 20I0 020 2020 030 2030 ' �opulation 7�38 8300 81�0_ 9500 ' 86�0 9800 9000 ; _ _ -- -- - - _ � ouseholds I 2766 ���3200 ��3195 '��3950� j 3610 �,=1100 I 3760 mployment �1110 1230 1370 '�1420 � 15�� 11500 1635 '�� (MPG Note: Some of the numbers for City data in the above table appear to have been rounded up to the nearest 5 units by MC, and some do not match to what is in our CMP Update; see the corrected table on the following page) The Update proposes higher employment forecasts in Oirono witlr 13�jobs added to each of the 2010, 2020 and 2030 forecasts. Council staff finds the employment forecast revisions to be reasonable and will ��ecommend that the Council accept the Ciry's employment forecasts shown in the above table. Advisorv comments: • The City desc��ibes a year 2030 "expanded MZISA altei�native" in the Comprehensive Sewer Plan. If the City pursues this "expanded MZISA alternative, " a Tier II sewer agreement and a Plan Amendment would be required. In that situation, the Council would Nequire a plan to achieve 3 units/net acre, average, in the "expanded MLISA." Year 2030 total forecasts could be increased as a result. • The Update forecasts are segmented by u�banized area and rural area (for example, Table 3B-1). The Council's sanitary sewered and unsewered forecasts diffef•from the City's urbanized and�-ural fos•ecasts. " Review of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page 3 of 17 Az�gust 28, 2009 "Forecasts" Analysis There is no issue regarding the `employment' forecasts. The issue is in the `population' and `households' forecasts. The differences between the City projections and the MC forecasts are directly attributable to the basis and philosophy used to create those predictions. MC forecasts reflect what the Met Council wants the City to be. City projections are based on the City's planned land use and zoning as expressed in the Update, and reflect a property by property analysis of future development potential, coupled with staff estimates of probable development timing. About calculating population and household numbers: "Persons per Household": Population projection numbers are simply created by m�ltiplying the expected number of households by the expected number of persons per household ("pph"). The number of persons per household in Orono as reported in the 1970 Federal Census was 3.16; it dropped to 2.99 in 1980; dropped to 2.79 in 1990; and dropped again to 2.73 in the 2000 Census. Met Council projections for Orono in 2010 are 2.59 pph, while Orono's projection is slightly lower due to the relatively high number of 1-2 person households expected to move into the condos and townhomes in the next year or two. For 2020 and 2030, both MC and Orono projections are based on a further reduction to approximately 2.40 �ph. "Households" vs "Dwellin� Units": A household is defined for the purposes of the Comp Plan as an occupied dwelling unit. A dwelling unit is a building or portion of a building intended for occupancy as separate living quarters, with cooking, sleeping and sanitary facilities provided within the dwelling unit. At any given time, perhaps 95% of Orono's dwelling units are occupied, and the remainder are vacant; therefore, in the CMP Update the number of existing or projected households is always smaller than the projected number of dwelling units. As noted above, the table in Met Council's letter contains data for City numbers that differs from that in our CMP Update submittal. Here is what I believe is a correct table based on the info that was in the submitted Update: Com arison of Council System Statement and Ci 's U date Forecasts ' �Census Council City Council City Council City � IUnsewered 2000 O10 010 020 2020 030 2030 ,Population N/A 2500 �2350 �500 2070 '2500 I 2250 ; -- --- - -- IHouseholds I N/A �,944 ��9-58 910 I1000 ��b-5 860 �1080 ��; 93-5 930 i ��'Employment �� N/A ��0 '�,3� 0 � 40 � �0 40 I __ _ _ — — �___ 1_— _ — __ -- -----� ___ � Census Council City Council �City Council City ' ISewered � 000 i2010 2010 � 2020� 2020 030 2030 Population NA ���800 5800 7000 ! 6580 17300 �� 67�0 IHouseholds NA 2 56 I�4� 2240 2950 ; �43 2740'3020 1 ?�?�2820 �m lo ment � A �1230 1335 I 1420 � 1515 1500 1595 � P Y ---- ---- _-� -- - — -- � -- '' _-- - - __ _ _ _ � Census Council City Council City �Council �' City ' �'Total '2000 2010 2010 �2020 2020 2030 2030 'Population ,7538 �8300 '81�0 '9500 � 86�0 9800 9000 -- --- -— --— _ _ ;Households 2766 3200 '�-�-9-3 3150 3950 �9 3600 4100 �83750 mployment �1110 '�1230 ,1370 1420 ; 1555 �1500 i 1635 Review of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page 4 of 17 August 28, 2009 Met Council's conclusion that Orono's existing developable MUSA areas are planned to develop at an overall density of less than 3 units per acre is absolutely correct. Much of the existing further-developable MUSA areas are Shoreland areas that were incorporated into the MUSA either in 1998 (prior to the 2020 CMP) or in 2001 (as part of the 2020 CMP). The Met Council approved these amendments to expand the MUSA with the full knowledge that Orono planned to allow sewering of existing low-density neighborhoods and further sewered development of undeveloped properties in these Shoreland areas under the 2-acre minimum lot size (0.5 units per acre) zoning standards that have been in place since 1975 or earlier. Those approvals did not require that the City develop these areas at densities of at least 3 units per acre. It did not place any restrictions on how these areas could develop. Regarding the two Advisory Comments: 1) The "expanded MUSA" is a scenario described on pages 4G 19/20 of the Sewer chapter, under which additional rural-density areas would be brought into the MUSA, most likely to retrofit existing Shoreland and non-Shoreland neighborhoods with sewer service, but also potentially to accommodate new low-density clustered development to preserve open spaces. However, the Met Council comment indicates any such MUSA expansion would require a plan to achieve 3 units per acre in the expanded area. That would not be our goal of an "expanded MUSA", so expanding the MUSA further into Orono's Rural Area to serve existing development or new low-density development is not likely to be accepted by Met Council. This Met Council position reflects the same logic that MC is trying to impose on our existing MUSA areas by denying sewer connections to individual homes. MC would have us create offsetting high density to average 3 units per acre. An example of how this would play out: the single family home at 3125 Fox Street, in the MUSA since 1998, has been denied a sewer connection by Met Council. To offset sewering this one 7-acre homesite, a 29 unit apartment/condo building on a 3-acre site would have to be built. 2) The Met Council forecasts for Sewered and Unsewered areas do differ significantly from our forecasts for the Urban and Rural areas, because they are different subsets of the City. The MC comment stems from their comparing apples and oranges. Met Council may be having difficulty grasping the idea that we have an "Urban Area" and a "Rural Area" defined primarily by historic and planned development density, that are completely different from our "Sewered Area" and "Unsewered Area" defined strictly by being in or out of the MUSA. Our "Sewered Area" includes all of our Urban Area and part of our Rural Area. Not all of our "Sewered Area"has been provided with sewer lines yet, but our intent is that it will be. However, when one compares apples and apples, Orono is projecting significantly fewer sewered households than Met Council for 2020 and 2030, based on our Plan vs. MC desires. Implications. Orono household forecasts for 2010 are about 50 units less than MC forecasts. Under Orono's current proposed guiding and zoning, City predictions indicate that 450 new households will be added to the City between 2010 and 2020; MC forecasts this number to be 750 units, a difference of 300 units. Between 2020 and 2030, both MC and Orono project an additional 150 homes, reflecting that the City will be nearing full development during that decade. Review of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page.5 of 17 August 28, 2009 In order for Orono to be consistent with MC 2020 household and population forecasts, the City would have to re-guide and rezone enough property to accommodate 350 additional households over and above the current planning. Two possible scenarios to accomplish this include: 1) at the Met Council minimum density of 3 units per acre, this translates to about 120 additional acres, an area slightly more than twice the acreage contained in the "Dumas/James" properties already guided for development at 2-4 units per acre; ar 2) at a density of 15 units per acre (similar to the Orono Woods Senior Housing site) this translates to about 25 additional acres, which would accommodate six buildings similar to Orono Woods in size and layout. The potential locations for either scenario are limited, and would require significant changes in the current guideplan. 2. HOUSING "The Update is incomplete for Housing. The Update does acknowledge the Ciry's share of the region's affordable housing need for 2011-2020 - 311 units, and cites the Ciry's o�cial controls and implementation prog�ams it will use to assist in the development of affo��dable housing. However, to be complete, the Update needs to include a breakout of the amount of land that will be available foN residential development or redevelopment during the 2011-2020 timeframe, along with the proposed land use designations and density ranges. " "Housing" Analysis This request for a summary of developable land amounts, land use designations and density ranges can be compiled into a more succinct format from data tables and maps already located in the Housing chapter, the Land Use chapter or the Sewer chapter. At any rate, the infarmation can be provided without much additional effort. Implications. Reading between the lines, my assumption is that once the data is provided, it will show clearly what we have already concluded - we have not guided land for the very hibh densities (15+ units per acre) that would be needed to potentially result in development of substantial amounts of affordable housing. When the land and other development costs are added in, affordable housing is very difficult here without some form of subsidy. I would anticipate that once the requested data is provided, MC will respond by telling us that what we are proposing is inadequate, and we should find more land to re-guide for higher density. Review of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page 6 of 17 August 28, 2009 3. LAND USE "The Update is incomplete ,for Land Use. The following items need to be addressed before the Update will be considered complete _for land use and density. The Update needs to show how the community plans to accommodate forecasted g��owth in its population, households, and employment. Land Use Categories The Update needs to descf•ibe the allowable uses for each of the land use categories shown on Map 3B-6 and needs to use planned land use categories consistently throughout the document. The Update describes urban land uses starting on page 3B-32 but these categories do not align with those shown on Map 3B-6. Other "non-urban" land uses shown on the map do not match the descriptions starting on page 3B-45. Future land use tables, maps, and description text need to all use the same land use categories. For all land use categories that allow residential uses, the Update needs to detail the allowable density ranges, including minimum density and maximum density. The Update currently only desc��ibes minimum lot sizes, which equates to a maximum density. The Council calculates the communiry's capacity to accommodate residential growth by multiplying the lowest allowed densiry in the planned land use densiry range by the net residential acreage. The Update needs to use a nunzber other than "zero" as a lowest allowed density for sanitary sewered development. In addition, the City needs to ensure that new residential development served by regional sanitary sewer achieves an overall minimum net densiry of 3.0 units per acre. Failure to achieve this density may be considered a system departure. The Update contains an Existing Land Use Map (Map 3B-5) and a table detailing acreages (Table 3B-3). However, the land use categories shown on the map and in the table do not match. The map shows three residential land use catego�•ies, while the table only shows two. The map and the table need to desc�ibe the same land use categories. Future Land Use Acrea�es As detailed in the Council's Local Plan�ing Handbook (p. 3-SJ, the Update needs to include a table quantifying the acreages in each of the land use categories in 2010, 2020, and 2030, as shown on Map 3B-6: Land Use Plan 2008-2030. The Update contains future land use projections in S year stages (Tables 3B-4a th��ough 3B-4e), but none of these indicate in which planned land use categories future development will occur. The Update needs to include the Council's Land Use Table In S-Year Stages (http:/lwww.metrocouncil.ors/planninLPH/forms/Land UseSvear doe� and ensure that the categories used in the table are those shown on the City's planned land use map (those in the template are for illustrative purposes). Please note that this table will be included in the staff review repoNt to the Council for action on the Ciry's Update. Capacitv to Accommodate FoNecasts The Update provides an analysis of residential land use capacity by zoning distr�ict (Table 3B-2), which shows that the Ciry could acconzmodate 72� more units using the Review of Met Council Comp Plarr lnitial Response Page 7 of 17 August 28, 2009 City's current zoning or planned guiding. While the household increase is nearly the same as that projected in the System Statement, the starting points are different. The Ciry shoN�s the existing number of households in the community to be about 500 units less than the System Statement forecasts for 2010. Council estimated that in April 2008, Orono had 3,002 households. (MPG Note: MC has misread Table 3B-2; it actually shows 3239 dwelling units, the equivalent of about 3,075 households at 95% occupancy, relatively near MC's 2008 estimate) The current guiding may be insufficient to accommodate the Council's forecasted growth through 2030. The Update needs to indicate how or what will be changed or reguided to accommodate the Council's forecasted growth. Tables 3B-4a and 3B-4b calculate future land use projections. These tables include existing and future households in the calculation, so it is difficult to determine whether new development will occur at densities consistent with Council policy (3 dN�elling units per net ac). Using the information provided in the Update, the overall development in the communiry (existing and future) results in a gross density of 0.8 dwelling units per acre (2,96� dwelling units on 3�78 gross acres). The Update describes the development of five different "Parcel Groups" within the community, but it appears that these areas have limited capacity to accommodate the City's forecasted growth as several of these areas have already undergone development. The land use categories used in the analysis of these groups does not match the guiding shown in Map 38-6. The Update indicates that future urban development will be carefully integrated into existing neighborhoods, but outside of the Parcel Group analysis, the Update does not indicate where future urban development will occur and at what densities it will occur. Council staff would like to meet with the City staff Co go over the land use questions. � POLICY ISSUES Urban Densitv The Update contains policies that are inconsistent with the 2030 Regional Development Framewof�k (RDF). In its description of u��ban and rural areas of the community, the Update indicates that development in the urban area "will remain relatively low (ranging from 1 unit per ac�°e to as much as 4-6 units per acre, with a few individual multi family sites as high as 1� units per acre)" (p. 3B-10). As described above, the Update does not provide sufficient information to assess whether new development and redevelopment will occur at densities consistent with Council policy,for sanita�y sewer serviced areas. In addition, because the Update has a stated policy of not expanding the MLISA, it is unclear how and where the Ciry will accommodate new sewef•ed development and/or redevelopment. The policy descs�ibed above and text elsewhere in the Update indicate that it may be unlikely that overall new development receiving sanitary sewer would achieve an overall net density of at least three units per acre (Text on page 38-13, Policy # 1 on page 3B-19, Policy #12 on page 3B-23). The City is advised of the Council's Revised Met�°opolitan Urban Service A�-ea Implementation Guidelines (http://www.mnetr�ocouncil.org/planning/assistance/MZISAChangeGuidelines.pdfl, which indicate the conditions under which properties may be connected to regional wastewater services as well as the Council's method fo� calculating residential development net density. Review of Met Council Comp Plan/nitial Response Page 8 of 17 August 28, 2009 The City has pai�ticipated in the Council's Plat Monitoring Program, having submitted data fi^om 2000 to 2008. In that time period, the Ciry approved 9 subdivisions for a total of 272 units on 79.64 net acres, resulting in a net f�esidential density of 3.42 units per acre. The City has shown the capaciry to accommodate development at urban densities, but the Update does not reflect City planning policy to continue to do so. Rural Densitv The RDF designates the area of Orono that is outside of the MIISA as "Diversified Rural,"which has a density policy of no n�ore than 1 unit per 10 acres. Maps of this area and descriptions in the text show that this area is largely developed at rural densities higher than 1 per 10, closer to 1 unit per 4 ac��es. Policy descriptions on page 3B-10 indicate that development in the "rural" area will continue on 2-7 acre lots, inconsistent with the 1 per-1 0 densiry policy, and that no additional areas within the rural area will be designated for MLISA expansion due to the existing rural development pattern. The Council's 2030 Water Resou��ces Management Policy Plan designates this area as a Long-TeNm Se��vice Area for the Regional Wastewater System, development in this rural area needs to be consistent with the Council's recently adopted Flexible Residential Development Guidelines. However, much of this land has already been subdivided at densities g�eater than 1 per-10 and is therefore inconsistent with the Flexible Residential Development Guidelines. The Council staff would pNopose to meet with the Ciry to discuss potential options for addressing these issues in the Update. " "Land Use" Analysis Met Council Forecast vs Orono's Plan. To begin with, Met Council expects Orono to modify its proposed land uses to accommodate the residential growth that Met Council forecasts for Orono. By 2030 Met Council expects Orono to have a population of 9800 people in 4,100 households. Orono under its proposed land use plan for 2030 will have a population of 9000 people in 3,7�0 households. The "discrepancy" is 800 persons in 350 households. Our population and household projections presented in the Plan are based on development of our few multi-family guided properties to the "preferred" option within the given density range, and on a parcel by parcel analysis of remaining developable land throughout the City. For instance, where the 50-acre Dumas/James properties are guided for a range of 2-4 units per acre, with a `preferred' development option of 120 units total, we have used the preferred option density of 2.5 units per acre to project population/households based on 120 units. This follows from the Rural Oasis Study options that suggested the high end of the density range would not be preferable for that site. In order to get to the high end of the density range, i.e. 4 units per acre of 200 units total on 50 acres, we would have to ignore the Rural Oasis recommendations for that site. How Might We Meet MC Forecasts? To align with Met Council's forecasted population and households, we would have to re-guide enough property to accommodate 370 dwelling units more than we have already guided far (370 units, not 350, because at any given time only about 95% of our dwelling units are occupied, so throughout the Comp Plan you will find that the Review of Met Council Comp Plarr lnitial Response Page 9 of 17 August 28, 2009 number of dwelling units always is slightly greater than the number of households). In one fell swoop, this would be the equivalent of 6 buildings the size of the Orono Woods Senior Housing (62 units) or the Stonebay Condominiums (57 units). One way to accomplish this would be to re-guide the Dumas/James properties to accommodate a total of 490 dwelling units rather than the 120 already projected by Orono. This would be a net density for those 50 acres of just under 10 units per acre. And it would end up being eight 62- unit buildings all in one complex. Another way to accomplish this would be to scatter those large buildings on sites around Highway 12 or Navarre. Each site would have to be approximately 3-5 acres in area, with a resulting density ranging from 12-20 units per acre. A third way to accomplish an additional 370 units would be to re-guide significant portions of the 2-acre zone near Highway 12 to allow for higher densities, say 3-6 units per acre (for example, the Stonebay Townhomes are at 4 units per dry acre). At 6 units per acre, we would have to re-guide 60-6� dry-buildable acres (note that wherever those acres might be today, they probably contain around 20 existing homes which would be removed; so we really need to accommodate 390 units). At 4 units per acre we would have to re-guide nearly 100 acres; at 3 units per acre, around 135 acres. We do not realistically have the option of re-guiding land in the 5-acre zone since the densities needed would require sewer. Could we re-guide enough land in the 1/2-acre and 1-acre zones, i.e. in Navarre, to accomplish the MC goal? Both zones are primarily developed lakeshore areas, with few undeveloped properties of a size that would accommodate the scale of multi-family buildings required to meet the goal. The scattered available sites (see Map 3B-4) would result in large multi-family buildings inserted into single-family neighborhoods, not necessarily a good fit. Another option would be to completely redevelop the heart of Navarre (CR15/CR19). There may not be a comfortable way to add the population needed to accommodate the Met Council's forecasted population and household numbers. Land Use Categories and Acreages. I will revise the maps, tables and text for consistency in category terminology as noted in the MC letter, and will supply them the acreages of the various land uses over time as requested. This will make it more clear to them that our current plan does not meet their goals. Density Ranges, Minimum Allowable Density. The request for detail on minimum and maximum allowable density ranges for all property guided residential, is somewhat difficult in Orono's context. We have always had a maximum allowed density for each zoning district, calculated as the inverse of the minimum dry buildable lot size - i.e. the 2-acre zone has a maximum density of 0.5 units per buildable acre, the 5-acre zone has a maximum density of 0.2 units per acre, the 1/2-acre zone has a maximum density of 2.0 units per acre, etc. However, neither the CMP nor the Zoning Code establish a minimum density (i.e. a maximum lot size) for most property in Orono. A range in allowed densities is described only for the more recently guided high-density sites, such as the Dumas/James properties (2-4 units per acre), Stonebay (3-6 units per acre) and the East Hackberry area (2-3 units per acre). Because Met Council calculates a community's capacit_y to accommodate residential rg owth "by multiplying the loN�est allowed density in the planned land use density range by the net residential acreage", they expect to see a minimum allowed density for each zoning district or planning area, that is something other than "zero" for sewered development. Review of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page 10 of 17 August 28, 2009 Therefore, what is the minimum density we would allow for property in the 1-acre zone, for example, which is entirely in the MUSA but which contains some developable properties that would be sewered? Ignoring the buildable area exclusions needed for new roads, stormwater ponds, etc. and assuming all code standards are met, would we allow a 5-acre site to subdivide: - into five 1-acre lots? Yes (net density = 1 unit per acre). - into three 1.66 acre lots? Yes (net density = 0.6 units per acre). - into two 2.5 acre lots? Yes (net density = 0.4 units per acre). In the same 1-acre zone, would we allow the owner of a 10-acre property to subdivide it into two 5-acre lots? Yes (net density = 0.2 units per acre). The bottom line is, we have never placed restrictions on development in the 1-acre zone that establishes a maximum lot size or a minimum density. The same is true for our other zones. If we were to arbitrarily establish a minimum density for new development in the 1-acre zone, what would it be? We would likely be satisfied with it as low as 0.2 units per acre; it would be counterproductive to the goals of our 1-acre zoning if it was any higher than 1.0 unit per acre; Met Council would like it to be at least 3.0 units per acre. Now consider the developable Shoreland areas in our 2-acre zone that were placed into the MUSA in 1998. We have parcels as large as 20 acres that could be developed into 2-acre lots; but we would not object to them being 3-acre or 4-acre or even 5-acre lots; and the zoning code would not prohibit a mere split into two 10-acre lots, i.e. a density of 0.1 units per acre. This is true of our 2-acre zones both within and outside the MUSA. What should we establish as the minimum allowed density? 0.1 units per acre? At 0.1 units per acre, the density range would be reported as 0.1 - 0.� units per acre. If we had, say �00 acres of developable land in the 2-acre zone, Met Council would multiply 0.1 units/acre x 500 acres = 50 units which would be Orono's `capacity to accommodate residential growth' on that land. That number has no relationship to reality, since we could ultimately expect 150-200 homes on those 500 acres under Orono's historic development patterns. Urban Density Issue. Met Council expects that going forward from 2000, all new development in the MUSA served by regional sanitary sewer will achieve a minimum net density of 3 units per acre. We have significant acreages of further developable land in the MUSA in the 2-acre zones (and a much smaller amount in the 1-acre and 1/2-acre zones) that we intend to allow to develop under the zoned and guided densities of 0.5-2.0 units per acre. Achieving a 3.0 units per acre density going forward will be impossible to accomplish under our proposed plan as noted further below. This also leads indirectly to our issue regarding Met Council's denial of individual sewer connections for existing homes in the MUSA on large lots. Met Council is using the same standard for existing development that it uses for new development. If the 7-acre property at 3125 Fox Street (denied a single sewer connection for the existing home) wanted to subdivide into 3 total lots, the resulting density would be 3 units per 7 acres = 0.43 units per acre. Met Council would probably not allow this development to be sewered, even though that was our clear intent in the 2000 CMP, unless we offset it elsewhere to result in a net overall sewered density of 3 units per acre. The calculations below illustrate the difficulty of ineeting the 3 units per sewered acre density average for the overall City: Review of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page 11 of 17 August 28, 2009 � At present we have about 2300 dwelling units in the MUSA connected to sewer. Our total MUSA area is approximately 4100�acres. Within the MUSA, we have another 200 existing homes that we would expect to connect to sewer. Within the MUSA, under our current Plan, we calculate that the zoning would allow another 375-450 new dwellings to be built (range depends on the number of units allowed on the Dumas-James sites). Since we are not expanding the MUSA, our final sewered density under the current plan is (2300 + 200 + 450) /4100 = 0.72 units per acre. • Of the potential 450 new dwellings that could be built in the MUSA, the probable density breakdown is as follows: � 60 remaining townhomes at Stonebay: density =4 units per acre (15 acres) � 200 at Dumas-James site: density=4 units per acre (50 acres) � 45 at "East Hackberry": density= 2.5 units per acre (18 acres) � 30 in Navarre/Forest Lake/Tonkawa areas: density = 1.0 units per acre (30 acres) � 115 in all other MUSA areas, 2-acre zone: density = 0.4 units per acre (290 acres) Net new-development developed density going forward from today would be calculated as: 450 units/403 acres = 1.1 units �er acre • If we also take into consideration our approved new residential development starting in 2000, we would calculate as follows: Entire Stonebay: 157 units on 25.2 net acres Willow View: 25 units on 30.7 net acres Orono Woods: 62 units on 4.0 net acres Creekside: 7 units on 5.4 net acres Glendale Cove: 8 units on 4.1 net acres Barth Addition: 2 units on 1.2 net acres Sharri Lakeview Estates: 6 units on 3.7 net acres Wildhurst Woods: 5 units on 5.3 net acres Tota1 = 272 units on 79.6 acres (272 + 450 - 60) / (79.6 + 403) = 662 units on 410.6 acres = 1.6 units per acre � In order to get to an average of 3 units per acre, one option (a poor one) might be to ban all new development within the MUSA areas zoned for 2-acre minimums. This would yield: (662 - 115) /(410.6 - 290) = 547 units on 120.6 acres = 4.53 units per acre It would also yield a rebellion by rural property owners who have long had the right to subdivide, and who would likely perceive this as a downzoning and a taking of value. � Instead of banning low density development, if we allowed the Dumas/Janles site to be the sacrificial lamb, it would have to be developed with 720 units on 50 acres, a density for that site of 14.4 units per acre, to yield an overall net density of 3.0 units per acre post-2000: [(60+720+45+20+115)+(272)] /410.6 acres= 1,232 units on 410.6 acres=3.00 units per acre Review of Met Counci!Conap Plan Initial Response Page 12 of 17 � August 28, 2009 Rural Density Issue. Met Council's Regional Development Framework places all of Orono's non-MUSA areas in the category "Diversified Rural" and within the Long Term Service Area for the Regional Wastewater System. They consider all of these areas as "temporarily rural". Met Council policy would disallow new development at densities greater than 1 unit per 10 acres in this area, consistent with their recently adopted (August 2008) Flexible Residential Development Guidelines, which identify, encourage and promote development that is the pure antithesis of Orono's low-density philosophy. Those Guidelines (copy attached) are based on the premise that "existing regional wastewater treatment plants and the broader infrastr�ucture efficiency of contiguous sewered development are predicated on a residential densiry of three units per acre or greater. " To that end, the Guidelines suggest that all new non-MUSA development should be planned and developed on an interim basis as "staging areas for future urbanization". The Guidelines suggest clustering at high density in no more than 2�% of a given parcel, to preserve the remainder of the developable land for future urban development at urban (3-plus units per acre) densities. Because we have already developed much of our non-MUSA acreage at densities greater than 1 unit per 10 acres, Met Council considers Orono as "inconsistent with the Flexible Residential Development Guidelines". They would like to meet with us to discuss how this issue might be addressed. The number of remaining developable non-MUSA parcels over 10 acres left in Orono is not large, but the potential implications for the owners of those properties is a concern. For instance, could Met Council re uire that no such property be subdivided to a density greater 1 unit per 10 acres? If so, it functionally places a development moratorium on those properties, unless/until they are allowed to be developed at a density of at least 3 units per acre... 4. PARKS "The comprehensive plan update is incomplete for regional park review pufposes. Lands within the regional parks system need to be guided with a future land use of ��Park, Recreational and Open Space" and regional parks and trails need to be appropriately referenced in the Update. In order to be complete for ��eview and to conform to the 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan� (Pa��ks Policy Plan), the following revisions need to be nzade: • The Council-approved master plan foi• Morris T. Baker Park Reserve includes "inholdings'; which are parcels that are within the boundary of the park reserve but have not yet been acgui��ed by Three Rivers Park District. The inholding parcels, which are shown outlined in pink on the following graphic, need to be guided with a future land use of "Pa�°k, Recreational and Open Space" on the Land Use Plan 2008-2030 Map (Map 3B6). These parcels also need to be shown as 'p��oposed acquisitions for Baker Park Reserve" on the Pa��ks, Open Spaces, Trails & Recreation Areas Map (Map 4E-2). • The parcel that is outlined in pink on the following graphic is o��ned by Three Rivers Park District as part of Big Island Regional Park. The future land use need.s to be guided as "Pai°k, Recreational and Open Space"on the Land Use Plan 2008- 2030 Map (Map 3B6). This parcel also needs to be shown as part of the regional park on the Parks, Open Spaces, Ti�ails & Recreation Areas Map (Map 4E-2) and on Map 3B-9. RevieN�of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page 13 of 17 August 28, 2009 I'� • The Lake Independence Regional Trail, which is adjacent to Old Crystal Bay Road, needs to be acknowledged in the Update and labeled on the Parks, Open Spaces, Trails and Recreation Areas Map (Map 4E-2) and the Comprehensive Trail System Map (Map 4E-3). � The Update ��eferences the D�. Arthur Allen Wildlife Refuge, ��hich is recognized as Big Island Regional Park in the Council's Parks Policy Plan. The references to the wildlife refuge need to indicate that it is part of Big Island Regional Park on Map 3B-9, Map 4E2, Table 4E-3, and on pages 3B-48, 3B-54, 4E-20, 4E-33 and 4F-20. • Three Rivers Pa��k District recently changed the names of its regional trails. The north branch of the Southwest LRT Regional Trail is now known as the Lake Minnetonka LRT Regional Trail. This trail nanze needs to be updated on Table 4E-3 and on pages 4A-8, 4A-35, =�E-35 and 4E-40. • The references to "Hennepin Parks"and "Hennepin Counry ParkReserve"needs to be changed to "Three Rivers Park District"on Map 3B-9 and Map 4E-2 as well as on pages 3B-14, 4A-21, 4G13 and 4E-13. Advisory Comment The Update discusses a proposed trail along County Road 19 and indicates that if constructed, it should become part of the regional trail system. The Pai�ks Policy Plan does not identify a future regional trail in this area. Council staff encourages the City to plan for this trail, but to be advised that any additions to the ��egional parks system need to be app�oved by the Met��opolitan Council. "Parks" Analvsis All of the comments regarding Regional Parks are easily addressed by making revisions to the maps, tables and text. The name `Big Island Regional Park" given for the Arthur Allen Wildlife Refuge located directly west of Orono's Big Island Nature Park, gives the connotation of being something more than a pure wildlife area, and begs the question of why the Three Rivers Parks website does not even acknowledge that Big Island Regional Park exists, and has no informa�ion about it... 5. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION "The Update is incompleCe for plarr implementation. The Update contains a zoning map and a one page synopsis of zoning district regulations. The synopsis does not provide adequate information about the City's existing zoning regulations. The Ciry is requested to submit a copy of its zoning district regulations for all distr�icts within which residential land uses are pe��mitted or conditional uses. In addition, the Update needs to contain or be accompanied by a 5-Year Capital Imp�°ovement Pf•ogram (CIP) covering at least the following areas:parks & open space, sewers, transportation, wate�� supply. The cover letter notes that a 7 yeaN CIP is being developed and is expected to be adopted later this year. " Review of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Resporrse Page 14 of 17 August 28, 2009 "Plan Implementation" Analvsis The request for additional zoning district information is easily addressed. However, Orono does not yet have a 5-year or 7-year CIP approved or adopted, and this item cannot be fully addressed until one is adopted. 6. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN "The Update is incomplete for Local Surface Water Management Plan. Orono lies within the Minnehaha Creek watershed. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's watershed management plan was approved by the Board of Water and Soil Resources in 2007. Orono was required to update its Local Suiface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) by July of 2009. The Update states that the Ciry will be submitting its LSWMP for review within a month or twa Until an acceptable final draft LSWMP is submitted for revie��, the Update will be incomplete for review. " "SWMP" Analvsis Bob Barth of Bonestroo & Associates is nearing completion of the SWMP Update for review by the CounciL We expect it will be available for discussion in the near future. 7. TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT "The Update is incomplete for transportation and transit. In o�°der to be found complete, the Update will need to provide the following: • Traffic forecasts for the year 2030. Map 4A-1 and the Roadway capacity issues discussion beginning on page �A-1� make ��eferences to tra�c projections for 2020. These need to be changed to 2030. • Revision of the TAZ allocation. The Update contains a map and table of the forecasted socioeconomic data by TAZ. However, the TAZ numbers do not reflect the Council's system statement forecasts for population, households oi° employment. • The Update needs to identify the City's transit market area, which is Market Area III. Advisory Comments • Roadway Functional Classification: The update accurately Neflects the Principal and Minor arterial system ��ithin the community relative to the TAB maps. On Page 4A-2� of the Plan, there is reference to a map of the system (Map 4A-4), but it may have been omitted in erroi�. • Route 677 needs to be identified as pa��t of the city's existing tr�ansit service. " Review of Met Council Comp Plan lnitial Response Page 1 S of 17 August 28, 2009 i . "Transportation" Analysis Traffic forecasts for 2030 from Hennepin County were not available earlier this year, but are available now, so the Map and text will be updated to reflect this information. The TAZ (Traffic Analysis Zones) table and map reflect Orono's projections, not Met Council's forecasts. Unless we revise our Plan to meet MC forecasts, the TAZ information should not be changed. The text can easily be revised to identify Orono as within Transit Market Area III. Map 4A-4 was inadvertently omitted from the CD that was sent to Met Council but will be included in future versions of the Plan. Route 677 can easily be identified as part of the existing transit service. Although not called out in the August 12 letter, staff is aware that the Park & Ride facility we had preliminarily proposed for the Highway 12/County Road 6 interchange area, is likely to end up in Maple Plain. 8. WATER SUPPLY "The Update is incomplete, as the City did not include water use projections in its water supply plan. Communities are required to project annual maximum and average day water use for the next ten years as well as projecting water use for 2020 and 2030 in their water supply plans. " "Water Supply" Analysis Water demand projections for 2008 through 2017 are available for insertion into the Water Supply Plan. Projections for 2020 and 2030 will have to be prepared with the assistance of Bonestroo & Associates. 9. WASTEWATER SERVICES "The Update is complete for review. The Ciry is proposing to develop its uNban area at a net densiry less than 3 units per acre. The Update shows a 2030 household projection of 200 fewer sewered households than the Council's system statement. The City indicates that its sanitary sewer system has adequate capacity to provide for the City's proposed sewered g��owth, but not the Council's. The Update does not provide information to verify these statements. Because the Update proposes to develop at net densities less than 3 units pe�- ac��e, the Update represents a System Departure and a Plan Modification may be recommended to the Council. " Review of Met Counci!Comp Plai�Initial Response Page 16 of 17 August 28, 2009 "Wastewater Services" Analvsis I believe the comments above reflect a faulty interpretation of our submitted Plan. I agree we are proposing development of the sewered areas of Orono at a net density that will ultimately not achieve 3.0 units per acre. I agree that our 2030 sewered household projection is 200 households less than the MC forecasts. However, I do not believe the Plan states or suggests that we do not have capacity in our sanitary sewer system to meet MC forecasted growth; rather, the Plan suggests that with certain planned system modifications, we have sufficient capacity for our proposed and intended growth, without making any comment about whether we have internal capacity for additional growth to meet MC forecasts. MCES (Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, which operates the metro sewer system) in the 2005 Orono Systems Statement indicates �hat MCES is committed to providing Average Annual Wastewater Flow capacity of 0.71 MGD (259.1 MGY) by 2030, based on a sewered population of 7,300 in 3,020 households and sewered employment of 1,500. For 2030 Orono is projecting a sewered population of 6,750 in 2,820 households and sewered employment of 1,595. Met Council's projections for 2010 suggest an average wastewater flow of 109 gpd per person, reducing to 100 gpd in 2020 and to 97 gpd by 2030. Usinb those numbers, there would be more than sufficient capacity to serve our projected 2030 sewered population. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Final Thoughts In order to meet Met Council's housing goals for Orono, we would have to accommodate 311 new affordable homes by 2020. Under our current Plan, we expect only 450-500 new dwelling units will be built in Orono between now and 2020. Making 2/3 of these "affordable" is not realistic. In order to be consistent with Met Council's forecasts for population and housing, by 2020 we need to accommodate approximately 370 more homes than we have planned for. In order to meet Met Council's sewered density goals for Orono, all new residential development in the MUSA must average out to 3 units per acre. To accomplish this we would have a number of difficult options, the least onerous of which may be to guide a limited number of areas for very high density. In order to meet Met Council's unsewered density goals for Orono, we would have to severely limit the ability of our remaining non-MUSA landowners to develop at the 2-acre and 5-acre densities for which these properties have been guided and zoned for the past 40 years or more. We do not know with any certainty how far Met Council will push us. Orono is beginning with the premise that we are proposing our Plan as we want it. Met Council is beginning with the premise that they expect us to change our Plan to meet their goals. Whether there is an acceptable compromise remains to be seen. Review of Met Council Comp Plan Initial Response Page 17 of 17 August 28, 2009 . � ._� ;;� Metropolitan Council ii 1��� August 12, 2009 ,QUG , �2�(�� C��'OF pRONo Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P. O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55356-0066 RE: City of Orono 2008-2030 Community Management Plan (Comprehensive Plan Update) —Incomplete for Review Metropolitan Council Review File No. 20637-1 Metropolitan Council File District 3 (Bob McFarlin) Dear Mr. Gaffron: Thank you for your submission of Orono's draft 2008-2030 Community Management Plan [Comprehensive Plan] (Update) on July 24, 2009. Council staff acknowledges the City . submitted its Update before the City's formal extension deadline was reached and understands that the draft as such would be incomplete for at least process issues. Staff review finds that the Update is incomplete and inconsistent with Council policy, and may be found to have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from metropolitan system plans. The Update review will be suspended until the following process and content completeness issues are addressed. PROCESS ISSUES These process issues will need to be addressed before the Update will be considered complete for review. • The draft Update was sent out for adjacent community and special district/agency review on June 10, 2009. The submittal lists 25 entities that were sent the draft Update for review and comment, and contains responses and/or sign-off responses from six. The Update will remain incomplete until responses are received and forwarded to the Council from the remaining 19 reviewing entities or until December 10, 2009, whichever comes first. • The draft Update needs to have a public hearing before either the planning commission or city council. A public hearing is required by statute (Minn. Stat. § 462.355, Subd. 2) before the draft Update can be acted on by the city council for submittal to the Council. • The draft Update needs to be approved for submittal to the Council by the city council. • The 2008 Transmittal form will need to be updated to reflect the completion of the above issues. www.metrocouncil.org 390 Robert Street North • St. Paui, MN 55101-1805 • (651)602-1000 • Fax(651)602-1550 • TTY(651)291-0904 An Equal Opportunity Employer Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator August 12, 2009 Page 2 CONTENT ISSUES - REQUIRED INFORMATION The following areas in the draft Update were found incomplete for content: FORECASTS (Todd Graham, 651-602-1322) The Update is incomplete with respect to forecasts. It is inconsistent with System Statement forecasts and regional policy. The Update indicates that Orono's future development is planned to be very low-density and with sanitary sewer service in some areas, due to wetlands and other environmental sensitivities. The Update proposes residential parcels of a size that fail to meet the Council's density requirements (3 units/net acre, average) for sanitary sewer service areas. The lower densities produce households and population outcomes that fall short of the Council's forecasts. City-preferred forecasts are shown below compared with the Council's System Statement forecasts. Council staff finds the City-preferred forecasts are inconsistent with System Statement forecasts and regional policy. The City needs to revise the Update and base its comprehensive planning on the System Statement forecasts of population and households. As proposed, the City's forecasts range from 6 to 17 percent below Council forecasts for 2020 and from 6-13% below Council forecasts for 2030. Com arison of Council S��stem Statement and City's U dafe Forecasts Census Council Ci Council Ci Council Ci nsevvered 000 O10 O10 020 2020 030 2030 Population :"A �?�00 ��4�0 ;��00 ' 2070 ?�00 ' 2��0 Households A 944 950 1000 865 1080 935 Employment A 0 35 0 40 0 40 Census Council City Council Ci � Council City Sewered 000 � O10 O10 020 � 2020� ��2030 � ; 2030 Population A �800 ��800 7000 6�80 7300 67�0 Households A 2256 2245 2950 2745 3020 282j Employment A 1230 1335 1420 1515 1500 1595 Census Council Ci Council j Ci � �Council Ci � otal 000 �� O10 2010 O20 2020 j2030 2030 Population 7538 �8300 81�0 9�00 � 86�0 �9800 � 9000 � Households 2766 3200 3195 3950 3610 100 3760 Employment 1110 1230 1370 1420 1555 1500 1635 The Update proposes higher employment forecasts in Orono with 135 jobs added to each of the 2010, 2020 and 2030 forecasts. Council staff finds the employment forecast revisions to be reasonable and will recommend that the Council accept the City's employment forecasts shown in the above table. Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator August 12, 2009 Page 3 Advisory comments: • The City describes a year 2030 "expanded MUSA alternative" in the Comprehensive Sewer Plan. If the City pursues this "expanded MUSA alternative," a Tier II sewer agreement and a Plan Amendment would be required. In that situation, the Council would require a plan to achieve 3 units/net acre, average, in the "expanded MUSA." Year 2030 total forecasts could be increased as a result. • The Update forecasts are segmented by urbanized area and rural area(for exarnple, Table 3B-1). The Council's sanitary sewered and unsewered forecasts differ from the City's urbanized and rural forecasts. HOUSING (Linda Milashius, 651-602-1541) The Update is incomplete for Housing. The Update does acknowledge the City's share of the region's affordable housing need for 2011-2020—311 units, and cites the City's official controls and implementation programs it will use to assist in the development of affordable housing. However, to be complete, the Update needs to include a breakout of the amount of land that will be available for residential development or redevelopment during the 2011- 2020 timeframe, along with the proposed land use designations and density ranges. LAND USE (Lisa Barajas, 6�1-602-1895) The Update is incomplete for Land Use. The following items need to be addressed before the Update will be considered complete for land use and density. The Update needs to show how the community plans to accommodate forecasted growth in its population, households, and employment. Land Use Categories The Update needs to describe the allowable uses for each of the land use categories shown on Map 3B-6 and needs to use planned land use categories consistently throughout the document. The Update describes urban land uses starting on page 3B-32 but these categories do not align with those shown on Map 3B-6. Other "non-urban" land uses shown on the map do not match the descriptions starting on page 3B-45. Future land use tables, maps, and description te�t need to all use the same land use categories. For all land use categories that allow residential uses, the Update needs to detail the allowable density ranges, including minimum density and maximum density. The Update currently only describes minimum lot sizes, which equates to a maximum density. The Council calculates the community's capacity to accommodate residential growth by multiplying the lowest allowed density in the planned land use density range by the net residential acreage. The Update needs to use a number other than "zero" as a lowest allowed density for sanitary sewered development In addition, the City needs to ensure that new residential development served by regional sanitary sewer achieves an overall minimum net density of 3.0 units per acre. Failure to achieve this density may be considered a system departure. The Update contains an Existing Land Use Map (Map 3B-5) and a table detailing acreages Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator August 12, 2009 Page 4 (Table 3B-3). However, the land use categories shown on the map and in the table do not match. The map shows three residential land use categories, while the table only shows two. The map and the table need to describe the same land use categories. Future Land Use Acrea�es As detailed in the Council's Local Planning Handbook(p. 3-5), the Update needs to include a table quantifying the acreages in each of the land use categories in 2010, 2020, and 2030, as shown on Map 3B-6: Land Use Plan 2008-2030. The Update contains future land use projections in 5-year stages (Tables 3B-4a through 3B-4e), but none of these indicate in which planned land use categories future development will occur. The Update needs to include the Council's Land Use Table In 5-Year Stages (http://www.metrocouncil or�/plannin�/LPH/forms/LandUse�vear doc) and ensure that the categories used in the table are those shown on the City's planned land use map (those in the template are for illustrative purposes). Please note that this table will be included in the staff review report to the Council for action on the City's Update. Capacity to Accommodate Forecasts The Update provides an analysis of residential land use capacity by zoning district (Table 3B-2), which shows that the City could accommodate 725 more units using the City's current zoning or planned guiding. While the household increase is nearly the same as that projected in the System Statement, the starting points are different. The City shows the existing number of households in the community to be about 500 units less than the System Statement forecasts for 2010. Council estimated that in April 2008, Orono had 3,002 households. The current guiding may be insufficient to accommodate the Council's forecasted growth through 2030. The Update needs to indicate how or what will be changed or reguided to accommodate the Council's forecasted growth. Tables 3B-4a and 3B-4b calculate future land use projections. These tables include existing and future households in the calculation, so it is difficult to determine whether new development will occur at densities consistent with Council policy (3 du/net ac). Using the information provided in the Update, the overall development in the community (existing and future) results in a gross density of 0.8 dwelling units per acre (2,965 dwelling units on 3578 gross acres). The Update describes the development of five different "Parcel Groups" within the community, but it appears that these areas have limited capacity to accommodate the City's forecasted growth as several of these areas have already undergone development. The land use categories used in the analysis of these groups does not match the guiding shown in Map 3B-6. The Update indicates that future urban development will be carefully integrated into existing neighborhoods, but outside of the Parcel Group analysis, the Update does not indicate where future urban development will occur and at what densities it will occur. Council staff would like to meet with the City staff to go over the land use questions. POLICY ISSUES Urban Densitv The Update contains policies that are inconsistent with the 2030 Regional Development Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator August 12, 2009 Page 5 FrameN�oi•k(RDF). In its description of urban and rural areas of the community, the Update indicates that development in the urban area"will remain relatively low (ranging from 1 unit per acre to as much as 4-6 units per acre, with a few individual multi-family sites as high as 15 units per acre)" (p. 3B-10). As described above, the Update does not provide sufficient information to assess whether new development and redevelopment will occur at densities consistent with Council policy for sanitary sewer serviced areas. In addition, because the Update has a stated policy of not expanding the MUSA, it is unclear how and where the City will accommodate new sewered development and/or redevelopment. The policy described above and text elsewhere in the Update indicate that it may be unlikely that overall new development receiving sanitary sewer would achieve an overall net density of at least three units per acre (Text on page 3B-13, Policy# 1 on page 3B-19, Policy#12 on page 3B-23). The City is advised of the Council's Revised Metropolitan Urban Service Area Implementation Guidelines (http://www.metrocouncil.o�planning/assistance/MUSAGhanaeGuidelines.pd�, which indicate the conditions under which properties may be connected to regional wastewater services as well as the Council's method for calculating residential development net density. The City has participated in the Council's Plat Monitaring Program, having submitted data from 2000 to 2008. In that time period, the City approved 9 subdivisions for a total of 272 units on 79.64 net acres, resulting in a net residential density of 3.42 units per acre. The City has shown the capacity to accommodate development at urban densities, but the Update does not reflect City planning policy to continue to do so. Rural Densi�v The RDF designates the area of Orono that is outside of the MUSA as "Diversified Rural," which has a density policy of no more than 1 unit per 10 acres. Maps of this area and descriptions in the text show that this area is largely developed at rural densities higher than 1 per 10, closer to 1 unit per 4 acres. Policy descriptions on page 3B-10 indicate that development in the "rural" area will continue on 2-7 acre lots, inconsistent with the 1-per-10 density policy, and that no additional areas within the rural area will be designated for MUSA expansion due to the existing rural development pattern. The Council's 2030 Water Resources Managenzent Policy Plan designates this area as a Long-Term Service Area for the Regional Wastewater System, development in this rural area needs to be consistent with the Council's recently adopted Flexible Residential Development Guidelines. However, much of this land has already been subdivided at densities greater than 1-per-10 and is therefore inconsistent with the Flexible Residential Development Guidelines. The Council staff would propose to meet with the City to discuss potential options for addressing these issues in the Update. PARKS (Jan Youngquist, 651-602-1029) The comprehensive plan update is incomplete for regional park review purposes. Lands within the regional parks system need to be guided with a future land use of"Park, Recreational and Open Space" and regional parks and trails need to be appropriately Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator August 12, 2009 Page 6 referenced in the Update. In order to be complete for review and to conform to the 2030 Regional Parks Policy Plan (Parks Policy Plan), the following revisions need to be made: • The Council-approved master plan for Morris T. Baker Park Reserve includes "inholdings", which are parcels that are within the boundary of the park reserve but have not yet been acquired by Three Rivers Park District. The inholding parcels, which are shown outlined in pink on the following graphic, need to be guided with a future land use of"Park, Recreational and Open Space" on the Land Use Plan 2008-2030 Map (Map 3B- 6). These parcels also need to be shown as "proposed acquisitions for Baker Park Reserve" on the Parks, Open Spaces, Trails & Recreation Areas Map (Map 4E-2). ,, , _ �„�r. , . Parc�l� autlin�ed in pink need to guided - ��� v�rith fut�ur�e land u�� of"Parks, �`�` Recrsatianal and t7pen Sp�ce."' �"� �` � ��� � F:: '"- �b��k"�'"-' � � � 4 � �= � ���'tl�. f �, ��� �����n e: M1 � � . 'Y .. .I� �. �.. �. ' 4 ��_ aM1 �� I;j�e "4 �-*r y�.:, `a,. f` �� � "�i�" �# ,r ' I �.+f�J��I . � -. - �J.�f�.��.___----- I l h'`•- ... ..� . . .. . . ..-.�.. .,,.. .... • The parcel that is outlined in pink on the following graphic is owned by Three Rivers Park District as part of Big Island Regional Park. The future land use needs to be guided as "Park, Recreational and Open Space" on the Land Use Plan 2008-2030 Map (Map 3B- 6). This parcel also needs to be shown as part of the regional park on the Parks, Open Spaces, Trails & Recreation Areas Map (Map 4E-2) and on Map 3B-9. • The Lake Independence Regional Trail, which is adjacent to Old Crystal Bay Road, needs to be acknowledged in the Update and labeled on the Parks, Open Spaces, Trails and Recreation Areas Map (Map 4E-2) and the Comprehensive Trail System Map (Map 4E-3). • The Update references the Dr. Arthur Allen Wildlife Refuge, which is recognized as Big Island Regional Park in the Council's Parks Policy Plan. The references to the wildlife refuge need to indicate that it is part of Big Island Regional Park on Map 3B-9, Map 4E- 2, Table 4E-3, and on pages 3B-48, 3B-54, 4E-20, 4E-33 and 4F-20. Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator August 12, 2009 Page 7 • Three Rivers Park District recently changed the names of its regional trails. The north branch of the Southwest LRT Regional Trail is now known as the Lake Minnetonka LRT Regional Trail. This trail name needs to be updated on Table 4E-3 and on pages 4A-8, 4A-35, 4E-35 and 4E-40. � ' ► Parcel outlined in pink is owned by Three Rivers and needs to be �uided v�rith future land � use,of"Park, Recreational and t�pen Space." � � � � ,`;,:. �, ��1..J ' ������� *� P rs� '�. ( '` „ ��. �� k�.i.i. �..�� . .. ... i .. • The references to "Hennepin Parks" and "Hennepin County Park Reserve" needs to be changed to "Three Rivers Park District" on Map 3B-9 and Map 4E-2 as well as on pages 3B-14, 4A-21, 4G13 and 4E-13. Advisory Comment The Update discusses a proposed trail along County Road 19 and indicates that if constructed, it should become part of the regional trail system. The Parks Policy Plan does not identify a future regional trail in this area. Council staff encourages the City to plan for this trail, but to be advised that any additions to the regional parks system need to be approved by the Metropolitan CounciL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION (Jim Uttley, 651-602-1361) The Update is incomplete for plan implementation. The Update contains a zoning map and a one-page synopsis of zoning district regulations. The synopsis does not provide adequate information about the City's existing zoning regulations. The City is requested to submit a copy of its zoning district regulations for all districts within which residential land uses are permitted or conditional uses. Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator � August 12, 2009 Page 8 In addition, the Update needs to contain or be accompanied by a 5-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) covering at least the following areas: parks & open space, sewers, transportation, water supply. The cover letter notes that a 7-year CIP is being developed and is expected to be adopted later this year. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (Judy Sventek, 651-602-11�6) The Update is incomplete for Local Surface Water Management Plan. Orono lies within the Minnehaha Creek watershed. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's watershed management plan was approved by the Board of Water and Soil Resources in 2007. Orono was required to update its Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) by July of 2009. The Update states that the City will be submitting its LSWMP for review within a month or two. Until an acceptable final draft LSWMP is submitted for review, the Update will be incomplete for review. TRANSPORATION & TRANSIT (Ann Braden, 651-602-1705) The Update is incomplete for transportation and transit. In order to be found complete, the Update will need to provide the following: • Traffic forecasts for the year 2030. Map 4A-1 and the Roadway capacity issues discussion beginning on page 4A-15 make references to traffic projections for 2020. These need to be changed to 2030. • Revision of the TAZ allocation. The Update contains a map and table of the forecasted socioeconomic data by TAZ. However, the TAZ numbers do not reflect the Council's system statement forecasts for population, households or employment. • The Update needs to identify the City's transit market area, which is Market Area III. 1 Advisory Comments • Roadwav Functional Classification: The update accurately reflects the Principal and Minor arterial system within the community relative to the TAB maps. On Page 4A-24 of the Plan, there is reference to a map of the system (Map 4A-4), but it may have been omitted in error. • Route 677 needs to be identified as part of the city's existing transit service. WATER SUPPLY (Sara Smith, 651-602-1035) The Update is incomplete, as the City did not include water use projections in its water supply plan. Communities are required to project annual maximum and average day water use for the next ten years as well as projecting water use for 2020 and 2030 in their water supply plans. OTHER ISSUES: WASTEWATER SERVICES (Roger Janzig, 651-602-1119) The Update is complete for review. The City is proposing to develop its urban area at a net density less than 3 units per acre. The Update shows a 2030 household projection of 200 Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator August 12, 2009 Page 9 fewer sewered households than the Council's system statement. The City indicates that its sanitary sewer system has adequate capacity to provide for the City's proposed sewered growth, but not the Council's. The Update does not provide information to verify these statements. Because the Update proposes to develop at net densities less than 3 units per acre, the Update represents a System Departure and a Plan Modification may be recommended to the Council. In order to expedite the Council staff's review of supplemental material please provide a cover memo identifying what information that the material being submitted is addressing in response to this letter. Please send one hard copy and one electronic copy in PDF format on disc of all supplemental materials to Cheryl Olsen, Reviews Coordinator at this address. After all of the required elements of the Update are submitted and found complete, Council staff will begin the official review process. Please contact Jim Uttley, Sector Representative and Planning Analyst at 651 602-1361 or the listed technical review staff with any questions or for additional assistance. � cerely, ��-b Phyll's anson, Manager Local lanning Assistance Cc: Bob McFarlin, Council Member District 3 Jim Uttley, Sector Representative & Planning Analyst Cheryl Olsen, Reviews Coordinator N:\CommDev\LPA\Communities\Orono\Letters\Orono 2009 CPU 20637-I Incomplete.doc � � Metropolitan Council Flexible Residential Development Ordinance Guidelines for the Diversified Rural Area August 2008 Background The 2030 Regional Development Framework (RDF)' indicates that land use patterns in Diversified Rural Area Communities "include a mix of a limited amount of large-lot residential and clustered housing with agriculture and other uses" (RDF p. 27). The RDF further states the communities in the Diversified Rural Area should preserve areas where post-2030 growth can be provided with cost-effective and efficient urban infrastructure and accommodate growth without prematurely requiring the provision of regional urban services. In addition, the 2030 Water Resources Management Policy Plan (WRMPP) identifies areas for post-2030 wastewater investment and service. These areas are described in the text of the document as well as illustrated in Appendix E on a map titled Regional Wastewater System Long-Term Service Areas. The existing regional wastewater treatment plants and the broader infrastructure efficiency of contiguous sewered development are predicated on a residential density" of three units per acre or greater (WRMPP p. 54). The Council's planning strategies for Diversified Rural Areas call far communities in those areas to have ]and use plans that "[a]ccomodate growth not to exceed forecasts and clustered development not to exceed 1 unit per 10 acres" (RDF p. 32). However, the results of a recent study of "flexible residential development ordinances" employed in Diversified Rural Area communities show that some communities have implemented ordinances that permit activities that are in conflict with metropolitan system plans.'° Density bonuses, large-lot development, and open space preservation ordinances sometimes permit residential development at densities that will severely limit the ability of some communities to achieve (in the future) the minimum density requirement of at least three units per net developable residential acre that is necessary for future cost-effective and efficient regional wastewater treatment services. The Council has developed guidelines for flexible residential development ordinances applied in communities in the Diversified Rural Area and identified as a Long-Term Service Area(LTSA) for regional wastewater services. These areas are essentially staging areas for future urbanization, and so development ordinances and land use patterns should reflect as much and not preclude future development on appropriate lands in those areas. A purpose of flexible residential development ordinances in these areas should be to preserve land for post-2030 growth and to accommodate the future extension of regional urban services. Communities should study and assess their landscapes to refine their development priorities. There may be areas within the community that contain an abundance of sensitive natural resources or that the community has identified as a greenway or conservation corridor. These areas may not be most suitable for future urbanization as the capability of the land to support development is low and constrained. In these cases, open space development or cluster development may be adapted to protect those resources to meet the community's goals. These guidelines are not intended to replace the work that has been done by numerous communities and organizations in developing flexible development ordinances. Rather, these guidelines are intended to be used along with those methods and standards for the varying types of flexible development ordinances. 1 Guidelines for Flexible Residential Development Ordinances'� Areas immediately beyond the current urban services boundary within the LTSA are considered temporarily rural. Residential development ordinances in these areas should limit densities to one unit per 10 acres, or allow the clustering of dwellings in a manner that will reserve land for future sewered development, in addition to protecting any sensitive resources that may exist. Ordinances providing for residential clustering in the above- described areas should take the following guidelines in consideration when developing or adapting flexible residential ordinances for these areas. 1. Provide a purpose within the ordinance that describes the need to reserve land resources for efficient future urbanization when appropriate infrastructure is available to support that development. Defining the purpose and intent of any ordinance provides the local unit of government with a basis for the regulations that follow. Clearly stating that a purpose of the flexible residentia] development ordinance is to reserve land resources for future development will allow potential applicants to better understand the regulations as they apply to individual properties. The local unit of government may also wish to apply aspects of an open space ordinance to other areas within the community that have different characteristics that they wish to set aside or protect; this distinction should also be stated and defined within the purpose section of the ordinance. 2. Describe the characteristics of the land required for future urbanization and seek to reserve tracts of land in a size and configuration capable of supporting future development (for example, non-hydric soils, location in relation to existing development,etc.). The ordinance should define the lands that are considered "buildable," as these lands are considered the most suitable for development. Removing lands that are restricted due to federal and state regulations, as well as any features that the local government has defined far protection or conservation, will allow the community to preserve sensitive natural features and to ensure the availability of land to accommodate future development. Density bonuses are commonly used by loca] communities as a means to encourage developers to use a non- conventional development ordinance. However, without specifying the types of lands that are required for future development, many communities have inadvertently encouraged large-lot development in which the private lots often consume most of the developable land and leave little remaining developable acreage available for future development. The lots within the development are often too large to efficiently extend urban-level services to the development. 3. Allow no more than 25% of the developable land in a project to be developed. For the purposes of future urbanization, larger future urbanization parcels should be reserved, limiting the cluster to a development area that a covers a minority of the area. To ensure that land is available for future development, the local unit of government should specify the maximum amount of developable land that is allowed to be used for the initial residential development. For the purposes of future urbanization, communities should ]imit the initial development envelope to no more than 25%of the total buildable area of the project parcel. 4. Require that the parcel(s) set aside for future urbanization be covered by a temporary development agreement or deed restriction, rather than a permanent conservation easement or other permanent restriction. In a typical open space development, with the purpose of long-term preservation of natural resources, communities usually ensure the long-term maintenance and protection of sensitive natural resources through the placement of a permanent conservation easement that is often conveyed to a trust or public entity. When seeking to reserve land for future development, however, the community should not place permanent restrictions on the capability of the land to be developed. Instead, communities should place on the future urbanization parcel temporary development agreements or deed restrictions that contain "triggers" for the removal of such restrictions. The restrictions prevent the land from being developed before urban services are available. The ordinance should also detail the "triggers," or conditions, under which such restrictions would be removed and the parcel made available for development. Such conditions may include the rezoning of the parcel, a change in the comprehensive plan, and the provision of urban infrastructure and utilities, among others deemed appropriate by the local unit of government. Page 2 Portions of the development that are designated as undevelopable or are to be set aside for recreational use or conservation purposes, on the other hand, should be either dedicated to the public or covered with a permanent conservation easement or permanent deed restriction. 5. Provide for the rezoning of the future urbanization parcel to a residential zoning classification at densities consistent with Council policy at such time that urban services are available to the parcel. To ensure the efficient utilization of urban services, communities should allow for the rezoning of the future urbanization parcel to densities that, at a minimum, are consistent with Council policy. This rezoning should only occur in conjunction with or after the provision of urban services, when the land is served by the infrastructure required to support higher density uses. 6. Encourage the use of community wastewater treatment systems to serve the temporary cluster and to allow for smaller lot sizes within the development. Clustering homes on smaller lots facilitates the connection of those homes to future sewer services and ensures that these services are being efficiently and economically utilized. These small lot sizes, however, are often too small to provide the necessary space for individual sewage treatment systems on each lot, in addition to a back-up site in case of primary system failure. Using a community treatment system resolves that issue: by employing a shared drainfield located in a common open space area, individual lots no longer need to be large enough to accommodate two on-site septic treatment sites. The use of smaller lot sizes will not only facilitate future connection to sewer services, once they become available, but also will reserve more developable land for future development. ' This memorandum references the online versions of the 2030 Regional Development Framework (as amended through December 14, 2006), the 2030 Water Resources Management Policy Plan (with revised forecasts as of January 9, 2008), and the Local Planning Nandbook. " The Council defines "residentiai density" as the "number of dweliing units per net residential acre of land" (WRMPP p. 111). For planning purposes,the Council uses a standard calculation of net developable acres and net densiry to measure a community`s capacity to accommodate residential development. The minimum density requirement is three units per net developable residential acre. Net residential acreage is calculated by subtracting from gross acres wetlands and water bodies, public parks and open spaces, arterial road right-of-way, and natural and other resources mapped and protected by� local ordinances and in the comprehensive plan update. (Loca! Planning Handbook p.3-�) "` Under Minnesota Statutes sections 473.858, subdivision 1 and 473.865, subdivision 2, a local governmental unit cannot adopt any official control of fiscal device which is in conflict with its local comprehensive plans "or which permits activity in conflict with metropolitan system plans."Official controls are: ordinances and rules which control the physical development of a city-,county,or town,or any part thereof or any detail thereof a�d implement the general objectives of the comprehensive plan. Official controls may include ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision controls,site plan regulations,sanitary codes,building codes,and official maps.(Minn.Stat.§473.852,subd.9) The "metropolitan system plans"are the"transportation portion of the Metropolitan Development Guide,the policy plans, and capital budgets for metropolitan wastewater service,transportation,and regional recreation open space."(Minn. Stat. §473.852, subd.8) '� Minn. Stat. § 473.854 authorizes the Council to "prepare and adopt guidelines and procedures relating to the requirements of sections 462.355,473.175,and 473.851 to 473.871 [the Metropolitan Land Planning Act]which will provide assistance to local governmental units in accomplishing the pro��isions of[the Act]." Page 3 � �Metropolitan Council Revised Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) Implementation Guidelines November 2007 Background Local comprehensive plans for"developing' communities submitted in the 1998 comprehensive plan updates (CPUs) identified the timing and staging of lands available for urban development to 2020; and, in many cases, areas planned for longer-term urbanization, often described as urban reserve areas. These areas planned for new development were expected to ultimately achieve a minimum net residential density of 3 dwelling units per acre when wastewater services became available. To ensure an adequate supply of urban land to accommodate future regional growth the Council continues to monitor the region's land supply. Monitoring includes designation of 2020-2030 land uses; enforcement of minimum urban density standards of 3-5 dwelling units per net residential acre in sewered areas; and planning for additional MUSA in the 2008 round of comprehensive plans that extend the planning horizon to 2030. In addition, the Council has a plat monitoring program that reports annually on development density trends in several developing communities and will be required in all developing communities following Council review of the 2008 round of comprehensive plan updates. Revised Guidelines In October of 2004 the Council adopted "Guidelines for Evaluating Plan Amendments Proposing Changes to Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) Timing Staging." Since early 2007, the Metropolitan Council and Metro Cities staffs have discussed the guidelines relative to the density calculation and the 2008 comprehensive plan reviews. Metro Cities requested that the Council consider revising its implementation �uidelines to be more flexible,more responsive to market forces, and to acknowledge the performance of individual communities in achieving the Council's policy of a minimum of 3 units per net acre. The Council agreed with Metro Cities' principles. In an attempt to respond to Metro Cities' concerns while maintaining the Council's objective of efficient, economical growth, the guidelines were revised as follows on September 12, 2007: 1. The city's overall residential density for development since 2000 must be a minimum of three units per developable acre. Determination of this density will be based on constructed residential units and approved preliminary plats. 2. Cities that have participated in the Council's Plat Monitoring Progra�n beginning in 2000 or submitted the necessary plat data from 2000 will be credited on a 1:1 basis for housing units platted or developed that yield an overall average density in excess of 3 units per net developable acre. The housing unit credits will be applied to areas guided for 2020-2030 urban services and to any other proposed reguided areas. The combined overall average density needs to be a minimum of 3 units per net developable acre based on an acreage average of the city's actual development and platting since 2000, the lowest allowable density in 2020-2030 guiding, and any reguided land. 3. Without development history from 2000, the Council will use the lowest allowable density on land guided for development from 2020-2030 and any reguided land from within the 2020 MUSA as changed fram the city's 1998 CPU. 4. The Council will not figure into the density calculation remaining undeveloped land within the 2020 MUSA per the city's existing 2020 plan, with the exception of areas that are being reguided in the 2030 CPU. 5. If an area is replatted, the Council will not recalculate the density for this area in the plat monitoring program. 6. Existing developments that are part of townships or areas being annexed fram townships, or areas that were developed prior to1985 with failing septic systems and no on site alternative septic locations will not be counted against a ciry's density calculation. Implications for Planning Forecasts/planned growth and minimum density requirements are separate but interrelated issues. The Met Council requires an overall minimum density in MUSA areas of at least 3 units per net developable acre. However, this minimum requirement represents a `worst case' scenario. In accordance with the Regional Development Framework, cities should plan to meet growth forecasts with density ranges between 3-5 units per acre for the MUSA area within each community. The Council also understands the community's need to plan for what their expectations will be for development patterns to accommodate forecasted growth. It is likely that this will in fact result in density that is greater than the lowest end of a density range. Therefore communities and the Council should plan to meet growth forecasts on the basis of a density somewhere between the lowest and highest numbers in the range of land use guiding. Example: Forecast: Growth of 3,000 sewered housing units, 2020-2030 Guiding: 3-5 units per acre Question: How much land is needed to accommodate this much development? Answer: Community may/should plan based on reasonable expectations (e.g., 4 units per acre => 750 acres) rather than lowest allowable (i.e., 3 units per acre=> 1,000 acres). The Council is already planning on this basis (ES sewer planning expects 4 units per acre). Application For all comprehensive plan amendments, the community needs to complete the comprehensive plan amendment submittal form. If a comprehensive plan amendment proposes a MUSA expansion, change in MUSA timing or staging, or sewer staging changes at less than 3 units/acre, the community will also need to complete the question(s) which address each of the MUSA expansion guidelines. The submittal form can found on the Council's website at http://www.metrocouncil.or�plannin�/assistance/resources htm. 473.858, 2008 Minnesota Statutes Page 1 of 2 �-- � ..r---- 2008 Minnesota Statutes 473.8�8 COMPREHENSIVE PLANS; LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL UNITS. Subdivision 1. No conflicting zoning, fiscal device, official control. Within nine months following the receipt of a metropolitan system statement for an amendment to a metropolitan system plan and within three years following the receipt of a metropolitan system statement issued in conjunction with the decennial review required under section 473.864, subdivision 2, every local governmental unit shall have reviewed and, if necessary, amended its comprehensive plan in accordance with sections 462.355, 473.175, and 473.851 to 473.871 and the applicable planning statute and shall have submitted the plan to the Metropolitan Council for review pursuant to section 473.175. The provisions of sections 462.355, 473.175, and 473.851 to 473.871 shall supersede the provisions of the applicable planning statute wherever a conflict may exist. If the coinprehensive municipal plan is in conflict with the zoning ordinance, the zoning ordinance shall be brought into conformance with the plan by local government units in conjunction with the review and, if necessary, amendment of its comprehensive lan required under section 473.864, subdivision 2. fter August 1, 1995, a local government � unit shall not a op any isca evice or official control which is in conflict with its comprehensive plan, including any amendments to the plan, or which permits activity in co ' with metropolitan system plans, as defined by section 473.852, subdivision 8. f The comprehensive plan shall provide guidelines for the timmg and sequence o t e adoption of official controls to ensure planned, orderly, and staged development and redevelopment consistent with the comprehensive plan. Far purposes of this section, a fiscal device or official control shall not be considered to be in conflict with a local government unit's comprehensive plan ar to permit an activity in conflict with metropolitan system plans if such fiscal device or official control is adopted to ensure the planned, orderly, and staged development of urbanization or redevelopment areas designated in the comprehensive plan pursuant to section 473.859, subdivision 5. Subd. 2. Adjacent review, comment. Local governmental units shall submit their proposed plans to adjacent governmental units, affected special districts lying in whole or in part within the metropolitan area, and affected school districts for review and comment at least six months prior to submission of the plan to the council and shall submit copies to them on the submission of the plan to the council. For minor plan amendments,the council may prescribe a shorter review and comment period, or may waive the review and comment period if the minor plan amendments involve lands that are not conti�uous to other local governmental units. Subd. 3. When to council. The plans shall be submitted to the council following recommendation by the planning agency of the unit and after consideration but before final approval by the governing body of the unit. Subd. 4. Status of old, new programs, plans, controls. Comprehensive plans, capital improvement programs, sewer policy plans and official controls of local governmental units adopted prior to the requirements of sections 462.355, 473.175, and https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=473.858 8/25/2009 473.858, 2008 Minnesota Statutes Page 2 of 2 � 473.851 to 473.871 shall remain in force and effect until amended, repealed or superseded by plans or controls adopted pursuant to sections 462.355, 473.175, and 473.851 to 473.871. Existing comprehensive plans, capital improvement programs, sewer policy plans, and official controls may be amended and new capital improvement programs and official controls may be prepared and adopted prior to the submission to the council of comprehensive plans required by sections 462.355, 473.175, and 473.851 to 473.871. History: 1976 c 127 s 8; 1977 c 347 s 68; 1985 c 62 s 4; 1995 c 176 s 5; 2007 c 113s8 https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=473.858 8/25/2009 473.852, 2008 Minnesota Statutes Page 1 of 2 � —� -�---- 2008 Minnesota Statutes 473.852 DEFINITIONS. Subdivision 1. Terms. As used in sections 462.355, 473.175, and 473.851 to 473.871, the following terms shall have the meaninbs given them. Subd. 2. Advisory Metropolitan Land Use Committee or advisory committee. "Advisory Metropolitan Land Use Committee" or "advisory committee" means an advisory committee established by the Metropolitan Council pursuant to section 473.853. Subd. 3. Applicable planning statute. "Applicable planning statute" means sections 394.21 to 394.37 for counties and sections 462.351 to 462.364 for cities and towns. Subd. 4. Capital improvement program. "Capital improvement program" means an itemized program for a five year prospective period, and any amendments thereto, subject to at least biennial review, setting forth the schedule,timing, and details of specific contemplated capital improvements by year, together with their estimated cost, the need for each improvement, financial sources, and the financial impact that the improvements will have on the local governmental unit. Subd. 5. Comprehensive plan. "Comprehensive plan" means the comprehensive plan of each local governmental unit described in sections 473.858 to 473.862, and any amendments to the plan. Subd. 6. Fiscal devices. "Fiscal devices" means the valuation of property pursuant to section 273.111, the desi�nation of urban and rural service districts, pursuant to section 272.67, and the establishment of development districts pursuant to sections 469.124 to 469.134, and any other statutes authorizing the creation of districts in which the use of tax increment bonding is authorized. Subd. 7. Local governmental unit or unit. "Local governmental unit" or "unit" means all cities, counties and towns lying in whole or in part within the metropolitan area, but does not include scho . � ubd. 8. Metropolitan system plans. "Metropolitan system plans" means the transportation portion of the Metropolitan Development Guide, and the policy plans, and capital budgets for metropolitan wastewater service, transportation, and regional , recreation open s a � � Subd. 9. Official controls or controls. "Official controls" or "controls" means ordinances and rules which control the physical development of a city, county or town ar any part thereof or any detail thereof and implement the general objectives of the comprehensive plan. Official controls may include ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision controls, site plan regulations, sanitary codes,buildinb codes and official maps. Subd. 10. Private sewer facility. "Private sewer facility" means a single lot, multiple lot or other sewage collection or treatment facility owned, constructed or httns://www.revisor_le�.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=473.852 8/25/2009 473.852, 2008 Mirulesota Statutes Page 2 of 2 operated by any person other than a local governmental unit or the council. Subd. 11. School district. "School district" has the meanin� given it by section 120A.05, subdivisions 10 and 14, and includes any independent or special school district whose administrative offices are located within the metropolitan area as of April 3, 1976. History: 1976 c 127 s 2; 1977 c 347 s 68; 1985 c 248 s 70; 1986 c 460 s 56; 1987 c 291 s 233; 1994 c 628 art 3 s 205,206; 1998 c 397 art 11 s 3; 2005 c 123 s 7; 2006 c 194 s 3; 2007 c 113 s 4 https://www.revisor.lea.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=473.852 Rn SnnnA 473.859, 2008 Minnesota Statutes Page 1 of 3 ,� � � 2008 Minnesota Statutes 473.859 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONTENT. Subdivision 1. Contents. The comprehensive plan shall contain objectives, policies, standards and programs to guide public and private land use, development, redevelopment and preservation for all lands and waters within the jurisdiction of the local governmental unit through 1990 and may extend through any year thereafter which is evenly divisible by five. Each plan shall specify expected industrial and commercial development, planned population distribution, and local public facility capacities upon which the plan is based. Each plan shall contain a discussion of the use of the public facilities specified in the metropolitan system statement and the effect of the plan on adjacent local governmental units and affected school districts. Existing plans and official controls may be used in whole or in part following modification, as necessary,to satisfy the requirements of sections 462.355, 473.175, and 473.851 to 473.871. Each plan may contain an intergovernmental coordination element that describes how its planned land uses and urban services affect other communities, adjacent local government units, the region, and the state, and that includes guidelines for joint planning and decision making with other communities, school districts, and other jurisdictions for siting public schools, building public facilities, and sharing public services. Each plan may contain an economic development element that identifies types of mixed use development, expansion facilities for businesses, and methods for developing a balanced and stable economic base. The comprehensive plan may contain any additional matter which may be included in a comprehensive plan of the local governmental unit pursuant to the applicable planning statute. Subd. 2. Land use plan. (a) A land use plan shall include the water management plan required by section 103B235, and shall designate the existing and proposed location, intensity and extent of use of land and water, including lakes, wetlands, rivers, streams, natural drainage courses, and adjoining land areas that affect water natural resources, for a�ricultural, residential, commercial, industrial and other public and private purposes, ar any combination of such purposes. (b) A land use plan shall contain a protection element, as appropriate, for historic sites, the matters listed in the water management plan required by section 103B.235, and an element for protection and development of access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. (c) A land use plan shall also include a housing element containing standards, plans and programs for providing adequate housing opportunities to meet existing and projected local and regional housing needs, including but not limited to the use of official controls and land use planning to promote the availability of land for the development of low and moderate income housing. (d) A land use plan shall also include the local government's goals, intentions, and https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=473.859 8/25/2009 473.859, 2008 Minnesota Statutes Page 2 of 3 priorities concerning aggregate and other natural resources, transportation infrastructure, land use compatibility, habitat, agricultural preservation, and other planning priorities, considering information regarding supply from the Minnesota Geological Survey Information Circular No. 46. Subd. 2a. Application of subdivision 2, paragraph (d). Subdivision 2, paragraph (d), applies only to land use plans adopted or amended by the governing body in relation to aggregate or when the governing body is presented with a written application for adoption or amendment of a land use plan relating to aggregate, from a landowner after August 1, 2001, in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington. Subd. 3. Public facilities plan. A public facilities plan shall describe the character, location, timing, sequence, function, use and capacity of existing and future public facilities of the local governmental unit. A public facilities plan must be in at least such detail as may be necessary to establish existing or potential effects on or departures from metropolitan system plans and to protect metropolitan system plans. A public facilities plan shall contain at least the following parts: (1) a transportation plan describing, designating and scheduling the location, extent, function and capacity of existing and proposed local public and private transportation services and facilities; (2) a sewer policy plan describing, designating and schedulinb the areas to be sewered by the public system, the e�:isting and planned capacities of the public system, the standards and conditions under which the installation of private sewer systems will be permitted, and to the extent practicable, the areas not suitable for public or private systems because of public health, safety and welfare considerations; (3) a parks and open space plan describing, designating and scheduling the existing and proposed parks and recreation open spaces within the jurisdiction; and (4) a water supply plan as described in section 103G.291, subdivision 3. Subd. 4. Implementation program. An implementation program shall describe public programs, fiscal devices and other specific actions to be undertaken in stated sequence to implement the comprehensive plan and ensure conformity with metropolitan system plans. An implementation program must be in at least such detail as may be necessary to establish existing or potential effects on or departures from metropolitan system plans and to protect metropolitan system plans. An implementation program shall contain at least the following parts: (1) a description of official controls, addressing at least the matters of zoning, subdivision, water supply, and private sewer systems, and a schedule for the preparation, adoption, and administration of such controls; (2) a capital improvement program for transportation, sewers, parks, water supply, and open space facilities; and (3) a housing implementation program, includin� official controls to implement the https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=473.859 8/25/2009 � 473.859, 2008 Minnesota Statutes Page 3 of 3 housing element of the land use plan, which will provide sufficient existing and new housing to meet the local unit's share of the metropolitan area need for low and moderate income housing. Subd. 5. Urbanization and redevelopment areas. The comprehensive plans may designate, when appropriate, five year urbanization areas and shall specify in the capital improvement program the timing and sequence of major local public facilities and in the implementation program official controls which will ensure that urbanization occurs only in urbanization areas and in accordance with the plan. The comprehensive plans may designate, when appropriate, redevelopment areas and may, as appropriate, specify in the capital improvement program the timing and sequence of local public facilities and in the implementation program the fiscal devices or official controls that will ensure that redevelopment occurs in accordance with the plan. Subd. 6. Plan review. The council shall, by January 1, 1994, prepare guidelines for the preparation of the water supply plans required in subdivision 3, clause (4). The plans must be submitted to the council by January 1, 1996. The council shall review the plans under section 473.175, subdivision 1, after submitting them to affected counties that have adopted groundwater plans under section 103B.255 for their review and comment. History: 1976 c 127 s 9; 1977 c 347 s 68; 1978 c 786 s 20; 1993 c 186 s 12-14; 1995 c 176 s 6-8; 1997 c 7 art 1 s 157; 1 Sp2001 c 8 art 2 s 73,74; 2007 c 113 s 9; 2007 c 131art1s80 https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=473.859 8/25/2009 � �► MPG Background Notes for 9-1-09 Meeting w/Jim Murphy & Bob McFarlin - Orono first began providing municipal sewers around the Lake in the early 1960s - The vast majority of Orono's sewer system was put in place long after original development occurred; we have been retrofittin� neighborhoods around the Lake - Orono's MUSA has been expanded on a regular basis since 1980 to accomplish this retrofitting - see the MUSA parts listing. - The area along the northeast side of Maxwell Bay was added to the MUSA in 1998 as the final stretch of Orono's 40 miles of Lake Minnetonka shoreline to be placed in the MUSA; Met Council approved that MUSA addition without any specific conditions for its development. - Orono's 2000-2020 Comp Plan showed that as of 1999 there were 2 connections to sewer within the Maxwell Bay MUSA area, that there would be 3 more connections expected by 2000; 25 more projected by 2010; and an additional 25 projected by 2020. Met Council approved that plan without any comment, and without any conditions relative to Maxwell Bay. - In October, 2004 Met Council adopted "Guidelines for Evaluating Amendments Proposing Metropolitan Urban Service Area(MUSA) Expansion". These Guidelines clearly indicate they are intended to apply to proposed new expansions of the MUSA, and that previous Met Council actions and commitments regarding the city's comp plan will be honored. - In early 2007 Met Council approved the extension of municipal sewer to the Farview neighborhood in the Maxwell Bay area, a neighborhood of 2+ acre lots. Sewer laterals were constructed during the 2007 construction season. - In August 2007 Met Council adopted revisions to the 2004 Guidelines that indicated they will not figure into the density calculation remaining undeveloped land within the 2020 MUSA per the city's existing 2020 Plan, unless those areas are being re-guided in the 2030 Plan. - When the City in the spring of 2008 requested approval to extend a sewer lateral to serve the house at 3125 Fox Street, a property in the Maxwell Bay area already in the MUSA since 1998, Met Council denied that connection. The letter to the City dated July 10, 2008 by Kyle Colvin indicates the connection was denied on the basis that it drops Orono's density calculation below 3.0 units per acre. - The property at 3125 Fox Street is not being reguided in the 2030 CPU. It is not the subject of a requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment to which the Guidelines and their Revisions were intended to pertain. It is not being developed. This is not an expansion of the MUSA. This is not a land use change. This is not a staging change. For those reasons alone, we do not understand fundamentally why the property should be included in the density calculation, nor do we understand the basis for denial of the connection. - The City provided this information to the Met Council in Mike Gaffron's letter dated July 25, 2008. Met Council staffpersons Phyllis Hanson and Jim Uttley subsequently met with Gaffron and (now former) City Administrator Bill Wells on October 14, 2008 in an attempt to resolve the issues. The discussion was less than productive, as MC staff's focus was completely on how we could provide more density, or prove by using a "lakeshore-abutting-property-only" subset of Orono's existing MUSA areas that those areas meet the 3-units/acre standard (They don't; more like 1.1 units per acre). They didn't want to discuss our basic concern that the new rules should not apply to requests for simple connections of existing homes already in the MUSA since 1998. They didn't want to discuss the matter further until they reviewed the 2030 Comp Plan Update. - In May 2009 Orono requested a similar approval for a short sewer extension for connection of a single existing home on Long Lake in the MUSA since the 2000 Plan was adopted. We have yet to hear an official action on that request. ii, ��I I � . �� � 1 2 3 q 5 �� � Planning Comm WS-5:30 pm 6 � 8 9 10 11 �2 HOLIDAY "Resume normal hours 8-4:30 Labor Day 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 "Council-7:00 *Council WS- Pm 6:15 pm 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 *Planning 'Safe Assure- *PC Application Comm-6:30 pm 8 am-4:30 pm Deadline-Noon 'Council Work Session-6:15 pm 27 28 29 3p 'Council-7:00 ��� 1 2 3 pm 4 'Fall newsletter in mail this week 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 *Planning Leaves&Grass- Leaves&Grass- Commission 9 am-3 pm 9 am-3 pm WS-5:30 pm 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Council-7:00 pm Council Work Leaves&Grass- Leaves&Grass- Session-6:15 pm 9 am-3 pm 9 am-3 pm Hwy 12 Mtg- 9:00-11:0 am Columbus Day '�8 19 20 21 22 23 24 Planning Comm- *Land Use Leaves 8 Grass- Leaves&Grass- 6:OOpm Application 9 am-3 pm 9 am-3 pm Deadline-Noon for 11/16 PC mtg 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Council-7:00 pm Safe Assure-8 Leaves&Grass- Leaves&Grass- am-4:30 9 am-3 pm 9 am-3 pm Council Work Session-6:15 pm Halloween MEMORAND UM ADDEND UM 9-14-09 Work Session To: Mayor and City Council From: Mike Gaffron, Asst. City Administrator Date: September 14, 2009 Subject: Comp Plan Update & Met Council Issues: Developable Parcels Inventory Attachments: A - Developable Parcels Inventory - Sorted by Map Key Number B - Developable Parcels Inventory - Sorted by Parcel Net Acreage C - Developable Parcels Inventory - Sorted by Zoning District D - Developable Parcels Inventory - Sorted by MUSA vs Non-MUSA E - Developable Parcels inventory - Excluding 32 Parcels - Sorted MUSA vs Non-MUSA F - Developable Parcels Inventory Maps: Northwest Orono Northeast Orono West Central Orono East Central Orono Navarre The attached inventory sheets and maps have been created to assist Council in discussing future development opportunities and limitations in Orono. They will also be useful as we move forward in discussions with Met Council to help illustrate the current status of development in the City, and why it is difficult to meet Met Council expectations for density and affordability. The maps are adapted from Comp Plan Map 3B-4, Remaining Developable Parcels, which shows all properties with a net acreage twice the zoning district minimum lot area after wetlands are excluded. The inventory assigns a map key prefix and number based on parcel location in one of 5 quadrants. Parcels are also identified by their Hennepin County PINS number and street address. "Net Acreage" is simply defined as the gross acreage of each parcel minus the estimated area of wetlands on the parcel, based on the City's wetland base maps and topography. The number of existing residences is shown, plus an estimate of the number of additional homes that could be developed on the property via subdivision. These are my estimates based on the site zoning and taking into account factors such as site shape and layout, topography, wetlands, lakeshare setbacks, and a variety of other factors that are often noted in the "Comments" column. See back of this sheet for some key statistics about our remaining developable lands. Orono's Remaining Developable Land ► Orono consists of about 4000 total tax parcels, of which approximately 3000 contain residences. ► 183 existing parcels (or groups of commonly-owned parcels) that are guided/zoned for residential use have not yet been fully developed based solely on the net acreage as compared to the minimum zoning lot size; i.e. they are potentially subdividable. These parcels are scattered around the City; they are not concentrated in any one area. ► It is noted that as many as 32 of these 183 parcels are probably not likely to be subdivided due to the nature of existing development on the site or other limiting factors. However, these were not excluded from the initial analysis, on the possibility that such limiting factors might be overcome through variance approvals, creative design or PUD/RPUD development methods; nevertheless, they are reported as having no potential additional homes. ► Of the 183 total parcels: - 33 are vacant with no residence structure - 146 contain one single-fainily home - 3 contain 2 homes - 1 contains 3 homes ► Of the 183 total parcels: - 7 exceed 20.0 acres in net area - 35 are 10.0-20.0 acres in net area - 61 are 5.0-9.9 acres in net area - 80 are smaller than 5.0 acres in net area ► Of the 183 total parcels: - approximately 85 are lakeshore properties, with another 25 being in the Shoreland but not abutting a lake ► Of the 183 total parcels: - 87 are within the MUSA, comprising some 513.5 net acres - 96 are outside the MUSA, comprising some 901.2 net acres If we exclude the 32 parcels that are unlikely to yield potential additional homes due to limiting factors (Attachment E): ► I51 parcels comprising 1230.5 net acres are further developable ► 70 of 151 are within the MUSA, comprising 445.6 net acres, containing 64 existing homes, and potentially yielding 340 additional homes. Ultimate net"new development" density for these 70 parcels is: (64+340) /445.6 = 0.91 units per acre ► 81 of 151 are outside the MUSA, comprising 784.9 acres, containing 61 existing homes, and potentially yielding 217 additional homes. Ultimate net "new development" density for these 81 parcels is: (61+217) /784.9 = 0.35 units per acre � � � .� City of Orono-September 2009 Residential Parcels that are Further Developable under Planned Zoning 8 Guideplan 2008-2030 #Potential Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments NW•1 31-118-23130013 4300 Watertown Road 10.2 1 1 No RR-1A 5-ac min NW•2 32-118-23 23 0009 460 Orchard Park Road 16.0 1 2 No RR-1A 5-ac min Wetland location may make it infeasible lo get 2nd additional homesite NW-3 32-118-23 31 0005 3760 Watertown Road 27.5 1 0 No RR-1A 5-ac min Land Trust Covenants believed to allow no additional development of property NW-4 32-118-23 32 0005 3850 Watertown Road 18.5 1 2 No RR-1A 5-ac min NW•5 32-118-23 33 0004 3855 Watertown Road 18.5 1 0 No RR-tA 5-ac min Land Trust Covenants believed to allow no additional development of property NW-6 32-118-23 33 0006 3925 Watertown Road 10.5 1 1 No RR-1A 5-ac min NW-7 06-117-23 11 0003 4246 Bayside Road 15.5 0 3 No RR-1A 5-ac min NW-8 06-117-23 22 0018 xxxx Bayside Road 12.0 0 5 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-9 06-117-23 23 0021 xxx North Arm Lane 4.9 0 0 No RR-1B 2-ac min Outlot in Conservation Easement ----- NW-10 06-117-23 24 0001 215 NoRh Arm Lane 9.0 1 3 No RR-16 2-ac min _ _ --------- _ --------- - NW-11 06-117-23 21 0005 4565 Bayside Road 9.5 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ _ - ----__ . _ NW•12 06-117-23 21 0003 4485 Bayside Road 7.6 1 2 No RR-16 2-ac min NW-13 06-117-23 21 0002 4455 Bayside Road 9.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Additional development limited due to topography NW-14 06-117-23 12 0008 4375 Bayside Road 14.5 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes&wetlands NW-15 06-117-23 12 0007 4355 Bayside Road 15.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes&wetlands NW-16 06-117-23 13 0001 4245 Bayside Road 6.5 1 0 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wellands NW-17 06-117-23 13 0003 xxxx Bayside Road 7.5 0 1 No LR-tA 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes&wetlands .__ _------ NW-18 06-117-23 14 0022 4045 Bayside Road 52 1 0 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited due to steep slopes 06-117-23 14 0027& . . NW-19 06-117-23 41 0107 405 Tonkawa Road 10.0 0 3 No LR-1A 2-ac min __ NW-20 OS-117-23 12 0022 60 Stubbs Bay Road South 9.0 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min - _ _ --------- NW-21 05-117-23 12 0017 3415 High Lane 4.0 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes&wetlands - _ _------ - NW-22 05-117-23 11 0002 3405 High Lane 7.4 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min 32-118-23 44 0002 d _ _ _ . _ __ __ _ NW-23 32-118-23440003 3280WatertownRoad 6.5 1 2 No RR-1B 2-acmin _ _ __ _ NW-24 32-118-23 43 0013 xxxx W atertown Road 14.3 0 6 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Preliminary Plat Approved Feb 2006-6 Lols Total-Has not progressed to Final _ -_ NW-25 32-118-23 42 0003 200 Stubbs Bay Road North 19.0 1 7 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Steep slopes wili limit development NW•26 32-118-23 42 0006 350 Stubbs Bay Road North 4.6 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-27 32-118-23 14 0002 3245 W ayzata Boulevard 13.0 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min 8 acres is sanitary landfill;remaining 5 acres may have 1-2 homesites... 33-118-23110001 & _ NW-28 33-118-23 22 0001 3200-3220 Wayzata Bivd 12.0 1 4 No RR-1B 2-ac min Potential high-end lakeshore homesites NW-29 28-118-23 31 0001 2940 Sixth Avenue North 13.0 1 5 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Preliminary Plat Approved January 2008 6 Lots Total NW-30 28-118-23 33 0008 3065 Jamestown Road 4.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min __ _ _ _ NW31 33-118-23 23 0002 3025 Wayzata Boulevard 33.0 1 130 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Guided for 2.0-4.0 units/acre SFR/MFR Mix-Rezoning will occur upon development NW-32 33-118-23 24 0001/2/3 Sxx Old Crystal Bay Road N 17.0 0 68 Yes RR-1B 2-ac min Guided for 2.0-4.0 unils/acre SFWMFR Mix-Rezoning will occur upon development NW33 33-118-23 32 0005 375 Old Crystal Bay Road N 6.4 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min City-owned open space-encumbered by MnDOT stormwater pond easement _ _ NW-34 33-118-23 31 0005 285 Old Crystal Bay Road N 4.5 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW35 33-118-23 31 0011 265 Old Crystal Bay Road N 7.8 1 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min NW-38 33-118-23 31 0007 225 Old Crystal Bay Road N 5.2 1 1 No RR-t B 2-ac min --- - - NW-37 33-118-23 34 0001 185 Old Crystal Bay Road N 9.8 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Current site of house-moving business -- --- - ---- NW38 33-118-23 33 0001 3020 Watertown Road 10.0 1 3 No RR-1B 2-ac min -- ------. - -.._. .__- NW-39 04-117-23 21 0004 85 Old Crystal Bay Road S 5.8 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min ___ --------_ __ NW-40 04-117-23 31 0001 425 Old Crystal Bay Road S 6.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-41 04-117-23 14 0003 405 Willow Drive South 7.0 1 2 No RR-16 2-ac min - ------- -- NW-42 28-118-23 42 0002 2700 Sixth Avenue North 11.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-43 28-118-23 41 0002 1125 Willow Drive North 4.2 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-44 27-118-23 32 0002 2300 Sixth Avenue North 7.0 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min #Potential Net p of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA 9 Zoning District Comments NW-45 27-118-23 31 0025 2085 Sixth Avenue North 4.7 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-46 27-118-23 34 0006 809 Brown Road NoRh 5.6 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min _______ --- ------------ -- --------- _ .--- _ __ __- - __ ---- NW-47 03-117-23 22 0015 2325 WateRown Road 4.6 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-48 03-117-23 24 0011 325 Brown Road South 4.9 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-49 34-118-23 12 0007 690 Brown Road NoRh 17.0 1 6 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited by wetlands;high-end lakeshore property ----- NE-50 34-118-23 44 0035 135 Orono Orchard Road N 12.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min W etlands,steep slopes and protected iributary impact future development NE-51 35-118-23 43 0024 1200 Lyman Avenue 4.5 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min --- -- NE-52 35-118-23 14 0002 550 East Long Lake Road 4.1 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Topography will likely preclude a second building si�e ----- NE•53 35-118-23 14 0008 900 Old Long Lake Road 25.0 1 6 No LR-1 A 2-ac min Topography&wetlands are limiting;likely to become a part of Wood Rill SNA _ -- --- - NE-54 26-118-23 34 0007 1245 Sixth Avenue North 4.7 1 1 Yes LR-1 A 2-ac min NE-55 26-118-23 34 0008 1295 Sixth Avenue North 87 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min The 2 possible additional sites are separated bywetland NE-56 26-118-23 34 0004 1305 Sixth Avenue North 7.7 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Topography is a limiting factor NE-57 26-118-23 33 0029 1485 Sixth Avenue NoRh 14.5 1 3 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Topography and wetlands are limiting factors -------- _._..-..--- -- NE-58 26-118-23 32 0008 1480 Sixth Avenue North 4.3 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min -_ ___ ___ _-- NE-59 26-118-23 32 0017 1550 Sixth Avenue Norlh 42 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetland location makes subdivision unlikely - --_ --------- NE-60 26-118-23 31 0002 xxxx Tamarack Drive 10.5 0 4 No RR-16 2-ac min __-- - ----- ---- - NE-61 26-118-23 41 0007 1150 Wyndmere Road 6.5 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ __ -------------_ NE-62 26-118-23 43 0006 1135 Spring Hill Road 5.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ _ - _- - ---------- NE-63 26-118-23 43 0004 1125 Spring Hill Road 4.7 1 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min _ _ __- -------- _ NE-64 26-118-23 43 0005 1025 Spring Hill Road 4.8 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min __ NE-65 25-118-23 32 0003 700 Sixth Avenue North 17.0 1 6 No RR-1 B 2-ac min ____ NE-66 25-118-23 32 0002 xxx Sixth Avenue North 6.5 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting factors _ _ - NE-67 25-118-23 33 0003 625 Spring Hill Road 4.3 1 1 No LR-1A 2-ac min NE-68 25-118-23 34 0002 465 Spring Hill Road 6.2 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography may be limiting factor NE-69 25-118-23 34 0003 445 Spring Hill Road 7.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography may be limiting factor NE-70 36-118-23 22 0003 755 Spring Hill Road 5.8 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography and wetlands are limiting factors NE-71 36-118-23 22 0002 765 Spring Hill Road 8.5 1 1 No LR-1A 2-ac min Topography and wetlands are limiting faclors NE-72 36-118-23 21 0005 761 Spring Hill Road 6.4 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min - -- -_ ---- - -- --- ---- - NE-73 36-118-23 21 0003 745 Spring Hill Road 6.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-74 36-118-23 21 0004 749 Spring Hill Road 8.5 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ _ _ _ NE-75 36-118-23 32 0008 380 RuAnn Road 4.7 1 0 No RR-18 2-ac min _ -- NE-76 36-118-23 31 0017 375 Wakefield Road 19.0 1 7 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ NE-77 25-118-23 41 0001 300 Sixth Avenue North 75.0 1 30 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Largest single undeveloped parcel remaining-Ciry hoping for perm.Cons.Easemt. _ ___ _ EC-78 02-117-23 13 0007 xxx W oodhill Road 6.5 0 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Part of Woodhill CC-steep slopes throughout parcel is limiting factor _ _ EC•79 02-117-23 13 0006 315 Woodhill Road 8.5 2 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult lo split up __ EC-80 02-117-23 24 0002 320 Orono Orchard Road S 4.7 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ - EC-81 02-117-23 24 0006 360 Orono Orchard Road S 6.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Residence centered on lot limits developability -- EC-82 02-117-23 31 0047 450 Orono Orchard Road S 10.2 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ ----- -- EC-83 02-117-23 23 0006 387 Orono Orchard Road S 10.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min W etlands,slopes,house location limit future development _ __ __ EG84 02-117-23 32 0001 485 Orono Orchard Road S 19.5 3 0 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Covenants limit property to 3 residences EC-85 02-117-23 32 0003 1540 Fox Street 4.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-86 03-117-23 31 0004 1620 Fox Street 9.5 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor EG87 02-117-23 32 0006 1560 Fox Street 10.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes,house location,parcel shape are limiting factors EC-88 02-117-23 23 0008 xxxx Fox Street 4.0 0 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes are limiting factors _... EC-89 03-117-23 14 0001 xxxx Fox Street 11.0 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting factors EC-90 03-117-23 41 0005 xxxx Fox Street 5.8 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min W etlands and topography are limiting factors _ - EC-91 03-117-23 41 0003 1700 Fox Street 12.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,topography,existing building locations are limiting factors EC-92 03-117-23 42 0009 1820 Fox Street 47 � 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography and existing improvements limit further developability EC-93 03-117-23 42 0016 1860 Fox Street 5.0 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands locations limit future development #Potential Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments EC-94 03-117-23 42 0015 1880 Fox Street 7.0 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min Wetlands locations limit future development EG95 03-117-23 13 0003 xxx Brown Road South 12.0 0 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Locating septic sites will be challenging due to topography EC-96 03-117-23 13 0001 350 Brown Road Soulh 5.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-97 03-117-23 11 0001 xxx Orono Orchard Road S 8.0 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes,access will be issues for developmenl EC-98 02-117-23 33 0010 1410 Shoreline Drive 7.0 1 0 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore,steep slopes,lot configuretion are limiling EC-99 11-117-23 32 0020 1400 Bracketts Point Road 12.5 2 3 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore,estate setting make development unlikely EC-100 10-117-23 14 0015 1100 Millston Road 10.0 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore EC-101 10-117-23 14 0014 1700 Shoreline drive 23.0 3 5 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore EC-102 10-117-23 12 0004 940 Brown Road South 4.0 1 0 Yes RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes are limiting EC-103 10-117-23 13 0001 1000 Brown Road South 4.0 1 0 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Wellands,slopes,configuration of buildable land are limiting WC-104 03-117-23 31 0001 445 Brown Road South 6.5 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,protected tributary,closed landfill are limiting faclors WC-105 03-117-23 31 0005 2180 Fox Street 4.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min WC-106 03-117-23 23 0014 400 Willow Drive South 112 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min WC-107 03-117-23 32 0015 2340 Fox Street 4.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min WC-108 04-117-23 14 0003 405 Willow Drive South 62 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor WC-109 04-117-23 41 0005 2420 Fox Street 5.7 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ __ _ _ _ WC-110 04-117-23 41 0012 505 W illow Drive South 4.8 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min WC-111 04-117-23 41 0011 2410 Fox S(reet 3.8 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetland reduces acreage to below 4.0 acres _ _ - __ . ----- _ WC-112 04-117-23 42 0010 2620 Fox Street 4.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min - - - WC-113 04-117-23 42 0023 540 Old Crystal Bay Road S 5.3 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min ___ ----- __ - __ ---- - _ - W C-114 04-117-23 44 0004 2601 Rainey Road 5.6 1 1 Yes RR-t B 2-ac min __ _ _ - - _-- ----- WC-115 09-117-23 12 0002 840 Old Crystal Bay Road S 4.0 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min _ ----- --- - - WC-116 09-117-23 14 0001 1100 Old Crystal Bay Road S 7.0 1 2 Yes RR-t B 2-ac min ---__------- _ _ WC-117 09-117-23 14 0007 1130 Old Crystal Bay Road S 6.8 1 2 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min - --- - WC-118 09-117-23 41 0009 23xx North Shore Drive 8.0 0 3 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor _ ---- - WC-119 15-117-23 22 0001 2165 North Shore Drive 9.8 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Wetlands,lakeshore,site configuration are limiting factors WC-120 10-117-23 33 0006 2285 North Shore Drive 19.0 0 7 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min WC-121 10-117-23 33 0005 2265 North Shore Drive 26.5 2 8 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min WC-122 10-117-23 33 0001 2385 North Shore Drive 3.8 0 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Wetlands are a limiting factor WC-123 09-117-23 44 0003 2425 North Shore Drive 4.5 1 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min Wetlands,lot configuralion will make a second lot diffcult WC-124 16-117-23 22 0006 1725 Bohns Point Road 2.9 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up WC-125 OS-117-23 44 0024 1595 Bohns Point Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up WC-126 08-117-23 44 0023 1535 Bohns Point Road 4.5 1 0 Yes LR-18 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up WC-127 09-117-23 33 0003 1420 Bohns Point Road 3.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up __ _ _ __ WC-128 09-117-23 32 0002 3017 North Shore Drive 3.6 1 2 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min _ _ WC-129 09-117-23 32 0003 3020 North Shore Drive 3.1 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min __ 09-117-23 21 0004& 09-117-23 21 0005& WC-130 09-117-23 21 0001 825 Old Crystal Bay Road S 25.0 2 8 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ __ _ __ _ _ _ ___ WC-131 04-117-23 34 0007 2905 Fox Street 9.0 1 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min WC-132 04-117-23 33 0011 3125 Fox Street 7.0 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min WC-133 04-117-23 33 0010 3175 Fox Street 8.1 1 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min --------- - WC-134 05-117-23 44 0013 3200 Fox Street 4.1 0 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Topography,lot shape are limiting factors ------------- WC-135 OS-117-23 44 0012 3250 Fox Street 5.3 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min ---- -------- --- WG136 05-117-23 44 0011 3280 Fox Street 5.0 0 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min - -----_ _---- __..._ WC-137 05-117-23 44 0003 3300 Fox Street 4.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min __ ---- -- -- --------- WC-138 05-117-23 44 0008 3350 Fox Street 7.2 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min W C-139 OS-117-23 43 0005 3400 Fox Street 5.5 1 1 Yes LR-1 A 2-ac min __ __ _ _ ___ _ _ _- _ WC-140 OS-117-23 44 0007 3345 Fox Street 4.7 0 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min #Potential Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Hames MUSA 9 Zoning District Comments WC-141 05-117-23 44 0006 3295 Fox Sireet 4.0 0 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min WC-142 05-117-23 34 0011 835 Partenwood Road 2.1 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min WC-143 08-117-23 12 0003 960 Tonkawa Road 2.7 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min ---_ . WC-144 08-117-23 12 0001 980 Tonkawa Road 2A 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Lot shape is limiting factor WC-145 08-117-23 13 0013 1040 Tonkawa Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-16 1-ac min Lot shape is limiting(actor _ _ ---- - WC-146 OS-117-23 21 0016 985 Tonkawa Road 2.3 1 0 Yes LR-16 1-ac min Lot shape and wetland are limiting WC-147 OS-117-23 21 0015 975 Tonkawa Road 2.2 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Lot shape is limiting factor - WC-148 08-117-23 21 0014 955 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min _ . -- _ _ -- WC-149 08-117-23 21 0013 935 Tonkawa Road 2.7 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min --- - - WC-150 08-117-23 21 0020 915 Tonkawa Road 2.1 0 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min -_ . _ _ _ WC-151 08-117-23 21 0019 895 Tonkawa Road 2.3 0 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min WC-152 08-117-23210001 801TonkawaRoad 3.4 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-acmin _. -_ _ --- -_ __- _ - ---_ __ .---------- W C-153 OS-117-23 33 0003 755 Tonkawa Road 22 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min WC-154 OS-117-23 33 0017 640 Tonkawa Road 22 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min _-_ ____ _- --- WC-155 05-117-23 32 0004 550 Tonkawa Road _ 6.6 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate layout,steep slopes are limiting factors WC-156 05-117-23 32 0005 520 Tonkawa Road _ 2.6 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Site layout,steep slopes,wetland are limiting factors WC-157 OS-117-23 32 0003 500 Tonkawa Road _ 3.4 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate layout,steep slopes are limiting factors WC-158 05-117-23 32 0002 460 Tonkawa Road 4.0 1 1 Yes LR-16 1-ac min _ _ . _ _ _ - - _ WC-159 OS-117-23 32 0001 420 Tonkawa Road 3.3 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min - - -- WC-160 06-117-23 41 0088 425 Tonkawa Road 4.7 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min WC-161 06-117-23 44 0016 800 North Arm Drive 42 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min W C-162 08-117-23 23 0001 3980 Dahl Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B t-ac min Slopes,house location are limiting factors _ ___ _ _ --- -------_ _ ____ WC-163 07-117-23 14 0015 1067 Linden�ane 2.4 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min WC-164 07-117-23 21 0002 1003 Wildhurst Trail 7.8 0 3 No RR-1B 2-ac min Steep slopes,wetlands are limiting _ _ _ - -- - ------- WC-165 07-117-23 22 0017 4735 West Brench Road 4.8 0 2 No RR-18 2-ac min __ __ _ _ _ WC-166 07-117-23 24 0043 1131 Wildhurst Trail 6.8 1 3 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Steep slopes are limiting WC-167 17-117-23 22 0040 1635 Concordia Street 32 1 4 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min -- -- _---------- WC-168 17-117-23 22 0013 1645 Shadywood Road 2.4 1 3 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min --- _ ----- _ NAV-169 17-117-23 31 0022 3760 Togo Road 1.3 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min Wetland on adjacent propeRy and lot widih are limiting __ -- - -__ _ _ NAV-170 17-117-23 31 0023 3740 Togo Road 1.5 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min Wetland on site is limiling factor _ - _ NAV-171 17-117-23 34 0002 3700 Northem Avenue 3.5 1 5 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min --- NAV-172 17-117-23 34 0014 3635 Togo Road 1.6 1 2 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min _ _ NAV-173 17-117-23 43 0135 2195 Shadywood Road 1.1 1 1 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min Currently is institutionally used as Hennepin County Public Works truck station-guided NAV-174 17-117-23 33 0151 3880 Shoreline Drive 6.7 0 13 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min and zoned for SFR at a density of 2 units per acre NAV-175 20-117-23 21 0037 2480 Casco Point Road 1.4 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min NAV-178 20-117-23 21 0034 2590 Casco Point Road 1.9 1 0 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min Estate property-site layout makes further subdivision difficult NAV-177 20-117-23 34 0008 3129 Casco Circle 2.1 1 2 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min NAV-178 20-117-23 11 0022 2525 Kelly Avenue 2.2 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topogrephy,wetland,lakeshore are limiting NAV-179 20-117-23 14 0026 2625 Kelly Avenue 3.0 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting _ _ --- __ NAV-180 20-117-23 14 0025 2655 Kelly Avenue 3.0 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting NAV•181 21-117-23 22 0018 2505 Old Beach Road 2.2 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min NAV-182 21-117-23 23 0051 2710 Pence Lane 3.4 1 2 Yes LR-1 B t-ac min NAV-183 21-117-23 21 0007 2605 West Lafayette Road 2.5 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min 1414.7 158 557 c �' � 1 City of Orono-September 2009 Residential Parce/s that are Further Developable under Planned Zoning&Guideplan 2008-2030-Sorted by Net Acreage #Potential Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments N677 25-118-23 41 0001 300 Sixth Avenue North 75.0 1 30 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Largest single undeveloped parcel remaining-City hoping for perm.Cons.Easemt. NW-31 33-118-23 23 0002 3025 Wayzata Boulevard 33.0 1 130 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Guided for 2.0-4.0 units/acre SFR/MFR Mix-Rezoning will occur upon development NW-3 32-118-23 31 0005 3760 Watertown Road 27.5 1 0 No RR-1A 5-ac min Land Trust Covenants believed to al�ow no additional development of property _ WC-121 10-117-23 33 0005 2265 North Shore Drive 26.5 2 8 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min 09-117-23 21 0004& _ - _ 09-117-23 21 0005& WC-130 09-117-23 21 0001 825 Old Crystal Bay Road S 25.0 2 8 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ _ NE-53 35-118-23 14 0008 900 Old Long Lake Road 25.0 1 6 No LR-1A 2-ac min Topography�wetlands are limiting;likely to become a part of Wood Rill SNA EC-101 10-117-23 14 0014 1700 Shoreline drive 23.0 3 5 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore EC-84 02-117-23 32 0001 485 Orono Orchard Road S 19.5 3 0 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Covenants limit property to 3 residences WC-120 10-117-23 33 0006 2285 North Shore Drive 19.0 0 7 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min __ - NW-25 32-118-23 42 0003 200 Stubbs Bay Road North 19.0 1 7 No RR-16 2-ac min Steep slopes will limit development NE-76 36-118-23 31 0017 375 Wake(ield Road 19.0 1 7 No RR-16 2-ac min NW-4 32-118-23 32 0005 3850 Watertown Road 18.5 1 2 No RR-tA 5-ac min NW-5 32-118-23 33 0004 3855 Watertown Road 18.5 1 0 No RR-tA 5-ac min Land Trust Covenants believed to allow no additional development of property NW-32 33-118-23 24 0001/2/3 Sxx Old Crystal Bay Road N 17.0 0 68 Yes RR-16 2-ac min Guided for 2.0-4 0 units/acre SFWMFR Mix-Rezoning will occur upon developmen! NE-49 34-118-23 12 0007 690 Brown Road North 17.0 1 6 No LR-1A 2-ac min Fulure development limited bywetlands;high-end lakeshore property . NE-65 25-118-23 32 0003 700 Sixth Avenue North 17.0 1 6 No RR-1 B 2-ac min . . . . . _.. . . . .. . _ . . . . _ NW-2 32-118-23 23 0009 460 Orchard Park Road 16.0 1 2 No RR-tA 5-ac min Wetland location may make it infeasible to get 2nd additional homesite __ --- NW-7 06-117-23 11 0003 4246 Bayside Road 15.5 0 3 No RR-tA 5-ac min _- _ _ NW-15 06-117-23 12 0007 4355 Bayside Road 15.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes&wetlands NE-57 26-118-23 33 0029 1485 Sixth Avenue North 14.5 1 3 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Topography and wetlands are limiting factors - - NW-14 06-117-23 12 0008 4375 Bayside Road 14.5 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands NW-24 32-118-23 43 0013 xxxx Watertown Road 14.3 0 6 No RR-16 2-ac min Preliminary Plat Approved Feb 2006-6 Lots Total-Has not progressed�o Final NW-27 32-118-23 14 0002 3245 Wayzata Boulevard 13.0 0 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min 8 acres is sanitary landfill;remaining 5 acres may have 1-2 homesites... NW-29 28-118-23 31 0001 2940 Sixth Avenue North 13.0 1 5 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Preliminary Plal Approved January 2008 6 Lots Total EC-99 11-117-23 32 0020 1400 Bracketts Point Road 12.5 2 3 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore,estate selting make development unlikely EG91 03-117-23 41 0003 1700 Fox Street 12.5 1 2 No RR-t B 2-ac min Wetlands,topography,existing building locations are limiting factors NW-8 06-117-23 22 0018 xxxx Bayside Road 12.0 0 5 No RR-1 B 2-ac min 33-118-23 11 0001 8 NW-28 33-118-23 22 0001 3200-3220 Wayzata Blvd 12.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Potential high-end lakeshore homesites NE-50 34-118-23 44 0035 135 Orono Orchard Road N 12.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes and protected iributary impact future development EC-95 03-117-23 13 0003 xxx Brown Road South 12.0 0 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Locating septic sites will be challenging due to topography WG106 03-117-23 23 0014 400 Wiliow Drive South 11.2 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min - _ --- NW-42 28-118-23 42 0002 2700 Sixth Avenue North 11.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-89 03-117-23 14 0001 xxxx Fox Street 11.0 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting faclors NW-6 32-118-23 33 0006 3925 Watertown Road 10.5 1 1 No RR-1A 5-ac min -- --- - NE-60 26-118-23 31 0002 xxxx Tamarack Drive 10.5 0 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min __--------- EG83 02-117-23 23 0006 387 Orono Orchard Road S 10.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes,house location limit future development ---- ----._ NW-1 31-118-23 13 0013 4300 Walertown Road 10.2 1 1 No RR-tA 5-ac min --------- - EC-82 02-117-23 31 0047 450 Orono Orchard Road S 10.2 1 3 No RR-18 2-ac min - - _- EC-100 10-117-23 14 0015 1100 Millston Road 10.0 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore - - ---- - _.__ 06-117-23 14 0027 8 NW-19 06-117-23 41 0107 405 Tonkawa Road 10.0 0 3 No LR-1A 2-ac min NW38 33-118-23 33 0001 3020 Watertown Road 10.0 1 3 No RR-1B 2-ac min EG87 02-117-23 32 0006 1560 Fox Street 10.0 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min WeUands,slopes,house location,parcel shape are limiting factors WC-119 15-117-23 22 0001 2165 North Shore Drive 9.8 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Wetlands,lakeshore,site confi uration are limitin facrors . #Potential � Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments NW-37 33-118-23 34 0001 185 Old Cryslal Bay Road N 9.8 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Current site of house-moving business _ -- NW-11 06-117-23 21 0005 4565 Bayside Road 9.5 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ __ _ EC-86 03-117-23 31 0004 1620 Fox Street 9.5 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor _ _ _ _ __ - --- ----- WC-131 04-117-23 34 0007 2905 Fox Street 9.0 1 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min -- __ -- _------ NW-10 06-117-23 24 0001 215 North Arm Lane 9.0 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ ----- NW-13 06-117-23 21 0002 4455 Bayside Road 9.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Additional development limited due to topography --__ ------. NW-20 OS-117-23 12 0022 60 Stubbs Bay Road Soulh 9.0 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min - -------- NE-55 26-118-23 34 0008 1295 Sixth Avenue North 8.7 1 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min The 2 possible addilional siles are separated by wetland -- ------_ NE-71 36-118-23 22 0002 765 Spring Hill Road 8.5 1 1 No LR-tA 2-ac min Topography and wetlands are limiting factors - __. _ _--- NE-74 36-118-23 21 0004 749 Spring Hill Road 8.5 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min - ----_ EG79 02-117-23 13 0006 315 Woodhill Road 8.5 2 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up WC-133 04-117-23 33 0010 3175 Fox Street 8.1 1 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min _ ---- WC-118 09-117-23 41 0009 23xx North Shore Drive 8.0 0 3 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor EC-97 03-117-23 11 0001 xxx Orono Orchard Road S 8.0 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min W etlands,steep slopes,access will be issues for development -----_ NW-35 33-118-23 31 0011 265 Oid Crystal Bay Road N 7.8 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min ---_ WC-164 07-117-23 21 0002 1003 Wildhurst Trail 7.8 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Steep slopes,wetlands are limiting _ ---- NE-56 26-118-23 34 0004 1305 Sixth Avenue North 7.7 1 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min Topography is a limiting factor _---_..___._- NW-12 06-117-23 21 0003 4485 Bayside Road 7.6 1 2 No RR-18 2-ac min ------------ NW-17 06-117-23 13 0003 xxxx Bayside Road 7.5 0 1 No LR-tA 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands NW-22 OS-117-23 11 0002 3405 High Lane 7.4 1 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min ____ .__ -- WC-138 OS-117-23 44 0008 3350 Fox Street 7.2 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ _ - --- - - - --_---- EC-98 02-117-23 33 0010 1410 Shoreline Drive 7.0 1 0 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore,steep slopes,lot configuration are limiting WC-132 04-117-23 33 0011 3125 Fox Street 7.0 1 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min - --- - --- - __ _ - - - - WG116 09-117-23 14 0001 1100 Old Crystal Bay Road S 7A 1 2 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min _ -- -__ _ _ _ --- --- --- ---- NW-41 04-117-23 14 0003 405 Willow Drive South 7.0 1 2 No RR-18 2-ac min ____ _ _ ------- ---- NW-44 27-118-23 32 0002 2300 Sixth Avenue North 7.0 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ - _ ------- ---- - - NE-69 25-118-23 34 0003 445 Spring Hill Road 7.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography may be limiting factor __ _ _ _ _-- -. _ __ EC-94 03-117-23 42 0015 1880 Fox Street 7.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands locations limit future development _ __ _ WC-166 07-117-23 24 0043 1131 W ildhurst Trail 6.8 1 3 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Steep slopes are limiting - WC-117 09-117-23 14 0007 1130 Old Crystal Bay Road S 6.8 1 2 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Currently is institutionally used as Hennepin County Public Works truck station-guided NAV-174 17-117-23 33 0151 3880 Shoreline Drive 67 0 13 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min and zoned for SFR at a density of 2 units per acre _ WC-155 OS-117-23 32 0004 550 Tonkawa Road 6.6 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate layout,steep slopes are limiting factors _. NW-16 06-117-23 13 0001 4245 Bayside Road 6.5 1 0 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes&wetlands 32-118-23 44 0002 & NW-23 32-118-2344 0003 3280 Watertown Road 6.5 1 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min NW-40 04-117-23 31 0001 425 Old Crystal Bay Road S 6.5 1 2 No RR-16 2-ac min _ _ NE-61 26-118-23 41 0007 1150 Wyndmere Road 6.5 1 1 No RR-16 2-ac min - - _ _ NE-66 25-118-23 32 0002 xxx Sixth Avenue NoRh 6.5 0 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting factors EC-78 02-117-23 13 0007 xxx Woodhill Road 6.5 0 0 No RR-16 2-ac min Part of Woodhill CC-steep slopes ihroughout parcel is limiting factor WC-104 03-117-23 31 0001 445 Brown Road South 6.5 1 0 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands,protected tributary,closed landfill are limiting factors NW-33 33-118-23 32 0005 375 Old Crystal Bay Road N 6.4 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Cily-owned open space-encumbered by MnDOT stormwater pond easement NE-72 36-118-23 21 0005 761 Spring Hill Road 6.4 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-68 25-118-23 34 0002 465 Spring Hill Road 6.2 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography may be limiting factor WC-108 04-117-23 14 0003 405 Willow Drive South 6.2 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor NE-73 36-118-23 21 0003 745 Spring Hill Road 6.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-81 02-117-23 24 0006 360 Orono Orchard Road S 6.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Residence centered on lot limits developability NW-39 04-117-23 21 0004 85 Old Crystal Bay Road S 5.8 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min NE-70 36-118-23 22 0003 755 Sprin Hill Road 5.8 1 0 No RR-1B 2-ac min Topo raph and wetlands are limitin factors . #Potential ` Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA 1 Zoning District Comments EC-90 03-117-23 41 0005 xxxx Fox Street 5.8 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting factors _ _. _ WC-109 04-117-23 41 0005 2420 Fox Street 5.7 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min __---- NW-46 27-118-23 34 0006 809 Brown Road North 5.6 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min ------- ______ WC-114 04-117-23 44 0004 2601 Rainey Road 5.6 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min _ ---- - ---____._ NE-62 26-118-23 43 0006 1135 Spring Hill Road 5.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ _ - ---- -- --- WC-139 OS-117-23 43 0005 3400 Fox Street 5.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min WGt 35 05-117-23 44 0012 3250 Fox Street 5.3 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min - ---------..._.._---- WC-113 04-117-23 42 0023 540 Old Crystal Bay Road S 5.3 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ ----------. NW-18 06-117-23 14 0022 4045 Bayside Road 5.2 1 0 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited due to steep slopes ---- ----- NW-36 33-118-23 31 0007 225 Old Crystal Bay Road N 5.2 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ _-_-------- EC-96 03-117-23 13 0001 350 Brown Road South 5.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min .---- ------ --- W C-136 OS-117-23 44 0011 3280 Fox Street 5.0 0 2 Yes LR-1 A 2-ac min _ _------------ EC-93 03-117-23 42 0016 1860 Fox Street 5.0 1 0 No RR-18 2-ac min WeUands localions limit future development ____ --- ------__ __ NW-9 06-117-23 23 0021 xxx North Arm Lane 4.9 0 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Outlot in Conservation Easement NW-48 03-117-23 24 0011 325 Brown Road South 4.9 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-64 26-118-23 43 0005 1025 Spring Hill Road 4.8 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min WC-110 04-117-23 41 0012 505 Willow Drive South 4.8 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min _ - - _- -------- ------. ---------- -- _. WC-165 07-117-23 22 0017 4735 West Branch Road 4.8 0 2 No RR-t B 2-ac min NE-54 26-118-23 34 0007 1245 Sixth Avenue North 4.7 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _-- ------ _---- - - -- --- -- _ - __-_ _ - - - --- ------- ---- --- -- - NE-63 26-118-23 43 0004 1125 Spring Hill Road 4.7 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min --- -------------------- - -- --_ _.. WC-140 OS-117-23 44 0007 3345 Fox Street 4.7 0 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min WC-160 06-117-23 41 0088 425 Tonkawa Road 4.7 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min NW-45 27-118-23 31 0025 2085 Sixth Avenue North 4.7 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min - - _ _ _ _ ------ NE-75 36-118-23 32 0008 380 RuAnn Road 4.7 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min -- ---- __.__ _--- EC-80 02-117-23 24 0002 320 Orono Orchard Road S 4.7 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min --- -- -- EC-92 03-117-23 42 0009 1820 Fox Sireet 4.7 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography and existing improvements limit further developability -- _ _._ - NW-26 32-118-23 42 0006 350 Stubbs Bay Road North 4.6 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _. -- _- _ NW-47 03-117-23 22 0015 2325 Watertown Road 4.6 0 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min _ _----- WC-123 09-117-23 44 0003 2425 North Shore Drive 4.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Wetlands,lot configuration will make a second lot difficult . ____ WC-137 OS-117-23 44 0003 3300 Fox Street 4.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min __ - ___ WC-126 OS-117-23 44 0023 1535 Bohns Point Road 4.5 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up NW-34 33-118-23 31 0005 285 Old Crystal Bay Road N 4.5 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min ___ _- --- - .. .-_ NE-51 35-118-23 43 0024 1200 Lyman Avenue 4.5 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min __ ---- -----__.._ ---- NE-67 25-118-23 33 0003 625 Spring Hill Road 4.3 1 1 No LR-1A 2-ac min _-------- _____ NE-58 26-118-23 32 0008 1480 Sixth Avenue North 4.3 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ _ ---- ----- - ----- WC-161 06-117-23 44 0016 800 North Arm Drive 4.2 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min NW-43 28-118-23 41 0002 1125 Willow Drive North 4.2 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min ---_ -- - -- _ _ ._- -- NE-59 26-118-23 32 0017 1550 Sixth Avenue North 4.2 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetland location makes subdivision unlikely NE-52 35-118-23 14 0002 550 East Long Lake Road 4.1 1 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min Topography will likely preclude a second building site -_ _ _----- WG134 OS-117-23 44 0013 3200 Fox Street 4.1 0 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min Topography,lot shape are limiting factors _ __ _ ----_-- EC-85 02-117-23 32 0003 1540 Fox Street 4.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ _ - ---------- W C-105 03-117-23 31 0005 2180 Fox Street 4.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _--- --- _ _ __ ------------ WC-141 OS-117-23 44 0006 3295 Fox Street 4.0 0 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ __ __..-----_._._ WC-158 05-117-23 32 0002 460 Tonkawa Road 4.0 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min - ----- EC-102 10-117-23 12 0004 940 Brown Road South 4.0 1 0 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,sleep slopes are limiting EC-103 10-117-23 13 0001 1000 Brown Road Soulh 4.0 1 0 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes,configuration of buildable land are limiting W C-115 09-117-23 12 0002 840 Old Crystal Bay Road S 4.0 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-21 05-117-23 12 0017 3415 High Lane 4.0 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands NW-30 28-118-23 33 0008 3065 Jamestown Road 4.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min � #Potential ' Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zaning District Comments EC-88 02-117-23 23 0008 xxxx Fox Street 4.0 0 1 No RR-16 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes are limiting faclors __ _ - WC-107 03-117-23 32 0015 2340 Fox Street 4.0 1 1 No RR-16 2-ac min __ - -- - - WC-112 04-117-23 42 0010 2620 Fox Streel 4.0 1 1 No RR-16 2-ac min _---------- WC-122 10-117-23 33 0001 2385 North Shore Drive 3.8 0 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Wetlands are a limiting factor . _- -- - __--- --- WC-111 04-117-23 41 0011 2410 Fox Street � 3.8 1 0 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetland reduces acreage to below 4.0 acres ._ ---- - - - __._---._._.------ WC-128 09-117-23 32 0002 3017 North Shore Drive 3.6 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min __ __ _ -------------_ NAV-171 17-117-23 34 0002 3700 Northern Avenue 3.5 1 5 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min ----- --- WC-148 08-117-23 21 0014 955 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 2 Yes LR-18 1-ac min - - -_----- - _ WC-152 08-117-23 21 0001 801 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min _ - _ __------_--- WC-157 05-117-23 32 0003 500 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate layout,steep slopes are limiting factors ----------- -_ NAV-182 21-117-23 23 0051 2710 Pence Lane 3.4 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min ------_-- - WC-159 05-117-23 32 0001 420 Tonkawa Road 3.3 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min _ _ _ ----- --- WC-167 17-117-23 22 0040 1635 Concordia Sireet 3.2 1 4 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min _ _-- -- _ --- W C-127 09-117-23 33 0003 1420 Bohns Point Road 3.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up _ _-- - _ _ -- - WC-129 09-117-23 32 0003 3020 North Shore Drive 3.1 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min _ __ ----- ------- NAV-179 20-117-23 14 0026 2625 Kelly Avenue 3.0 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting _ __-_--___ -- -- NAV-180 20-117-23 14 0025 2655 Kelly Avenue 3.0 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting _ ----- ----- --- WC-124 16-117-23 22 0006 1725 Bohns Point Road 2.9 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up ---------- - WC-143 08-117-23 12 0003 960 Tonkawa Road 2.7 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min WC-149 08-117-23 21 0013 935 Tonkawa Road 2.7 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min _ _.. ---- - WC-156 OS-117-23 32 0005 520 Tonkawa Road 2.6 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Site layout,steep slopes,wetland are limiting factors _ ---------- NAV-183 21-117-23 21 0007 2605 West Lafayette Road 2.5 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min WC-163 07-117-23 14 0015 1067 Linden Lane 2.4 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min _. _ -------_-- WG168 17-117-23 22 0013 1645 Shadywood Road 2.4 1 3 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min WC-146 OS-117-23 21 0016 985 Tonkawa Road 2.3 1 0 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min Lot shape and wetland are limiting - ------ WC-151 OS-117-23210019 895TonkawaRoad 2.3 0 2 Yes LR-1B 1-acmin _ _--- WC-147 08-117-23 21 0015 975 Tonkawa Road 2.2 1 0 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min Lot shape is limiting factor . _------- WC-153 OS-117-23 33 0003 755 Tonkawa Road 2.2 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min W C-154 05-117-23 33 0017 640 Tonkawa Road 2.2 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min NAV-178 20-117-23 11 0022 2525 Kelly Avenue 2.2 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting NAV-181 21-117-23 22 0018 2505 Old Beach Road 2.2 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min WC-125 OS-117-23 44 0024 1595 Bohns Point Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up WC-142 OS-117-23 34 0011 835 Partenwood Road 2.1 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min __ _--- WC-145 08-117-23 13 0013 1040 Tonkawa Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Lot shape is limiling factor -- - _ _ _ WC-150 08-117-23210020 915TonkawaRoad 2.1 0 2 Yes LR-18 1-acmin _ - ------ _ WC-162 08-117-23 23 0001 3980 Dahl Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B t-ac min Slopes,house location are limiting factors NAV-177 20-117-23 34 0008 3129 Casco Circle 2.1 1 2 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min _ _ _ _ W C-144 OS-117-23 12 0001 980 Tonkawa Road 2.0 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Lot shape is limiting factor NAV-176 20-117-23 21 0034 2590 Casco Point Road 1.9 1 0 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min Estate property-site layout makes further subdivision difficult NAV-172 17-117-23 34 0014 3635 Togo Road 1.6 1 2 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min NAV-170 17-117-23 31 0023 3740 Togo Road 1.5 1 1 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min Wetland on site is limiting factor NAV-175 20-117-23 21 0037 2480 Casco Point Road 1.4 1 1 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min NAV-169 17-117-23 31 0022 3760 Togo Road 1.3 1 1 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min WeUand on adjacent property and lo[width are limiting NAV-173 17-117-23 43 0135 2195 Shadywood Road 1.1 1 1 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min . . 14147 158 557 � � .���.� � � City of Orono-September 2009 Residential Parcels that are Further Developable under Planned Zoning&Guideplan 2008-2030-Sorted by Zoning District #Potential Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments WC-121 10-117-23 33 0005 2265 North Shore Drive 26.5 2 8 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min NE-53 35-118-23 14 0008 900 Old Long Lake Road 25.0 1 6 No LR-1A 2-ac min Topography&wellands are limiting;likely to become a part of Wood Rill SNA 09-117-23 21 0004& 09-117-23 21 0005 8 WC-130 09-117-23 21 0001 825 Old Crystal Bay Road S 25.0 2 8 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min EC-101 10-117-23 14 0014 1700 Shoreline drive 23.0 3 5 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore WC-120 10-117-23 33 0006 2285 North Shore Drive 19.0 0 7 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ _ _ NE-49 34-118-23 12 0007 690 Brown Road Norih 17.0 1 6 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited by wetlands;high-end lakeshore property NE-57 26-118-23 33 0029 1485 Sixth Avenue North 14.5 1 3 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Topography and wetlands are limiting factors _ EC-99 11-117-23 32 0020 1400 Bracketts Point Road 12.5 2 3 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore,estate setting make development unlikely _ 06-117-23 14 0027& NW-19 06-117-23 41 0107 405 Tonkawa Road 10.0 0 3 No LR-1A 2-ac min EC-100 10-117-23 14 0015 1100 Millston Road 10.0 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore WC-119 15-117-23 22 0001 2165 North Shore Drive 9.8 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min WeUands,lakeshore,site configuration are limiting fac[ors WC-131 04-117-23 34 0007 2905 Fox Street 9A 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min NE-55 26-118-23 34 0008 1295 Sixth Avenue North 8.7 1 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min The 2 possible additional sites are separated by wetland NE-71 36-118-23 22 0002 765 Spring Hill Road 8.5 1 1 No LR-tA 2-ac min Topography and wetlands are limiting faclors _ _ __ ------ WC-133 04-117-23 33 0010 3175 Fox Street 8.1 1 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min NE-56 26-118-23 34 0004 1305 Sixth Avenue North 77 1 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min Topography is a limiting factor ___ _____ NW-17 06-117-23 13 0003 xxxx Bayside Road 7.5 0 1 No LR-tA 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes&wetlands ____ _______ WC-138 05-117-23 44 0008 3350 Fox Street 7.2 1 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min EC-98 02-117-23 33 0010 1410 Shoreline Drive 7.0 1 0 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore,steep slopes,lot configuration are limiting W C-132 04-117-23 33 0011 3125 Fox Street 7.0 1 2 Yes LR-1 A 2-ac min NW-16 06-117-23 13 0001 4245 Bayside Road 6.5 1 0 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands _ _____ NE-62 26-118-23 43 0006 1135 Spring Hill Road 5.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min WC-139 OS-117-23 43 0005 3400 Fox Street 5.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min W C-135 OS-117-23 44 0012 3250 Fox Street 5.3 1 1 Yes LR-1 A 2-ac min NW-18 06-117-23 14 0022 4045 Bayside Road 5.2 1 0 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited due to steep slopes --- --- - WC-136 OS-117-23 44 0011 3280 Fox Street 5.0 0 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min _---------- NE-64 26-118-23 43 0005 1025 Spring Hill Road 4.8 1 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min _ _ ------ --- NE-54 26-118-23 34 0007 1245 Sixth Avenue North 4.7 1 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min NE-63 26-118-23 43 0004 1125 Spring Hill Road 4.7 1 1 Yes lR-1A 2-ac min WC-140 OS-117-23 44 0007 3345 Fox Sireet 4.7 0 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min - -_ --- WC-123 09-117-23 44 0003 2425 North Shore Drive 4.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Wetlands,bt configuration will make a second lot difficult ___ _ _ WP137 05-117-23 44 0003 3300 Fox Street 4.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _-----_ NE-67 25-118-23 33 0003 625 Spring Hill Road 4.3 1 1 No LR-1A 2-ac min _ ___--- NE-52 35-118-23 14 0002 550 East Long Lake Road 4.1 1 1 Yes LR-1 A 2-ac min Topography will likely preclude a second building site ------------ W C-134 OS-117-23 44 0013 3200 Fox Street 4.1 0 1 Yes LR-1 A 2-ac min Topography,lot shape are limiting factors _________ _ WC-141 OS-117-23 44 0006 3295 Fox Slreet 4.0 0 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min WC-122 10-117-23 33 0001 2385 North Shore Drive 3.8 0 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Wetlands are a limiting factor WC-166 07-117-23 24 0043 1131 Wildhurst Trail 6.8 1 3 Yes LR-16 1-ac min Steep slopes are limiting ------------ WC-155 OS-117-23 32 0004 550 Tonkawa Road 6.6 1 1 Yes �R-18 1-ac min Estate layout,steep slopes are limiting factors WC-160 06-117-23 41 0088 425 Tonkawa Road 4.7 1 2 Yes LR-18 1-ac min WC-126 OS-117-23 44 0023 1535 Bohns Point Road 4S 1 0 Yes LR-18 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up WC-161 06-117-23 44 0016 800 North Arm Drive 4.2 1 2 Yes LR-18 1-ac min WC-158 05-117-23 32 0002 460 Tonkawa Road 4.0 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min WC-128 09-117-23 32 0002 3017 North Shore Drive 3.6 1 2 Yes LR-18 1-ac min i #Potential • Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments WC-148 OS-117-23 21 0014 955 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min _ WC-152 08-117-23 21 0001 801 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min _ WC-157 05-117-23 32 0003 500 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate layout,steep slopes are limiting factors NAV-182 21-117-23 23 0051 2710 Pence Lane 3.4 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min . _ WC-159 OS-117-23 32 0001 420 Tonkawa Road 3.3 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min WC-127 09-117-23 33 0003 1420 Bohns Point Road 3.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up _ ----------- WC-129 09-117-23 32 0003 3020 North Shore Drive 3.1 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min -- - NAV-179 20-117-23 14 0026 2625 Kelly Avenue 3.0 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting - - _ NAV-180 20-117-23 14 0025 2655 Kelly Avenue 3.0 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting _ _ -- ------------- WC-124 16-117-23 22 0006 1725 Bohns Point Road 2.9 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up _ . _ _ _.-..--- -..-- WC-143 08-117-23120003 960TonkawaRoad 2.7 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-acmin _ _ _ . --------- WC-149 OS-117-23 21 0013 935 Tonkawa Road 2.7 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min _ - - - - WC-156 OS-117-23 32 0005 520 Tonkawa Road 2.6 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Site layout,steep slopes,wetland are limiting factors _ - ------------ NAV-183 21-117-23 21 0007 2605 West Lafayette Road 2.5 1 1 Yes LR-16 1-ac min WC-163 07-117-23 14 0015 1067 Linden Lane 2.4 1 1 Yes LR-16 1-ac min ---------- . _ . WC-146 OS-117-23 21 0016 985 Tonkawa Road 2.3 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Lot shape and wetland are limiting WC-151 08-117-23 21 0019 895 Tonkawa Road 2.3 0 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min WC-147 08-117-23 21 0015 975 Tonkawa Road 2.2 1 0 Yes LR-1 B t-ac min Lot shape is limiting factor - - ---- - -- -- __ WC-153 05-117-23 33 0003 755 Tonkawa Road 2.2 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min WC-154 05-117-23 33 0017 640 Tonkawa Road 2.2 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min _-___ __ NAV-178 20-117-23 11 0022 2525 Kelly Avenue 2.2 1 0 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting NAV-181 21-117-23 22 0018 2505 Old Beach Road 2.2 1 1 Yes LR-16 1-ac min _- - - ----------------- W C-125 08-117-23 44 0024 1595 Bohns Point Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up _ _. _ __----------- W C-142 OS-117-23 34 0011 835 Partenwood Road 2.1 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min W C-145 08-117-23 13 0013 1040 Tonkawa Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Lot shape is limiting factor WC-150 08-117-23 21 0020 915 Tonkawa Road 2.1 0 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min _ --- _ _ W C-162 OS-117-23 23 0001 3980 Dahl Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Slopes,house location are limiting factors _ -_ - _ WC-144 OS-117-23 12 0001 980 Tonkawa Road 2.0 1 0 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min Lot shape is limiting factor Currently is institutionally used as Hennepin County Public Works truck station-guided NAV-174 17-117-23 33 0151 3880 Shoreline Drive 6.7 0 13 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min and zoned for SFR at a densily of 2 units per acre _ _ - NAV-171 17-117-23 34 0002 3700 Northern Avenue 3.5 1 5 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min WC-167 17-117-23 22 0040 1635 Concordia Street 3.2 1 4 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min WC-168 17-117-23 22 0013 1645 Shadywood Road 2.4 1 3 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min . _ __-._. NAV-177 20-117-23 34 0008 3129 Casco Circle 2.1 1 2 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min NAV-176 20-117-23 21 0034 2590 Casco Point Road 1.9 1 0 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min Estate property-site layout makes further subdivision difficult - - NAV-172 17-117-23 34 0014 3635 Togo Road 1.6 1 2 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min NAV-170 17-117-23 31 0023 3740 Togo Road 1.5 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min Wetland on site is limiting factor _ NAV-175 20-117-23 21 0037 2480 Casco Point Road 1.4 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min . NAV-169 17-117-23 31 0022 3760 Togo Road 1.3 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min Wetland on adjacent property and lot widlh are limiting NAV-173 17-117-23 43 0135 2195 Shadywood Road 1.1 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min NW-3 32-118-23 31 0005 3760 Watertown Road 27.5 1 0 No RR-1A 5-ac min Land Trust Covenants believed to allow no additional development of property NW-4 32-118-23 32 0005 3850 Watertown Road 18.5 1 2 No RR-1A 5-ac min _ _ NW-5 32-118-23 33 0004 3855 Watertown Road 18.5 1 0 No RR-1A 5-ac min Land Trust Covenants believed to allow no additional development of property NW-2 32-118-23 23 0009 460 Orchard Park Road 16.0 1 2 No RR-1A 5-ac min Wetland location may make it infeasible to get 2nd additional homesite _ _ NW-7 06-117-23 11 0003 4246 Bayside Road 15.5 0 3 No RR-1A 5-ac min NW-6 32-118-23 33 0006 3925 Watertown Road 10.5 1 1 No RR-1A 5-ac min NW-1 31-118-23 13 0013 4300 Waterlown Road 10.2 1 1 No RR-tA 5-ac min NE-77 25-118-23 41 0001 300 Sixth Avenue North 75.0 1 30 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Largest single undeveloped parcel remaining-City hoping for perm.Cons.Easemt. NW31 33-118-23 23 0002 3025 Wa zata Boulevard 33.0 1 130 Yes RR-�B 2-ac min Guided for 2.0-4.0 units/acre SFR/MFR Mix-Rezonin will occur upon development #Potential . Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA 1 Zoning District Comments EC-84 02-117-23 32 0001 485 Orono Orchard Road S 19.5 3 0 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Covenants limit property to 3 residences NW-25 32-118-23 42 0003 200 Stubbs Bay Road North 19.0 1 7 No RR-16 2-ac min Steep slopes will limit development - NE-76 36-118-23 31 0017 375 Wakefield Road 19.0 1 7 No RR-18 2-ac min NW-32 33-118-23 24 0001/2/3 5xx Old Crystal Bay Road N 17.0 0 68 Yes RR-1B 2-ac min Guided for 2.0-4.0 units/acre SFR/MFR Mix-Rezoning will occur upon development NE-65 25-118-23 32 0003 700 Sixth Avenue North 17.0 1 6 No RR-1B 2-ac min NW-15 06-117-23 12 0007 4355 Bayside Road 15.0 1 4 No RR-18 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands _ _ NW-14 06-117-23 12 0008 4375 Bayside Road 14.5 1 3 No RR-1B 2-ac min Future development limited by s�eep slopes 8 wetlands NW-24 32-118-23 43 0013 xxxx Watertown Road 14.3 0 6 No RR-1B 2-ac min Preliminary Plat Approved Feb 2006-6 Lots Total-Has not progressed to Final NW-27 32-118-23 14 0002 3245 Wayzata Boulevard 13.0 0 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min 8 acres is sanitary landfill;remaining 5 acres may have 1-2 homesites... ---_ _ NW-29 28-118-23 31 0001 2940 Sixth Avenue North 13.0 1 5 No RR-16 2-ac min Preliminary Plat Approved January 2008 6 Lots Total EC-91 03-117-23 41 0003 1700 Fox Street 12.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,topography,existing building locations are limiting factors NW-8 06-t 17-23 22 0018 xxxx Bayside Road 12.0 0 5 No RR-18 2-ac min 33-118-23 11 0001 8 _. - NW-28 33-118-23 22 0001 3200-3220 Wayzata Blvd 12.0 1 4 No RR-18 2-ac min Potential high-end lakeshore homesites _ _ ___ NE-50 34-118-23 44 0035 135 Orono Orchard Road N 12.0 1 4 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes and protected tributary impact future development _ ___ __ EC-95 03-117-23 13 0003 xxx Brown Road South 12.0 0 4 No RR-1B 2-ac min Locating septic sites will be challenging due to topography _ ____-- - _ _ WC-106 03-117-23 23 0014 400 Willow Drive South 11.2 1 4 No RR-18 2-ac min - -- -_ NW-42 28-118-23 42 0002 2700 Sixth Avenue North 11.0 1 4 No i2R-18 2-ac min -- ---_ _ ____ EG89 03-117-23 14 0001 xxxx Fox Street t 1.0 0 3 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands and lopography are limiting factors __ --- - -- ----- NE-60 26-118-23 31 0002 xxxx Tamarack Drive 10.5 0 4 No RR-18 2-ac min EC-83 02-117-23 23 0006 387 Orono Orchard Road S 10.5 1 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes,house location limit future development _ - - --- EC-82 02-117-23 31 0047 450 Orono Orchard Road S 10.2 1 3 No RR-18 2-ac min -- - -- NW-38 33-118-23 33 0001 3020 Watertown Road 10.0 1 3 No RR-1B 2-ac min . _- __ __ EC-87 02-117-23 32 0006 1560 Fox Street 10.0 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes,house location,parcel shape are limiting factors NW-37 33-118-23 34 0001 185 Old Crystai Bay Road N 9.8 1 3 No RR-1B 2-ac min Current site of house-moving business - _ __ NW-11 06-117-23 21 0005 4565 Bayside Road 9.5 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min -- _ - _ EC-86 03-117-23 31 0004 1620 Fox Street 9.5 0 3 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor ----------- _ NW-10 06-117-23 24 0001 215 North Arm Lane 9.0 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-13 06-117-23 21 0002 4455 Bayside Road 9.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Additional development limited due to topography _ _ --------- - NW-20 OS-117-23 12 0022 60 Stubbs Bay Road South 9.0 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min - _ ------ NE-74 36-118-23 21 0004 749 Spring Hill Road 8.5 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min ---__ EC-79 02-117-23 13 0006 315 Woodhill Road 8.5 2 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up -- _---- EC-97 03-117-23 11 OOOt xxx Orono Orchard Road S 8.0 0 2 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes,access will be issues for development - _ -- WC-118 09-117-23 41 0009 23xx North Shore Drive 8.0 0 3 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiling factor _ --- NW-35 33-118-23 31 0011 265 Old Crystal Bay Road N 7.8 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ _ _ -- WC-164 07-117-23 21 0002 1003 Wildhurst Trail 7.8 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Steep slopes,weUands are limiting - - --------- -- ---- NW-12 06-117-23 21 0003 4485 Bayside Road 7.6 1 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min -_ - - ---- ____ __-------- NW-22 OS-117-23 11 0002 3405 High Lane 7.4 1 2 No RR-18 2-ac min - .--- ------ NW-41 04-117-23 14 0003 405 Willow Drive South 7.0 1 2 No RR-18 2-ac min - - _ - _----------- - NW-44 27-118-23 32 0002 2300 Sixth Avenue North 7.0 1 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min NE-69 25-118-23 34 0003 445 Spring Hill Road 7.0 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min Topography may be limiting factor - ___ _ _---- -_ EC-94 03-t t 7-23 42 0015 1880 Fox Street 7.0 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands locations limit future development -_ - -- _ WC-116 09-t 17-23 14 0001 1100 Old Crystal Bay Road S 7.0 1 2 Yes RR-18 2-ac min WC-117 09-117-23 14 0007 1130 Old Crystal Bay Road S 6.8 1 2 Yes RR-18 2-ac min _ -- 32-118-23 44 0002 & NW-23 32-118-23 44 0003 3280 Watertown Road 6.5 1 2 No RR-18 2-ac min NW-40 04-117-23 31 0001 425 Old Crystal Bay Road S 6.5 1 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min NE-61 26-118-2341 0007 1150 Wyndmere Road 6.5 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min NE-66 25-118-23 32 0002 xxx Sixth Avenue North 6.5 0 2 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands and topo ra h are limitin factors . � #Potential , Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments EC-78 02-117-23 13 0007 xxx Woodhill Road 6.5 0 0 No RR-18 2-ac min Part of Woodhill CC-steep slopes ihroughout parcel is limiting factor WC-104 03-117-23 31 0001 445 Brown Road South 6.5 1 0 No RR-1B 2-ac min Wetlands,protected tribulary,closed landfill are limiting factors NW-33 33-118-23 32 0005 375 Old Crystal Bay Road N 6 4 0 2 No RR-18 2-ac min City-owned open space-encumbered by MnDOT stormwater pond easement NE-72 36-118-23 21 0005 761 Spring Hitl Road 6.4 0 3 No RR-18 2-ac min NE-68 25-118-23 34 0002 465 Spring Hitl Road 62 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography may be limiting factor _ WC-108 04-117-23 14 0003 405 Willow Drive South 62 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min WeUands are limiting factor _ NE-73 36-118-23 21 0003 745 Spring Hill Road 6.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-81 02-117-23 24 0006 360 Orono Orchard Road S 6.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Residence cenlered on lot limits developability N W-39 04-117-23 21 0004 85 Old Crystal Bay Road S 5.8 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min -- ---- - _ _ _ _ ._ - -- -- NE-70 36-118-23 22 0003 755 Spring Hill Road 5.8 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography and wellands are limiting factors - _ _ -- ------------ EC-90 03-117-23 41 0005 xxxx Fox Street 5.8 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting factors _--------- W C-109 04-117-23 41 0005 2420 Fox Street 57 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-46 27-118-23 34 0006 809 Brown Road North 5.6 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min - - -- - _ _ ---- ------- W G114 04-117-23 44 0004 2601 Rainey Road 5.6 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min _ __ _ .. _---- ______-- -- W C-113 04-117-23 42 0023 540 Old Crystal Bay Road S 5.3 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min __________ ____ ----- - _ _ NW-36 33-118-23 31 0007 225 Old Crystal Bay Road N 5.2 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ --------- -- -.. ---- ---- EC-96 03-117-23 13 0001 350 Brown Road South 5.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ -- ------------ EC-93 03-117-23 42 0016 1860 Fox Street 5.0 1 0 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands locations limit future development -- --- - - _-- -----_.-__ NW-9 06-117-23 23 0021 xxx North Arm�ane 4.9 0 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Outlot in Conservation Easement _ NW-48 03-117-23 24 0011 325 Brown Road South 4.9 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min - -- _._ ._ __ __ WC-110 04-117-23 41 0012 505 Willow Drive South 4.8 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min --._------ -------- WC-165 07-117-23 22 0017 4735 West Branch Road 4.8 0 2 No RR-18 2-ac min _ _ NW-45 27-118-23 31 0025 2085 Sixth Avenue North 4.7 1 1 Yes RR-1B 2-ac min NE-75 36-118-23 32 0008 380 RuAnn Road 4.7 1 0 No RR-1B 2-ac min EC-80 02-117-23 24 0002 320 Orono Orchard Road S 4.7 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min --- EC-92 03-117-23 42 0009 1820 Fox Street 4.7 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography and existing improvements limit further developability ---- NW-26 32-118-23 42 0006 350 Stubbs Bay Road North 4.6 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-47 03-117-23 22 0015 2325 Watertown Road 4.6 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _- __ ____ ------- --_ NW-34 33-118-23 31 0005 285 Old Crystal Bay Road N 4.5 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-51 35-118-23 43 0024 1200 Lyman Avenue 4.5 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-58 26-118-23 32 0008 1480 Sixth Avenue North 4.3 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-43 28-118-23 41 0002 1125 Willow Drive North 42 1 1 No RR-16 2-ac min NE-59 26-118-23 32 0017 1550 Sixth Avenue North 4.2 1 0 No RR-1B 2-ac min Wetland location makes subdivision unlikely EC-85 02-117-23 32 0003 1540 Fox Street 4.1 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min WC-105 03-117-23 31 0005 2180 Fox Slreet 4.1 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min - __. . NW-21 OS-117-23 12 0017 3415 High Lane 4.0 1 0 No RR-18 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands _ __ __ __ _ NW-30 28-118-23 33 0008 3065 Jamestown Road 4.0 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min EC-88 02-117-23 23 0008 xxxx Fox Street 4.0 0 1 No RR-18 2-ac min WeUands,slopes are limiting factors __ EC-102 10-117-23 12 0004 940 Brown Road South 4.0 1 0 Yes RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes are limiting EC-103 10-117-23 13 0001 1000 Brown Road South 4.0 1 0 Yes RR-1B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes,configuration of buildable land are limiting WC-107 03-117-23 32 0015 2340 Fox Street 4.0 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min WC-112 04-117-23 42 0010 2620 Fox Street 4.0 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min WC-115 09-117-23 12 0002 840 Old Crystal Bay Road S 4.0 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min WC-111 04-117-23 41 0011 2410 Fox Street 3.8 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetland reduces acreage to below 4.0 acres 1414.7 158 557 � � - ,� �_ City of Orono-Septembe�2009 Residential Parcels that a�e Furthei Developable under Planned Zoning 6 Guideplan 2008-2030-Sorted by MUSA vs Non-MUSA r� M Potential Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments NW-31 33-118-23 23 0002 3025 Wayzata Boulevard 33.0 1 130 Yes RR-16 2-ac min Guided for 2.0-4.0 units/acre SFR/MFR Mix-Rezoning will occur upon development EC-84 02-117-23 32 0001 485 Orono Orchard Road S 19.5 3 0 Yes RR-18 2-ac min Covenants limit property to 3 residences NW-32 33-118-23 24 0001/2/3 5xx Old Crystal Bay Road N 17.0 0 68 Yes RR-18 2-ac min Guided for 2.0-4.0 units/acre SFR/MFR Mix-Rezoning will occur upon development WC-118 09-117-23 41 0009 23xx North Shore Drive 8.0 0 3 Yes RR-1B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor WC-116 09-117-23 14 0001 1100 Old Crystal Bay Road S 7.0 1 2 Yes RR-18 2-ac min ____ WC-117 09-117-23 14 0007 1130 Old Crystal Bay Road S 6.8 1 2 Yes RR-18 2-ac min NW-46 27-118-23 34 0006 809 Brown Road North 5.6 1 1 Yes RR-18 2-ac min ----__ _ _ - W C-114 04-117-23 44 0004 2601 Rainey Road 5.6 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-45 27-118-23 31 0025 2085 Sixth Avenue North 4.7 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-102 10-117-23 12 0004 940 Brown Road South 4.0 1 0 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes are limiting ___ EC-103 10-117-23 13 0001 1000 Brown Road South 4.0 1 0 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes,configuralion of buildable land are limiling _ _ _--- _ WC-115 09-117-23 12 0002 840 Old Crystal Bay Road S 4.0 1 1 Yes RR-1 B 2-ac min Currently is institutionally used as Hennepin County Public Works truck station-guided NAV-174 17-117-23 33 0151 3880 Shoreline Drive 6.7 0 13 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min and zoned for SFR at a density of 2 units per acre NAV-171 17-117-23 34 0002 3700 NoRhem Avenue 3.5 1 5 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min ._ _ - -___ _ WC-167 17-117-23 22 0040 1635 Concordia Street 3.2 1 4 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min WC-168 17-117-23 22 0013 1645 Shad . . _ _--- - _ ywood Road 2.4 1 3 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min NAV-177 20-117-23 34 0008 3129 Casco Circle 2.1 1 2 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min - --- -- -- __ __ - ---- ------- NAV-176 20-117-23 21 0034 2590 Casco Point Road 1.9 1 0 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min Estate property-site layout makes further subdivision difficult _ _ _ _ __ _ _ - ------ --- - -- -- - --- -- ---- __ NAV-172 17-117-23 34 0014 3635 Togo Road 1.6 1 2 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min - NAV-170 17-117-23 31 0023 3740 Togo Road 1.5 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min Wetland on site is limiting factor NAV-175 20-117-23 21 0037 2480 Casco Point Road 1.4 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min - ___ NAV-169 17-117-23 31 0022 3760 Togo Road 1.3 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min Wetland on adjacent property and lot width are limiting _ - -- _ __. _ - - - _ - - _ ___- NAV-173 17-117-23 43 0135 2195 Shadywood Road 1.1 1 1 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min __ __ _ _ _ _`--- - _ _ --- - W C-166 07-117-23 24 0043 1131 W ildhurst Trail 6.8 1 3 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Steep slopes are limiting _ _ __ __ W C-155 OS-117-23 32 0004 550 Tonkawa Road 6.6 1 1 Yes LR-t B 1-ac min Estate layout,steep slopes are limiting factors _ _. . WC-160 06-117-23 41 0088 425 Tonkawa Road 4.7 1 2 Yes LR-18 1-ac min - ---------- W C-126 08-117-23 44 0023 1535 Bohns Point Road 4.5 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up W C-161 06-117-23 44 0016 800 North Arm Drive 4.2 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min ----------- ------- WC-158 OS-117-23 32 0002 460 Tonkawa Road 4.0 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min WC-128 09-117-23 32 0002 3017 North Shore Drive 3.6 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min __------------ WC-148 08-117-23 21 0014 955 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min WC-152 08-117-23 21 0001 801 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min WC-157 OS-117-23 32 0003 500 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate layout,steep slopes are limiting(actors NAV-182 21-117-23 23 0051 2710 Pence Lane 3.4 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min WC-159 OS-117-23 32 0001 420 Tonkawa Road 3.3 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min -----_---....__. _.- WC-127 09-117-23 33 0003 1420 Bohns Point Road 3.1 1 0 Yes LR-18 1-ac min Estale parcel will be difficult to split up WC-129 09-117-23 32 0003 3020 North Shore Drive 3.1 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min NAV-179 20-117-23 14 0026 2625 Kelly Avenue 3.0 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting - ------- - - NAV-180 20-117-23 14 0025 2655 Kelly Avenue 3.0 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting W C-124 16-117-23 22 0006 1725 Bohns Point Road 2.9 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult lo split up WC-143 08-117-23 12 0003 960 Tonkawa Road 2.7 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min _-- ----------- WC-149 OS-117-23 21 0013 935 Tonkawa Road 2.7 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min _ _ _ - -- - - ---- --- -- W C-156 05-117-23 32 0005 520 Tonkawa Road 2.6 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Si�e layout,steep slopes,wetland are limiting factors NAV-183 21-117-23 21 0007 2605 West Lafayette Road 2.5 1 1 Yes LR-t B 1-ac min WC-163 07-117-23 14 0015 1067 Linden Lane 2.4 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min WC-146 OS-117-23 21 0016 985 Tonkawa Road 2.3 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Lot shape and wetland are limitin ' #Potential , Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA 7 Zoning District Comments W C-151 08-117-23 21 0019 895 Tonkawa Road 2.3 0 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min W C-147 OS-117-23 21 0015 975 Tonkawa Road 22 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Lot shape is limiting factor _ _ _ - __- -- ------------- WC-153 OS-117-23 33 0003 755 Tonkawa Road 22 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min _-- W C-154 05-117-23 33 0017 640 Tonkawa Road 22 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min NAV-178 20-117-23 11 0022 2525 Kelly Avenue 2.2 1 � 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting - _ - __ _ - -- __ _ ----- --- NAV-181 21-117-23 22 0018 2505 Old Beach Road 22 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min _ --- - . _- - - ---- W C-125 08-117-23 44 0024 1595 Bohns Point Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Estale parcel will be difficult to split up _._ _ - ----- -- --- WC-142 OS-117-23 34 0011 835 Partenwood Road 2.1 1 ' 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min _ _ --- W C-145 08-117-23 13 0013 1040 Tonkawa Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Lot shape is limiting factor ___ - WC-150 08-117-23 21 0020 915 Tonkawa Road 2.1 0 2 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min WC-162 08-117-23 23 0001 3980 Dahl Road 2.1 1 0 Yes LR-18 1-ac min Slopes,house location are limiting factors WC-144 OS-117-23 12 0001 980 Tonkawa Road 2.0 1 0 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min Lot shape is limiting factor , _-- - -- WC-121 10-117-23 33 0005 2265 North Shore Drive 26.5 2 8 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ , --- _ 09-117-23 21 0004& 09-117-23 21 0005& WG130 09-117-23 21 0001 825 Old Crystal Bay Road S 25.0 2 8 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min __ - _ EC-101 10-117-23 14 0014 1700 Shoreline drive 23.0 3 5 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore - - - WC-120 10-117-23 33 0006 2285 North Shore Drive 19.0 0 7 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min __ . _ _ _ ___ NE-57 26-118-23 33 0029 1485 Sixth Avenue North 14.5 1 3 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Topography and wetlands are limiting factors EC-99 11-117-23 32 0020 1400 Bracketts Point Road 12.5 2 3 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore,estate setting make development unlikely EC-100 10-117-23 14 0015 1100 Miliston Road 10.0 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Lakeshore - - --- _ ------- WC-119 15-117-23 22 0001 2165 North Shore Drive 9.8 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Wetlands,lakeshore,site configuration are limiting factors WC-131 04-117-23 34 0007 2905 Fox Street 9.0 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ -- - __. _ --- _ NE-55 26-118-23 34 0008 1295 Sixth Avenue North 8.7 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min The 2 possible additional sites are separated by wetland -- __. _ - - -- --- WC-133 04-117-23 33 0010 3175 Fox Street 8.1 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min - ---- r -- _ NE-56 26-118-23 34 0004 1305 Sixth Avenue North 7J 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Topography is a limiting factor - - __ __- -- WC-138 �OS-117-23 44 0008 3350 Fox Street 72 1 2 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min _ _ - EC-98 02-117-23 33 0010 1410 Shoreline Drive 7.0 1 0 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min Lakeshore,steep slopes,lot configuration are limiting ___ ____ - - ------- WC-132 04-117-23 33 0011 3125 Fox Street 7.0 1 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min NE-62 26-118-23 43 0006 1135 Spring Hill Road 5.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ _______ _ WC-139 OS-117-23 43 0005 3400 Fox Sireet 5.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ --- _ WC-135 OS-117-23 44 0012 3250 Fox Street 5.3 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min _ __ _ _ - ------ - WC-136 05-117-23 44 0011 3280 Fox Street SA 0 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min � __ -- - __ - __ -- -�---- NE 64 26-118-23 43 0005 1025 Spring Hill Road 4 8 1 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min - _ _ _ _ _ __ - - - _ -------- ---- -- NE-54 26-118-23 34 0007 1245 Sixth Avenue North 4.7 1 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min _ -- __ -_-- ___ _ NE-63 26-118-23 43 0004 1125 Spring Hill Road 4.7 1 1 Yes LR-tA 2-ac min _ -- -- WC-140 OS-117-23 44 0007 3345 Fox Slreet 4.7 0 2 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min -- _._ __ -- - WC-123 09-117-23 44 0003 2425 North Shore Drive 4.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Wetlands,lot configuration will make a second lot difficult WC-137 OS-117-23 44 0003 3300 Fox Street 4.5 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min NE-52 35-118-23 14 0002 550 East Long Lake Road 4.1 1 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Topography will likely preclude a second building site __ _ - -- - ------ WC-134 OS-117-23 44 0013 3200 Fox Street 4.1 0 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min Topography,lot shape are limiting factors __ _. WC-141 -05-117-23 44 0006 3295 Fox Street 4.0 0 2 Yas LR-1A 2-ac min - __ __ _ _ WC-122 10-117-23 33 0001 2385 North Shore Drive 3.8 0 1 Yes LR-1A 2-ac min 'Wetlands are a limiting factor - __ NE-77 25-118-23 41 0001 300 Sixth Avenue North 75.0 1 30 No RR-t B 2-ac min Largest single undeveloped parcel remaining-Ciry hoping for perm.Cons.Easemt. _ - NW-25 32-118-23 42 0003 200 Stubbs Bay Road NoRh 19.0 1 7 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Steep slopes will limit development NE-76 36-118-23 31 0017 375 Wakefield Road 19.0 1 7 No RR-1B 2-ac min _ -- NE-65 25-118-23 32 0003 700 Sixth Avenue North 17.0 1 6 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-15 06-117-23 12 0007 4355 Bayside Road 15.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes&wetlands NW-14 06-117-23 12 0008 4375 Ba side Road 14.5 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited b stee slo es&wetlands . #Potential Net #of Existing Additional � Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments NW-24 32-118-23 43 0013 xxxx Watertown Road 14.3 0 6 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Preliminary Plat Approved Feb 2006-6 Lots Total-Has not progressed to Final NW-27 32-118-23 14 0002 3245 Wayzata Boulevard 13.0 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min 8 acres is sanitary landfill;remaining 5 acres may have 1-2 homesites... NW-29 28-118-23 31 0001 2940 Sixth Avenue North 13.0 1 5 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Preliminary Plat Approved January 2008 6 Lots Total EC-91 03-117-23 41 0003 1700 Fox Street 12.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,topography,existing building locations are limiting factors NW-8 06-117-23 22 0018 xxxx Bayside Road 12.0 0 5 No RR-1 B 2-ac min 33-118-23110001 & NW-28 33-118-23 22 0001 3200-3220 Wayzata Blvd 12 0 1 4 No RR-18 2-ac min Potential high-end lakeshore homesites NE-50 34-118-23 44 0035 135 Orono Orchard Road N 12.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes and protected iributary impact fuWre development EC-95 03-117-23 13 0003 xxx Brown Road South 12.0 0 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Locating septic sdes will be challenging due to topography W C-106 03-117-23 23 0014 400 W illow Drive South 112 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-42 28-118-23 42 0002 2700 Sixth Avenue North 11.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EG89 03-117-23 14 0001 xxxx Fox Street 11.0 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting factors NE-60 26-118-23 31 0002 xxxx Tamarack Drive 10.5 0 4 No RR-1B 2-ac min EC-83 02-117-23 23 0006 387 Orono Orchard Road S 10.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes,house location limit future development EC-82 02-117-23 31 0047 450 Orono Orchard Road S 10.2 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-38 33-118-23 33 0001 3020 Wateriown Road 10.0 1 3 No RR-1B 2-ac min EC-87 02-117-23 32 0006 1560 Fox Street 10.0 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes,house location,parcel shape are limiting factors NW-37 33-118-23 34 0001 185 Old Crystal Bay Road N 9.8 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Current site of house-moving business NW-11 06-117-23 21 0005 4565 Bayside Road 9.5 1 3 No RR-16 2-ac min EG86 03-117-23 31 0004 1620 Fox Street 9.5 0 3 No RR-16 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor NW-10 06-117-23 24 0001 215 Norih Arm Lane 9.0 1 3 No RR-t B 2-ac min NW-13 06-117-23 21 0002 4455 Bayside Road 9.0 1 1 No RR-t B 2-ac min Additional development limited due to ropography NW-20 05-117-23 12 0022 60 Stubbs Bay Road South 9.0 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-74 36-118-23 21 0004 749 Spring Hill Road 8.5 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-79 02-117-23 13 0006 315 Woodhill Road 8.5 2 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Estate parcel will be difficult to split up EC-97 03-117-23 11 0001 xxx Orono Orchard Road S 8.0 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes,access will be issues for development NW-35 33-118-23 31 0011 265 Ofd Crystal Bay Road N 7.8 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min WC-164 07-117-23 21 0002 1003 Wildhurst Trail 7.8 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Steep slopes,wetlands are limiting NW-12 06-117-23 21 0003 4485 Bayside Road 7.6 1 2 No RR-18 2-ac min NW-22 05-117-23 11 0002 3405 High Lane 7.4 1 2 No RR-18 2-ac min NW-41 04-117-23 14 0003 405 Wiilow Drive South 7.0 1 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min NW-44 27-118-23 32 0002 2300 Sixth Avenue North 7.0 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-69 25-118-23 34 0003 445 Spring Hill Road 7.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography may be limiting factor EC-94 03-117-23 42 0015 1880 Fox Street 7.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands locations limit future development 32-118-23 44 0002 8 NW-23 32-118-23 44 0003 3280 Watertown Road 6.5 1 2 No RR-18 2-ac min NW-40 04-117-23 31 0001 425 Old Crystal Bay Road S 6.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-61 26-118-23 41 0007 1150 Wyndmere Road 6.5 1 1 No RR-16 2-ac min NE-66 25-118-23 32 0002 xxx Sixth Avenue North 6.5 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting factors EC-78 02-117-23 13 0007 xxx Woodhill Road 6.5 0 0 No RR-16 2-ac min Part of Woodhill CC-steep slopes throughout parcel is limitiny factor WC-104 03-117-23 31 0001 445 Brown Road South 6.5 1 0 No RR-18 2-ac min WeUands,protected tributary,closed landfill are limiting factors NW-33 33-118-23 32 0005 375 Old Crystal Bay Road N 6.4 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min City-owned open space-encumbered by MnDOT stormwater pond easement NE-72 36-118-23 21 0005 761 Spring Hill Road 6.4 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-68 25-118-23 34 0002 465 Spring Hill Road 62 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography may be limiting factor WC-108 04-117-23 14 0003 405 Willow Drive South 6.2 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor NE-73 36-118-23 21 0003 745 Spring Hill Road 6.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-81 02-117-23 24 0006 360 Orono Orchard Road S 6.0 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min Residence centered on lot limits developability NW-39 04-117-23 21 0004 85 Old Crystal Bay Road S 5.8 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-70 36-118-23 22 0003 755 Sprin Hill Road 5.8 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topo raphy and wetlands are limitin factors . . #Potential Net #of Existing Additional ' Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments EC-90 03-117-23 41 0005 xxxx Fox Street 5.8 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting factors WC-109 04-117-23 41 0005 2420 Fox Street 5.7 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min WC-113 04-t 17-23 42 0023 540 Old Crystal Bay Road S 5.3 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-36 33-118-23 31 0007 225 Old Crystal Bay Road N 5.2 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-96 03-117-23 13 0001 350 Brown Road South 5.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-93 03-117-23 42 0016 1860 Fox Street 5.0 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands locations limit future development NW-9 06-117-23 23 0021 xxx North Arm Lane 4.9 0 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Outlot in Conservation Easement NW-48 03-117-23 24 0011 325 Brown Road South 4.9 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min WG110 04-117-23 41 0012 505 W illow Drive South 4.8 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min WG165 07-117-23 22 0017 4735 West Branch Road 4.8 0 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min NE-75 36-118-23 32 0008 380 RuAnn Road 4.7 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-80 02-117-23 24 0002 320 Orono Orchard Road S 4.7 1 1 No RR-t B 2-ac min EC-92 03-177-23 42 0009 1820 Fox Street 4.7 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography and existing improvements limit further developabiliry NW-26 32-118-23 42 0006 350 Stubbs Bay Road North 4.6 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-47 03-117-23 22 0015 2325 Watertown Road 4.6 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-34 33-118-23 31 0005 285 Old Crystal Bay Road N 4.5 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-51 35-118-23 43 0024 1200 Lyman Avenue 4.5 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-58 26-118-23 32 0008 1480 Sixth Avenue North 4.3 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-43 28-118-2341 0002 1125 Willow Drive North 42 1 1 No RR-1B 2-ac min NE-59 26-11&23 32 0017 1550 Sixth Avenue North 4.2 1 0 No RR-16 2-ac min Wetland location makes subdivision unlikely EC-85 02-117-23 32 0003 1540 Fox Street 4.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min WC-105 03-117-23 31 0005 2180 Fox Street 4.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-21 OS-117-23 12 0017 3415 High Lane 4.0 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes&wetlands NW-30 28-118-23 33 0008 3065 Jamestown Road 4.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-88 02-117-23 23 0008 xxxx Fox Street 4.0 0 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes are limiting factors WC-107 03-117-23 32 0015 2340 Fox Street 4.0 1 1 No RR-16 2-ac min WC-112 04-117-23 42 0010 2620 Fox Street 4.0 1 1 No RR-16 2-ac min WC-111 04-117-23 41 0011 2410 Fox Street 3.8 1 0 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetland reduces acreage to below 4.0 acres NW-3 32-118-23 31 0005 3760 Watertown Road 27.5 1 0 No RR-1A 5-ac min Land Trust Covenants believed to allow no additional development of property NW-4 32-118-23 32 0005 3850 Watertown Road 18.5 1 2 No RR-1A 5-ac min NW-5 32-118-23 33 0004 3855 Watertown Road 18.5 1 0 No RR-1A 5-ac min Land Trust Covenants believed to allow no additional development of property NW-2 32-118-23 23 0009 460 Orchard Park Road 16.0 1 2 No RR-1A 5-ac min Wetland location may make it infeasible to get 2nd additionai homesite NW-7 06-117-23 11 0003 4246 Bayside Road 15.5 0 3 No RR-1A 5-ac min NW-6 32-118-23 33 0006 3925 Watertown Road 10.5 1 1 No RR-1A 5-ac min NW-1 31-118-23 13 0013 4300 Watertown Road 10.2 1 1 No RR-1A 5-ac min NE-53 35-118-23 14 0008 900 Old Long Lake Road 25 0 1 6 No LR-1A 2-ac min Topography&wetlands are limiting;likely lo become a part of Wood Rill SNA NE-49 34-118-23 12 0007 690 Brown Road North 17.0 1 6 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future developmenl limited by wetlands;high-end lakeshore property 06-117-23 14 0027& NW-19 06-117-23 41 0107 405 Tonkawa Road 10.0 0 3 No LR-1A 2-ac min NE-71 36-118-23 22 0002 765 Spring Hill Road 8.5 1 1 No LR-1A 2-ac min Topography and weUands are limiting factors NW-17 06-117-23 13 0003 xxxx Bayside Road 7.5 0 1 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands NW-16 06-117-23 13 0001 4245 Bayside Road 6.5 1 0 No LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands NW-18 06-117-23 14 0022 4045 Bayside Road 52 1 0 No LR-tA 2-ac min Future development limited due to steep slopes NE-67 25-118-23 33 0003 625 Spring Hill Road 4.3 1 1 No LR-tA 2-ac min 1414.7 158 557 � « . . � �����m���Z m m��m���m�Z�D �����m��m��Cmic�m Z�n� �Z a ����� ���� c�� ��� ���� ����� �� �� , �� , � ��.� �N���A.W A��A���N� � � � �� � ����� � � p��V W��� ..a� 2 N U� A W m W N(J� .�'A W W W ��U��� � �W�W �W W� p N N�W .N N Oo CI� -+ A V W �. O'.O O](l�tD A Cli�p V�N Ol OD N W -`(O O O � 3 A p.�.(O.N�N.Ui.m.Ut.(O'.�l..OJ.O1.m U��.(T CI�.CI�..m.A.V.(T.V .(O��.A.tD..U�m�t0 A�A V1�0�m(iWJ O O(�O(O(D O'W�d V�l�I�I V 00 V�l V�N W�I�l OJ�1 V V W�I N�I �I �J�I�l V V OD V V W V V V�l���I�l�l�l�I�I W W * ` N N���N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N'.N'�N N N N�N N N N N N N N N N N 0 �F� W W W W W W W W W W W(J W W W W W(J W(J W W W W W W W W W W'�.W�,W.W.W W.W W W W W W W W W W W W����A�A� A A A j A W j A A A A A A A W W W �N W�A W A�W'W'.W'�N��W W N W�N N N W N� � � W N N A.A A A A.A W A A W A A w W A A N W A A W A A A�W A�A��N�A.N W'A�,W A W W� O O O O O O O O O O O�O O�O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O'O O'O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O�O O'�O�O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � O O O O O O O N O O OJ'�O�.O O O O O O(n O A O O O O O O O N N O O�O O O O�O�� � � �N N QJ W N Ql W W(T A V W V�(7��',�N��U�m A OJ A � V W ��W A(O O�V-+U�O tD m A-�G1 A(!����N O N �� �Q � W N�P OD W W V�W(J N N��A W-+W W W�N W(li W �i j��W��N��.W��N.N.� ���(T N -+O� N W D W 1 W.��A N N(P O W A O-�N N W O N N A�m O V�N � W W W�',�N(O, � A A X N V N N O p_ N �w W���O O(O�O�O O O N Oo N A(T A N W U�O W O(p O N W�W�N O Cti O%��I IDiO��O O N X �p(P m N a �I cn.�0cno�m�,Z.o.cn��cncncn�cncn000cn � .�o o �cnoocn�x cncn�cn�cnoocn'.�cno� cncn � fD o° a o x m }��o o�'x�x° o�o o'o�m° F� a��o a o x o o x o o�m.x Q o s a o�N � a � oxi n x r �x � � �s m.x j x x x j..> > m � a x x �� x �x 3 v, n s C�3 0 (� � C1 N N�y ��o D��y� y� �� �������������� ?. �,z,c�.,z�DC/�ND��� m D� N�.w (/�°� �D �,O s � m m� � m �� 2� m 2 m m�m =A o � �w��,v', 'm w m � �m `m tD � u, m ��m' d �w y�.p o �1 cR �? m o = �7� _m <? <? -� d � �.m m .o [� m o �7 0 0 o . .r O^ � -� o -w n o O ��',.-ii'. m .� �. .� o .9� a m �C m v �', ,� m � �7� m Z1 �7 a Z w ���p�. W. m�.m m 'm m o.� �m .�m m � Rl �a,�� . .�p <' � o a o 0 o a<� d�.��� m I0. .D�a9� � ���� O Vl m Z m Z m w m .,� � ,� Z���� Z, .Z m m � �. .�1. � �7�. <o no a a 3 0�<, o. ��<' o �.< � << w u°� �D � �� . � o o �m .J m, 'o�!�,m,m � m a fD a a � . � a a � a. ,a� n �. � � Vi � � � � . , . � . � �. Z (n ' � a . . . �, . �. � Q � . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . , , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . � ' � p � W',A�A A�.A,A A�A A A A A A A A(T Cli(l�Cli U�Cl�O�Ol O)m'�I.�I V�V OD��OD OD I t0 i..tD'I O N A�V',c0 W CNJ� �W!p Z "'� = Ou'�O O O'.-���.N CT(T��.V�l�I�I�J W O W Cl�(T�m m V OJ O>�O O N�I O�'�..�I V i O'i N O Cn Cli�,O'..O'O O N O� ^ � � . � . . , �. . . � CI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �. , . �. , . . . . . . . - -- . , . .. _. : . �. . . . . . , , Q n # Z � _ °, O fii o m p��O.O� � � � � .� ��O�O� � ��� �O �I�'I� � ',�'.Oi�� �.�� N-�O O W N N � 3 % � �, . .. . i �I � . ' '�. lD N Q � N ^' � � �'. '�. '� " � � , , � � . . . . . , . , � ��. .. . . . . � .. . . ; i . i . . _ . I . �,i , . . .. � d . I� �. . . . , . . , � � � D _ ' �o a ° � C ��N��IV� ����-+N N�.N'.-���.�.-�����i��lW N W N'�NIN��iW�N N N N N W W�V U�OD W W 3 . �p �.. , . � i, , � O� O w Q � ' � � '� I y o�i ti Q ? . . .. � . - n: fD 3 7 O ��{{�-«�-<-<-<{-�{{�{-(-«j�{ .�-��j j�{{{{-<-<j-�{{�� {{y = � m m N m N m m m m N � N m m m m m m N m m m m m m m m m m m m �o � N m N N m m ro m � N f� N f/+ f/� N N N N fA N N N l/i fl� N (/1 Vl (/� !!i N U• N N N f/i N N th f/� t/� N D � rr�7rrrrrrZ7rrrrrrrrr��7rr �7�.r�rArr�7rrrrrrr�7rrr rZ7N � � �7�7�7�0�7�1T7�1?J,�T1Z1T1��7�1T1�1TJZ7Z7�1�7 �.,Z1���1,TIAZI�0�1.17?7T]�OT1ZjZ7�1�1 ,17,�7� � � D�,[o W D D D Co D�.D�D D w D D D D D D�o m Co n a7[n D Qo D D��D A.D�D D.D D¢�D D D D p>> y a' m N�N N N N ��N�N N N�N�N�N N N N N N N�� N�N N N N N N N N N NIN N N�N N N N N O � 6l N p� 61 N Ol Ol N 91 p�.N N 6l N N N�.61�N�N�N N 61 N p� tU N p� N N p� 61 N�Gt 61 N N N p��.N N 0I '�0I�p� y v 0 0 � o 0 0 0 0 0 � o 0 0 0 0 0��,0�,0�0 � � o � o 0 0 � o o � o n o 0 0 0 0 � o�n o �n n�� f=D 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3'�3�3'�3�'3.3�.3 � 3 3 � 3 � 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3.3 w > > 5-> > > 5>>�5� > > >>>>'>>>j 5��,9�,3 �> > � S� 9 ��S � S S > >�S 9�> >� �� �9� p N � � 1 .�.�. . . . - -�--. . .. - -._ .m.� � �_�: . . .�. .�, .r.r.�.� r. . .�-� � GI �, , �� �' II � a i � o � � � ��o Q � Q 3 = ] n n�'�d y � ���.� ' I� ' �' '�, . . �'�m� o � y o� a° °o o ° o� � Q 0l ,�,� I I� II II �II ', .���n V' f�D ��G� N. N � ��G N � IV� � N � - � � � � .-. O ' U1 .�p Q � (D � .� I ' � I ' � f/i. F N d O O (� 0 3, , �F �. . � i i I � ��� 'm ' m'3. .Q' o � �o o � �� - D� <o, � 'I � � y d � 3. 3.� c �p m.� > > ln � ' v�o ^'' � �... I ��i i I �°i °' �� ,'o � m "' �.n y . m i Qa a`< � � �.� � � �� I �' j '' �, y � c n o m o 3 w � � '� � 3 a f, � I� � I �i �m m.a $ � y � F� � � C C c; m j i � m .� � m m � �t T (A 4 �°' I �p �'� m F � � �� ' . 3 w 2 � '��, m. .m��' < ��3 3 n� n'p ��. � �, '. ��� j '� � �. � C j �,, � ��.. p��. (D It�,T, , T � Q) g'� °1 � I � I , i I � �. � � m �� ��°�m�� . � N � m Q m�, � ' , ' : I �� ��'v. � ' d °� 3 � � � Z 1v S o I �' i I i o c� � i ' a fD ? N x x O O 3. O n a �� '�� I I ��� 'N � ��� '� �� '� `<� � m � � 00 £ � o �, II i � i, . . � ^ '.. I �II ,�, �c o o N a i I i �c , i � m > > I C W m � i i � I I a' o' i`, i� � � 0 - i '� � I ,, � N f f n * i , il'�, I � � ii * 0 0', I i o � � ' ' i I � � i � � � N � � c c ''� I I� �� . . . . ' . � ^ , . . i '��� '�. c c I �, I I I I � ., I �, � i I I� � � I i �I ;I I i ; o 0 I I ' i '. �. � � . � N � . I > > n n I �I � I i i I ' I m m I � � �I ''I I I� I j II I I I ! o. I i I �I ', �I c`p� m. 0 0 �� i , I 'I I � � i �i � i i I � �� �� a �. � ' � , i , ' I� I� ! i , lill � i ' '� III � m � I i i ^ � , . a�, . . , � . . m . a. � . �. , . , �. I � . #Potential . Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments W C-128 09-117-23 32 0002 3017 North Shore Drive 3.6 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min _ _.----- ------------- - --- NAV-171 17-117-23 34 0002 3700 Northern Avenue 3.5 1 5 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min -------------- NAV-182 21-117-23 23 0051 2710 Pence Lane 3.4 1 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min -- - ----- WC-148 OS-117-23210014 955TonkawaRoad 3.4 1 2 Yes LR-1B 1-acmin ------ --- -- --- _ _ _ WG152 OS-117-2321 0001 801 Tonkawa Road 3.4 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min __ _ _ ------------ W C-159 OS-117-23 32 0001 420 Tonkawa Road 3.3 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min _ _ ---- WC-167 17-117-23 22 0040 1635 Concordia Street 3.2 1 4 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min _------------ -_ - WC-129 09-117-23 32 0003 3020 NoRh Shore Drive 3.1 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min - ---- -- ---- - - NAV-179 20-117-23 14 0026 2625 Kelly Avenue 3.0 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting ------ --- - NAV-180 20-117-23 14 0025 2655 Kelly Avenue 3.0 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min Topography,wetland,lakeshore are limiting ____ __ __------- WC-143 08-117-23 12 0003 960 Tonkawa Road 2.7 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min ---- - -------- WC-149 08-117-23210013 935TonkawaRoad 2.7 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-acmin - __ _ _ _---- -- _ . __. _ _ NAV-183 21-1 t 7-23 21 0007 2605 West Lafayette Road 2.5 1 1 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min -- -- _ ----- -- ------ ------ WG168 17-117-23 22 0013 1645 Shadywood Road 2.4 1 3 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min , _------ -- -- ---- --- -- ___ - WC-163 07-117-23 14 0015 1067 Linden Lane 2.4 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min _ -- - -- _._ _ ----------- W C-151 A8-117-23 21 0019 895 Tonkawa Road 2.3 0 T 2 Yes LR-1 B 1-ac min -- - ---------- NAV-181 21-117-23 22 0018 2505 01d Beach Road 2.2 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min _ -- _ - - - - - --------------- __._.---- - WC-153 05-117-23 33 0003 755 Tonkawa Road 2.2 1 1 Yes LR-16 1-ac min _ _ _ WC-154 '05-117-23 33 0017 640 Tonkawa Road 2.2 1 1 Yes LR-1B 1-ac min _ _ - ---- NAV-177 20-117-23 34 0008 3129 Casco Circle 2.1 1 2 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min __ _ __ _------- WC-150 08-117-23 21 0020 915 Tonkawa Road 2.1 0 2 Yes LR-18 1-ac min _ _ _ ---- WC-142 OS-117-23 34 0011 835 Partenwood Road 2.1 1 1 Yes LR-18 1-ac min --- - - -- NAV-172 17-117-23 34 0014 3635 Togo Road 1.6 1 2 Yes LR-1 C 0.5-ac min - -- ----- --- _ _ . __ __ NAV-170 17-117-23 31 0023 3740 Togo Road 1.5 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min Wetland on site is limiting factor ----- -- _ _ -- - - _ NAV-t75 20-117-23 21 0037 2480 Casco Point Road 1.4 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min _ _- ---- NAV-169 17-117-23 31 0022 3760 Togo Road 1.3 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min Wetland on adjacent property and lot width are limiting __ NAV-173 17-117-23430135 2195 Shadywood Road 1.1 1 1 Yes LR-1C 0.5-ac min - _ _ Subtr 445.6 64 340 NE-77 25-118-23 41 0001 300 Sixth Avenue North 75.0 1 30 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Largest single undeveloped parcel remaining-City hoping for perm.Cons.Easemt. NE-53 35-118-23 14 0008 900 Old Long Lake Road 25.0 1 6 No LR-1A 2-ac min Topography 8 wetlands are limiting;Iikeiy to become a paR of Wood Rill SNA NE-76 36-118-23 31 0017 375 Wakefield Road 19.0 1 7 No RR-1B 2-ac min NW-25 32-118-23 42 0003 200 Stubbs Bay Road North 19.0 1 7 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Steep slopes will limit development NW-4 32-118-23 32 0005 3850 WateRown Road 18.5 1 2 No RR-1A 5-ac min _ __ --- NE-49 34-118-23 12 0007 690 Brown Road North 17A 1 � 6 No LR-1A 2-ac min FuWre development limited by wetlands;high-end lakeshore propeRy _ __ NE-65 25-118-23 32 0003 700 Sixth Avenue North 17 0 ' 1 6 No RR-t B 2-ac min NW-2 �32-118-23 23 0009 460 Orchard Park Road 16.0 1 2 No RR-1A 5-ac min Wetland location may make it infeasible to get 2nd additional homesite - --- _ NW-7 06-117-23 11 0003 4246 Bayside Road 15.5 0 3 No RR-1A 5-ac min _ - - - NW-15 06-117-23 12 0007 4355 Bayside Road 15.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands NW-14 06-117-23 12 0008 4375 Bayside Road 14.5 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands NW-24 32-118-23 43 0013 xxxx W atertown Road 14.3 0 6 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Preliminary Plat Approved Feb 2006-6 Lots Total-Has not progressed to Final NW-29 28-118-23 31 0001 2940 Sixth Avenue North 13.0 1 5 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Preliminary Plat Approved January 2008 6 Lots Total NW-27 32-118-23 14 0002 3245 Wayzata Boulevard 13.0 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min 8 acres is sanitary landfill;remaining 5 acres may have 1-2 homesites... - - - _ - EC-91 03-117-23 41 0003 1700 Fox Street 12.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands,topography,existing building locations are limiting faclors - _- _ NW-8 06-117-23 22 0018 xxxx Bayside Road 12.0 0 5 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-95 03-117-23 13 0003 xxx Brown Road South 12.0 0 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Locating septic sites will be challenging due to topography NE-50 34-118-23 44 0035 135 Orono Orchard Road N 12.0 1 4 No RR-t B 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes and prolected tributary impacl future development 33-118-23110001 & . NW-28 33-118-23 22 0001 3200-3220 Wa ata Blvd 12.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Potential hi h-end lakeshore homesites • #Potential . Net #of Existing Additional Map Number Parcel ID Address Acreage Homes Homes MUSA? Zoning District Comments W C-106 03-117-23 23 0014 400 Willow Drive South 112 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ _-__ _ ---._ NW-42 28-118-23 42 0002 2700 Sixth Avenue North 11.0 1 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-89 03-117-23 14 0001 xxxx Fox Street 11.0 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting faclors NE-60 26-118-23 31 0002 xxxx Tamarack Drive 10.5 0 4 No RR-1 B 2-ac min EC-83 02-117-23 23 0006 387 Orono Orchard Road S 10.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min W etlands,slopes,house location limit future development NW-6 32-118-23 330006 3925 Watertown Road 10.5 1 1 No RR-1A 5-ac min EC-82 02-117-23 31 0047 450 Orono Orchard Road S 10.2 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-1 31-118-23 13 0013 4300 Watertown Road 10.2 1 1 No RR-tA 5-ac min 06-117-23 14 0027 8 . NW-19 06-117-23 41 0107 405 Tonkawa Road 10.0 0 3 No LR-1A 2-ac min - _ ..-__ NW-38 33-118-23 33 0001 3020 Watertown Road 10.0 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min -- ___ EC-87 02-117-23 32 0006 1560 Fox Street 10.0 1 1 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands,slopes,house location,parcel shape are limiting factors _ ____ __-_ NW37 33-118-23 34 0001 185 Old Crystal Bay Road N 9.8 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Current site of house-moving business _ _ --- - _---- EC-86 03-117-23 31 0004 1620 Fox Street 9.5 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor _ - ---. NW-11 06-117-23 21 0005 4565 Bayside Road 9.5 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ _ ___ NW-10 06-117-23 24 0001 215 North Arm Lane 9 0 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min - -- -__ NW-20 OS-117-23 12 0022 60 Stubbs Bay Road South 9.0 1 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min __ ____ __ _ NW-13 06-117-23 21 0002 4455 Bayside Road 9.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Additional development limited due to topography --- NE-74 36-118-23 21 0004 749 Spring Hill Road 8.5 0 3 No RR-16 2-ac min -----_ . NE-71 36-118-23 22 0002 765 Spring Hill Road 8.5 1 1 No LR-1A 2-ac min Topography and wetlands are limiting factors EC-97 03-117-23 11 0001 xxx Orono Orchard Road S 8.0 0 2 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands,steep slopes,access will be issues for development ______ WC-164 07-117-23 21 0002 1003 Wildhurst Trail 7.8 0 3 No RR-1B 2-ac min Steep slopes,wetlands are limiting NW-35 33-11&23 31 0011 265 Old Crystal Bay Road N 7.8 1 2 No RR-t B 2-ac min ___ __ _--- NW-12 06-117-23 21 0003 4485 Bayside Road 7.6 1 2 No RR-18 2-ac min ____ NW-17 06-117-23 13 0003 xxxx Bayside Road 7.5 0 1 Nc LR-1A 2-ac min Future development limited by steep slopes 8 wetlands ----- _ ------ NW-22 05-117-23 11 0002 3405 High Lane 7.4 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _______ _--- - NW-41 04-117-23 14 0003 405 W illow Drive South 7.0 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min - _--- NW-44 27-118-23 32 0002 2300 Sixth Avenue North 7.0 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min --- _ ---__ ------ EC-94 03-117-23 42 0015 1880 Fox Slreet 7.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands locations limit future development ---------- _ NE-69 25-118-23 34 0003 445 Spring Hill Road 7.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography may be limiting faclor --- - __---------- NE-66 25-118-23 32 0002 xxx Sixth Avenue North 6.5 0 2 No RR-18 2-ac min Wetlands and topography are limiting factors 32-118-23 44 0002 8 . NW-23 32-118-23 44 0003 3280 WateRown Road 6.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ _ --- - -- ----- NW-40 04-117-23 31 0001 425 Old Crystal Bay Road S 6.5 1 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NE-61 26-118-23 41 0007 1150 Wyndmere Road 6.5 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _ NE-72 36-118-23 21 0005 761 Spring Hill Road 6.4 0 3 No RR-1 B 2-ac min _-- NW-33 33-118-23 32 0005 375 Old Crystal Bay Road N 6.4 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min City-owned open space-encumbered by MnDOT stormwater pond easement NE-68 25-11&23 34 0002 465 Spring Hill Road 6.2 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Topography may be limiting factor WC-108 04-117-23 14 0003 405 Willow Drive South 62 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wetlands are limiting factor NE-73 36-118-23 21 0003 745 Spring Hill Road 6.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min -__ __..- ___-- --- EC-81 02-117-23 24 0006 360 Orono Orchard Road S 6.0 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Residence centered on lot limits developabiliry EC-90 03-117-23 41 0005 xxxx Fox Street 5.8 0 2 No RR-1 B 2-ac min Wellands and topography are limiting factors __ -------.__. _ ---- NW-39 04-117-23 21 0004 85 Old Crystal Bay Road S 5.8 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min - - ---- ----- ------- WC-109 04-117-23 41 0005 2420 Fox Slreet 5.7 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min WC-113 04-117-23 42 0023 540 Old Crystal Bay Road S 5.3 1 1 No RR-t B 2-ac min __ _ __ _ --- .---- --- ____ NW-36 33-118-23 31 0007 225 Old Crystal Bay Road N 52 1 1 No RR-t B 2-ac min - ---- --- - --- --- --- - EC-96 03-117-23 13 0001 350 Brown Road South 5.1 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min NW-48 03-117-23 24 0011 325 Brown Road South 4.9 1 1 No RR-1 B 2-ac min WC-165 07-117-23 22 0017 4735 West Branch Road 4.8 0 2 No RR-1B 2-ac min Y a ��zmgmzzzzzzzm�3 nn�nnn�mm�m����� -+W� -+����W�N A O�Z N O O � W A ��I �C 3 v � O O N O O O N N N W(J W O O O� A W�N W N OD N m W N N W N A y � ���������� �� � �n V V N V�I V OD OD OD 00 OD 0�V J J� � � � i i i i i i i i i i i � � N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N� W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W . N N W W�N A W N �W N N A� O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O � O O O O O O O O N O�O � 'O(T N OD V�W N W N(T A�Ui N N ��� '� �'.N'N.W X j���m�-+ N��W N(J(l�D '� ''� '�.��.W.O K (T��N A W N CT W N O a �� �'� '�.O�'i O'N K O O CT�O�O�cn��C�' �''.. I TI'.�T L T O O<'O(n a���O<y ' ' .O�,O.Ol.O G � �� �i%�,X 3'K K X —J •K-• (7� Q N � p N 'cn'cn N �tn v�°'� � � y� ° f � I��.��o��m.� � 0=<`� D Co o �0 , . ,����,?�,m.mm � �� ��� ? ��. �I o ' ',, .o,.Q.Z m m Q v A c � . �ma� . , � .o���, n o o � . ��'��' , �� ', ',,. �'. �' �a, ��o�. .°�n��. � �,. ��'� Q. �. � � ' �� . �Z ��� O' S I I -�. _. , , D N v n OD A A A A�A�A'A'.A�,A'A A�A AiA�,A Z � A O O O O���.N�.W��W CJt N m�����I�OJ GI .�. N � N . . . . . _ . . . � . . . . . , , � _� � o m N � �� �o ���� � ���o�.�,3 x U. N f0 N ^ 7 � _.._ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D � = a � fJl N O a O CII', .a ��_a ..a�� � � � ��N� V J .� �� O � N � = N y � C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O D J . . '�1�1T1T1TlZ].��.�TJ�1Z7�]T]T1N �.,1].T7 Tl 77�Zl ZI Zl?�TJ A�1 Tl�7�1 T]� � '�.,W�,W w w W ao Oo D W W W W Co w w� � "N N N���N N N N N N N N N N N N O '.Ol�N�'61�N 4U N N d N N N N N 61 N » �.o lo�n��o 0 0 0 � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 � 3��.3'3!3�,3�3 3 3.3 3 3 � 3 � 3 � .�'.�.._.....�.�,�S> >>>> > >> . . ;_ . . . , . . . . _ .. _ . .� I , � o °i 3 ' i . . a�. ,, , �i � �., I ; � II y II �! , I�, I �. N i O I '�. ry �� I II �I �I �', ', �'. i N � I 'I I i ' v � ' 3 � ! � � � I '� = I! � � � , o Il , ii I . N 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 �I �� � I � jl I li � � Il �i �, ' � i � , � ��, ; �, ; I ; ' ' I� , I , � � I ' I �� ��� ', � � i � l ' , I % � iii, , I I I I � I ,' � ��i +��i�� iw���1�,:�-. -�+.K ��e;i�i�.wi _ � � x�� �" � � � � ,�' � Q , ���, j=�, �� �� r � ���,�� � �. , � � � � � _ _ , . _ 0 � �i � I �� �, . �" �. � I ' � �IAf , : � �-- w � � I � , . � — � � —� .� .. �� i . �j _ .. I .. ,. 1I� �I� —• I t �+� � 41 � � � �` � iR �7R� ! � 0 ( __—!� � �� � �} '� ' Z � � (�M� _—i,,l '����r...���'. , � rn - O ,; � _ _. .r.l,� �� .,�.�. � . M F �` � _. , � �1 ._`�- �t _�:f��� �,�� , � �i��— � _ � .� ' ,�" t> � � � ,�i ��� � �=�,� � .� �� ' T t� ,� � '7• _ � .T F :�+`;� � ,.. � � .....,. _ . � w�� � � i � . / f y� ` ; �;d ��5[ / i �. "' . ^^. �1' ,'k_ � .} `�� �.�x"'£'z: i � a � � A � 'n . .. � . � . . 6 _;'. ���*��i � ' 7 ,.y . ` /� # � . '1� '1 r �I t,. .4�� x... `y) "' �'�p'1 . � ��� � ' "'+&'t .\'ip!}� r � �W'� s.dc_.._,.__ _ `'k. t, � ' i�;, ,� � 's�3; �� Ci d � ..+r �d'i�� �' �'�� ->;,: ;.s �-_ � } ,�,��'���*� '� ^����l.� �rr'� _�i�y '\ ,f'l . ... . '� � . � .� � �. _ f � � � � � n , ,�' �� a Y;,�,,,�"' �� — � �.` � .� r ,� �a.� � .. . . ., � � . . _ : . � s �� 1 rSI_���� f�,�iY tKL�. �1 �� ` r�. . i G .L_--- — — n`��, ' �..� `_.._. � o _�' � b"`� ��' O �,*„ �_ '�' � �S .��— �vR i�a2�r,� �', _ � 1 i > . ; �l�.E lM�46 � �'� ��� � �S,^ � � �f � �'� C7 I ' ���` r,... ,Sr�IA�Mi4 --` ` . . � �k f` �x.�liut���f . � . . . ._- . .�..: 1. �C11Mk tlU3��` j ✓�+"' S ■Itt f�I[..�� " � �+ � �.� �� ��' ��' � �j` �' '.�.x�`'m+'" �r�` Y`�! � t�� � ;� T } � � � --r � .r ,� .��. •�$a...... - � q ������ co � `�' x ,� �.;.� � !►�' o �i�` � � 2 p ,'v�� �'q�c``Q � � � � �z � ��� � .: � �, � � �� ��. � � � �. � . �e �: . ,� � �� � ' y�� .� ,�. __t,.: �: � m �: 1�rr t , � � . � � � , w� „ E�W w - fj + ,� .. � � ` �� *� .�� I: ., , � wY ��r ." c�L.t� t:�'� l � �' _: ,' . y �' ;�.�' � - :�_ � _ � ____ � _ ,,�, ��.,�='�'"�'" � � `�:� . �� �;; `��`,� ; �` G � � s��: � ., � . � � , ��� � : � :. . ��� ,� �~ , �e,, � �`��� !." �.� ��� �` `„r��.� � � -� � � '� . ' .� - '� � � ' ' ,� � rT1 �� ,� � �:� . 7 r M��,�"�'.��;� � �. E �; a d �'w�.w;s...x� . �� .. � �r'� �� �. .. , _ �, � 7 �t'€it�E� � ��� ��"� �`� �:" t- �....��� �6:tt� �.1 �� "'* � . ;�1�` l�' � .., ^ o � T 1 � i�i �u. � .a✓�. 1'�. ,� _ tv��R�� � rt��'_i�,,,, �-,r ._., � � . _ , _ �� .� � — __� �; ; � �� � �. =t � g : �� f -. � `�,' �..� C7 :`�a°W^' � � �` � � i � �Y � r�.� ' � , � � �I. � � � E �.. '� ' � . �j�. , F � � .� .. t � � s . L � �a ° �. f "�- � � - K> � � _ ��,� �,. 11� �s.,n,�.,. �! � —� �y�b��„,'- j s;- g�� �� Q � � �� .� , .� � � !� � ! �:;:,�i�t�A�°" � � } , ,� � ��� . Q ��� ____ — '��'-�'��--� � � � � ���,+�:.�_ �1�,�_ �C i � �,..�►:"�� ` 'i� Z �°:,.�� � � p �T �'� 'R y ,� �� �1� ��`.����'`.. � ��'..��° � z �` �. � �-��y� �' „ � r� � �� �,�,�,� � � ,c/� �, s - . �� � � �/ '.f\ �. j / �� � � A `� C� .& "L� � .f L -r'� t/ "'� ..� ' -i.� ��� _ `f _____..� ... r�^l._ �? '�r 9 n 'V � . '� > "A� � � �, �; t � � �_ ,� ' ,�i,'� 8 . �,. � �! J1 >" � �a: ��� .V �i. �. J'� , w�,, `�'- H �� � � i �' � z� {`. �� � `.� � � ' � hTQ'J {� �--yr�� ,I � � . ._ �� � -` � -t � - - & p � - l ; � � � - ...c. , ..... � ►.1 i». d � 4'a--�—.� �� J CJ �` _—_'� - E,.,'�E'„�_�__,..^_�---_- E• � ",, o �: �, ,�:. : : �; ti� � � ; '� �4 � i �`' ��� � � ri ' ' ...{ »,� � .� � ���"�,- :�� ��' f � r��; ��4'�1--�'..._._. r , �, � ,� ' � k �`r�- � ..�.'.*���N"'':•` .r. ''? � , -.. �-�! � �`� *�' �. r � �� p � � �� � �, '� ti �� � �'�� �/�. � � p �til ' �� �. A,�" Y., I i 8( t � ( ' . � ���� +���� � r � '`4 � . � f t_�.t ...._ ,J� ��,`_. � . � .. . � N� � _,�' - . _�� ..-...,.,... `.. � � �.: � � _ ,!. �,� t�---- -__.___..__ � � � p � ��l � � � � � � j� � � � �� � �� �x��� ,,,e _ —`` � _ .�,, J� , - y� �'�� . ,1. -� ��� �� �'�.� a�� c '' �� .. � ,., r�- �,_.� � � R —� +� N � `.- t: �' 1 �a �. � -""`�� �.,4 �T'_ 3� Id T. . � : 4,� C �,�, � ..'�a x� �,;�, " � � � �` � � � �' �'�. , �~ �`' -- ? �+ �rf i� ����� *�� ��.� �� . ���. 1 �i ; '`� b "- . 'n .. [_ � , . . .�. _ _ � � -i.-w..!.�.d,..+.rm. ... ....� ..... .......�... �a._. } ...... c �. � � � i �' d Cl 5 � ` � ,����-� �' � ��, � �-, ,� - .�a �, � j ��..�" :��� - � 1 {� � , �� � � � a� i �i. ,� � _� '"' } � ;�� � r- 'x� ����+ .. ---- � , -` ,,,, � � � � ..�.�� �� �.,��� � � - '� � .� `.� ^ �� ,� , �. � x � yyy� \� � � , � � � ��� _� � �� , ° ,., � ;, \ �ti ' 1 Y t--+..r �.s�...e�_.i_�. �r 1-I �� eJ�i 1 !1 1 . � I � I �� �"'1 � W p M.I O � N O O Q �T � , � � � � � � �� W �' � � O 0 � L� -- +► ��4r �w���� '��„a�F�-"` r ' �--"�"� „Y w� � _. P i —�'� i ���'��14. , �a� �.- "°`�r�• t* � "� ,,< k, , �� !l��� � '�► ' ' � � � +rtq" „� �,������'` , , b : �y � t����'��� �'�' ;� �� ��.�.+ y � �. -- — _.^. �``,� �9� `Ip�������s��:`� � ,�� �lf��— ; . �` ,� � ��+ i �'1�11����i.y� � . ' }E � � ,.._t' 5,:�['r� �.-.- ` ._. _ .._..._. _�._._ . � ..�a,�;�„. ti r � � � •� �- ! � � � �, � �� �. ' '! ;�. ,..� , °:, � � ; ° � ,�;w .� s � �.a� � �,. �,�� � '' � � °� w � r �" ��'���`� c �,'' �, � . '� n- ���' __ .� °� „ � �:: ',�:, �-Q� .�-- � �� _� _ � .; � ,{ 0 �c � � ` y� _ �, s. ' �' i� . �I ~# � ^ ���y r� �. �rr (� �. � J •��ti' � ��c , .: -. � , ���, ____ , _.____ __ �—�.._�. . � . � � `�� M ' � � ��7 Q,,T �,., �. ; � -` � .`-. � �; �3' Y y ,� �' � �� � � � � �., K �� '� � -'` R. . ' �. _"' ' ti .." � - . . �.4. . � 1 '� .. F ' �,., �"�r� � ! '4 .�� .., �_..__ . J)n �. ' w�j " ,�'-.. , •' ' '�-�f a�u��, �� ��",y`. s �1 � � � ��� ��r� � ':� '�,� 4 �� � __-� , .—_ _ _ _ � �� �. :_�� .���.ry,: � ,��.�.., , �, �y �. � : I � ° I + � ��,;�,� `, .� � � � t , � � � �, � i �.���,s `����i� , � t ��� ' '' � . � p !�� �: � �. �� � � ,����,::� ; � � � � t�� � `� ■ii�fi������! ��—iir-n-�i� �i����..r � � �: � '���.�_>��: , � - �� "� —� � S ' � i � i I, � ! ' ... .. .—._ ...._ ' , 4 � --r- r.����� � ,.,._ f...,.�f�.,�,a_..��,�, *t��r�,�7�� � �� � ��.n {� f � �'�+�d�`.�'Cll <.. � �� � ' ��� v� � �f� � ',• ���r—_t�7 *�'s � , � � � ' �- _ `�;';�.� �! :�� �� � � o�' �4 � .� - � � ii ����ii�ii�i��/ ���i� � �� t^( � y� E �� .�r' � � �� `. -� � Y��4 �� i� � � � � t� �m. � � y ��#."� Lr��tG�i4����` � v����"��, t � � ��� , . ...f� � v ,. _... � ..� y v� �.a --.._ .�..� . b� f ��� f� •�`y� .r��,'��. � ; � ��,� � � � � � ��� � br� . � � � � �T"� �� �E.�`/ �x,Jt'• ... , Z . ; �.� , - ::� a � � $�,� " �,. � ��` „� �� _ �'�` � 4.}�'��� ,- K ��- .7.:.� �Y� �gY' ���,. ��.,,�• �"c .,�'���S9R���� �� � � ' , � � !-- �,.. _ .: � :-�������a� ___ �_� �`� _ - � .�� � � -��i�t�������"�►.�"'�� �r���i � � � ,.� j � �t �:t 1 '-��'s#C�.'Cy � � y r�`- O � ���Ai�.�`.��y„"�t����ii����'��. d'` `��, � r' '� .. �� 1'?_ . '�, ���_ -.. � � � ��� t�� � M1 . � -_, �a. �,y:,,,;,' � � % .r. � ' ',��. � +� ,� '�� q .: , „.. - �'� �••�`•� ,,.v4. ,�a � � ' �.r�.. �. � t`n n �,, E. :�.` ; .,� 06� - � � i ��,�"��� `` _ � . �_��r��a� id � � � F Q,:``�,��J n ---� : � r",�}¢! � e.�, __._� �is � � �4 i � ` ��.�.� `C ' � ��.,. '.i , � � .s��: , �"�n..� `�e.: V� �i ,j� � � � �,� i .� � ~+ -..1 � �,1 �. � j ,S �` " `.�t� rl,�t�a.. � � '! : i ... "'C�.._ , "'�SI�P , � . f�'�`n..,3 . � } _ /3 .� �•pPi, � ! � � k .~�' ��.r.'' I � �-_��-� � . s.��� ��"tYY.+ts "S - %3f�� � _ ' � � . K-. : 4.. "�� �� ------ � ....: �^ __-_.__. F�----� � - � - .�c;,;� �Y -� �� '� , , ��. .� _ ,�� � �� ,,� r�. j� � ' �,� `;.r�,� ) _f� ,�- "� � � .,,� � , '+� , k, •� '� �X '� ���WeI '� �.� a d '�� � .�� � _ �� v k � ,� � .,� _ , .�d � fAMF� �O ��W ` 4. � ��d f P � `'��"a . �� y ��., �� '.�i` � f� � ''j .. ....�,y�`�.���+�= �I�'. ' .�� � �� ['�� _ '�� �� p j _ �`���.;� � r,_ c ,��, ' .�� �' ,� I f .�,'� " �--T" '� "�`���, i ``«�'� � �- � '�'. ' - -- , ��-:l� `� 'r°' �. _ cOLlTI-i 'trlL_�i'�'u' '. � DR. I _� , � N ,� � —, �' ak � r� ���-.�--� ,� �� �� � � � �'° . r,� r - f _ � � _..,�---�'�..�.4 � x _ ����" E: �� -=�_� �' � a_� �' _ �� �` ' ���' �'�,+�� � ; 1♦ '`.,,�.,.:....._.� s�, � .��� '"� � ���`�'�'� —_, � .t� _ ,, �� -'-�,1��"".�� � ` 1� �'�.�" ' •,.� � � ` �. � *�` �. .,�'�—_ �.�, .�`�,� ;�, ;,� Y' �� ��� , ��� i ," .e�6�'� 'x' � � �, �e' I ,i � {� � � r � �� * � � � �! � � r�3 '+i� — � " �s ;� � � � ` r� '` ,, _ c. �=-- __--- '�'� _ ___ - �'�_ ��'��;. � � , � ��. � ; ►� � � � � � , ' ���� c� .� � , :� = T � � ' ��f �� .�, -, - �� = d�'*,'��'y�M'�� � � � �., '�;�'.. �4� . ` � �:��.n�NI �. �� iJ � � ,� '� �+ K` I._� t wO ��.s;S ��t��f..;�� ` ",,.� :. .:� � 1. �t . <,� .s��a• ' . � - ���.1t` ; �--- ' � ' �����`��. -- "���.s � +� r 9'�: !� � �„ ,.�i���E _� �' � � +� *r���it� �e�$�r� �p �- '�'� °a�1�S� ' :��---�� i"-> '�.4 ? � `"�; _,,t � . � .=�; � � ���� r� � � . � , ��-� � : r.� � . — _ , � � —� ��,� �,� � �� � . ri � .,.� ��_� ♦ �'� �����>5� � . � ` ��� �� � '� �,���-w� -�-..�,A . '� .� ��'' .,� t - �� 1 .� � � = � I �� - _ �'+�,�� � - _- � �$ �_r_ , � ! `r� �` �� ! � � '� ' �, � � � � � � � t t � � � I � 4 � � f ��� � � � .. .. . .. . . .__ . � , , i��.� , .._. �6�`�6 ` ' � S, 1 .a �,� ' � f J1 I � ,t�� � I I � MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: LIN VEE, CITY CLERK SUBJECT: COMMENTS REGARDING INFORMATION UPDATES DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 2009 Because the Information Updates that are sent via email to Council on Fridays are not open for discussion because of the open meeting law, Council may want an opportunity to ask questions or comment on items included in the updates. Attached are the memos from the last two Friday updates for reference if Council wishes to discuss any of these items. i MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: ORONO MANAGEMENT TEAM SUBJECT: 1NFORMATION UPDATE DATE: AUGUST 28, 2009 • Casco Point—Construction Notice, see attached memo. � Myrtlewood sewer and water project is complete. • Attached is a memo to the Mayor and Council with my analysis of Met Council's initial response to our Comp Plan submittal. The exhibits are in separate pdf files as this got fairly large. Per Mr. Murphy's recent email comments, this is something we will have to spend some quality time on in the coming months... (MPG) • Andrew Gillette, a Planner with Hennepin County, is trying to establish a date in September for a weekday early morning meeting at the Freshwater Center in Navarre to present the results of the County Road 19 Trail Planning process to the joint Councils and appropriate advisory commissions (Parks, Planning) of Orono, Tonka Bay and Shorewood. He is looking at the week of September 14 or 21 —I have advised him we have a potential conflict with the 15`h or 16th which we are considering for our visioning session with Prouty. Please let me know your availability for either week (MPG). • Public Works has ground off the Dakota trail crossings, and have added a coat of black tar and sand to the crossings at: Orono Orchard Rd, Russell Ave, Spates Ave, and Northern Ave. i �, � i � i I MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: ORONO MANAGEMENT TEAM SUBJECT: INFORMATION UPDATE DATE: SEPTEMBER 4, 2009 • Melanie, Ron and Tom Kellogg met with Mr. Batty and Mr. Habib regarding the proposed expansion of the Keaveny building. Staff suggested that a partial second story above the existing building may be more appropriate than an expansion eastward. The applicants are going to prepare revised plans, probably for review by the Planning Commission in October. (MC) • Staff has been inundated with calls/complaints this week regarding possible home occupation activity at a home in the Chevy Chase neighborhood. We have investigated and have found no violations; the renter at that site has had a large group of people (with lots of cars) helping to pack up belongings for removal, and has indicated that all activity will disappear by the end of next week. We will continue to monitor. (MC) • Mike and Jim Murphy met with our Met Council rep Bob McFarlin to discuss the issues surrounding their denial of sewer connections for existing homes in the MUSA. We think Bob now has a better understanding of our concerns and our position. He didn't make any specific commitments. We should discuss this at our next work session. (MPG) • A draft letter to Wes Wolverton is attached. If you have any comments to this letter please contact Ron Olson. This letter will be sent on Tuesday. (RO) iII i I