Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-22-2020 Council Packet
Agenda Council Meeting Monday, June 22, 2020 6:00 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us The public is invited to address the council regarding any item on the regular agenda. If your topic is not on the agenda, you may speak during the Public Comments section. Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance Approval of Agenda Consent Agenda 1. City Council Meeting Minutes of June 8, 2020 2. Council Work Session Minutes of June 8, 2020 3. Claims/Bills 4. City of Orono Text Amendment Related to Utility Billing – Ordinance 5. Approval of Rental Licenses 6. Covid-19 Preparedness Plan 7. 2020 Crack Sealing 8. Southways Development – Formal Acceptance of Public Improvements – Resolution 9. Approval to Accept Donation – Colin Charlson 10. Disposal of Firearms 11. Request to Hire Full-Time Police Officer 12. LA20-000028, Baycliff Homes o/b/o David and Wendy Jacobsen-Gretsch, 2440 Old Beach Road, Variance – Resolution 13. LA20-000031, Dale Gustafson, 2927 Casco Point Road, Variances, Resolution Public Comments – (Limit 5 Minutes per Person) This is an opportunity for the public to address matters not on the agenda. The council will not engage in discussion or take action on items presented at this time. However, the council may refer issues to staff for follow up or consideration at a future meeting. Speakers should state their name and home address at the podium before speaking. Presentation 14. Annual Public Hearing for MS4 Storm Water Permit 15. Accept Donation from Big Island Legacy Finance Director Report Planning Department Report 16. LA20-000003, John Newell, 1485 Sixth Ave N, Sketch Plan Mayor/Council Report City Administrator Report Agenda Council Meeting Monday, June 22, 2020 6:00 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us City Attorney Report Adjournment Upcoming Events 2020 07-03-20 Official Holiday, City Offices Closed 07-06-20 Park Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:00 p.m. 07-13-20 Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 07-13-20 City Council Meeting, Monday, 6:00 p.m. 07-20-20 Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:00 p.m. (Victoria Seals) 07-27-20 Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 07-27-20 City Council Meeting, Monday, 6:00 p.m. 08-10-20 Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 08-10-20 City Council Meeting, Monday, 6:00 p.m. 08-11-20 Election Day, Primary Election 08-17-20 Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:00 p.m. (Matt Johnson) 08-24-20 Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m. 08-24-20 City Council Meeting, Monday, 6:00 p.m. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 21 ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Dennis Walsh, City Council Members Richard Crosby, II, Matt Johnson, Aaron Printup, and Victoria Seals. Representing Staff were City Administrator Dustin Rief, Finance Director Ron Olson, Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, City Planner Laura Oakden, Public Works Director/City Engineer Adam Edwards, and City Attorney Soren Mattick. Mayor Walsh called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT AGENDA 1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 26, 2020 2. COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES OF MAY 26, 2020 3. CLAIMS/BILLS 4. APPROVAL OF GARBAGE HAULER LICENSE 5. APPOINTMENT OF PRIMARY & GENERAL ELECTIONS ABSENTEE BALLOT BOARD – RESOLUTION No. 7101 6. APPOINTMENT OF ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE 2020 PRIMARY AND GENERAL ELECTIONS – RESOLUTION No. 7102 7. APPOINTMENT OF 2020 SEASONAL EMPLOYEES 8. SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LINE INSPECTION PROGRAM – ORDINANCE This item was removed from the Consent Agenda. 9. LA20-000021 – JEFF BRADY, 350 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCE – RESOLUTION No. 7103 This item was removed from the Consent Agenda. 10. NAVARRE HARDWARE HAND SANITIZER DONATION 10a. LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN OPEIU LOCAL 12 AND THE CITY OF ORONO Crosby moved, Seals seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as revised, with Item Nos. 8-9 being removed from the Consent Agenda, and Item No. 10a being added to the Consent Agenda. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 21 PUBLIC COMMENTS None. PRESENTATION 11. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOGNITION Walsh read a Resolution of Appreciation to John Thiesse for distinguished service as a member of the Planning Commission: Whereas, John Thiesse has served this community with distinction as a member of the Planning Commission since his appointment on December 13, 2010; and whereas, his nine years of service have been marked by responsible research, thoughtful review, quick wit, compassion, and consistent, constructive contributions with the community’s best interests in mind; and whereas, he served as the Planning Commission Chairperson from 2016 until 2019; and whereas, he has earned the appreciation, admiration, and respect of those with whom he has worked; and now, therefore, be it resolved, that the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby express its sincere appreciation to John Thiesse for his distinguished service to the community and does also rightly commend him for the manner in which he has served his community. Be it further resolved, that the City Council extends to John their best wishes for continued success in his future endeavors. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held this 8th day of June, 2020. Seals moved, Printup seconded, to accept the Resolution No. 7105 A Resolution of Appreciation to John Thiesse. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. John Thiesse thanked Staff members Oakden, Barnhart, Curtis, etc., the Planning Commission members he has worked with, and also the City Council members. 12. GILLESPIE CENTER ANNUAL REPORT Deb Taylor, CEO of Senior Community Services (SCS) and acting President of the Gillespie Center, stated Orono continues to grow in population. In 2000 it was at 9%, 2010 it was at 12%, and 2018 it was at 18%. SCS partnered with the Mound Senior Club/Westonka Senior Citizens, Inc., which became the Gillespie Center 19 years ago. SCS continues to contract with Gillespie to provide senior programming. She described the services provided such as the HOME Program, which is available to residents aged 65- plus, all incomes, and a subsidy provided for those in need and services which are on a sliding fee scale. She said many people only need a little help to stay in their homes and most people want to stay there. With the advent of COVID-19, everyone wants to stay in their own homes. In response to COVID-19, they have additional phone calls and support for running errands and grocery shopping. The Medicare Partners Program is for Medicare beneficiaries. They have Memorandums with hospitals/clinics throughout the State; they will accept Medicare payment for people who are having a hard time affording their supplement (s). The hospitals/clinics have agreed to waive the copay and accept Medicare in full. She indicated they have a social worker who helps older adults find services while they are aging in place who has been particularly busy because of COVID-19. They have seen an increase in caregiver services, and Gillespie/SCS is a great resource. She described a tech tool called CareNextion which is similar to CaringBridge; it is for family caregivers and free. There is an ability to set up an online care team; there is a calendar and journal feature. Since COVID-19 hit in March, there are an additional 4,000 caregivers using the site to coordinate care for their loved one(s). MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 21 Jeanne Brustad, past-President of the Gillespie Center, noted Mindy Anderson is the Gillespie Center’s full-time Director and has been with them over 13 years. Greg Sletten has many roles including Rental Coordinator, Cook, and Chief Custodian. The Center has provided a variety of meals for several years. Currently they serve a hearty noon meal for $5 every Wednesday for anyone in the community, although they have been closed since March. On June 17 they will have take-out dinners available every Wednesday. They have the usual activities senior centers have, including card games and exercise groups. They also take trips to various places in the community and surrounding areas. She noted the reason for a senior center is to give retired community members, as well as other members, a place to gather and keep active. She stated Gillespie Center would not survive without volunteers. Volunteer opportunities include sitting at the front desk, which is basically the face of the Center, as they sign up visitors for various programs, answer the phone, and help with questions visitors may have. Volunteers are also able to move tables, chairs, and equipment required for various activities. She noted some volunteers are from the Westonka School’s Honor Society, DECA, and sports kids who help serve food or help with Santa’s Hidden Treasures. Activities include: author talks, defensive driving class, Happy Feet Footcare visits, a ukulele group, movie time, monthly casino trips, estate planning assistance, and weekly square dancing. They also go out in the community in a variety of ways such as the Gillespie Singers, who go to various nursing homes. Every third Wednesday, 6-12 musicians from all over the state come to the Gillespie Center and jam during lunch, using both their voices and instruments. As far as attendance on those Wednesdays, it can range from 65-150 people. There are several fundraisers throughout the year including the Holiday Boutique, where shoppers from all over the area can do their Christmas shopping. It is managed completely by volunteers and counts for 6-8% of the Center’s total yearly income. Hidden Treasures is housed in the lower level of the building and is similar to a garage sale. The crochet, knitting, and other craft groups also meet in that area. Santa’s Hidden Treasures is held once a year, where parents/grandparents bring kids to the Center, the kids take a picture with Santa, and then can go shopping with 50-cent coupons. The kids can buy things for their parents, grandparents, and siblings as gifts. School kids are involved in that activity as far as shopping, wrapping gifts, etc. Several times each year they host large family dinners with entertainment and sometimes dancing. They have other funding such as volunteers picking up day-old bread and sweets at Cub Foods and having it on display for community members with a suggested donation. Since the shutdown, it has been operating as a drive-thru every morning, and leftovers are taken to the food shelf in Mound. That activity generally provides between 10- 12% of fundraising monies. She stated most senior centers are funded by the cities they serve in Minnesota. The City either houses them in their building, as in Minnetonka, or provides another building. No city provides their support, as they are a unique community comprised of several cities. The Gillespie Center has no mortgage since the building was built in 2001, due to community fundraising efforts and a matching grant by Bill Gillespie. She gave a brief history regarding Center funding. She said the members of the Center were tired of always fundraising to pay for everything. Members were looking for a way to not constantly worry about paying the light bill. In 2011, an endowment fund was created. Thanks to the Cities of Mound, Spring Park, and Minnetrista, there is a 10-year contract with them; and they have just completed year eight of that contract. Because of that contract, the Center has $1,157, 371.60 as of April 30, 2020, in the Charles Schwab Endowment Fund. Those funds are not touched. According to the way it is set up, the Center is able to use 4% of the funds/income each year to help with the running of the facility. There are no plans to use that until the contract is over and hopefully not until that 4% will completely fund the facility. The way the contract works is that the Center fundraises and is required to make income of over $110,000 each year to put into the endowment fund. They have done so for eight years. The three cities provide the Center with $105,000, which is the cost to run the building every year, based on the number they established in the beginning of the contract. That money is used to pay expenses which includes salary, heating/cooling of the building, snow-plowing, garbage pickup, maintenance and other building expenses, which add up to about $105,000 yearly. She stated the situation MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 21 is a little shaky this year. They have some stable fund expectations of income yearly. They usually receive several donations from the Lion’s Club, which is 8% of their income. Because of pull tabs in bars being closed for several months, it is assumed their donations will not be as large, if at all. Membership is usually around 400, bringing in another 8% of their income. For the first time in several years, they have not been able to go out and get new members or have programs that get new members. Meanwhile, some of their members are passing away. They hope when the building is open again, they can get back up to 400 members. Another way they receive income is from memorials and other donations from members, which is 5% of the Center’s income. They also receive donations from their card clubs and craft clubs. For the first time in 15 years, last year they had to cancel their golf tournament due to a lack of players because of the number of golf tournaments in the area, which is another one of their fundraisers. She discussed other fundraisers such as Sweepstakes Tickets and said they have been unable to sell all their tickets the last couple of years to gain a maximum profit of around $10,000. She indicated numbers are hard to track in the community. She lives in Orono, is in the Mound Westonka School District, has a Wayzata ZIP code. Locals refer to her location as Navarre; old locals refer to her as Spring Park because Casco Point used to be a Spring Park area; her Fire Department is Long Lake. At each activity at the Center, whether it is a driving class to reduce insurance costs, an author book talk, a dance, etc., they do not keep track. When they tried to ask a couple of years ago -- because the City of Orono and other cities wanted to know numbers -- their answers did not give the Center the right answer. Her own neighbors did not give enough correct answers so they knew it was Orono. Many people said Wayzata, because that is their mailing address, and so they do not think they live in Orono. She stated SCS has provided work for 43 Orono verified residents and are guessing that they have 37 paid members that are Orono residents. Half of the card clubs are not members; the Center does not force them to become members, although the cost is only $25. She actually does not know how many people from Orono are using the Center; she wished she could tell everyone. She said she believes it is the job of cities to create an environment where people want to move to their city and stay there. She believes the Gillespie Center is a great aid to help each of the member cities. As the communities are aging, almost 20% of Orono residents are over the age of 65. As a former teacher, she will be the first one to say that cities need to provide things for children. However, there is a large group of seniors that need to be taken care of also. She has lived in Orono for 42 years and loves everything about the community. She thanked everyone for their help. She played a video which highlighted several aspects of the Center. Walsh and Council members thanked Ms. Taylor and Ms. Brustad for their work. FINANCE DIRECTOR REPORT 13. FIRST QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT Olson presented the First Quarter 2020 Budget Report, noting the Council received some of the basic information previously. He stated the first quarter is the slowest quarter of the year, both for revenues and expenditures. At the end of the first quarter, the City was at 16.12% of budget compared to 17.15% in 2019, which is in the same ballpark. He noted Licenses & Permits in 2019 and 2020 are almost exactly equal. In Charges for Service, it is about $8,000 less in 2020 than 2019. Those two items are tracking right on budget and with past years; those are the two categories that are sort of variable. The amount of building permits in any given year can increase or decrease based on the economy or if a big building project comes in. Charges for Service includes Police, which is pretty consistent year after year, increasing as the contracts call for, and also includes site inspections and plan reviews. That can also be a very volatile revenue source. Depending on what is coming in, it might be a very large or very small fee. As of May 31, 2020, looking at Licenses & Permits, the number is $50,000 less than a year ago; Charges MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 21 for Service is $150,000 less. Looking at the bottom line, on May 31, 2019, the City was at 22.5% of budget; this year, on May 31 the City is at 18.28% of budget. He noted COVID-19 and the economy feeling the effects of a shutdown as the reasons for the decrease. He stated the property tax settlements are not shown on the information. The City will receive its first portion of property tax in about two weeks; it will be 70% of the collections through May 15 and will give the City a glimpse into how property tax collections are going. He referenced the year 2008, when the housing market bubble burst and collections went down; the City dropped to about 97% of budget instead of around 99% of budget. If that happens this time, $150,000 would not be collected this year. Walsh noted the City always gets their money, although sometimes it comes later. He pointed out that even though it looks like Licenses & Permits is $50,000 less and Charges for Service is $150,000 less, in 2019 the City was way over budget in terms of revenue. Even though the first quarter was very slow and the second quarter does not quite make up for it, this year the City is at 45% and 41%. For perspective, the City may be down from last year, but the City was way over budget in terms of revenue. Olson stated five months is 42% of the year, so even on the Charges for Service, it is targeted to be on budget. He remembers when the budget was being set, the revenue budget for Permits and Charges for Services was increased a little. Johnson had asked how far the City could go, and he had said the City was in good shape raising the number this much. However, he never anticipated COVID-19 or the unrest the last couple of weeks, all of which causes people to worry which leads them to potentially not spend money. Walsh stated the City needed more developers to come in and build houses. Johnson said he thought there were quite a bit of renovations going on which is less in permitting dollars. They are a placeholder for what people think they can do. He stated there will be a rebound. Walsh said the City is in good shape. The City has been calm in how they have approached the budget and is still above percentage in terms of the year and have not yet hit the great months: July, August, September, and October. Crosby said he thought the momentum would start to pick up in the third quarter. Olson noted the graph being shown is another way to look at building permits. He indicated the brownish- orange color is 2020 and is lagging behind. Johnson asked if those numbers were in dollars. Olson stated the graph reflected dollars. Johnson asked if Olson had the unit numbers. Rief said that information was in a report he had submitted earlier. Johnson stated that is the renovation permit. Olson said that is what happened in 2008; there was maybe a decrease in new construction but lots of remodels. He said it is hard to predict absolutely what will happen. The City has a pretty robust base, and MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 21 one way or another building seems to happen. He displayed a graph of the Plan Check/Site Exam fees. He noted the school fell off, which is why the budget was not increased, because you do not get a school every year. He displayed a graph of the overall budget and stated the City is a little lower in the first quarter. His guess is that the City will come in just slightly under revenue budget at this time, maybe 98%. It will depend if the economy picks up like everyone is expecting it to and if there is not a second wave. He noted it is worth thinking about it, and then in two weeks, when the 2021 budget starts being created, assumptions will have to be made about what the economy is going to do. He displayed a graph reflecting expenditures. On March 31, 2020, there were 21.5% of expenditures compared with 20.41% last year. He said the only department that shows anything large at all would be Mayor and Council, but that is the license memberships being paid at the beginning of the year and it is normal to be pretty high after the first quarter. He discussed the top vendor list, indicating the Bond Trust Services is at about $1 million and will be the number one vendor for at least the next 4-5 years and sometime in the future will drop off completely. He displayed the 19 top vendors including HealthPartners, City of Long Lake, Met Council, etc., and said they equal 83% of what the City spent so far through the first quarter. Printup noted the City has very little to no control over numbers 3 and 4, which are the Fire Department and Met Council. Numbers 5 and 6 are services going back to the citizens that the City does have control over. Walsh noted they are services the City is requesting for roads and infrastructure, etc. Johnson said those expenses are planned for. Walsh noted the City had just paid off some expenses and also just paid off a big bond a month ago. Johnson indicated it would not be HealthPartners the next time they looked at the financial report. Printup said there will be competitive bidding going on. Olson also displayed a graph with the City’s investments which total $12 million. He noted the tax settlement money will be put in the 4M Fund and, depending on cash flow needs, it might be left there, because if there is a road or sewer project, the City needs some liquidity. However, if possible, the City will invest in long-term investments, although they are not paying a lot right now. He noted Goldman Sachs came out with a 30-year Certificate of Deposit that pays 2%. Crosby asked if the City is keeping the maturities they are buying under 10 years. Olson answered that the investment policy is 7-8 years and they have not been buying anything in the 7-8 years, it is more 2-3. He noted most of those were bought in March and they could still get 1% at that time. However, he cannot get anywhere near that at this time. He also noted the City had received interest year-to-date of $63,980, which is very comparable to last year. However, a lot of the 2% investments have been called this year and are being reinvested at .2%. Walsh noted the City had called a 3% and so they made up for it. Olson said the City has to keep an eye on what their revenues do. They will get some idea in June, but they won’t really know on property taxes until July, and they might not know what building revenues are doing until the end of summer. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7 of 21 Printup stated it is important to remember that last year things were high and that this year they are lower, but Orono is in good shape. 9. LA20-000021 – JEFF BRADY, 350 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, VARIANCE – RESOLUTION No. 7105 Johnson noted he was okay with the item being on the Consent Agenda except during the Planning Commission review, the property had two structures outside of its property line, and he wanted to confirm the City’s conditions have him putting those within the property line. Oakden stated she believed the resolution did not list that as a condition and noted it as a discussion from the Planning Commission, that they discussed it with the Applicant, who seemed open to moving them. She said they can be included as part of the discussion. Johnson moved, Crosby seconded, to approve Resolution No. 7105, LA20-000021 – Jeff Brady, 350 North Shore Drive, Variance – Resolution, with the amendment of a requirement to have the accessory structures inside of the property line. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Printup absent during the vote.) PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT 14. LA20-000028 – BAYCLIFF HOMES O/B/O DAVID AND WENDY JACOBSEN-GRETSCH, 2440 OLD BEACH ROAD – VARIANCE Staff presented a summary of packet information. David and Wendy Jacobsen-Gretsch, 2440 Old Beach Road. Mr. Jacobsen-Gretsch thanked the City Council for their time and commitment during this crazy time and also thanked them for coming out to the site. He stated their project is an intentional remodel of the property; what was unintentional is all the problems they discovered. They ended up removing two raised patios with storage units due to water damage. They are asking for a variance to extend the adjacent setback due to a hardship in their property. As stated in the Planning Committee notes, the purpose of the house setback/adjacent property setback is to prevent encroachment lake views and is designed to prevent homes from moving towards the lakeshore. They are asking for a variance that is in complete alignment with that, especially considering the hardship they are proposing that exists on their property which is completely out of their control. From their perspective, the hardship is clear. The house to the north moved back when they tore down their house to build a pool. That has adjusted their setback to make the existing structure nonconforming. That change was obviously out of their control and has caused a hardship not only to them but also to their property. The distance is 15 feet between the movement of that house back to theirs. He said that 15 feet across their lot is about 3,000 feet of unusable space due to that movement. That is the hardship that they claim which is out of their control. They will still be 107 feet back from the shoreline. He noted it is a little frustrating through the process in that they chose to preserve the existing house and it probably would have been resolved had they torn down the existing house and started over. He hopes the City Council can see that they were trying to invest in what was already there. He also believes the hardship addresses an area of the setback rule that was never really intended. He asked what someone does when a house moves back. He asked what would happen if the neighbor moved back another 50 feet, because then his entire backyard would be nonconforming. That is where he thinks it goes bigger than the individual hardship; it goes to the lack of productivity of the entire lot. He noted the Council has done a MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 8 of 21 lot of things to be more efficient and have things align with more common sense. He believes the variance aligns with that. Everyone they have talked to has said, “Yeah, that kind of makes sense, the neighbor did that.” He said they respect the City Council’s decision but ask for their support. Printup stated it is a very valid point, because what do you do when the neighbor goes back as opposed to the conventional wisdom of when a neighbor goes forward. Walsh said there have been a number of instances when the house has been way back, and if somebody is trying to build a house where it is so far back, it has created a practical difficulty. He can visualize that the house the applicant is in currently, when it was built, was built with plenty of room and gave themselves some flexibility. Because the house next to them went backwards, it created a practical difficulty for them. They did not create it; it was created for them. He thinks it is pretty reasonable to be able to keep the existing line that was there and to be able to build into that and solve the problem they have. It is also in line with what they have done in the past, houses that are already way back that the Council has kind of let come up within a reasonable sight line. Crosby stated he went out to the site and visited with the homeowner, and the neighbor’s house is fairly far forward to allocate for their pool, and so forth. It is not a practical difficulty that the Applicant created and it is a practical difficulty to him. Johnson noted that by the other house moving back, it put the existing house in nonconformance. He said the Council thinks about that all the time in other areas, but a house going backwards is not as common. He noted people do not come to the Council for permission to move their house farther back; that is not seen at their level. He indicated that was his only hesitation when he first reviewed the information, but he agrees it has created a hardship that the Applicant did not create. Somebody would not know to go to their neighbor and say, “Hey, don’t put your house back there because I want to put a screen porch up.” He also noted the Applicant is way beyond the 75-foot mark. He is in support of the variance. Seals said usually they get called out when there is a narrow lot. She was surprised when she went out there that there was the issue because it does not feel like they were encroaching upon the lake, and she is also in support of the variance. Printup moved, Crosby seconded, to direct Staff to draft a resolution reflecting approval of LA20- 000028 – Baycliff Homes o/b/o David and Wendy Jacobsen-Gretsch, 2440 Old Beach Road – Variance. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 15. LA19-000031 – DALE GUSTAFSON, 2927 CASCO POINT ROAD, VARIANCES Staff presented a summary of packet information. Johnson said he was at the site, and the stairs are exceptionally steep. To him, it is a reasonable request to find a reasonable route down to the shore. He is not sure if the shed was ever a lawful shed in the first place and is not in favor of allowing the moving of the shed. Walsh noted there is the replace-in-kind issue, but it has to be where it is and the owner is kind of stuck with it. Normally, the owner couldn’t get anything. Otherwise, people would be moving things all over the place. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 21 Don Adams, 2927 Casco Point Road, thanked Staff for her help, having never done an application before. He said they recently bought the house and their goal is to create a shoreline that is appealing. The white stairs are horrible, dangerous, and rotting. Most of the plants are buckthorn and poison ivy, and they have torn out a lot of garbage. Their goal is to beautify the area, but the most important goal is to find a way to go down to the shoreline safely, which is the reason they are proposing the stairs. They tried to pick the elevation that has the least amount of buildup to make the stairs because their north shoreline is super steep. With picking the best spot to bring it down, it goes into the existing shed. He noted the survey was not done correctly the first time. With the survey displayed, he indicated the wall around the existing shed, which was not on the original survey, and said that's basically where the stairs would come into play. They would propose to remove the wall and eliminate some of the existing hardcover. They are also considering removing 176 square feet of hardcover, which would be almost 70%. Walsh asked what hardcover the homeowner was referring to. Mr. Adams said all the pavers are hardcover. Walsh noted he was not supposed to have pavers to begin with. Mr. Adams stated he thinks he gets grandfathered in, if he is not mistaken, with anything there. The goal with the project is to remove the pavers and move the shed to an area that already has hardcover. He said he does not have a huge lot and the shed is placed directly in the middle of his lot. His hope is to be able to move it and utilize the shoreline better and remove 175 square feet of existing hardcover. Printup noted it is good to get rid of the buckthorn. Mr. Adams said he has had poison ivy twice and it is not fun. The shoreline is a mess and he knows that is why his neighbors are in favor of his plan. Crosby asked if Mr. Adams was going to keep the existing shed. Mr. Adams stated he would love to keep the existing shed. He would not make it bigger. It is a weird- shaped roof, and he is trying to align it with the level of quality that his house is. He is trying to design it in a way that fits. He said they would rip out the current staircase and then hope they could get approval on the stairs as well as moving the shed. Crosby asked where Mr. Adams would be looking to move the shed from, noting it was in the middle. Mr. Adams said it would basically be where the current stairs are. It would be 10-15 feet. It opens up the ability for them to use the shoreline. They would like to put a low-grow grass there and keep it as natural as possible. His goal is to protect the lake, make a shoreline that looks beautiful and also in line with what Orono is trying to do, which is to eliminate or decrease hardcover. He hopes the City Council considers that and they can make a spot that is good for both of them. Mr. Crosby stated he was not able to see the property and asked Johnson to tell him more about it. He understood Johnson felt it was important to change the staircase. Johnson noted that if anyone misses one stair, they will be at the bottom of the staircase. He said that, to the naked eye, that side is not obviously less steep. He feels that getting a better stairs is good. He is wondering where the record is of what was authorized there, because there are pavers down by the lake, a shed down by the lake. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 10 of 21 Walsh said that is part of the problem; sometimes you don’t find the stuff until someone needs a variance and they come in, City Staff goes out and sees it, and wonders where all of that came from. Johnson said it is also the City’s opportunity to clean up some of these things because sheds down by the lake are not something the City is promoting. He would be careful about the long-term consequences of letting someone move one, because the City has been pretty rigid on not letting people move things even an inch. He thinks that is hard for someone new in the area to understand, but it is their job because they see a big picture of it all. He said the shed should be removed, anyway. Walsh indicated it would be possible to move the stairs around to go around the shed. He agrees that the City has not let anyone move anything in the 0-75 whether it was supposed to be there, is there, or was grandfathered in. He told Mr. Adams the good news is, he has a shed by the lake; the bad news is, he has to live with where the shed is located. He can fix it up, make it look beautiful, but he has to stay with the volume and the gable, or whatever it happens to have, as a roof. Mr. Adams asked, if the moving of the shed was going to be declined, could he still have a vote for the stairs. Walsh indicated they would be approving the stairs, but they are not going to approve moving the shed. Johnson moved, Printup seconded, to approve the stairs. If the Applicant has to move the stairs, Staff approves adjustments within reason to try to work around the shed if Mr. Adams wants to keep the shed, but the moving of the shed is denied. Barnhart noted, for the Council’s understanding, stairs are a permitted improvement. The variance is the retaining wall associated with the construction of the stairs and there might be some flexibility in terms of the location that Staff can approve. Johnson said Dale Gustafson was the landslide guy that came at one time and is a good guy trying to get things stabilized. He is assuming they are doing the right things with the retaining wall. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 16. LA20-000027 – BOB ERICKSON, 365 WESTLAKE STREET, SKETCH PLAN Staff presented a summary of the packet memorandum. Bob and Lisa Erickson, 365 Westlake Street. Mr. Erickson said his goal is to combine the land at 364 Westlake Street with the south 127 feet of Westlake Street while dedicating land for a new cul-de-sac. He believes this could be accomplished by the approval of a single lot replat resulting from a Class 3 subdivision. The new cul-de-sac would be centered on the same point that was used in 1999 when he received a lot line rearrangement on the east side of Westlake Street for his house at 372 and another lot at 364. At that time, the City agreed to a 40-foot radius on the east side of the street. The new additional cul- de-sac area shows a 50-foot radius. The new portion will be big enough to provide on-street parking. Since the area added is larger than the amount dedicated, a new lot at 1.19 acres will be slightly nonconforming in the two-acre zone. He is also offering to pay a $100,000 park dedication fee and to remove 2, 286 square feet of pavement hardcover from the south end of the street. 59% of the hardcover MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 11 of 21 is within the 75-foot setback area. The reduction in hardcover close to the lake will reduce the amount and rate of stormwater runoff and reduce the amount of unburned hydrocarbons, salt, and sediment entering the lake. The existing lake access does not actually provide any access to the lake because the lakeshore has been completely overgrown with aquatic vegetation for a number of years, and is never used because it is not possible to do so. Two separate portions of the east-west alley on the east side of Westlake Street were vacated years ago, the most recent in the 1990s. Further, almost every house on the street has its own lakeshore, so they would not have a use for public access even if it was usable. Easements can be provided for drainage and sanitary sewer maintenance. At the same time, having a dead-end street of substandard width with no cul-de-sac causes frequent problems for delivery trucks, garbage haulers, and lawn services. Fortunately, there have not been any fires or medical emergencies, because Westlake Street is not prepared for them. The problems intensify when anyone parks in the street, which is barely wide enough for two-way traffic. In addition to fire trucks, another type of vehicle never seen in 18 years is a school bus, because it would be impossible for one to turn around. He said they had renters at this location with school-aged children. They walked the kids the full length of the street to catch the bus on Bayside. There are lake accesses nearby that are well-suited and popular for a variety of recreational uses. The City maintains a fishing dock at the south end of Stubbs Bay Road, which is also used for launching canoes, kayaks, and swimming. In the winter it is used by snowmobilers and cross-country skiers to get to the Luce Line Trail and Bederwood Park. The existing recreational facilities are within walking distance of Westlake Street. Also, on Stubbs Bay is the Eastlake Street access, which adjoins a larger neighborhood area of homes without lakeshore with a lake access, which could see more use if it were improved. The DNR lake access facility is two miles away on Maxwell Bay with ramps, a fishing dock, and toilet facilities. He said Hennepin County boat ramp and trailer parking on North Arm Bay is also nearby. When complete, the Westlake Street neighborhood will be well-served with improved water quality, on-street parking, and an appropriate terminal for the safe and convenient reversal of traffic movement. The City will also benefit from the generous contribution for recreational purposes or for whatever purpose the City deems appropriate. He said he is confident this will improve traffic function and home values for the neighborhood and at the same time represents the highest and best use of the property. Walsh noted Seals lives in the area and asked what her thoughts were about the access, etc. Seals said she did not know how anyone could access the lake from there. Walsh asked if Seals felt she was pretty well-served from the one on Stubbs Bay. Seals stated she did and did not know how much the access on the other side is used because it is on a dead end and she does not typically go there. The one on Stubbs Bay is used a lot, including for fishing and paddleboarding. Crosby noted, in order to access the one being discussed, a machete would need to be used. Walsh said these accesses are on a case-by-case basis and the Council has made it a little bit of a mission to clean some of them up. He stated this is on a dead-end street into a marsh that no one can get through, and it seems to be a reasonable opportunity to clean it up and have a turnaround that makes sense in the neighborhood. He said it is bizarre that it is a two-acre zoning and the plat in the late 1800s/early 1900s has half-acre units. There are long, skinny half-acre properties. He noted that Mr. Erickson started combining some of the lots and trying to make them more useful. He said Mr. Erickson has got to give up MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 of 21 some land to make the cul-de-sac in addition to making a donation and getting rid of all of the hardcover. So, it seems like a reasonable use as far as cleaning some of the spots up. Crosby stated the cul-de-sac will add a lot to the end of the road and make it safer, and vehicles will be able to turn around because no one can turn around there. Printup said when it comes to public accesses, he gets edgy not wanting to give up the land. But there are three City improvements, and he thinks it is one of the areas that makes sense. Walsh noted it makes sense especially when there are a bunch of accesses in the area that are well-done and just blocks away. He said this will clean up an area that is screaming to get cleaned up. Johnson asked what the conforming radius of a cul-de-sac is. Walsh said it is 50 or 60. He believes 50 feet is being proposed. Johnson stated he met with Mr. Erickson, and as he was there, a car came down the street and turned around in Mr. Erickson’s driveway. He is not a huge advocate of getting rid of public accesses, but when they are not usable and there is some public benefit with the cul-de-sac, that is important. He asked if where he is doing the lot combination is a two-acre zoning district so that it cannot be undone. Walsh said Johnson was right. He noted the zoning can always be changed, but it would not set a very good precedent. Oakden stated 365 Westlake used to be multiple small lots that are already combined. City Staff would review how to get the vacated road to the 365 property and Mr. Erickson will give up some land for the right-of-way to create the cul-de-sac. That balance maintains the substandard lot in a sense, because you are taking some land with the road but giving up some land for the cul-de-sac. Johnson clarified the area is zoned two-acre but had eight lots on it. Oakden said at one time it was multiple small lots. Johnson indicated he thinks there is a net gain for the City and it makes it better. Walsh stated this was a guidance suggestion and Mr. Erickson has guidance, and the next step is to take it to the Planning Commission in a formal setting and then back to the Council. Crosby noted it would be an improvement to the whole neighborhood when it is done. Oakden said there would be a DNR review when it is a lake access point, so that adds a few more days to the review process. Staff will work with the Applicant. 17. LA20-000030 – ERIC LUTH O/B/O YMCA GREATER TWIN CITIES AND GORDON JAMES INC., 135 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD, PRELIMINARY PLAT Staff presented a summary of the packet memorandum. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 13 of 21 Walsh stated the City Council had an application similar to this approximately a year ago, although the Applicant did not move forward on it yet, where half was in the Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA) and the other half was not. The City took the strategic conclusion at that point, because it was on a hill and so close to the lake, that it made more sense to chew up a little bit of the City’s flexibility with the MUSA number to make sure things like that are on the MUSA. The site is surrounded by wetlands. The City put together the impact on the MUSA, and it was pretty negligible because it is very small in terms of the number. Even if things were switched, it would still be at 4.3-4.5. He said if the City is going to use the flexibility in the number, this item would be the time to do that. Printup said an email was received saying to stick to the septic and stick to what everybody else had. He is wondering if that had something to do with the fear of density coming in. Johnson noted in the Planning Commission meeting it was a fear of change. The people that surround the property have gotten used to having nothing back there. Seals and Printup noted that happens quite often and is very normal. Johnson said one of the abutting properties tried to get hooked up to the City sewer and got turned down. He thought there was pushback from some of the surrounding neighbors wanting screenage, etc. It is a conforming subdivision and the Council does not get to dictate their screenage for something within code. Printup stated that often something like that is playing a part. He asked if there would be any type of unintended consequences of increased numbers tapping into the sewer line. Barnhart stated there could be, although he could not say. He thinks the bigger issue would be if the City expanded the MUSA and changed the density. Several Council members indicated that would not happen. Barnhart noted that was one of the main issues when the project came up because it is a very nice, pristine rural area. Printup said the reason there is septic in certain areas and large lots is to keep the densities down; it is a tool in the tool box. If a sewer is coming into the area, it is not a scary monster. Johnson noted the sewer easement is already running through this property. John Quinlivan, 5159 Main Street, ob/o Gordon James, said he appreciates the Council’s time. He stated they are emphatically not asking for more density, nor are they asking to plop in more homes. There are a couple of things that drove this. There are steep slopes that surround the entire property, and when the septic designer was out there, he said it was a nightmare trying to figure it out. Walsh indicated Mr. Quinlivan had called him, and Walsh told him to bring it to the Council if there was a situation. Mr. Quinlivan said Rusty, who does a lot of work in the City, told him he could make it work but there are so many Type 1 wetlands. He said he believes the density is a scary issue to people. He stated the other issue is the homes on the right are worried about privacy. Bringing in sewer allows them to move MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 14 of 21 the homes around because he is not taking up two huge sites on each lot for septic. He noticed when they did the survey, there’s someone with a fire pit that’s eight feet within the land and there is also a pool on the property line. They do not want to take anything away from anybody, but they want to work with people to set up homes there that are going to work for the neighborhood. Printup noted the new homeowners will want privacy, too. Mr. Quinlivan said that is what he shared with the Planning Commission, too. If you run from the street down the driveway, the old easement runs down there and curves straight, so there is already an easement there for utilities. He thinks the unintended consequences are probably mitigated in a huge way because on the southern end is the Luce Line. He said the sewer line will be well within the property. He reiterated the conversation was initiated because Rusty was out there and he called Barnhart, who was kind enough to run the density report which he believed was 4.6 to 4.4. It is negligible if it is put in and gives them a lot of flexibility on the site. They are not asking for more density than what R-2 allows. Walsh stated the City would not allow more homes, anyway. Printup stated if too many people started one that would affect the sewer numbers, and the City would tell them no because there is a certain capacity. Walsh indicated they would be case-by-case situations, too. Rief said they have been in a lot of conversations with Long Lake Creek Watershed, and the north and west boundaries are Long Lake Creek, and the City would be supporting the effort to improve the watershed as well. Walsh clarified that the Council was not making a decision but only giving guidance today. Eric Luth asked where he goes from here. Barnhart said the next step is to make a formal amendment to the Comprehensive Plan application so there will be a Planning Commission public hearing which they would act on, and then following that solution, the Applicant would finish up the preliminary plan. 8. SANITARY SEWER SERVICE LINE INSPECTION PROGRAM – ORDINANCE Edwards stated the Sanitary Sewer Service Line Inspection Program is before the Council for approval or additional guidance. He took the comments from the earlier session and added them in the document, along with a few others. Johnson said he is against it at the point of sale. He stated it is a huge problem; looking at the claims and bills about the overage, it needs to be addressed. When he read through the timeline, it brought up more questions. He contacted Golden Valley, talked to a man named Jeff Oliver, and wanted to share what he learned from Mr. Oliver. He said they started their program in 2007, there was a huge learning curve, and it took more time to get it rolled out than they ever thought because of all the logistics that go with it. Mr. Oliver is willing to talk to Orono and give them the whole plan of what worked and what didn’t. He suggested considering that resource so Orono’s rollout is good. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 15 of 21 Seals asked what was problematic with Golden Valley as far as why it took them so long. Johnson said Golden Valley did not get the cooperation from realtors when it got rolled out. Walsh said Golden Valley did it so that when someone listed their property, it had to be done. Johnson said the realtors fought the City; the City did not get any support in rolling out the idea. Since it was 2007, it was probably a pretty aggressive idea at the time. Golden Valley does the vast majority of the inspections, but they have a provision that vendors can get approved to do it. One of the things they learned is, if there are outside vendors doing it, they had to specify what type of camera quality, because some guy might have black-and-white photos. They had to come up with a process, if an outside vendor was used, of what specifically they have to do. He said he called three people that do that inspection, and none of them had the same camera. Two of them said they would not be responsible for sending the video; another guy said he would put it on a thumb drive and give it to the resident and they can be responsible for getting it to the City. Then the City would get thumb drives potentially. Golden Valley also ran into a very clear definition of what’s acceptable, because when you do these, you find dips. Lots of engineers will say a certain amount of dip is acceptable or is not acceptable. Also, they can’t do the scoping because it needs to be cleaned first. He asked what provisions do they have when the scope won’t go through because of all the roots that grow in there and make it so the scope does not work and a cleaning has to be set up first. He said this is costing Orono hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Met Council. Walsh said if the City does it, it bypasses all the issues about specs from a different vendor, although it puts more onus on the City. Johnson said the issue with just the City doing it is really their capacity to respond within what is defined as a reasonable timeline to get everything done. As he read through the structure, the City provides timelines of when they have to get it corrected. Some of them are catastrophic, and they can’t be given 90 days to fix a catastrophic failure such as a complete separation and there is a sinkhole of that household’s waste going in the ground, or a line collapses. Statistically, what is being proposed does work. They saw a huge reduction in their daily groundwater getting in, etc. Golden Valley started out with the City putting lining in, just like Orono. It was Mr. Oliver’s opinion that the majority of the water getting in was coming from the residential properties. He stated when Golden Valley would do roadwork, they would do every sewer on there because there is an economy of scale when you are pounding them out and already doing the roadwork. Walsh noted those are not voluntary at that point because people are selling their house. The City is doing road work and then they are going to do inspections. Johnson said the City is proposing $250 and he wanted to make sure the City was not undercutting what the private sector charges. Walsh stated $250 was a pretty fair cost. He said it would be another discussion if the City were doing a road and wanted to proactively start going in and doing that. The City has never done it before and can baby step their way into it. He mentioned that it sounds like the program is set up relatively well at this point. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 16 of 21 Edwards said Orono’s program is modeled almost completely after Golden Valley, because they are kind of the model in the metro that everybody uses. He backed out the road construction provision that some cities have in their ordinances. He got the feeling from a previous discussion that might be considered overstepping. He said that is another successful provision some cities use; they primarily use it on a road reconstruct such as a full rebuild/full utility replacement; they will require all of the service lines be televised, and any that need to be replaced can be replaced as part of the project. The advantage is that there can be a better cost because the same vendor/contractor is doing all the utility work at once. He noted Delano did one of those projects about a year ago, where they did a complete reconstruct. Walsh stated that made sense because they talked in general that they did not want to willy-nilly go out and do it. If it is limited to a full road reconstruct, everything is already opened up, 20 locations could be solved at the same time and it’s good for ten years. He noted that in Golden Valley, if you list your house, you have to have the inspection; if you take your house off the market and list it a year later, you have to do everything all over again. Orono is more reasonable because they are doing ten years and when they are doing it, it is being fixed correctly the first time. He asked if the Council wanted to add back in the full reconstruct. Printup said he would not do it now because not only is it bad timing, but the City is just stepping into it. Walsh agreed that it could always be added. Also, there are no full road reconstructions in front of the City that he is aware of this year or next year. Edwards stated there are none anytime soon that are full reconstructs and where there would be utilities. Seals said she feels it might be too much because she is still getting emails on the utilities. Walsh noted he would like to get it in place and was glad Johnson confirmed a number of things with Golden Valley. If the City needs to make tweaks as they go along, they can do so. Crosby stated the reconstruct portion definitely needs to be added in the future. Printup asked if there would be people that would be interested in it because they don’t want a backup and so they would do it on their own. Crosby said there would be some people. Seals stated her husband would be one of them. Walsh said if someone has backups, they would be doing a camera at some point to figure out what is causing the problem. Printup stated he has no interest in knocking on doors and saying that the City government is here. He is in favor of it as people are heading out of town. Johnson noted some people in Orono move within the City. Walsh said if they are buying a new house, they know they are getting theirs done, too. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 17 of 21 Crosby said it gives people something not to worry about, which could be a major inconvenience moving in and then having your sewer back up. Johnson noted that this is the big picture. There are provisions that say under certain circumstances a homeowner would not need it; for example. if the principal dwelling will be demolished but the “when” is not addressed. He said the details need more attention and he can share what he has. Walsh asked if this is a motion or to provide direction. Edwards said it was brought as a motion for approval. If there is further direction, he is happy to take that. Walsh noted it says Council action: review and provide direction. Edwards said he had not updated the agenda item. Walsh said if there were additional things Johnson would like to go over, he would not have any problem passing it with conditions of Johnson having a few tweaks with Rief so it can be nailed down. Edwards stated there are two parts: one, getting an ordinance approved and put on the book. Two, there are standard operating procedure things that need to be in place, not all of which are in place, such as the engineering guidance; if the City only accepts a video, what format it will be; what level of defects in a pipe are going to trigger the City to say it needs to be replaced. He said if Johnson’s corrections are ordinance-related, he would not want to approve an ordinance that is still in draft. Johnson said his proposal is to not approve this because the ordinance takes effect immediately upon passage. There is no communication about it. He stated it could be taken off-line and he would be willing to work on it with Edwards. Walsh stated it could then be brought back and what got changed can be discussed and the Council can move forward. Printup moved to table, Seals seconded, the Sanitary Sewer Service Line Inspection Program – Ordinance. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Seals asked everyone to take care of themselves and go to some restaurants which are finally opening. School is over but she didn’t notice a change at her house. Johnson said there was an incident across from his house and he hopes for the best for everybody. His son is in the National Guard so he has been paying particular attention to the looters. He noted the protestors are not his concerns but the looters are. He said the citizen soldiers are giving orders and we have to respect what they are doing right now. The events add a little more pressure to the circumstances right now. He said he is a realtor, and currently the market is in good shape. His vision is really small, it is the Lake Minnetonka area, and there is a lot of interest in real estate right now. He thinks people are tired of being cooped up. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 18 of 21 Printup noted it was a nice recognition of Planning Commissioner Thiesse and said that he did a very good job on the Planning Commission. He seconded what Johnson said about prayers to a lot of people. Crosby stated he supports the Police Officers and believe 99.5% of the officers are good cops. He thinks disparaging all Police Officers because of some evil cops is the wrong thing to do. He thinks it is disgusting that Minneapolis is talking about defunding their Police Department. If they had proper funding for the Police Department, they might not have had these incidents happen. If anything, they need to consider increasing funding, increasing training, and supporting their Police Department. He said the same thing goes across the country like New York City. Violence and rioting are not the answer; two wrongs never make a right no matter how much you would like it to. People can be good to each other and mourn the victims who have been killed in this tragedy. We have to remember the people in the National Guards and military who serve us and have some prayers for their safety. He has been in Orono since 1994 and never thought he would see what happened in Minneapolis, and then have the Mayor and Governor for the most part do nothing but have a stand-down. He commented that is not going to happen here. Orono is here to protect its citizens, properties, businesses, and everyone’s lives, including their Police Officers. Walsh said, on a positive note, his youngest son got engaged. He stated everyone’s heart has to go out to the thousand businesses that were damaged or completely destroyed with half a billion dollars in damage, the second-most in the history of the United States in any city. His heart goes out to the neighborhoods; hopefully, they will come back. He noted Minneapolis cannot get rid of the Police Department because it is part of their charter, even if they take the money away. Crosby stated the neighborhoods have to make choices and he hopes they come back. If they don’t, it will devastate their communities. Walsh moved, Printup seconded, to direct staff to draft a resolution that Orono will not only not defund its Police Department, Orono will make sure its Police Department is fully funded and take care of all of its citizens and businesses. Walsh noted that, as elected officials, the City Council’s first priority is public safety. When you lose the knowledge of your first priority, it’s time to find a different job to do, and hopefully that is what people will do at the ballot box. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT 18. AUTHORIZE BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT INVOLVING CITY PROPERTY AND 1121 NORTH SHORE DRIVE Rief said there was originally a vacation involved with the right-of-way to the east side of the property. That was dropped but the planners brought forward this portion. The property owner does not have a dock and wants to put one in. Lake Minnetonka Watershed District had a request to do a boundary lot adjustment with the City. Using an aerial map, he said the lots on the left side are underneath the water of Forest Lake. There have been a number of vacations to the south related to the shoreline where there originally was a road; farther south there’s a bit of a curve as if the shoreline looked differently when these were platted. This is one of two properties where the property line does not touch the water and the MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 19 of 21 City is being requested to do a boundary lot line adjustment and allow the owners to have access to their water. Walsh asked who owns the property in front of the lot. Rief answered that the City does. Walsh asked if it was part of a road before. Rief stated there are parcels underneath the lake in Forest Lake and that is the City’s. Seals stated she looked at the Hennepin County Property Report and the map and said the whole situation is weird. Walsh said Hennepin County has a whole subdivision in the middle of the lake. Rief noted when the City gets a listing of property it owns, those parcels under the water are included. He said most of the properties extend into the water; the property being discussed is in the top part of the triangle but does not touch the water. Crosby asked, when they touch the water, if they can legally say it is their water. Johnson and Rief said they cannot say it right now. Crosby asked if the land underneath the water is legally theirs. Rief said on the other properties the land underneath is theirs. Walsh said this is an easy situation to clean up. Printup asked if their taxes were less because of the weird sliver that separates them. Rief stated they are still considered lakeshore. Johnson said he looked up the information, and both properties were told they had lakeshore; in particular, this property owner was told they had 100 feet of lakeshore. Walsh asked if the City was selling the land or doing a boundary line adjustment. Rief stated the City can do a boundary adjustment. Johnson noted he is not okay with the south lot because they have to do a lot line combination, as nobody wants to get rid of a right of a dock on a vacant piece of property. Rief said the property to the south is owned by the property owner to the right. Johnson stated both of the property owners have a dock. Rief said they hold the same address so he wondered if they had the rights, although he did not know. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 20 of 21 Using the Hennepin County map, the owners of the lots were found. Johnson stated the owner would have to do a lot combination. Printup said they already have an agreement. He thinks that is the case because they dealt with the family several years ago with a lot two blocks over and had a special agreement to have a dock in that location. Rief asked if there was a lawsuit related to that area. Crosby asked how it would look if the City vacated it. Rief said the City would not vacate it. It is a parcel the City owns so it is a boundary line adjustment. Walsh clarified that the City is just giving direction at this point. Rief said it is administrative action. It is something the City owns so it had to come before the Council. Johnson asked if the City was going to adjust their lot so it is completely in the water. Walsh noted all of the other lots are in the water, too. Johnson asked if the City would want the owner to do a lot combination at the highlighted area. Walsh said the property being discussed is 1121. Johnson clarified that it was a lot line adjustment for the lot at 1121. Seals asked why the City would not do both. Barnhart stated there is some legal expense involved in the lot line adjustment; there is a survey requirement and legal descriptions. Printup asked to take the issue to a Work Session. Barnhart said normally City Staff handle boundary line adjustments administratively. The only requirement is to provide a survey showing the change and the legal description before and after. The property owner came forward with a proposal which involved the City so it was brought to the Council. The reason why Staff is not taking an opportunity to clean up the others is because of the incurred expense and that the other property owner has not indicated a desire to do so. Walsh said he had no problem with the 1121 but the property owner should pay the expense, which Council members agreed with. Rief thanked the City Council for supporting the Police Department, especially because of the last couple of weeks, and said he and the Police Chief appreciate their support. He said road construction projects are in progress. Budgets will be discussed at the next Work Session. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 21 of 21 None. ADJOURNMENT Printup moved, Seals seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 8:18 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: _____________________________________ _______________________________________ Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor Orono City Council Work Session Minutes Monday, June 8, 2020 Council Chambers 5:00 p.m. PRESENT: Mayor Dennis Walsh, Council Members Richard F. Crosby II, Victoria Seals, Aaron Printup and Matt Johnson. Staff members present were City Administrator Dustin Rief, Finance Director Ron Olson, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, and City Clerk Anna Carlson. 1. Spring Park Public Works Proposal Public Works Director/City Engineer Adam Edwards began discussion explaining that in 2019 the City of Orono had been approached by Spring Park about the possibility for Orono to provide Public Works services their city. Edwards explained the breakdown of services, possible costs, extra staffing and affects it may have on Orono if services were provided to Spring Park. He noted that Spring Park uses many of the same contractors for services. They would have to buy into our Workflow systems such as the GIS and Cartegraph system and other costs were calculated related to the total cost for a contract for our services. Edwards added that he felt Orono has the capabilities to provide Public Works services to Spring Park. There would be a need for restructure within the Public Works Department, an additional truck and an additional employee. Council Member Aaron Printup asked if Spring Park had any vehicles. Edwards noted they do not. City Administrator Dustin Rief mentioned they may have a generator or two to back up their lift stations. Rief also mentioned that we are also challenged with adding the additional duties for the Water/Sewer Supervisory, so those additional costs have not been added to the total cost shown before council tonight. Printup asked if there would be any impacts that could affect Orono by taking on additional service. Edwards noted that no, the department would add an additional maintenance worker and we would work as a group to service both cities as a whole. Mayor Dennis Walsh mentioned he thinks that there is no problem with being a good neighbor to Spring Park and to assist them. Walsh mentioned it’s important to note that their capital costs are not going to go through to Orono and that the contracted services are mainly what will be negotiated. Council Member Matt Johnson mentioned that staff should make sure we are capturing all of our costs prior to making any type of commitment. Orono City Council Work Session Minutes Monday, June 8, 2020 Council Chambers 5:00 p.m. Edwards mentioned he is looking to council for guidance. Once we receive note that you support staff for examining this closer, staff will bring back to council for approval. Guidance over all is to get final numbers and draft contract. Council Member Victoria Seals would like staff to dig into the numbers a bit more prior to sharing this with Spring Park. 2. Solicitor License Moratorium Rief began discussion about Soliciting during the pandemic. He asked for guidance for allowing Solicitors to go to residents homes during while executive orders are in place for social distancing. Walsh asked if the attorney had any concerns about this discussion. Walsh is concerned that people may not have the choice if people are coming to them during this time while they do have a choice to visit places outside their homes. Johnson also mentioned we don’t really have control for enforcing protocols during executive orders. Printup asked if this would be through 2020. Rief mentioned it would be observed while the Governor’s orders for COVID-19 are effect. It may be wise to not offer the opportunity in order to protect the residents. Walsh agreed that the City may want to avoid sending people out into the neighborhoods that may impact the residents by promoting Solicitors during the pandemic. Council agrees that a moratorium may be a wise choice for now. 3. Elections Update City Clerk Anna Carlson gave an update to the council about the Absentee Voting period. She mentioned that Hennepin County had offered options for handling in-person voting during the 46 days leading up to the 2020 Primary Election to all HC Cities in response to COVID-19. Carlson noted that Orono would opt to handle the Direct Balloting period for Orono residents for the last 7 days prior to Election Day beginning on August 4, 2020 allowing voters to enter City hall and vote. Orono City Council Work Session Minutes Monday, June 8, 2020 Council Chambers 5:00 p.m. Adjourned: 5:45 p.m. CITY OF ORONO: __________________________________ Dennis Walsh, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Anna Carlson, City Clerk AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: MLU Reviewed By: RJO Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to approve payment of claims made on the City for services and/or products provided to the City. 2. Background. The attached claims for payment have been received by the City. Staff has reviewed the claims and is recommending approval of the listing for payment. The claims will be paid by checks 114069 to 114156, totaling $276,744.28. 3. Noteworthy Payments. Vendor Amount Description of Payment #114079 League of MN Cities (Berkley Risk Admin) $39,975.00 Payment for 2020 property/casualty insurance premium. #114140 Shaughnessy Lawn Care $5,100.00 Payment 6 weeks of services for spring cleanup, dethatching, mowing and raking. #114151 Valley Rich Co $27,052.59 Payment for valve and water main repairs. 4. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of a motion authorizing payment to the claims list as presented. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the claims list as presented. Exhibits A. Check Register Item No.: 3 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: Claims/Bills Presenter: Ron Olson Finance Director Agenda Section: Consent Agenda City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 1 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount SF Mobile-Vision Inc 06/15/2020 113857 27372 101-42110-416 SOFTWARE Police Department 988.00- Total 113857:988.00- SF Mobile-Vision Inc 06/15/2020 114069 27372 101-42110-416 SOFTWARE Police Department 988.00 Total 114069:988.00 PAYCHEX 06/22/2020 114075 21879219 101-41900-319 HR SETUP Central Services 2,035.15 Total 114075:2,035.15 A 1 ELECTRIC SERVICE OF WA 06/22/2020 114076 22173 601-49400-405 ELECTRICAL REPAIR - INTERCONNECT SUMP P Water 153.09 Total 114076:153.09 Axon Enterprises Inc 06/22/2020 114077 SI-1661744 101-42110-221 TASER SUPPLIES Police Department 816.00 Total 114077:816.00 Beniek Property Services Inc.06/22/2020 114078 154324 101-42110-404 WEED SPRAYING BACK LOT Police Department 300.00 Total 114078:300.00 Berkley Risk Admin Co LLC 06/22/2020 114079 060420 703-49960-361 2020 PROPERTY/CASUALTY INSURANCE 39,975.00 Total 114079:39,975.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.06/22/2020 114080 0249958-Rev 435-48972-304 19-046 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD OVERLAY 132.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.06/22/2020 114080 0249959 435-48973-304 2020 STREETS IMPROVEMENTS 20-001 2020 Street Improvments 3,672.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.06/22/2020 114080 0249963 225-45200-304 EAST LONG LAKE TRAIL 20-029 13,552.50 BOLTON & MENK INC.06/22/2020 114080 0251362 101-43280-304 20-000030 ORCHARD HILL DEVELOPMENT Special Services 1,173.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.06/22/2020 114080 0251367 435-48972-304 19-046 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD OVERLAY 420.00 BOLTON & MENK INC.06/22/2020 114080 043020-Reve 435-48973-304 2020 STREETS IMPROVEMENTS 20-001 2020 Street Improvments 2,432.00- Total 114080:16,517.50 BOND TRUST SERVICES CORP 06/22/2020 114081 58634 321-47000-620 GO SERIES 2010A AGENT FEES 475.00 BOND TRUST SERVICES CORP 06/22/2020 114081 58635 323-47000-620 GO SERIES 2016A AGENT FEES 475.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 2 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 114081:950.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0000G-175 101-41600-307 COVID 19 - POLICY/LEGAL REVIEW Law/Legal Services 879.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0000G-175 101-41600-307 LABOR MATTERS Law/Legal Services 759.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0000G-175 101-41600-307 GENERAL LEGAL 5/2020 Law/Legal Services 1,660.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0004G-163 101-42110-307 POLICE MATTERS 5/20 Police Department 280.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0115G-118 101-41600-308 CODE ENFORCEMENT 5/20 Law/Legal Services 330.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0201G-97 101-41600-307 MISC RECORDINGS 05/20 Law/Legal Services 492.05 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0670G-2 101-43280-307 LA20-000012 -LAKEVIEW OF ORONO Special Services 530.20 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0674G-2 101-43280-307 LA20-000023 - 2635 KELLEY Special Services 82.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0675G-2 101-43280-307 LA20-000025 - 855 OCB Special Services 82.50 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0677G-2 101-43280-307 LA20-000032 - IVY PLACE 2ND ADDTN Special Services 272.90 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0678G-1 101-43280-307 LA20-000024 - 1380/1386 REST POINT Special Services 110.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0679G-1 101-43280-307 LA20-2000027 - 365 WESTLAKE Special Services 110.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0800G-58 101-42400-307 STAFF MEETINGS 5/20 Building & Zoning 264.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0801G-58 101-41600-307 COUNCIL MEETING 05/20 Law/Legal Services 495.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0802G-58 101-42400-307 B&Z ASSISTANCE 5/20 Building & Zoning 660.00 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 06/22/2020 114082 0803G-49 101-41600-307 ORDINANCES - 5/20 Law/Legal Services 973.50 Total 114082:7,981.65 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/22/2020 114083 052120-2 101-42110-321 PHONE CASE Police Department 37.54 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/22/2020 114083 052620 601-49400-227 TREE REPLACEMENT FROM WATER DIG Water 399.95 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/22/2020 114083 060520 701-49800-212 NON-OXY FUEL 25.82 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/22/2020 114083 061020 101-42110-437 TASER REFRESHER Police Department 495.00 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/22/2020 114083 061720 710-49970-416 ONLINE MEETING PLATFORM 280.65 CARDMEMBER SERVICE 06/22/2020 114083 061720-1 101-45210-221 SQUARE CC READER Golf Course 52.19 Total 114083:1,291.15 CCP INDUSTRIES INC.06/22/2020 114084 IN02543718 101-43000-226 TRAFFIC VESTS Public Works Department 303.48 Total 114084:303.48 CECE S SIGNS 06/22/2020 114085 8388 701-49800-221 GRAPHICS 277.00 Total 114085:277.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN 06/22/2020 114086 052820 601-49400-381 GAS SERVICE 04/20/20-05/20/20 Water 508.07 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 3 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN 06/22/2020 114086 052820 602-49450-381 GAS SERVICE 04/20/20-05/20/20 Sewer 327.62 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN 06/22/2020 114086 052820 101-41900-381 GAS SERVICE 04/20/20-05/20/20 Central Services 184.71 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN 06/22/2020 114086 052820 101-42110-381 GAS SERVICE 04/20/20-05/20/20 Police Department 63.63 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MAIN 06/22/2020 114086 052820 101-45210-381 GAS SERVICE 04/20/20-05/20/20 Golf Course 43.60 Total 114086:1,127.63 CENTURY LINK 06/22/2020 114087 060420 601-49400-321 WATER PLANT PHONE/INTERNET 4/24-5/23/20 Water 106.02 CENTURY LINK 06/22/2020 114087 1493189475 614-49840-329 INTERNET 5/20-5/7/20 Cable Franchise 1,056.44 Total 114087:1,162.46 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/22/2020 114088 4051888915 101-43000-221 SHOP TOWELS Public Works Department 3.50 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/22/2020 114088 4051888915 101-43000-226 UNIFORM Public Works Department 59.54 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/22/2020 114088 4052553738 101-43000-221 SHOP TOWELS Public Works Department 3.50 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/22/2020 114088 4052553738 101-43000-226 UNIFORMS Public Works Department 59.54 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/22/2020 114088 4053062688 101-41900-404 MAT SERVICE - CH Central Services 21.92 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/22/2020 114088 4053062755 101-43000-404 MAT SERVICE - PW Public Works Department 25.92 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/22/2020 114088 4053172765 101-43000-221 SHOP TOWELS Public Works Department 3.50 CINTAS CORPORATION 06/22/2020 114088 4053172765 101-43000-226 UNIFORMS Public Works Department 59.54 Total 114088:236.96 CITYVIEW PLUMBING & HEATIN 06/22/2020 114089 103968296 601-49400-405 FURNANCE REPAIR SOUTH WTR PLANT Water 660.47 Total 114089:660.47 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT 06/22/2020 114090 200531 101-43000-224 ASPHALT Public Works Department 813.70 Total 114090:813.70 CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CO 06/22/2020 114091 0015119 101-41900-223 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES Central Services 266.00 Total 114091:266.00 CORE & MAIN 06/22/2020 114092 M400027 651-49910-227 FLARED END SECTIONS HDPE - REST POINT LA Storm Water 487.44 Total 114092:487.44 CROSSROADS ANIMAL SHELTE 06/22/2020 114093 44318702 101-42110-317 ANIMAL CARE Police Department 60.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 4 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 114093:60.00 DPC INDUSTRIES 06/22/2020 114094 DE82000068 601-49400-216 CHLORINE Water 20.00 Total 114094:20.00 EADER, BRADLEY 06/22/2020 114095 061720 101-22205 ESCROW REFUND RPS18-000091 4710 AUGUST 10,000.00 Total 114095:10,000.00 EARL F ANDERSON & ASSOC 06/22/2020 114096 N123366 101-43000-224 SIGN REPLACEMENT - BRACKETTS POINT AND Public Works Department 201.71 Total 114096:201.71 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 06/22/2020 114097 779416 101-41900-352 EMPLOYMENT AD MSSR Central Services 240.00 Total 114097:240.00 EMBEDDED SYSTEMS INC.06/22/2020 114098 344073 101-42110-403 SIREN MAINTENANCE Police Department 1,107.00 Total 114098:1,107.00 FASTENAL 06/22/2020 114099 MNPLY1230 101-43000-224 WASHERS Public Works Department 3.75 FASTENAL 06/22/2020 114099 MNPLY1231 101-43000-226 RUBBER GLOVES Public Works Department 43.26 FASTENAL 06/22/2020 114099 MNPLY1233 101-43000-226 EAR PLUGS Public Works Department 87.00 Total 114099:134.01 FERGUSON WATERWORKS #25 06/22/2020 114100 0455409 601-49400-227 METERS Water 5,473.07 Total 114100:5,473.07 FIEGER, JANET MARIE 06/22/2020 114101 061620 101-22205 ESCROW REFUND LA19-000086 580 BIG ISLAND 700.00 FIEGER, JANET MARIE 06/22/2020 114101 061620 101-39615 ESCROW REFUND LA19-000086 580 BIG ISLAND 21.00- Total 114101:679.00 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 06/22/2020 114102 3270-469927 101-43000-240 SHOP SUPPLIES Public Works Department 10.98 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 06/22/2020 114102 3270-477718 101-42110-402 SQUAD MAINTENANCE Police Department 26.98 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 5 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 114102:37.96 GOPHER ACE 06/22/2020 114103 1486/1 601-49400-227 POWER CORD Water 15.99 GOPHER ACE 06/22/2020 114103 1794/1 101-43000-489 MISC. SUPPLIES - DESK REPAIR Public Works Department 17.99 Total 114103:33.98 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TE 06/22/2020 114104 1000151028 710-49970-401 NETWORK SUPPORT 6-2020 58.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TE 06/22/2020 114104 1000151106 101-42110-414 RADIO LEASE Police Department 2,273.08 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TE 06/22/2020 114104 1000151129 101-43000-414 PW RADIOS 04/20 Public Works Department 206.91 Total 114104:2,537.99 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 06/22/2020 114105 1000150908 101-41600-309 JAIL CHARGES Law/Legal Services 311.80 Total 114105:311.80 JAMI WITTKE 06/22/2020 114106 061120 101-42110-226 INV. UNIFORMS Police Department 131.00 Total 114106:131.00 KENNETH N POTTS PA 06/22/2020 114107 060420 231-45650-307 ATTORNEY FEES 300.00 Total 114107:300.00 LAKESCAPE LLC 06/22/2020 114108 530 101-45200-404 BEACH WEED CONTROL Parks 674.68 Total 114108:674.68 LOUWERSE, MICHAEL 06/22/2020 114109 061720 101-22205 ESCROW REFUND LA20-000029 4731 NORTH SH 700.00 Total 114109:700.00 Lube Tech & Partners LLC 06/22/2020 114110 1619043 601-49400-227 FIRE HYDRANT OIL Water 661.60 Total 114110:661.60 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT 06/22/2020 114111 P27902 701-49800-222 UNIT #460 SWEEPER REPAIR TASK 32649 66.13 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT 06/22/2020 114111 P27904 701-49800-222 UNIT #460 SWEEPER REPAIR TASK 32649 63.20 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 6 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 114111:129.33 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 06/22/2020 114112 21813032 701-49800-212 DIESEL FUEL 341.68 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 06/22/2020 114112 21813033 101-42110-212 UNLEADED FUEL Police Department 3,129.55 Total 114112:3,471.23 MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTA 06/22/2020 114113 0001111202 602-49450-383 WASTEWATER CHARGES 07/2020 Sewer 51,616.28 Total 114113:51,616.28 METRO WEST INSPECTIONS S 06/22/2020 114114 2416 101-42400-310 BUILDING INSPECTIONS Building & Zoning 7,897.00 Total 114114:7,897.00 MHSRC/Range 06/22/2020 114115 629430-7716 101-42110-437 EVOC TRAINING - 2 OFFICERS Police Department 870.00 Total 114115:870.00 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPA 06/22/2020 114116 00060302 701-49800-222 ACETYLENE, OXYGEN 30.69 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPA 06/22/2020 114116 00060303 101-42110-221 REFILL O2 Police Department 51.15 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPA 06/22/2020 114116 00060304 101-42110-221 REFILL O2 Police Department 7.13 Total 114116:88.97 Minnesota Pollution Control Agen 06/22/2020 114117 SD-272 602-49450-441 MPCA LICENSE Sewer 23.00 Total 114117:23.00 MINT ROOFING 06/22/2020 114118 1187853 101-42110-404 BUILDING REPAIR Police Department 109.87 Total 114118:109.87 MN Dept of Health, Env Health Di 06/22/2020 114119 851527 101-45210-489 MDH GOLF FEES Golf Course 40.00 Total 114119:40.00 Morrie's Auto Body & Glass 06/22/2020 114120 25688 101-42110-402 SQUAD 247 REPAIRS Police Department 615.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 7 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 114120:615.00 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/22/2020 114121 324454 601-49400-489 SHIPPING Water 11.38 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/22/2020 114121 325022 701-49800-221 EXTENSIONS FOR PORTA-POWER 9.46 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/22/2020 114121 325027 701-49800-221 EXTENSIONS FOR PORTA-POWER 5.58 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/22/2020 114121 325042 701-49800-221 EXTENSIONS FOR PORTA-POWER 16.35 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/22/2020 114121 325126 101-45200-223 QUICK LINKS - SWIM BUOYS Parks 35.97 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/22/2020 114121 325139 101-43000-489 HAND SOAP Public Works Department 22.99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/22/2020 114121 325172 601-49400-240 PROPANE TORCH Water 36.99 NAVARRE HARDWARE 06/22/2020 114121 325210 602-49450-240 0536 LOCKS Sewer 155.88 Total 114121:294.60 Newegg Business Inc 06/22/2020 114122 1302793902 710-49970-221 MICROPHONE TIPS - CC 19.00 Newegg Business Inc 06/22/2020 114122 1302797704 710-49970-221 MONITORS - POLICE 429.67 Newegg Business Inc 06/22/2020 114122 1302799582 710-49970-221 MONITORS - J BARNHART 309.98 Total 114122:758.65 O SULLIVANS HOLIDAY 546 06/22/2020 114123 053120 101-42110-402 05/20 CAR WASHES Police Department 60.50 Total 114123:60.50 O SULLIVANS HOLIDAY 547 06/22/2020 114124 053120 101-42110-402 05/20 CAR WASHES Police Department 153.78 Total 114124:153.78 Occupational Health Centers of M 06/22/2020 114125 103186691 101-42110-319 MEDICAL EXAM NEW HIRE Police Department 402.50 Total 114125:402.50 OFFICE DEPOT 06/22/2020 114126 5042344430 101-42110-201 OFFICE SUPPLIES Police Department 22.56 OFFICE DEPOT 06/22/2020 114126 50423511300 101-42110-201 OFFICE SUPPLIES Police Department 51.56 OFFICE DEPOT 06/22/2020 114126 5069166370 101-41900-221 OFFICE SUPPLIES Central Services 46.24 OFFICE DEPOT 06/22/2020 114126 5087419630 101-42110-201 OFFICE SUPPLIES Police Department 58.99 OFFICE DEPOT 06/22/2020 114126 5087423670 101-42110-201 OFFICE SUPPLIES Police Department 23.99 OFFICE DEPOT 06/22/2020 114126 5094150770 101-42110-201 OFFICE SUPPLIES Police Department 26.52 OFFICE DEPOT 06/22/2020 114126 5094175640 101-42110-201 OFFICE SUPPLIES Police Department 49.99 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 8 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Total 114126:279.85 OLSEN CHAIN AND CABLE INC 06/22/2020 114127 654945 701-49800-403 ANNUAL HOIST INSPECTION 200.00 Total 114127:200.00 ONLINE SOLUTIONS LLC 06/22/2020 114128 3725 101-42400-439 ADDING ALICIAQ AS USER Building & Zoning 1,410.00 Total 114128:1,410.00 OTTEN BROTHERS 06/22/2020 114129 1-1610719 101-45210-223 GOLF MULCH Golf Course 23.97 OTTEN BROTHERS 06/22/2020 114129 1-1613146 101-45210-223 GOLF GARDEN MULCH Golf Course 31.96 OTTEN BROTHERS 06/22/2020 114129 1-1617444 101-45210-223 GOLF DRAINAGE SOD Golf Course 19.50 Total 114129:75.43 OUTDOOR ESCAPES OF LAKE 06/22/2020 114130 061620 101-22205 ESCROW REFUND LA20-000008 505 WILLOW D 700.00 OUTDOOR ESCAPES OF LAKE 06/22/2020 114130 061620 101-39615 ESCROW REFUND LA20-000008 505 WILLOW D 21.00- Total 114130:679.00 Perry's Truck Repair 06/22/2020 114131 51077 701-49800-403 SNOW PLOW REPAIRS 282.00 Total 114131:282.00 PERSONNEL EVALUATION INC 06/22/2020 114132 36810 101-42110-319 BACKGROUND INV EXPENSE Police Department 20.00 Total 114132:20.00 PLUNKETT S 06/22/2020 114133 6669320 101-41900-404 CITY HALL PEST CONTROL 6/1/20 Central Services 232.54 Total 114133:232.54 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC 06/22/2020 114134 39113 602-16500 LS #19 REMODEL 12,380.00 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC 06/22/2020 114134 39121 602-16500 LS#30 REMODEL 12,380.00 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC 06/22/2020 114134 39158 602-49450-406 SERVICE CHECKS Sewer 4,340.00 Total 114134:29,100.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 9 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Ray's Tree Service 06/22/2020 114135 051520 101-43000-408 TREE REMOVAL, TRIMMING Public Works Department 1,000.00 Total 114135:1,000.00 Reed Wholesale & OCS 06/22/2020 114136 9718 101-45210-093 GOLF SNACKS FOR RESALE Golf Course 833.20 Total 114136:833.20 RYAN AUTO MALL 06/22/2020 114137 238935 101-42110-402 SQUAD MAINTENANCE Police Department 54.20 Total 114137:54.20 SAFETY VEHICLE SOLUTIONS 06/22/2020 114138 2028 101-42110-402 SQUAD MAINTENANCE Police Department 173.94 Total 114138:173.94 SECOND NATURE GRAPHICS 06/22/2020 114139 385 101-41900-201 BUSINESS CARDS Central Services 69.00 Total 114139:69.00 SHAUGHNESSY LAWN CARE 06/22/2020 114140 060320 101-45200-404 PARK MOWING Parks 5,100.00 Total 114140:5,100.00 SHERWIN WILLIAMS 06/22/2020 114141 0094-4 101-45200-223 BEDERWOOD SHED PAINT Parks 269.08 Total 114141:269.08 STAR TRIBUNE 06/22/2020 114142 060720 101-41300-208 6/23/20 - 9/22/20 - SUBSCRIPTION ACCT 1913693 Administration 63.05 Total 114142:63.05 STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 06/22/2020 114143 I1429826 101-42110-240 SMALL TOOLS Police Department 71.98 STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 06/22/2020 114143 I1430490 101-42110-226 UNIFORM Police Department 105.98 STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 06/22/2020 114143 I1430623 101-42110-226 UNIFORM Police Department 13.99 STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 06/22/2020 114143 I1430767 101-42110-226 UNIFORM Police Department 99.99 STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 06/22/2020 114143 I1430822 101-42110-226 UNIFORM Police Department 189.99 STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 06/22/2020 114143 I1433410 101-42110-226 UNIFORM Police Department 31.96 STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 06/22/2020 114143 I1434574 101-42110-226 UNIFORM Police Department 30.00 STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 06/22/2020 114143 I1434872 101-42110-226 UNIFORM Police Department 87.90 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 10 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 06/22/2020 114143 I4434936 101-42110-226 UNIFORM Police Department 15.98 Total 114143:647.77 SUMMIT COMPANIES 06/22/2020 114144 1519503 101-42110-319 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SERVICE PD Police Department 85.30 SUMMIT COMPANIES 06/22/2020 114144 1519503 101-45200-319 FIRE EXTINGUISHERS - BRUSH SITE AND BEDE Parks 268.00 Total 114144:353.30 TEELE, BRENT 06/22/2020 114145 061720 101-22205 ESCROW REFUND RPS19-000162 577 PARK LAN 1,000.00 Total 114145:1,000.00 THOMSON WEST 06/22/2020 114146 842399829 101-42110-311 INTEL PROCESSING Police Department 213.03 Total 114146:213.03 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial Inc 06/22/2020 114147 M25666 101-41300-439 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 05/18/2020 Administration 575.00 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial Inc 06/22/2020 114147 M25666 101-41110-439 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 05/11/2020 Mayor & Council 410.50 Total 114147:985.50 TOM MITTELSTAEDT PAINTING 06/22/2020 114148 6600 101-43000-404 PAINTING OF FUEL CUBE.Public Works Department 4,897.50 Total 114148:4,897.50 TREHUS BUILDERS 06/22/2020 114149 061720 101-22205 ESCROW REFUND RPS20-000043 3490 BIRCH L 1,000.00 Total 114149:1,000.00 TWIN CITY SEED COMPANY 06/22/2020 114150 47055 651-49910-227 STORM SEWER DITCHING Storm Water 567.50 Total 114150:567.50 VALLEY RICH CO 06/22/2020 114151 28326 601-49400-405 VALVE REPAIR @ BAYVIEW & 19 Water 10,295.93 VALLEY RICH CO 06/22/2020 114151 28333 601-49400-405 TOGO & 19 VALVE REPAIR & INSTALL.Water 13,110.20 VALLEY RICH CO 06/22/2020 114151 28361 601-49400-405 WATERNAIN BREAK 2599 CASCO POINT RD Water 3,646.46 Total 114151:27,052.59 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 11 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 101-42110-321 INTERNET 6/7-7/6/20 Police Department 1,797.58 VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 101-42110-221 PD EQUIPMENT - SILTALA & FISCHER Police Department 207.44 VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 101-42110-321 INTERNET 6/7-7/6/20 Police Department 249.40 VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 101-42400-321 INTERNET 6/7-7/6/20 Building & Zoning 70.02 VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 101-43000-321 INTERNET 6/7-7/6/20 Public Works Department 35.01 VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 101-45200-321 INTERNET 6/7-7/6/20 Parks 35.01 VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 101-45210-321 INTERNET 6/7-7/6/20 Golf Course 146.15 VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 101-45220-321 INTERNET 6/7-7/6/20 Brush Site 105.03 VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 601-49400-321 INTERNET 6/7-7/6/20 Water 166.57 VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 602-49450-321 INTERNET 6/7-7/6/20 Sewer 166.58 VERIZON WIRELESS 06/22/2020 114152 9856071431 710-49970-221 PHONES 493.72 Total 114152:3,472.51 WASTE MANAGEMENT RECYC 06/22/2020 114153 0069602-280 603-49500-316 RECYCLING 06/2020 15,831.75 Total 114153:15,831.75 Wright-Hennepin Coop Electric 06/22/2020 114154 3502806071 101-45220-381 BRUSH SITE 5/1-6/1/20 Brush Site 23.77 Wright-Hennepin Coop Electric 06/22/2020 114154 3502806071 101-45210-381 GC SECURITY 7/1-7/31/20 Golf Course 41.82 Wright-Hennepin Coop Electric 06/22/2020 114154 3502806071 101-43000-381 ELECTRICAL SERVICE 05/01-06/01/20 Public Works Department 158.03 Total 114154:223.62 XCEL ENERGY 06/22/2020 114155 686668296 101-41900-381 ELECTRIC 4/21/20-5/20/20 Central Services 1,419.47 XCEL ENERGY 06/22/2020 114155 686668296 101-42110-381 ELECTRIC 4/21/20-5/20/20 Police Department 957.07 XCEL ENERGY 06/22/2020 114155 686668296 101-42110-381 ELECTRIC 4/21/20-5/20/20 Police Department 33.50 XCEL ENERGY 06/22/2020 114155 686668296 101-43000-381 ELECTRIC 4/21/20-5/20/20 Public Works Department 189.56 XCEL ENERGY 06/22/2020 114155 686668296 101-43000-386 ELECTRIC 4/21/20-5/20/20 Public Works Department 1,979.42 XCEL ENERGY 06/22/2020 114155 686668296 101-45200-381 ELECTRIC 4/21/20-5/20/20 Parks 22.64 XCEL ENERGY 06/22/2020 114155 686668296 601-49400-381 ELECTRIC 4/21/20-5/20/20 Water 6,431.88 XCEL ENERGY 06/22/2020 114155 686668296 602-49450-381 ELECTRIC 4/21/20-5/20/20 Sewer 2,822.08 XCEL ENERGY 06/22/2020 114155 686668296 101-45210-381 ELECTRIC 4/21/20-5/20/20 Golf Course 513.11 Total 114155:14,368.73 Yamaha Golf & Utility 06/22/2020 114156 01-235782 101-45210-415 GOLF CART RENTAL Golf Course 1,100.00 Total 114156:1,100.00 City of Orono Check Register - COUNCIL REPORT Page: 12 Check Issue Dates: 6/9/2020 - 6/22/2020 Jun 18, 2020 01:48PM Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount Grand Totals: 276,744.28 AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: RJO Reviewed By: DJR Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose: To amend Section 14.110 of the Orono City Code to allow for monthly utility billing to begin with the July 2020 utility bills. 2. Background: During the 2020 utility rate discussions during the fall of 2019, The City Council directed staff to implement a monthly utility billing schedule. Due to the recent City staffing reorganization, this change has been postponed until the third quarter 2020 billing. The changes are as follows: Section 14-110 a. The billing period is changed from quarterly to monthly with the delinquent period changing from 30 days to 21days. The change in the delinquency period means that the due date of bills will change from the 10th of the month following the bill date to the 25th of the billing month. Section 14-110 b. – A minor grammatical change is being made to the pronoun referring to the owner as him. The delinquency period for the annual certification process is being changed to 30 days from 45. 3. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approving the ordinance changes to section 14- 110. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the ordinance amending city code section 14-110 to allow for monthly billing. Exhibits A. Ordinance Item No.: 4 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: City of Orono Text Amendment Related to Utility Billing - Ordinance Presenter: Ron Olson, Finance Director Agenda Section: Consent Agenda ORDINANCE NO. ____, THIRD SERIES CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.110 RELATED TO BILLING, PAYMENT AND DELINQUENCY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Article III of the Orono City Code is amended as follows: ARTICLE III. – CITY UTILITIES Sec. 14-110. - Billing, payment and delinquency. (a) All municipal utilities shall be billed quarterly monthly, and a utilities statement or statements shall be mailed to each consumer. All utility charges shall be delinquent if they remain unpaid after 30 21 days from the date of the bill. Payments received on or before the 30th 21st day shall be deemed as paid within that period. A penalty of eight percent shall be added to and become part of all delinquent utility bills. If service is suspended due to delinquency, it shall not be restored at that location until a reconnection charge has been paid for each utility reconnected in addition to amounts owed for service and penalties. If delinquent charges are specially assessed under subsection (b) of this section, an additional sum of eight percent computed on the delinquent amount of charges and penalties shall be added to and become part of the amount so assessed to cover administrative costs of making the assessment. (b) Payment for service and charges provided for in this section shall be the primary responsibility of the owner of the premises served and shall be billed to him them unless otherwise authorized in writing by the tenant and owner and consented to by the city. The city may collect the payment in a civil action or, in the alternative and at the option of the city, as otherwise provided in this subsection. Each such charge is made a lien upon the premises served. All such charges which are on September 1 of each year more than 45 30 days past due shall be certified by the city clerk to the county auditor on or before December 1 of each year; and the city clerk in so certifying such charges to the county auditor shall specify the amount, the description of the premises served, and the name of the owner. The amount so certified shall be extended by the auditor on the tax rolls against such premises in the same manner as other taxes, collected by the county treasurer, and paid to the city along with other taxes. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this 22nd day of June, 2020 on a vote of __ ayes and __ nays by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota. CITY OR ORONO: _____________________________ ATTEST: Denis Walsh, Mayor ______________________________ Anna Carlson, City Clerk Ordinance published in The Laker and The Pioneer newspapers the week of ________, 2020. AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: A.Carlson Reviewed By: A.Carlson Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to approve the Rental Licenses for the license period of June 22, 2020 to December 31, 2021. 2. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the rental licenses as listed in Exhibit A for the license period of June 22, 2020 to December 31, 2021. The Rental License Applicants in Exhibit A have submitted all of the requested documents and have met all requirements. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the rental licenses listed in Exhibit A for the license period of June 22, 2020 to December 31, 2021. Exhibits A. Listing of Rental Licenses Item No.: 5 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: Approval of Rental Licenses Presenter: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Agenda Section: Consent Agenda Exhibit A City Council 2020 Rental License RL20-000011 Robert Knuth 100 RL20-000012 Greg Blasko 100 License# Licensee Total License Fees AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: DJR Reviewed By: DJR Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose: To adopt the State required COVID 19 Preparedness Plan Background: The Minnesota Governor has signed an Emergency Executive Order 20-74 requiring essential organizations to adopt a preparedness plan. The preparedness plan addresses worker and visitor safety precautions/protocols to prevent the spread of COVID-19 2. Staff Recommendation: Adopt the COVID-19 Preparedness Plan COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the COVID-19 Preparedness Plan Exhibit A A. COVID-19 Preparedness Plan Reference A. Orono COVID-19 Emergency Response Plan B. Orono COVID-19 Leave Plan C. League of Minnesota Cities Pandemic Planning Guidance for Cities D. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/covid-19/controlprevention.html#health E. Centers for Disease Control https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/index.html F. Minnesota Department of Health https://www.health.state.mn.us/diseases/coronavirus/index.html G. Hennepin County Department of Health https://www.hennepin.us/residents/emergencies/covid-19 H. League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) https://www.lmc.org/ I. Metro Cities https://www.metrocitiesmn.org/covid-19---resources-for-city-officials J. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) https://www.fema.gov/ Item No.: 6 Date: June 22,2020 Item Description: COVID-19 Preparedness Plan Presenter: Dustin Rief, City Administrator Agenda Section: Consent Agenda AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: DJG Reviewed By: Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain Council approval for the 2020 Streets and Facility Maintenance Crack Sealing project. 2. Background. Crack sealing is a routine preventive road maintenance process. 3. Project Scope. The identified streets shall have their cracks and routed, cleaned and sealed. Spot sealing will be required on areas with a concentration of small cracks. (See Exhibit A) 4. Cost. Public Works received quotes from 2 contractors for crack sealing. A summary of the quotes received are listed in the table below. The lowest quote was from MP Asphalt Maintenance for $20,152.00 Contractor Price per linear foot Total Quote MP Asphalt Maintenance $0.65 $20,152.00 Allied Blacktop Company $0.95 $51,950.00 5. Funding. The project will be funded from the pavement management fund. The 2020 Public works plan and CIP allocated $50,000 pavement preventive maintenance. 6. Staff Recommendation. I recommend acceptance of the low quote for crack sealing. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to authorize MP Asphalt Maintenance to complete the 2020 Street Maintenance crack sealing project for $ 20,152.00 Exhibit A- Street Listing Item No.: 7 Date: June 22,2020 Item Description: 2020 Crack Sealing Presenter: DJ Goman Streets Supervisor Agenda Section: Consent Agenda Exhibit A Crack Sealing Areas for 2020 City Hall and Police Dept. Parking Lots Willow Drive S. (Hwy 12 Bridge to Fox St.) Old Crystal Bay Road N. and S. Watertown Road Stubbs Bay Road to McCulley Minnetonka Ave Casco Point Road to Casco Circle AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: Reviewed By: DJR Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose. The purpose of this item is for City Council to accept the roadway within the Southways development. 2. Background. The Southways development was approved subject to the terms of the Development Contract, Southways, 18-3998, executed by the developer and the City June 11th, 2018. Per the contract the sanitary sewer and storm water utilities as well as the roadway are to be a public facilities owned, operated and maintained by the City of Orono. The sanitary sewer was accepted on January 13th 2020. On June13th, 2020 the wear course of pavement was completed for the roadway. 3. Public Improvements. The development infrastructure that is public include the storm water system, sanitary sewer system and the roadway. 4. Staff Recommendation. I recommended formal acceptance of the roadway COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached resolution accepting the roadway improvements within Southways as public facilities. Exhibits A. Resolution References A. Development Contract, Southways, 18-3998 Item No.: 8 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: Southways Development - Formal Acceptance Public improvements – Resolution Presenter: Adam T. Edwards Public Works Director/City Engineer Agenda Section: Consent Agenda CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __ A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE SOUTHWAYS DEVELOPMENT AS PUBLIC FACILITIES WHEREAS, on June 11th , 2018 the City of Orono and James and Mary Jundt entered into Development Contract Southways, 18-3998, (the "Contract") which documented the terms and conditions under which the development known as Southways was approved; and WHEREAS, the terms and conditions of the Agreement state that final acceptance of the improvements to be publicly owned, including, sanitary sewer, storm water and the roadway, shall take the form of a Resolution passed by the Orono City Council, on the advice of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has recommended that the City formally accept the roadway improvements; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono does hereby formally accept the public roadway improvements associated with Southways and shall assume ownership and maintenance of said facilities. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota this 22nd day of June, 2020. ATTEST: Anna Carlson, City Clerk Denis Walsh, Mayor AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: Correy Farniok Reviewed By: DJR Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain approval to accept a donation from Colin Charlson – State Farm. 2. Background. The Police Department has received 17 -$20.00 gift cards from Colin Charlson – State Farm. The donation is in appreciation to the Orono Police Department. 3. Project Scope. Accept the 17- $20.00 gift cards and distribute to officers to use or hand them out to those in the community that are in need per Colin Charlson request. 4. Staff Recommendation. I recommend approval to accept the 17- $20.00 gift cards. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion for approval and to accept the 17- $20.00 gifts cards and to distribute as requested by Colin Charlson. Item No.: 9 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: Approval to Accept Donation Presenter: Correy Farniok Police Chief Agenda Section: Consent Agenda AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: Correy Farniok Reviewed By: DJR Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain approval for the disposal of a firearms. 2. Background. Over the last several weeks the police department has received several guns (3) that were dropped off by their owners and requested to be destroyed. These 3 guns will be destroyed by Orono Public Works. 2. Project Scope. Disposal of firearms. 20-004243 Mossberg 385KB 20 gauge shotgun SN#164600 National Firearms Co. 12 gauge shotgun SN#131629 Winchester Model 12 12 gauge shotgun SN#695950 3. Staff Recommendation. I recommend the disposal of a firearms. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to dispose of 3 firearms. Orono Public Works will cut up and destroy. Item No.: 10 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: Approval to Dispose of Firearms Presente r: Correy Farniok Police Chief Agenda Section: Consent Agenda AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: Correy Farniok Reviewed By: DJR Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain approval to hire a full-time police officer. An opening exists for a full-time police officer after Officer Jason Barnes resigned on May 29, 2020. 2. Background. Trey Wiebusch is currently employed as a community service officer by Eden Prairie Police Department and a seasonal park service assistant Three Rivers Park District. Wiebusch has a Bachelor of Arts Degree from University of St. Mary, Bismarck ND in Criminal Justice and Spanish. His Law Enforcement certificate is from Hennepin Technical College. Wiebusch is excited about the opportunity to work for the Orono Police Department. A conditional job offer has been extended and Wiebusch has successfully completed a Psychological Exam, a Physical (Pre-employment medical) exam and has passed the MN Peace Officers Standards and Training licensing exam. 3. Staff Recommendation. I recommend to hire Trey Wiebusch as a full-time police officer at the starting rate of $32.04 per hour, with a start date of June 23, 2020. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve the hiring of Trey Wiebusch as a full-time police officer at the rate of $32.04 per hour with a start date of June 23, 2020. Item No.: 11 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: Request to Hiring Full-Time Police Officer Presenter: Correy Farniok Police Chief Agenda Section: Consent Agenda AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: mcc Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose. To consider a resolution granting a variance in order to construct a 2-level porch addition on to the existing home encroaching 10’ 2” into the average lakeshore setback. 2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was received and was considered to be complete on April 22, 2020. The 60-Day review period has been extended and now expires on August 20, 2020. 3. Background/ Summary. On June 8, the Council reviewed the application for the requested average lakeshore setback variance and voted 5 to 0 to direct staff to draft an approval resolution for consideration. 4. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends the Council adopt the draft approval resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council should amend or adopt the drafted approval resolution. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. Draft Council Minutes C. Council Memo 06/08/2020 References Council Exhibits 06/08/2020 PC Exhibits 05/18/2020 Item No.: 12 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: LA20-000028, Baycliff Homes o/b/o David and Wendy Jacobsen- Gretsch, 2440 Old Beach Road, Variance – Resolution Presenter: Melanie Curtis Planner Agenda Section: Consent Agenda CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 1 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1279 FILE NO. LA20 -000028 WHEREAS, on April 22, 2020, David Jacobsen-Gretsch and Wendy Jacobsen- Gretsch (hereinafter the “Applicants”), through their builder, applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 2440 Old Beach Road and legally described as: Lot 2, “Shore Hills” except that part thereof lying Southerly of a line running from a point in the Westerly line of said Lot, distant 24 feet Northerly of the Southwesterly corner thereof to a point in the Southeasterly line of said Lot, distant 263.4 feet Northeasterly of the Southwesterly coroner thereof (hereinafter the “Property”); WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow construction of a home addition 10’ 2” lakeward of the average lakeshore setback; and WHEREAS, on May 18, 2020, after published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, on May 18, 2020, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the variance; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 2020, the City Council reviewed the application and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 2020, the City Council voted 5 to 0 to direct preparation of findings for approval of the variance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby approves the requested variance as described above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning the Property: CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 2 FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #LA20-000028. The analysis contained within staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference. 2. The Property is located in the LR-1B One Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Property contains 1.4 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 177 feet at the ordinary high water level and 195 feet at the 75-foot setback. 4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25% according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. 5. Applicant has applied for the following variance: a. Average Lakeshore Setback Variance 6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. ANALYSIS: 1. “Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance . . . .” The requested average lakeshore setback variance is in harmony with the Ordinance as the most adjacent neighbors’ views will not be impacted by the improvements. 2. “Variances shall only be permitted . . . when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan.” The variances resulting in a permit for construction of an addition to an existing single family residence in a residential zone are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. “Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. ‘Practical difficulties,’ as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that: CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 3 a. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls. The request to permit construction of building improvements lakeward of the average lakeshore setback appears to be reasonable; the mature vegetation, topography, and home orientation separate the Property from the adjacent neighbors. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. The location of the existing home, the orientation and location of the neighboring homes, and the character of the lake shoreline in question are conditions not created by the landowner. c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” It does not appear that the requested average lakeshore setback variance to permit an addition to the home will adversely impact views of the lake currently enjoyed by the adjacent property owners or alter the character of the locality. 4. “Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.” Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. “Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78.” This condition is not applicable. 6. “The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located.” This condition is not applicable, as the use for a residential home is an allowed use in the LR-1B District. 7. “The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling.” This condition is not applicable. 8. “The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property.” The location of the existing home, the orientation and location of the neighboring homes, and the character of the neighborhood CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 4 are unique conditions affecting the subject Property and the immediately adjoining properties. 9. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located.” The location of the existing home, the orientation and recent re-location of the neighboring home are unique conditions affecting the subject Property. 10. “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.” The applicant states that the variance is necessary to preserve their right to improve their home and property. 11. “The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter.” Granting the requested variance will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort, or morals; nor will it be contrary to the intent of the Code. 12. “The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty.” The application of the average lakeshore setback severely limits the options for improving the property/home; the granting of the requested variance is necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty resulting from the location of the existing home in relation to the newly constructed neighboring home, the orientation of the neighboring homes, and the character of the lake shoreline. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow construction of an addition 10 feet 2 inches lakeward of the average lakeshore setback, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. 2. The approved project shall conform to the survey dated March 27, 2020 and updated on April 22, 2020, and the building plans submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibits A & B. 3. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 5 completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (June 22, 2021). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may result in the termination of any authority granted herein. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 22nd day of June, 2020. ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: _______________________________ ________________________________ Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT 14. LA20-000028 – BAYCLIFF HOMES O/B/O DAVID AND WENDY JACOBSEN-GRETSCH, 2440 OLD BEACH ROAD – VARIANCE Staff presented a summary of packet information. David and Wendy Jacobsen-Gretsch, 2440 Old Beach Road. Mr. Jacobsen-Gretsch thanked the City Council for their time and commitment during this crazy time and also thanked them for coming out to the site. He stated their project is an intentional remodel of the property; what was unintentional is all the problems they discovered. They ended up removing two raised patios with storage units due to water damage. They are asking for a variance to extend the adjacent setback due to a hardship in their property. As stated in the Planning Committee notes, the purpose of the house setback/adjacent property setback is to prevent encroachment lake views and is designed to prevent homes from moving towards the lakeshore. They are asking for a variance that is in complete alignment with that, especially considering the hardship they are proposing that exists on their property which is completely out of their control. From their perspective, the hardship is clear. The house to the north moved back when they tore down their house to build a pool. That has adjusted their setback to make the existing structure nonconforming. That change was obviously out of their control and has caused a hardship not only to them but also to their property. The distance is 15 feet between the movement of that house back to theirs. He said that 15 feet across their lot is about 3,000 feet of unusable space due to that movement. That is the hardship that they claim which is out of their control. They will still be 107 feet back from the shoreline. He noted it is a little frustrating through the process in that they chose to preserve the existing house and it probably would have been resolved had they torn down the existing house and started over. He hopes the City Council can see that they were trying to invest in what was already there. He also believes the hardship addresses an area of the setback rule that was never really intended. He asked what someone does when a house moves back. He asked what would happen if the neighbor moved back another 50 feet, because then his entire backyard would be nonconforming. That is where he thinks it goes bigger than the individual hardship; it goes to the lack of productivity of the entire lot. He noted the Council has done a lot of things to be more efficient and have things align with more common sense. He believes the variance aligns with that. Everyone they have talked to has said, “Yeah, that kind of makes sense, the neighbor did that.” He said they respect the City Council’s decision but ask for their support. Printup stated it is a very valid point, because what do you do when the neighbor goes back as opposed to the conventional wisdom of when a neighbor goes forward. Walsh said there have been a number of instances when the house has been way back, and if somebody is trying to build a house where it is so far back, it has created a practical difficulty. He can visualize that the house the applicant is in currently, when it was built, was built with plenty of room and gave themselves some flexibility. Because the house next to them went backwards, it created a practical difficulty for them. They did not create it; it was created for them. He thinks it is pretty reasonable to be able to keep the existing line that was there and to be able to build into that and solve the problem they have. It is also in line with what they have done in the past, houses that are already way back that the Council has kind of let come up within a reasonable sight line. Crosby stated he went out to the site and visited with the homeowner, and the neighbor’s house is fairly far forward to allocate for their pool, and so forth. It is not a practical difficulty that the Applicant created and it is a practical difficulty to him. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Johnson noted that by the other house moving back, it put the existing house in nonconformance. He said the Council thinks about that all the time in other areas, but a house going backwards is not as common. He noted people do not come to the Council for permission to move their house farther back; that is not seen at their level. He indicated that was his only hesitation when he first reviewed the information, but he agrees it has created a hardship that the Applicant did not create. Somebody would not know to go to their neighbor and say, “Hey, don’t put your house back there because I want to put a screen porch up.” He also noted the Applicant is way beyond the 75-foot mark. He is in support of the variance. Seals said usually they get called out when there is a narrow lot. She was surprised when she went out there that there was the issue because it does not feel like they were encroaching upon the lake, and she is also in support of the variance. Printup moved, Crosby seconded, to direct Staff to draft a resolution reflecting approval of LA20- 000028 – Baycliff Homes o/b/o David and Wendy Jacobsen-Gretsch, 2440 Old Beach Road – Variance. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: mcc Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: 1. Purpose. This application is regarding an application for a variance in order to construct a 2-level porch addition on to the existing home encroaching 10’ 2” into the average lakeshore setback. 2. MN§15.99 Application Deadline. The application was received and was considered to be complete on April 22, 2020. Therefore the 60-Day review period expires on June 21st. 3. Background/ Summary. The new owners of the property want to make some improvements to the home including an addition on the lakeside which will extend partially into the average lakeshore setback. The current home is situated approximately 6 inches into the average lakeshore setback (on the curved wall). The addition would extend 10 feet, 2 inches further toward the lake, expanding the encroachment. 4. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. On May 18th, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. Following the public hearing the Planning Commission voted 7 to 0 on a motion to deny the requested average lakeshore setback variance to expand the nonconforming setback. 5. Public Comment. Comments from the neighbors were received and are attached as Exhibit C. Item No.: # Date: 8 June 2020 Item Description: #LA20-000028, Baycliff Homes o/b/o David and Wendy Jacobsen-Gretsch, 2440 Old Beach Road - Variance Presenter: Melanie Curtis Planner Agenda Section: Planning Department Report AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: mcc Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: 6. Staff Recommendation. The house can be expanded within the conforming building envelope. Lacking a valid practical difficulty to support the new encroachment, planning staff recommends denial of the requested variance. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Council should discuss the application, and vote to direct staff regarding drafting a resolution reflecting Council’s decision. Exhibits Exhibit A. Proposed Plans Exhibit B. Draft PC Minutes Exhibit C. Public Comment Exhibit D. PC Staff Report References PC Exhibits 05/18/2020 Exhibit A. Application & Narrative Exhibit B. Practical Difficulties Documentation Form Exhibit C. Proposed Survey & Staff Annotated Site Plan Exhibit D. Submitted Hardcover Calculations Exhibit E. Proposed Plans and Elevations Exhibit F. Aerial Photos Exhibit G. Public Comment Exhibit H. Property Owners List Exhibit I. Plat Map AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: LLO Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By DJR 1. Purpose. Consider resolution approving variances for retaining walls in the 75’ lakeyard and denying a variance for a relocated accessory building in the, 75’ lakeyard and average lakeshore setback (ALS). 2. Background. At the June 8, 2020 City Council meeting the Council reviewed the staff reports, public comments, and the Planning commission’s recommendation. The council voted 5-0 on a motion to approve the retaining walls within the lake yard and deny the lake yard setback, average lakeshore setback and hardcover variances for the relocation of the shed as presented and directed staff to draft an approval and denial resolution for adoption at the June 22, 2020 meeting. 3. 15.99 Deadline. The application was complete in March 31, 2020. Following the 60-day rule the application would expire July 12, 2020. 4. Staff Recommendation. Based on Council’s direction, staff has drafted an approval resolution for the retaining walls for the lake stairs and denial for the lakeyard setback, average lakeshore setback and hardcover variances associated with the relocation of the shed within the lake yard. The City attorney has reviewed the resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt or amend the resolution. Exhibits A. Draft Resolution B. Draft Council Minutes References City Council Memo + Exhibits of 06/08/2020 PC Memo + Exhibits of 05/18/2020 Item No.: 13 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: LA19-000031, Dale Gustafson, 2927 Casco Point Road, Variances, Resolution Presenter: Laura Oakden Planner Agenda Section: Consent Agenda CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 1 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1279 AND DENYING A VARIANCE FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SETION 78-1279 FILE NO. LA20 -000031 WHEREAS, on April 24, 2020 Don Adams (“Applicant”), applied for a variance from the City Code for the property addressed 2927 Casco Point Road and legally described as: Lots Ninety-five (95) and One Hundred Six (106), and including that part of Lake Shore Avenue vacated lying across said Lot Ninety-five (95), Spring Park, hereinafter the (“Property”); WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow retaining walls within the 75’ lakeyard to support new stairs; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow the relocation of an existing shed within the 75’ lakeyard and average lakeshore setback; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1680 to allow the relocation of an existing shed changing the nature of the hardcover from patio to building within the 75’ lakeshore setback; and WHEREAS, on May 18, 2020, after published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, on May 18, 2020, the Planning Commission recommended approval for the variance 78-1279 to allow new retaining walls to support the stairs; and WHEREAS, on May 18, 2020, the Planning Commission recommended denial for the variance 78-1279 to relocate the existing shed; and CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 2 WHEREAS, on June 8, 2020, the City Council directed preparation of findings for approval for the retaining walls and denial of the variances associated with the proposed shed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby approved the variances for the retaining walls and denied the requested variance for the relocation of the shed as described above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning the Property: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #LA20-000031. The analysis contained within staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference. 2. The Property is located in the LR-1C Zoning District. 3. The Property contains 0.57 acres in area and has a defined lot width of 51 feet. 4. The Property is within Tier 1 and hardcover is limited to 25 % according to the Stormwater Quality Overlay District. 5. Applicant has applied for the following variances: a. Retaining walls within the lake yard b. Accessory building within the lake yard c. Hardcover for a new shed within the lake yard d. Average Lakeshore Setback 6. In considering this application for variance, the Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. ANALYSIS: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Preserving and protecting the existing slope in the lake yard is in harmony with the intent of the ordinance. The proposed retaining walls will be screened with vegetation to maintain the rural nature of the lake. Allowing a new building in the setbacks is not in harmony of the City Code. The existing building is in a CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 3 noncondorming location. The applicant can replace the building “in kind” in the current location and it would not be in harmony with the City Code to allow the nonconforming building to be located to a more visible portion of the property. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed retaining walls are recessed into the earth to limit their visual impacts and support the stairs and slope on the property, maintaining the rural character of the lake. An accessory building within the lakeyard, average lakeshore setback and creating new building hardcover is not consistent with the comprehensive plan to preserve the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. 3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties. a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the official controls; The owner proposes to install retaining wall improvements which are residential in nature and reasonable from a residential scope. The proposed accessory building is not proposed in a reasonable location. The property owner has not demonstrated that the proposed building can’t be located in a conforming location. b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; The owner has proposed retaining walls as a solution which will protect against failure of the slope. The existing slope of the lake yard was not a result of actions by the owner. The circumstances for the accessory building are not unique and property has chosen the proposed building location within the protected lakeyard, average lakeshore setback and new hardcover within the lakeyard. The building location is driven by convenience instead of compliance with the Code; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance to permit retaining wall structures within the 75-foot setback will help to maintain the existing slope and character of the area. Allowing a new shed to be located in the lake and side required yards does not match the natural character for the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. 5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 2, when in harmony with Orono City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable. 6. The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as the use for a single family home with CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 4 stairs for lake access and accessory buildings are allowed uses in the LR-1C District. 7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable. 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property. The slope of the property combined with the pre-existing improvements is a unique condition to the subject property. The existing shed and proposal to move the shed to an unpermitted area is not a special condition and is not unique. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located. The subject property’s specific slope and existing improvements are creating conditions which do not apply to adjacent properties. The new proposed shed would be closer to the lake than the current shed. The new placement of the shed would change the nature of the hardcover from patio to building within the lakeyard and the building would be placed in the average lakeshore setback. This condition is created by the property owner and not unique. 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Granting a lake setback variance to allow the retaining walls within the 75-foot lake setback is reasonable and necessary to preserve the property rights of the owner and supported by the vulnerable lake yard slope on the property. Allowing the relocation of an accessory building within the lakeyard, average lakeshore setback and as new building hardcover is not necessary and could be relocated to a more conforming location. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the lakeyard setback variance allowing the retaining walls within the 75-foot lake setback will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any way be contrary to the ordinances. Allowing a new accessory building in the lakeyard, average lakeshore and as new hardcover would be contrary to the intent of the City Code. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The applicant has demonstrated practical difficulties which support granting the lakeyard setback variance to permit the construction of retaining walls to support lake access stairs within 75 feet of the OHWL. Relocation of the accessory building within the lakeyard, average lakeshore and as new building hardcover is not necessary and serves as a convenience to the applicant. CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________________ 5 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS: Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 to allow retaining walls within the 75’ lakeyard setback to support the proposed lake stairs and denies the variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1279 and 78-1680 for the relocation of the accessory building within the 75’ lakeyard, average lakeshore setback and as a change of nature to the hardcover from patio to building within the 75’ lakeshore setback, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the entire record, above Findings. 2. The approved project shall conform to the site plan dated May 28, 2020 submitted by the Applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. 3. Any amendments to the plans which are not in conformity with City codes may require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property not with the Applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction and commencing construction of said project. A framing inspection must be completed within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (June 22, 2021). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution may result in the termination of any authority granted herein. ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this ______ day of ________________, 20__. ATTEST: CITY OF ORONO: _______________________________ ________________________________ Anna Carlson, City Clerk Dennis Walsh, Mayor 6.30° FN D I P 9 2 3 5 95 4 . 1 FN D I P " 1 . 5 95 7 . 0 FN D I P 1 2 7 5 5 95 7 . 9 FN D I P 1 2 7 5 5 95 7 . 2 FN D I P 9 2 3 5 96 0 . 8 FND I P 3 / 4 " 961 . 3 9 5 3 .8955.6 9 5 7 .8957 .5 954.1955.7 956.0954.4 954.8956 .5 955.3 957 .0 955.1 955.4956.9 957 .495 8 .0 95 8 .2 957 .5955.6 95 8 .2 9 5 1 . 9 9 5 1 . 8 Clear rock behind wall 9 5 1 . 5 951 . 2 9 5 1 . 1 9 5 1 . 0 9 5 1 . 4 9 5 1 . 1 9 5 2 . 2 9 5 2 . 2 9 5 2 . 8 9 5 2 . 0 9 5 1 . 9 9 5 1 . 5 951 . 2 9 5 1 . 1 9 5 1 . 0 9 5 1 . 4 9 5 1 . 1 9 5 2 . 2 9 5 2 . 2 9 5 2 . 8 9 5 2 . 0 9 5 1 . 9 9 5 6 .6 9 5 7 .7 9 5 8 .1954.895 5 .1 9 5 5 .3 9 5 4 .8 9 5 4 .9 9 5 5 .4 9 5 5 .3 9 5 4 .9954.8956.5 9 5 7 .8 9 5 7 .7 9 5 7 .8 9 5 9 .1 9 6 1 .6 954 . 7 954 . 4 954 . 4 954 . 8 954 . 9954 . 9 956 . 6 956 . 0 955 . 0 954 . 5 953 . 0 953 . 1 953 . 8 953 . 9 957 . 9 958 . 5 952 . 2 952 . 0 951 . 8 952 . 7 94 2 . 1942 . 7 941 . 7942 . 6 941 . 9943 . 1 L O T 1 0 6 L O T 1 0 7 L O T 1 0 5 S P R I N G P A R K x q c ; B I T U M I N O U S x q c ;S T A I R S 7.5 75 ft Line 2'2'2' Future Shed Existing Shed LakeMinnetonka GreenDale Design 1845 Wisconsin Ave. No. Golden Valley, MN 55427 Tel. (763)544-4215 Mr.&Mrs. Don Adams 2927 Casco Point Road Orono, MN 55391 0 4 8 SET I P P O L 9 3 3 . 5 9 3 4 . 0 9 3 5 . 0 9 3 5 . 5 9 3 6 . 0 951 Maple 3'6'3'6'3'6'3'6' STMP Light Ex Shrub 3 ft wall/ 936' 6" 2' 0" 93 6 . 5 93 7 . 5 This leg is there but was not on survey 7 3.5ft 7 risers 3.5ft 7 risors 3.5ft Elv 933 FT Elv 940 8 risers3.5ft Stump Maple End of 0-75 Foot Shoreline Zone 935 936 Existing walls removed and new replaced as is. See aditional plan. Remove Existing Steps fill erosion under steps replant see Planting plan. Proposed Steps Granite slabs for steps Pavers for landings Granite pieces under Slabs and steps to Shim them level. Remove 36' 0.6' Small section that was not on the first or second survey. The wall starts at 36" and ends at 6" 944. 5 940.0 93 3 . 5 93 8 0 945 947.5 946.0 48 49 47 945.0 948.5. 46 45 40 44 944 . 0 43 943 . 0 939.0 543. 5 42 41 943. 5 942 . 5 942 . 0 941.5 941 . 0 941 . 5 941.0 940.5 938.5 9 3 3 . 0 938.5 939.5 945.5 949.0 946.5 947.0 948.0 949.5 950.0 9 3 7 . 0 95 0 . 5 . Side-view block is 6" thick Granite step slabs are covered by grade and by plants Outer side turns in. Steps can have lower grades on the outside. This requires shiming with partial granite block. All shims are under stair blocks so they do not show from above. More slope Steep Slope Normal Slope Top Vies Shim blocks are under step slabs and do not show from top. Stair and slope detail 933 936'6" 936'6" 938'6" Remove pavers and plant Low grow grass 28' 950.0 945.0 940.0 935.0 930.0 929.6 Lakeside Steps Scale 1" = 8' May 28, 2020 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ 15. LA19-000031 – DALE GUSTAFSON, 2927 CASCO POINT ROAD, VARIANCES Staff presented a summary of packet information. Johnson said he was at the site, and the stairs are exceptionally steep. To him, it is a reasonable request to find a reasonable route down to the shore. He is not sure if the shed was ever a lawful shed in the first place and is not in favor of allowing the moving of the shed. Walsh noted there is the replace-in-kind issue, but it has to be where it is and the owner is kind of stuck with it. Normally, the owner couldn’t get anything. Otherwise, people would be moving things all over the place. Don Adams, 2927 Casco Point Road, thanked Staff for her help, having never done an application before. He said they recently bought the house and their goal is to create a shoreline that is appealing. The white stairs are horrible, dangerous, and rotting. Most of the plants are buckthorn and poison ivy, and they have torn out a lot of garbage. Their goal is to beautify the area, but the most important goal is to find a way to go down to the shoreline safely, which is the reason they are proposing the stairs. They tried to pick the elevation that has the least amount of buildup to make the stairs because their north shoreline is super steep. With picking the best spot to bring it down, it goes into the existing shed. He noted the survey was not done correctly the first time. With the survey displayed, he indicated the wall around the existing shed, which was not on the original survey, and said that's basically where the stairs would come into play. They would propose to remove the wall and eliminate some of the existing hardcover. They are also considering removing 176 square feet of hardcover, which would be almost 70%. Walsh asked what hardcover the homeowner was referring to. Mr. Adams said all the pavers are hardcover. Walsh noted he was not supposed to have pavers to begin with. Mr. Adams stated he thinks he gets grandfathered in, if he is not mistaken, with anything there. The goal with the project is to remove the pavers and move the shed to an area that already has hardcover. He said he does not have a huge lot and the shed is placed directly in the middle of his lot. His hope is to be able to move it and utilize the shoreline better and remove 175 square feet of existing hardcover. Printup noted it is good to get rid of the buckthorn. Mr. Adams said he has had poison ivy twice and it is not fun. The shoreline is a mess and he knows that is why his neighbors are in favor of his plan. Crosby asked if Mr. Adams was going to keep the existing shed. Mr. Adams stated he would love to keep the existing shed. He would not make it bigger. It is a weird- shaped roof, and he is trying to align it with the level of quality that his house is. He is trying to design it in a way that fits. He said they would rip out the current staircase and then hope they could get approval on the stairs as well as moving the shed. Crosby asked where Mr. Adams would be looking to move the shed from, noting it was in the middle. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 8, 2020 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Adams said it would basically be where the current stairs are. It would be 10-15 feet. It opens up the ability for them to use the shoreline. They would like to put a low-grow grass there and keep it as natural as possible. His goal is to protect the lake, make a shoreline that looks beautiful and also in line with what Orono is trying to do, which is to eliminate or decrease hardcover. He hopes the City Council considers that and they can make a spot that is good for both of them. Mr. Crosby stated he was not able to see the property and asked Johnson to tell him more about it. He understood Johnson felt it was important to change the staircase. Johnson noted that if anyone misses one stair, they will be at the bottom of the staircase. He said that, to the naked eye, that side is not obviously less steep. He feels that getting a better stairs is good. He is wondering where the record is of what was authorized there, because there are pavers down by the lake, a shed down by the lake. Walsh said that is part of the problem; sometimes you don’t find the stuff until someone needs a variance and they come in, City Staff goes out and sees it, and wonders where all of that came from. Johnson said it is also the City’s opportunity to clean up some of these things because sheds down by the lake are not something the City is promoting. He would be careful about the long-term consequences of letting someone move one, because the City has been pretty rigid on not letting people move things even an inch. He thinks that is hard for someone new in the area to understand, but it is their job because they see a big picture of it all. He said the shed should be removed, anyway. Walsh indicated it would be possible to move the stairs around to go around the shed. He agrees that the City has not let anyone move anything in the 0-75 whether it was supposed to be there, is there, or was grandfathered in. He told Mr. Adams the good news is, he has a shed by the lake; the bad news is, he has to live with where the shed is located. He can fix it up, make it look beautiful, but he has to stay with the volume and the gable, or whatever it happens to have, as a roof. Mr. Adams asked, if the moving of the shed was going to be declined, could he still have a vote for the stairs. Walsh indicated they would be approving the stairs, but they are not going to approve moving the shed. Johnson moved, Printup seconded, to approve the stairs. If the Applicant has to move the stairs, Staff approves adjustments within reason to try to work around the shed if Mr. Adams wants to keep the shed, but the moving of the shed is denied. Barnhart noted, for the Council’s understanding, stairs are a permitted improvement. The variance is the retaining wall associated with the construction of the stairs and there might be some flexibility in terms of the location that Staff can approve. Johnson said Dale Gustafson was the landslide guy that came at one time and is a good guy trying to get things stabilized. He is assuming they are doing the right things with the retaining wall. AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: Reviewed By: DJR Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is meet the requirements of the City’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permit. (MS4) 2. Background. The City of Orono holds a MS4 permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program for operation of the City’s stormwater drainage system. The NPDES is a national regulatory program under the jurisdiction of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and is administered at the State level by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). 3. Requirement. A requirement of the permit is that an Annual Report be prepared and submitted to the MPCA. Staff has prepared the report, and will submit to the MPCA after this meeting. One component of the report is that the City must hold a Public Meeting. The meeting must provide a summary of the City’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP), the activities of the City for the past calendar year in regards to the permit requirements, and must afford the opportunity for public input and comment. 4. Action. There will be a short presentation as part of the public hearing. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Conduct a public hearing to receive public input and comments regarding the City of Orono’s SWPPP Item No.: 14 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: Annual Public Hearing for MS4 Storm Water Permit Presenter: Adam T. Edwards Public Works Director/City Engineer Agenda Section: Presentation AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: Correy Farniok Reviewed By: DJR Approved By: DJR 1. Purpose. The purpose of this action item is to gain approval to accept a donation from the Big Island Legacy. 2. Background. The City has received a donation for the Big Island Nature Park in the amount of $58,000.00. 3. Project Scope. Accept the $58,000 towards improvements at Big Island Park. 4. Staff Recommendation. I recommend approval to accept the Big Island Legacy donation of $58,000.00. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion for approval and to accept the $58,000 donation from Big Island Legacy for improvements at Big Island Nature Park. Item No.: 15 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: Accept Donation from Big Island Legacy Presenter: Dustin Rief City Administrator Agenda Section: Presentation AGENDA ITEM Prepared By: LLO Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By DJR 1. Purpose. To consider a sketch plan proposal for a 3 lot single family residential subdivision. 2. Background. The 26.12 acre parcel is located in the LR-1A zoning district (2 acre minimum), and currently contains one house on the south side of the property. A segment of Long Lake Creek runs through the parcel, connecting an existing pond on the NW side to the Long Lake to the south. The proposal would divide the parcel into 3 lots and include a new private road and cul-de-sac. There is currently a shared driveway which serves the existing home and 2 other parcels. Roads: The plan proposes a new private road to serve the proposed new lots, terminating in a cul de sac. A shared driveway off of the cul de sac is proposed to serve three lots: Lot 2, and the existing 1305 and 1405 6th Avenue N. The City Code only allows 2 homes to share 1 driveway. This subdivision does not create or improve this non-conforming situation. The council should discuss their support to allow the existing 3 properties to continue to share a driveway off a new cul-de-sac. The alternative would be to extend the road to the south, across Long Lake creek. Utilities: The property is in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA); however, sanitary sewer service is not ‘available’. The applicant proposes establishing septic systems for each lot, shown on the sketch plan. Water will be furnished by individual wells. The Planning Commission discussed sanitary sewer service and encouraged the applicant explore alternatives to onsite septic systems. Natural Environment. City Code requires conservation design for projects either greater than 5 acres, or at densities greater than one unit per 2 acres. Since this parcel is greater than 5 acres, a Conservation design plan will be required, unless waived by the City Council. The council should discuss support a waiver of the conservation design requirement in lieu of identifying substantial trees (greater than 6’ DBH). 3. Planning Commission Vote and Comment. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed sketch plan at the February 18, 2020 Meeting. The Commission advised the applicant to explore connecting to a low pressure sewer system per the City Engineer’s comments. The Commission supported the project with the current design of the cul-de-sac driveway configuration and conservation design waiver. 4. Public Comment No public comment was received. During the meeting, the applicant indicated that the project may not go through, and that a portion of the property may be sold to a neighbor. If a new lot is created, a subdivision will be required. It is not uncommon for a subdivision proposal to change between the sketch and the preliminary plat stage. 5. Staff Recommendation. Staff is requesting feedback from the council regarding the project, including the proposed driveway/ cul-de-sac configuration and a waiver to the conservation design requirement. Item No.: 16 Date: June 22, 2020 Item Description: LA20-000003, John Newell, 1485 Sixth Ave N, Sketch Plan Presenter: Laura Oakden Planner Agenda Section: Planning Department Report COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED City Council should provide feedback regarding the project as proposed. Exhibits A. Sketch Plan and Location Maps B. Staff Report Planning Commission C. PC Minutes 2/18/2020 References PC Exhibits A. Application B. Proposed Plan C. Applicants response letter D. County Comments E. Location Map and Aerial Photos 3, 20 0.0© Bolton & Menk, Inc - Web GIS 0 Legend Map Name This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information, and data located in various city, county, and state offices, and other sources affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City of Orono is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. Disclaimer: 2/13/2020 11:49 AM 2,240 Feet City Limits 40 0.0 © Bolton & Menk, Inc - Web GIS 0 Legend Map Name This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information, and data located in various city, county, and state offices, and other sources affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City of Orono is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. Disclaimer: 2/13/2020 11:48 AM 280 Feet City Limits Lake Access Points Parcels (2/1/2020) Lakes & Ponds 20 0.0 © Bolton & Menk, Inc - Web GIS 0 Legend Map Name This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information, and data located in various city, county, and state offices, and other sources affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City of Orono is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. Disclaimer: 2/13/2020 11:51 AM 140 Feet City Limits Parcels (2/1/2020) To: Jon Ressler and Planning Commission Members Dustin Rief, City Administrator From: Laura Oakden, Planner Date: February 18, 2020 Subject: #LA20-000003, John Newell, 1485 Sixth Ave N, Sketch Plan Background The property is located in the LR-1A, 2 acre, zoning district and currently contains one house located on the south side. According to the survey, the property is 26.12 acres with roughly 1.59 acres as Co Rd 6 easement. The existing lot is roughly 1042’ wide along Co Rd 6. The property has a pond located on the west side that is managed though the DNR by the MCWD. The property also includes a segment of Long Lake Creek running through the middle NW to SE which connects this pond to Long Lake. The existing house will be retained on proposed lot 2 of the plat. Proposal The proposed property would be divided into 3 lots. The new proposed private road and cul-de- sac will be places over the existing shared driveway. There is currently a share driveway which serves a home within the project property and 2 other homes. Roads/ Access. The plan shows a cul-de-sac and a road as Outlot A roughly 600 feet in length. Based on the rural nature of this development, and the cul de sac, it is anticipated that the road and cul-da- sac will be private. No paved roadway is shown. It is assumed that the paved roadway will meet city standards of 24 feet in width. The cul de sac will provide access to the new lots, lots 1 and 3. Access onto 6th Avenue N will be restricted. The proposed road follows the existing driveway. The plan proposes a shared driveway off of the cul de sac serving three lots: Lot 2, and 1305 and 1405 6th Avenue N. This subdivision does not create or improve this non-conforming situation. The City Code only allows 2 home to share 1 driveway. Application Summary: The applicant is requesting sketch plan consideration on a proposed 3 lot single family residential development to be served by septic and a new private road. Staff Recommendation: While no formal action is required, this memo will serve as a foundation for the Planning Commission’s discussion with the applicants to bring to light potential issues for discussion and issues to be addressed prior to submission of a formal Preliminary Plat application. Planning Department Staff requests input on the flexibility requested for allowing a shared driveway which serves 3 existing homes from the new cul-de- sac. FILE #LA 20-000003 February 18, 2020 Page 2 of 4 The Planning Commission should discuss if allowing flexibility to allow the existing 3 property to continue to share a driveway off a new cul-de-sac would be supported. The alternative would be to extend the road to the south, across long lake creek. Parks/ Trails. The plans do not suggest any interior sidewalks or trails through the development. The plans also do not show any proposed parkland dedication. The Comprehensive Plan does not identify the need for additional park land on this property; it is anticipated that park dedication will be satisfied by a cash donation for the 2 new lots. Utilities. The property is in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA); the applicant proposes establishing septic systems. While the property is within the MUSA boundary, there is no infrastructure currently in place which will allow this property to connect to the sanitary sewer system. (Sec. 82-224 only requires connection when the system is “reasonable accessible”.) The two new lots have been tested but Olsons Septic Testing and each lot show 2 septic areas shown on the sketch plan. Water will be furnished by individual wells. The City Engineer provided comments recommending the applicant explore installing a low pressure system which would allow them to connect to the municipal sanitary sewer. This would require the applicant to obtain easements across private properties. The roads and all utilities will be installed by the developer. This project will trigger stormwater management rules of the MCWD. Additional improvements including ponding, ditches, and curbing may be required. The applicant has been advised to visit with the watershed district early in the subdivision design process. Lots The property is located within the LR-1A Zoning district. The three new proposed lots must have a minimum of 2 acres in size and 200 feet of defined width. As shown on the sketch plan all 3 lots appears to meet the minimum size requirement, though surface areas below the ordinary high water mark of any surface water or wetlands or floodplain areas may not be used in order to meet any portion of the minimum lot area requirements, and may impact Lot 2. Area (Gross) Width Width @Co. Rd 6 Lot 1 3.49 536’ 565’ Lot 2 17.20 225’ N/A Lot 3 3.04 497 145* • Area for Dry-buildable not identifies at this time. Lot 3 is considered a corner lot with the front yard identified as the shortest distance abutting a road. Staff supports establishing the front yard of lot 3 along the new road, meeting the width requirements. The OHWL elevation for Long Lake (944.3) is not identified on the survey and should be verified.. Because Long Lake Creek feeds into the lake in a close proximity to the project there is a chance the OHWL touches the property. This could possibly create a lakeshore lot along Lot 2 and/or FILE #LA 20-000003 February 18, 2020 Page 3 of 4 Lot 3 changing the standards and setbacks to the proposed lots. Currently the lots are not identified as lakeshore lots. The Planning Commission should provide feedback whether or not some flexibility from identifying the front lot for Lot 3 along the Outlot A will be supported. Natural Environment. For the Preliminary Plat a determination of the floodplain, wetlands, top of bank and bluff for the property will be required. These areas are to be preserved and protected. A wetland delineation will be required and approved by MCWD. Long Lake Creek is a main waterway to the lake. Further analysis of the project with regard to shoreland management may yield additional comments. The applicant has stated there will no grading south of the proposed cul- de-sac where the creek crossing, wetlands, floodplain, steep slopes and woods areas exist. The grading plan, once developed, will need to be further evaluated to ensure that this goal can be met. A Long Lake Creek runs through the property, running from the pond in Lot 2 toward Long Lake. Depending on the identified top of bank all three proposed lots could be affected by the 100’ creek setback. This creek is considered a tributary, and the 100 lake yard applies from the top of bank if the lots are served by septic systems. The watershed districts comments may influence changes to the plan. The applicant is stating no work is being proposed in the wetlands, creek, floodplain and steep slopes. A Wetland Delineation and a NOD from the MCWD will be required. City Code requires conservation design for projects either greater than 5 acres, or at densities greater than one unit per 2 acres. A Conservation design plan will be required, unless waived by the City Council. The Planning Commission should discuss support a waiver of the conservation design requirement in lieu of identifying substantial trees (Oaks, Maple, Basswood, etc. greater than 6’ DBH). Engineer Comments The following are comments given by the City Engineer to be addressed with a preliminary plat. 1. Private Roadway- A maximum of two properties are allowed to share a driveway. The proposed roadway should be extended to a point to allow the homes to the south to access it directly without a shared drive. As currently depicted three houses would share driveway south of the proposed cul-de-sac. 2. Private Roadway- a roadway and cul-de-sac conforming to City standards will need to be constructed in Outlot A. 3. Sanitary- Property is within the MUSA and therefor eligible to connect to city sanitary sewer. Applicant should explore the possibility of constructing a low pressure system to serve the properties included in the sketch plan. The closest connection is to the south and would require easements to cross private property. 4. Any existing easements on the property should be shown. 5. All existing structures on the property should be shown such as the dam and Creek crossing. 6. Extent of the wetlands/ creek flood plain should be depicted FILE #LA 20-000003 February 18, 2020 Page 4 of 4 Hennepin County Comments The City has received comments from Hennepin County included as Exhibit D. Overall the access looks to be adequate pending verification of sight distances. The county will be requesting a 50 foot right-of-way section plus a 10 foot D/U easement during the plat. The county is also requesting the existing gravel driveway on the east side of the lake/pond be removed. Issues for Consideration • The Planning Commission should discuss if allowing flexibility to allow the existing 3 properties to continue to share a driveway off a new cul-de-sac. • The Planning Commission should provide feedback whether or not some flexibility identifying the front lot for Lot 3 along the Outlot A. • The Planning Commission should discuss support a waiver of the conservation design requirement in lieu of identifying substantial trees (Oaks, Maple, Basswood, etc. greater than 6’ DBH). List of Exhibits Exhibit A. Application Exhibit B. Proposed Plan Exhibit C. Applicants response letter Exhibit D. County Comments Exhibit E. Location Map and Aerial Photos MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 18, 2020 6:00 p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ 6. LA20-000003 JOHN NEWELL, 1485 6TH AVENUE NORTH, SKETCH PLAN, 8:01 P.M. – 8:32 P.M. John Newell, Applicant, was present. Staff presented a summary of packet information. Ressler asked for clarification of the conservation design requirement and why the Commission would discuss a waiver in lieu of identifying substantial trees. Oakden stated that she believes it is relatively common on smaller plats like this where only 3 lots are created to identify substantial trees, which are over 6 inches in diameter rather than going through an entire conservation design process. Ressler ask if this is a cost savings as well as an efficiency. Oakden stated that was correct. Thiesse asked if the City had any regulations that will allow it to protect the trees once they are identified. Barnhart stated that what the City looks at with the conservation design requirement includes more than just the trees, such as slopes. He stated that while there isn’t anything in the Code, he gave the example of a stand of significant oaks. He explained that the City could say to the developer that this is an important feature of the lot and should be protected, so the City may not approve a plan that shows a road cutting directly through that area. He gave another example of the conservation design identifying the mature oak in Basswood Forest. He explained that the conservation design is used to help guide the developer in areas that the City is trying to protect from a character standpoint. Ressler asked if the City had reviewed the proposed well and septic plans. Oakden stated that she thinks the applicant has just recently coordinated their septic testing, so she does not think the City has reviewed this yet. She noted that the applicant has received feedback that they have viable septic sites. Barnhart stated that the City is not looking for a final report at this stage, until the City has determined the layout is acceptable, but to just know that there are viable sites. He gave an overview of how the sketch plan process works in this situation. Thiesse asked if there was sanitary sewer in this area around Highway 6. Oakden stated that there isn’t and would connect over on Brown so the applicant would have to explore through private lots in order to connect. Erickson asked if that may be feasible for the southernmost location. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 18, 2020 6:00 p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Oakden stated that she believes the City Engineer has provided comments for the applicant to look into this possibility. Erickson stated that he has own homes that had septic and others than had sanitary sewer. He stated that personally, he recommends that if you are in MUSA that it be used, if it can be used. Ressler asked what the alternative to the cul-de-sac would look like. Oakden stated that there is no alternative. She explained that the applicant is proposing the cul-de-sac option and hoping for Commission feedback. She stated that if the Commission did not support this layout it would be up to the applicant to come up with an alternative. Libby stated that he understands that this the sketch plan phase, but noticed that two of the lots has visible evidence of new driveway turn arounds. He questioned whether, in new construction, there is a current requirement that the driveway have the ability to have a turn around to go back out again for an emergency vehicle. Oakden stated that there is not necessarily a requirement but noted that the City does require there to be turn around avenues on tighter lots. Curtis noted that it was not for emergency vehicle turn around, but rather that these homes could front out on a busy road. John Newell, 1485 County Road 6, stated that he has been involved with this property since he was 21 years old and knew the previous owners. He explained that he cut the driveway into this house as well. He stated that he now owns the house and the property. He stated that he had spoken with Staff quite a few times before he put pen to paper to try and get as much information as possible, however some things have transpired since they put pen to paper. He stated that one of the neighbors that adjoins the property have expressed interest in purchasing Lot 3 and not developing it. He stated that if that happens, then they probably wouldn’t need to bring in a cul-de-sac. He stated that ideally, he would keep this area rural if at all possible. He stated that they are planning to release the wetlands to the DNR. He explained that they have not received a written offer, but if Lot 3 is sold, the property will stay exactly as it is. Libby asked if Mr. Newell had any interest in using the existing infrastructure with the sewer connections rather than going with private septic and well systems. Mr. Newell stated that his understanding was that there was no connection possible because of the private properties and the creek. He noted that he didn’t believe there is a lot of significant material on the lower 2 lots and explained that most recently it was mostly buckthorn. He stated that the previous owners hayed this property. He stated that were the original house is there are maples, basswoods, and oaks and this would not be affected by Lot 1 and Lot 3. He reiterated that he does not see a way to connect to the sanitary sewer system in a way that would be approved by the DNR. Ressler stated that he thinks the layout is sensible and noted that one thing the City looks for is the width of the roads and ensure that the cul-de-sacs are adequate in order to easily provide turn around for MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 18, 2020 6:00 p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ emergency and other vehicles. He stated that as Commissioner Libby noted, it is nice to see the turn arounds included in the individual properties which he feels is a nice touch. Mr. Newell explained that was just him putting lead to mylar. He stated that there are no actual proposals for the housing, he just wanted the Commission to be able to see where they might go on the site. Erickson stated that he is in favor of allowing the flexibility for the three homes to use the cul-de-sac as outlined in the staff report. He stated that is also comfortable with the allowing flexibility in identifying the front lot for Lot 3 along the Outlot A. He noted that he would also support a waiver of the conservation design requirement in lieu of identifying substantial trees. He stated that if there is a way for the southernmost lot to be able to hook up to sanitary sewer, he would encourage that because it would help avoid the problem of crossing the creek. Mr. Newell reiterated that he does not see how he can get a City sewer line hooked up without creating some major problems with his neighbors. Thiesse stated that he believes Commissioner Erickson was referring to a low-pressure line which has nothing more than a 2- or 3-inch diameter line and could probably be trenched in. He suggested if that is considered, he gets easements for Lots 1 and 3 because someday they will need to get there too. Libby explained that there is a precision guided laser boring installation protocol that has been shown to be extremely accurate. Barnhart suggested that the Commission move on from discussion regarding the sewer design in order to discuss other comments. Ressler stated that the Commission discussion are the items that Commissioner Erickson outlined from the staff report. He stated that he would also support of all three issues for consideration from the staff report. Bollis stated that he likes the overall layout and feels it makes sense to him. He stated that conservation design is the only thing that he would object to not going through. Thiesse asked if he would support doing conservation only on the front two lots. Bollis agreed that would make sense. Thiesse stated that Mr. Newell is improving the first part of the driveway and asked if the City had any jurisdiction on him changing the existing driveway since it is already there. Barnhart stated that it is already there, but generally, what the City tries to do with subdivisions is improve existing conditions and non-conformities, so they do look to make these types of improvements. Thiesse stated that the City are sticklers for this type of thing and encouraged Mr. Newell to be prepared to defend his decision. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, February 18, 2020 6:00 p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Newell stated that he is a landscape architect from Lake Tahoe so he has experience with watersheds and collection. He explained the reasons for the cul-de-sac placement to allow for a silt pond. Thiesse stated that he understands, but reiterated that it doesn’t meet the City standards so he will need to be ready to defend it when the time comes. Ressler noted that this discussion may be moot if Lot 3 ends up being sold, but hoped that the feedback from the Commission was helpful to Mr. Newell. Mr. Newell stated that the discussion was very helpful to him.