The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-14-2005 Council PacketACFNDA for C fUINt IL MEKTING sk i for MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14,2005, 7;00 l».M ORONO COUNCII. CHAMBERS, 2780 KEU.EY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items arc considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one nuition by tlie City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located on tlie counter near the sign in sheet. •fr-r-riK|Q FEB 1 4 2005 CITY Oh OhU/VO ROLE CALL PLEDGE OF ALI.E(;iANC’E CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approvc/Amend PUBIJC HEARING - 7:00 P.M. 2. Amiual Public I Icaring for NPDHS Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan APPRO\’AL OF MINUTES * 3. Regular Council Meeting of Januar>' 24, 2005 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Irene Silber, Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - J. Marc l-ritzler. Representative I PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 4. «04-3052 Eric Vogstrom. 26 18 Casco Point Road - Variances - Resolution 5. //05-3072 Orono Schools, 685 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Variance and Conditional Use Permit 6. //05-3079 Nicole and Peter I homas, 1385 Orono Lane - Variance 7. ^/05-3080 Interspace West, 2060 Wa>v.ata Boulevard W'est - PUD - Concept Plan Re\ iew 8. 1/05-3081 ZB Construction, Inc., 26.\x Kelley Parkway (Outlot E, Stonebay) - RPUD - Development Plan Review MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SER\ ICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 9. Approve Purchase of Public Works Street Sw eeper CITY ADMINISTRA rOR'S REPORI 10. Appoint Auditor for Fiscal Year 2004 11. Long l^kc I-ire Station - Application and Certificate for Pa\Tiient No. 14 12. Long l^ke Fire Station - Change Order No. 8 13. Na\ arre Firefighter Gear Purchase 14. CRT Waste - Resolution 15. Forfeitet! Vehicles - Autliorization to Sell 16. On-Site Septic Manager - Position Revision and Reclassification 17. Amend 2005 Official Meeting Schedule L‘.-i V { AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY' 14,2005,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORO;VO, MINNESOTA CITY A IT ORNEY'S RE POR I 18. LICENSES Kennel Licenses Special Event Permit * 19. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND FATNTS 2005 02/14 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.ni. 02/21 - HOLIDAY, Prcsidcni.s ’ Day 02/22 - Planning Commission Meeting, Tuesday, 6:00p.m. 02/28 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 03/02- 03/03- 03/07 03/14 03/17 03/21 03/28 03/31 Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday. 5:30 p.m. Council Work Session, Thursday. 5:45 p.m. - Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. - Council Work Session, Thursday, 5:45 p.m. - Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. ■ Council Work Session, Thursday, 5:45 p.m. Public Attendanci Meeting Datf I ^ “ 0)> C ouncil □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other NAME (please print) <—^ k i 'ISEiaii U-.c , 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.. 9. lU. II. 12. 13.. 14. 15. Plkasi: I illou r iiil informationreoi ^ested BELOW FOR OUR CT I Y RECORDS. i ADDRJiSS I’RESKN 1 FOR (from agcnd.'i) NAMF OR NUMBER O REQUKST FOR COUNCII. ACTION DATE: February 14,2005 ITEM NO.: 2 Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Oappa 'ritlc Director of Public Services Administratu^ Reviewed:r Agenda Section: Public Services Director’s Report Item Description: NFDFS Storm Water Pennit Annual Meeting CQl Mf-eTi,jQ 1 4 2005 Introduction CITY OF Oli’Oivo In 2003 the City applied fur a National Pollution Discharge lilimination System (NPDBS) Sturm Water permit, and one of the requirements of this permit is that the City must hold an annual meeting to obtain public comments on this permit and the activities associated with this permit. Background information on the NPDHS storm water program and development of the permit application is provided below. This is a five year pennit with 2004 being the second year of the permit cycle. Federal legislation in the Clean Water Act requires that all states implement a program to require a. (NPDES) permit for storm water discharges. 'ITic original NPDliS program, which started in the 1960's in respon.se to water pollution problems, required Nl’DF.S permits for all point .source discharges such as industrial sites and waste water treatment plants. A Her the point source water pollution problems were corrected, the F'nvironmcntal Protection Agency (BPA) began to regulate non-point sources of water pollution caused hy storm water runoff as storm water nmolf is a significant .source of water pollunon. The responsibility for administration ofthisNPDFS program was transferred to the states for permitting and administration. Phase I of the storm water program required permits for large cities. In Minnesota, the only two cities with Phase 1 permits arc Minneapolis and St. Paul. Ihe Phase II regulations expanded the permitting requirements to smaller cities. The medium si/e cities in greater Minnesota and all of the suburban cities in the metropolitan area arc now required to have a NPDliS Phase II Storm Water Permit. This permit requires that the City develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which includes a set of Best Management Practices (BMPs) describing the City’s program for storm water runoff control. Sturm Water Pullution Prevention Plan The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) consists of a .set of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that address activities that the City will undertake to control and help reduce stormwater pollution. 'ITicse BMPs must address the six following Minimum Control Measures Page 1 of4 1 . Public Rducatiun and Outreach 2. Public Involvement and Participation 3. Illicit Discharge and Detection 4. Construction Site RunotT('untrol 5. Post Construction Runoff Control 6. Pollution Prevention and Housekeeping The permit requirements purposely were not designed to be highly prescriptive in nature in recognition of the fact that every community is unique with differing storm water issues and available resources. The intent of the pennit requirements is that each community develops its own unique SWPPP based on a self a.sse.ssment procc.ss and the development of BMPs that address storm water pollution control to the Maximum Hxtent Practical. 'Ilie City developed a SWPPP with 43 BMl^s to address the required six minimum control measures. Annual Meeting A public hearing notice for the annual meeting was published in the January S"* I.aker/Pionccr newspapers. The purpose oi'this meeting is to provide an opportunity for public comments on the Orono WDES Pha.se II Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which contains a li.sting of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for storm water management, fhe following items should be discussed at the meeting. o The original SWPPP o Status of compliance with Pennit conditions o The appropriateness of the BMPs li.stcd in the SWPPP o Progress toward achieving the Measurable Goals The OrigiBMl SWPPP 'I'hc stonn water permit requirements purjxKScly were not designed to be highly piescriptivc in nature in recognition of the fact that every community is unique with difTcring storm water issues and available resources. ITie City developed its own uni(|ue SWPPP based on a self assessment process and the development of BMPs that address .storm water pollution control to the Maximum Extent Practical. Orono’s SWPPP has 43 BMPs to address the required six minimum control measures. 1 . Public I'lducation and Outreach 2. Public Involvement and Participation 3. Illicit Discharge and Detection 4. Construction Site Runoff Control 5. Post Construction Runoff Contmi 6. Pollution Prevention and Housekeeping Page 2 of 4 1 \ A set of BMPs has been developed that provides eredit for many items that the City is already doing to control stormwater pollution and also includes several BMPs to meet new requirements. 'I'he City’s long-standing development philosophy of low density 2 and S-acre zoning development and wetland protection to protect Lake Minnetonka, and the other lakes in the City, is the best method of reducing stormwater pollution. Emphasis on the City’s low density development philosophy is discussed in the overview section of the permit and is also listed in several BMP’s. City ordinances and policies that limit impervious surfaces in the shoreland areas, protect lakeshore trees and vegetation, wetland setbacks, and require stormwater treatment for all new developments are all valuable BMPs to control stormwater runoff. Orono ’s Surface Water Management Plan that provides detailed information on the City’s stormwater drainage system and stormwater control is another important BMP. The entire City development review process is a good educational tool and provides many opportunities to educate residents on the philosophy behind our restrictive approach in regulating density and limiting impervious surfaces. The City can also count our comprehensive septic inspection and monitoring program, sanitary sewer maintenance and rehabilitation projects, the new SCADA system, and the spring cleanup and recycling programs for reduction of illicit discharges to the storm water system. Overall, the City is in good shape and can take much credit in meeting the intent of the NPDES Phase II permit to control stormwater runoff. Orono is also involved in a cooperative effort with other cities, Metro Watershed Partners, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District in developing cooperative educational programs to increase public awareness of storm water management issues. Status of compliance with Permit conditions The City is in substantial compliance with the permit conditions and has continued to maintain the programs and policies described in the Best Management Practices. The appropriateness of the BMPs listed in the SWPPP The development of the BMP’s in the SWPPP were based on a self assessment process and consideration of the unique factors in the City of Orono and address storm water pollution control to the Maximum Extent Practical. There have not been any substantial changes in the factors that were considered in the development of the original BMP’s that would cause these BMP’s to not be applicable anymore. Progress toward achieving the Measurable Goals The City is making progress toward achieving the measurable goals. T he City’s zoning ordinances contain limitations on the size of houses and impervious surfaces in the Shoreland areas. In 2004, approximately 30 replacement homes were constructed with most of these on the Page 3 of 4 I>ake Minnetonka shoreline. For situations where an existing house is removed and replaced, the new house is normally required to be in conformance to the /.oning regulations for structural coverage and impervious surface limitations. This can result in a reduction of imf>erviou.s surface on the property or impervious surfaces being moved further from the lakeshurc. In addition to replacement homes on the lakeshore, there were many more lakeshore remodeling projects. For house remodeling projects the City’s policy is to move toward closer adherence to the zoning regulations which may result in less impervious surface and impervious surface being moved further from the lakeshore. Erosion and drainage problems are also corrected during housing redevelopment projects. In summary Orono’s stringent zoning requirements continue to be an effective Best Management Practice for storm water runoff management. 'fhe City continued recycling, spring cleanup, and yard waste collection programs to reduce illicit discharges to the storm water system. One existing neighborhood was provided sanitary sewer service to eliminate non conforming septic systems. The City conducted inspections for 30 new and replacement septic systems and SSO inspections of existing septic systems to ensure satisfactory operation of septic systems and reduce illicit discharges. Hie Public Works Department completed annual inspections and servicing on 4S liO stations and cleaned approximately 10,000 lineal feet of sewer. 'ITie City has a SCADA system to provide notifleations for malfunctioning liH stations. Storm sewer system cleaning was also completed by Public Works A City project to construct a new storm sewer to divert stormwater that previously flowed down a steep hill into I^ke Minnetonka through a wooded wetland area before discharge into the lake was completed in 2004. Construction site inspections and correction of erosion problems were also completed in the past year. City staff is involved in a cooperative effort with other cities, Metro Watershed Partners, and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District in developing cooperative educational programs to increase public awarcne.ss of storm water management i.ssues. Staff has also attended training sessions on erosion control and storm water management and golf course pesticide and herbicide u.se. fraining sessions were also attended for staff to maintain state certifications in various areas. A comprehensive safety training program and other programs on public works operation and maintenance were attended by public works personnel. COUNCIL AC TION REQUESTED: Conduct a Public Hearing to obtain comments on the City’s NPDRS Pha.se II Storm Water Permit Page 4 of 4 V > MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 24, 2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. COl iMnii ROLL 1 4 2005 The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: May v.I^rbara Peterson: Council members Jim Muqjhy, Lili McMillan, and Bob Sansevere; City Attorney ihftfiifi'''C;(VO Barrett, Representing staff were. City Administrator Ron Moorsc, Planning Director Mike Oaffron, Planners Janice Giindlach and Melanie Curtis, Public Service Director Greg Gappa, Engineer Tom Kellogg and Recorder Kristi Anderson. Council member Jim White was absent. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:03 P.M, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approvc/Amend Items 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 were added to the Consent Agenda. Item 2 was removed from the Consent Agenda. Sansevere moved, McMillan seconded, to approve the Coiucnt Agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2. Regular Council Meeting of January 10,2005 McMillan changed p. 5, the fifth paragraph, final two words in the sentence to ‘exotic plants’. McMillan moved. Mayor Peterson seconded, to approve the Minutes of January 10, 2005, as amended. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - JelT Soderstrom Soderslrom indicated that he was available for comment, since their next meeting would be in two weeks. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - David Rahii Rahn stated that he had nothing to report, but would remain for questions. Sansevere complimented Chair Rahn on running an effective and efficient meeting last week. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. PAGE 1 of 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 24,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 3. «04-30I6 WAYZATA DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH, FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL - RESOLUTION NO. 5279 Representative Henry Lazniarz was present GalTron explained that the City Council had reviewed various aspects of the final plat application at a previous meeting, including concems voiced by neighboring property owners. Tlie applicant has since revised plans responding to the comments by the City E.iginccr and the discussions among the Council and neighbors. Gaffron indicated that staff has reviewed the varioas legal documents with the applicant's attorney and is continuing to make minor revisions, to that end, staff would recommend approval of the Final Plat Approval Resolution, subject to satisfactory completion of all required submittals, plans, documents, payments, etc. prior to release of the plat and associated documents for filing. With regard to the Engineering Plans, Gaffron stated that the revisions were minor and could be worked out, if the City Council is comfortable with approving the plat subject to staff and City Imginccr approval. In addition, staff has been advised by the applicant that the MCWD permits would be issued shortly. Although the applicant had proposed the road name to be 'Creekside Trail’, Gaffron explained that the police department has rejected this name, or any other name with ‘creekside’ in it to avoid confusion with similarly named streets in Orono and Long Lake. Gaffron pointed out that ’creek-something’ would likely be decided upon at a later date. Gaffron reiterated that staff rcconunendcd adoption of the resolution for Final Plat Approval of CREEKSIDE IN ORONO, subject to satisfactory completion of all required submittals, plans, documents, payments, etc. prior lO release of the plat and associated documents for filing. Staff would also recommend that the Council authorize the Mayor, clerk and City staff to execute the Developers Agreement once it has been approved by the City Attorney and Planning Director. McMillan asked if staff was satisfied with the proposed conservation casement language. Gaffron stated that, once the language had been tweaked, staff was satisfied. Lazniarz made a minor correction on page 4 of the Re.solution under the Lot 2 heading to reflect Lot 2. Saii.sevcrc moved. Mayor Peterson seconded, adopting RESOLUTION NO. 5279, a Resolution which grants hinal Plat Approval of CREEKSIDE iN ORONO, subject to .satisfactory completion of all rcc|uircd submittals, plans, documents, payments, etc. prior to release of the plat and associated documents for filing, and authorizes the Mayor, clerk and City staff to execute the Developers Agreement once it has been approved by the City Attorney and Planning Director for 120 Brown Road South. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays I, Murphy dissenting. Murphy commented that his concerns still exist that they arc trying to ‘shoehorn’ more into the space tlian should be allowed. Although he recogni/cd Lazniarz for working closely with the City and neighbors to be within the codes and satisfy coneems, Murphy still felt the development was Uh) much. PAGE 2 of 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 24,2005 7:00 o ’clock p.ni. *4. M04-3022 FHIL SKOOG, 280 TONKA AVENUE - VARIANCE - RESOI,UTION NO. 5280 Sanseverc moved, MclVfillan seconded, adopting RESOl.UTION NO. 5280, a Resolution granting renewal of variances granted in 2000 for a rear yard setback variance in order to construct a dining room addition to the existing home 43.9 ’ from the rear lot line where 50’ is retpiired to the residence at 280 Tonka Avenue. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 5. <104-3052 ERIC VOGSTROM, 2618 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES Curlis indicated that she was unaware the applicant would be aliscnt this evening. McMillan stated that, due to the complexity of the agreement, she was reluctant to proceed with this application without the applicant present. The other Council members concurred. Murphy added that his concern includes reservations that the applicant will do what he agrees to in good feith, when he does not feel his attendance is neces.sary at thts level. Although one neighbor was present for comment. Attorney FJarrett recommended his comments be postponed until the next Council meeting when the applicant is present to hear the neighbors concerns and comment on them. Moorse pointed out that the applicant had been informed that the Council would not take action regarding the application until the City had received the signed tree replarement agreement. Mayor Peterson moved, Murphy seconded, to table application #04-3052, Eric Vogstrom, 2618 Casco Point Road, in the absence of the applicant. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *6. #05-3071 ANTHONY THOMAS HOMES, 400 LEAF STREET - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 5281 Sanscverc moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLD TION NO. 5281, a resolution granting a lot area variance for 400 Leaf Street. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *7. #05-3076 GREGORY AM) JEANNE GUSTAFSON, 1280/1290 SPRUCE PLACE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 5282 Sansevere moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5282, a Resolution granting a lot area variance, lot width variance, and coiulitioiial use permit for 1280/1290 Spruce Place. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. mayor /city council REPORT Muiphy reported that the City continues its efforts to negotiate with the Vets regarding the Big Island Vet Camp and recently met with the Board of Governors ’ realtors. Miir|)hy stated that, on behalf of the City, Gabriel Jabbour is nweting with the Board of Governors this evening at their regular meeting to encourage them to entertain public ownership of the property in an informal discussion. PAGE 3 of 8 ^' r MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 24,2005 7:00 o’clock p.ni. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT Gappa had nothing to report. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT *8. NAVARRE FIRE STATION - CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 AND REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO. 9 (FINAII Saiisevere moved, McMillan seconded, to approve change order No. 2, and request for payment No. 9, for the Navarre Fire Station, with the condition that $21,181.00 of the payment request amount be withheld until the SCBA air compressor payment issue is resolved to the sati.sfaction of the City. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *9. DAKOTA RAIL TRAIL - RESOLUTION NO. 5283 Sansevere moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5283, a Resolution encouraging the HCRRA to expedite the development of a regional trail on the Dakota Rail corridor. VOTE; Ayes 4, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT Attorney Barrett had nothing to report. 10. LICENSES COMMERCIAL KENNEL LICENSE 1. D. Brian Fulmer 3505 Wayzata Boulevard West RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE 2. RelKcca Field 1729 North Farm Road 7. Robin Kilbane 495 Oxford Road 3. Kevin Gamclt 450 Orono Orchard Road South 8. Jane Klinc/Steve Bell 4455 West Branch Road 4. Jim and Judy Hatchett 840 North Shore Drive 9. Jim and Jennifer Matasovsky 1290 Loma Linda Avenue 5. David and Heidi Hust 45 Smith Avenue 10. LuAnn and Davis Runkle 2684 Casco Point Road 6. Colleen Jabbour 984 1'onkawa Road PAGE 4 of 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 24,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. (10. LICENSES, Coiitimied) ANNUAL LIQUOR LICENSE 11. Club On Sale & Sunday Liquor Spring Hill Golf Club Tom Dalum 725 Sixth Avenue North SPECIAL EVENT 12. Applicant: Event: Location: Date: Time: Wells Fargo Bank - Wayzaia Wells Fargo Half Marathon Begin: Wells Fargo Bank Wayzata. Lake Street to Femdale Road to County Road 15 to Orono Orchard Road to Fox Street to Old Crystal Bay Road to County Road 51 to County Road 19 to Crystal Bay Road to Norlhvicw Koad to Lake Road to County Road 15 to Old Beach Road to County Road 19 to Bcchrlc Avenue to the SouUiwest LRT Trail to Water Street. Finish; Wells Fargo Bank Excelsior Sunday, May 1, 2005 8:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. TOBACCO LICENSE 13. Lakeview Golf of Orono, Inc. Grant Wenkstem 405 North Arm Drive 14. Narrows Saloon James Anderst 3380 Shoreline Drive 15. Navarre Citgo LeRoy Koehnen 3360 Shoreline Drive 16. Navarre Liquors Inc. Steven Corl 3421 Shoreline Drive 17. O’Sullivans Holiday John O’Sullivan 2420 Shadywood Road 18. O’Sullivans Holiday John O’Sullivan 3340 Shoreline Drive 19. Rick’s Market Von Martin 3333 Shoreline Drive 20. Spring Hill Golf Club Tom Dalum 725 Sixth Avenue North 21. Wayzata Country Club Richard Kohn 200 Wayzata Boulevard West 22. Western Convenience Store Mohammed I lamoude 2160 Wayzjita Boulevard West Sanseverc moved, McMillan .seconded, approving the licenses listed above. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *11. BILLS Sanseverc moved, McMillan seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VO TE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PAGE 5 of 8 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 24,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. ADJOURNMENT Sanscvcrc moved, Murphy seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council Meeting of Jannary 24, 2005 at 7:26 P.M. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vcc, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor PAGE 6 of 8 f n3 1 4 2005 CITV OP Umu/vO A RESOLUTION BY THE ORONO PARK COMMISION SUPPORTING ACQUISITION OF THE BIG ISLAND VETERANS CAMP BY THE CITY OF ORONO TO ENSURE CONTINUED PUBLIC OWNNERSIIIP OF THIS RESOURCE WHEREAS, the future use and ownership of the 53 acre Veterans Camp on Big Island in the City of Orono is uncertain, at this time, as the Veterans Board of Governors that owns and operates the eamp have approved the sale of the camp and there is a potential possibility tliat the camp may be sold to private individuals for development purposes. WHEREAS, this property has by used by the veterans since the end of World War I us a natural and peaceful place for rest and relaxation, and this property today still remains in a pristine and natural state that is only minimally developed. WHEREAS, this 53 acres of virtually undeveloped natural open .space on Big island in the center ol heavily developed and utilized l.akc Minnetonka in the Twin Cites metropolitan area that has a population of over two million people is a unique and irreplaceable property. WHEREAS, the primary goal of the City of Orono for the past thirty years has been the protection of Lake Minnetonka water quality through preservation of natural open spaces and low density development, and City ’s 2000 to 2002 Community Management Plan classifies the Big Island Veterans Camp as recreational space. WHEREAS, another important goal of the City of Orono for the past thirty years has been the protection and acquisition of open space areas to provide for abundant high quality natural park areas for the enjoyment of nature. WHEREAS, the Orono Park Commission is an appointed citizen advisory commission that makes recommendations to the City Council on issues concerning parks, open .space, and trails in the C ity, and finds that the City acquisition of the veterans camp to preserve this valuable open space for public use is consistent with the long term City goals for the protection of Lake Minnetonka and the pre.servation of open space to provide high (|uality recreational opportunities. THEREFORE, BE II RESOLVED, that the Orono Park Commission supports the City of Orono’s efforts for acquisition of the Big Island Veterans Camp for continued open space preservation and the provision of natural space public recreational opjrortunities Adopted by the Orono Park Commission at a regular meeting held on February 7, 2005 Hate A|i|ilic«lion Krccivccl: 08*18 04 Hale Aiipllcatftoii Coiii|ilcte: 09-1J-04 I20*l)ay Review Period Kitendccl: O.MO-Ofi li^rrTIKJG FEB t A 200S KKgiJDS 1 FOR COUNCIL ACTION cn Y OK UliUNO I )atc: February 11,2005 Item No. H l)c|)Hrlmen( Approval: Naiiir: Melanie (.’urtis v *y|/ 'I'lllc: (’ity IMauner AdmiiiMlratur Approval:A^l*ll(la Sciiion: lii'iii Description: //04-3052 I{rie Vogstroin • 2618 Casco I’oinI Koail Vairiances /oniiiK District: I art Area: Lot Whlth: LR-IC, One l•amily Lakcsliorc Kesiilcnlial, 0.5 acrc/lOO’ 0.47acre/20.56l .s.f. 100’ parallel to the shore & 80’ Qil ly setback List of Kshiltits: A. Ke.sointion per Council Direction H. Vegetation Restoration Plan (VRP) (*. Ivngineer Connnent.s to VRP I). Stall Ameiulnients to VRP !•’. VRP Agreeinent l\ Council Minutes 01-10-05 (i. Council Memo oft)I-04-05 Application Summary: I he most recent revision of this application was crmceptnally approval at y»)ur previous meeting based «>n ralnctitais to the propo.seil building Ibolpiint and hardcover levels. That approved revision consisted of a 1,4‘)0 s.f. building Ibotprint and a.ssoeiaied hardcover totaling .317% Ibr the 75’-250’ /.one. A revised Vegetation Restoration Plan (VRP) was al.st) reviewed The VRP has al.so been reviewed by the City iMJgineer, Planning Stall and the adjoining property owner. I'nrther revisions basal on the comments of the vaiions reviewing parties have been inc(»rporaied into the version ol the VRP which will be enforced by the Agreement attached as l•■xhibil V.. Staffhas received a copy of the piivale agreement between the applicants and the neighboinig pu)perty tiwncrs which re.solves the illeg.al tree removal issue by the applicants on the neighbor ’s propeiiy Plaiiiiiiig Stuff Uccommendution Approve oi amend the attached Re.sointion aind VRP Agieemeilt. Rcsloi'wlioii PIhii Hie (’it) Fnginecr has had an opportunity to review the applicaint’s revised VRP and has provided comments. In addition to the Ihigineer comments SlaH'lias al.so incorporailed StalTcomments with the adjoining neighhoi.s’ concerns into an aiddendnni to become part ot the fmal approved VRP. Cmiiicil Action Kc(|iic.stcd Approve or amend (he attached Resolution and VRJ’ Agreement. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1288 SUBDIVISION B FILE NO. 04-3052 WHEREAS, Eric Joel Vogstrom and Elizabeth A. Vogstroin, husband and wife (hereinafter “the applicants”) arc the owners of tlie property located at 2618 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City”) and legally described as follows; North 80 feet of Block 3, Winships Subdivision of Lot 1, Spring Park Second Addition. Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal 2^ning Code Section 78-1288 Subdivision B to allow 31.7% hardcover within the 75 ’-250 ’ zone where 25% is normally allowed in conjunction with the construction of a new single family residence. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. 2. 'Phis application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-3052. The property is located in the LR-IC One Family Lake.slu)ie Residential Zoning District which requires a minimum lot area of 'A acre and a minimum lot width of 100’. 3.The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearings held on September 20, October 18, and November 15, 2004 and recommended approval of variances based on the following findings; a. Tlic applicants’ property is 20,561 s.f. or 0.47 acre in area and has 100’ in width at a line parallel to the shore and 80’ in width at the 75 ’ Page 1 of 6 5. setback, and therefore meets the build-ability criteria of Zoning Code Section 78-72(b)(l). b. The property is divided into two non-contiguous portions by the lagoon which is part of I.ake Minnetonka, ’fhe applicants’ land access to the non-contiguous piece is walking access over the adjacent City right-of-way. c. llie applicants’ existing driveway is located almost wholly on the adjacent City right-of-way. With the redevelopment of tliis property the applicants will abandon the existing driveway. The City Council reviewed this application on October 25, November 8 and 22, and December IS, 2004 and January 10 and 24, 2005 and makes the following additional findings: a.The proposed house footprint exclusive of decks at 1,499 s.f has been minimized to an appropriate level for the size of the property. The proposed 75’- 250’ zone hardcover level of 31.7% is the minimum hardcover necessary ,o support the proposed house while providing for adequate driveway and other site plan elements. b. The applicants have removed vegetation in violation of City Codes on their property and on tlie neighboring property. The restoration of the vegetation will be dealt with separately from the variance Resolution with an approved Vegetation Restoration Plan and Agreement with the City. c. The applicants have reached an agreement with the adjacent property owner witli respect to the tree removal and screening. d. Ihc grading and drainage plan shall include gutters, downspouts, swales, draintile, etc as determined necessary to guarantee the runolT from tlie applicants’ property docs not negatively affect the adjacent properties. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff. Page 2 of 6 conuncnls by Uic applicants and tlic public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safely and welfare of the community. 6.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other properly in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely alTect traffic conditions, light, air nor j>ose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properly; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or dilTiculty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the .spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 Subdivision B to allow 31.7% hardcover within the 7.S ’-250 ’ zone where 25% is normally allowed in conjunction with construction of a new single family residence subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and ('ity Cmmcil review. Hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone shall not increase alx)ve the level of 0 s f. or 0%. Hardcover in the 75-250 ’ zone shall be limited to 2,432 s.f. or 31.7% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depictevl on l‘!\bibit A. Applicants are advi.sed that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of existing/appii)veil hardet)ver shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. Applicants shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorative landscape beds on the property to ensure their pertueability as non-hardcover surfaces I’age 3 of 6 4. Applicants shall remove all gravel hardcover on the adjacent right-of-way and establish suitrble vegetative groundcover by September 30,2005. 5. Required removals of structure and hardcover shall be completed prior to tlie footing inspection for the new residence. 6. The approvals granted by this variance resolution shall not be valid until the applicants have entered into an Agreement with the City regarding their Vegetation Restoration Plan including appropriate provisions and financial security to assure execution. No temporary or permanent Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued until the Vegetation Restoration Plan has been executed to the City's satisfaction. 7. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not witli the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new construction within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (February 14,2006). 8. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 9. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants’ heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 14 “' day of February, 2005. Page 4 of 6 A M ‘ bar, .. .r r.^i .t,.- wat i .... ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, Cily Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Tltc foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this M*** day of __, 2005 by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ day of , 2005 by Linda S. Vcc, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 k t'1 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of by Eric Joel Vogstrom, husband of Elizabeth A. Vogslrom. 2005 Notary Public S TATE OF MlNNESOl'A COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this__day of by Elizabeth A. Vogstrom, wife of Eric Joel Vogstrom. .2005 Notary Public Page 6 of 6 6" Elm Stu?T)p^ /T c*' -ytlT-Sf Mr<‘ «.l 7» iCur \S 89'P ’OO"^ E 2\1.W-- "/^3H Spruce ^tomp j \ li;uorcs I .\ •[ 12 Hj Ft M'' Oak itump o I Oi j Ret ^^at! / J n Alarth l/n^ of Block .t5. Win ships • Suhd. of Lot /, Spfmg Bark 2nd Addition / ©/ 12‘ i^cc ^__12‘:0a^ "© / Tt' ^ JSMI / / / / ) — ^■ ¥** Spruce Stump founti BtNCHMARK .■70P Of IRON 944. JO-’ C'clr { *j * • / \ 3*,spruce Stump v I t.9' 5" Spruce ‘ 7Jr<»e stump location shorvn as per client \A not field ^enfied' ^ * V / }o± -?• r/r. Tree? : iocatii as pe not ft • V/ A 13^ am ahr ioc^thn . 'tomt oa pat a:ant or &jycrHopN-rz? &6" (Cgtievws \. ■Mi u isonestroo g^Rpsene ■ Anderfik & ^ I Associates Engineers & Architects 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 Office: 651-636 4600 • Fax: 651 636-1311 WWW bonesiroo.coin '«m CITY OF OftOMo January 14,2005 Ms. Melanie Curtis Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: 2618 Casco Point Road File No. 139-05-000 Plat No. 04-3052 Dear Melanie: Attached please find comments from Sherri Buss at our office regarding the restoration plan for 2618 Casco Point Road. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Attaclunent Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono Mike Gaffron, City of Orono • Si. Paul. Si. Cloud. Rochesler. Willin.ii. MN • Milwaukee, Wl • Chicago. IL Affl/nMlive Aciion/tqujil Opporluniiy Cinployer snd employer Owned \ [ m J Bonestroo Bosenc V S Anderlik & Ivll Associates Engineers & Architects BonntroOt Romm, Andtrilk and Aaaocialas, Inc. i« an Affirmallvc Action/Equal Opportunity Employar and Cmployaa Owned Principals: Otio O Bonestroo. P E. • Marvin L Sorvala. P E. • Glervi R. Cook. P E • Robed 0. SchorSchC PE* Jerry A Bourdon. P E • Mark A Harwon. P E Senior Consultants: Robert W Roseno. P.E • Jotepb C. Anderlik. P E. • RlcKard E. Turner. P E • Susan M Eborttn. C P A Associate Principals: Knth A Gordon. P.E. • Robert R. Pfefferlo. P E • Richard W Foster. P E • David O. Loskota. P E.. • Michael T Rautmann. P E. • Ted K Field. P E • Kerweth P Anderson. P.E. • Mark R Rolfs. P E • David A Bonestroo. MBA* Sidney P. Wlllamson, P E . L S • Agnes M Ring. MBA • Allan Rick Schmidt. P E • Thomas W Peterson. P E • James R Maland. P.E. • Miles B Jenser^. P E • L Phillip Gravel III. P E • Darnel J Edgerlon. P E. • Ismael Martinei. P E • Thomas A. Syfko. P E • Sheldon J Jotvison * Dale A Grove. P E • Thomas A Roushar. P.E. • Robert J Devery. P E Date: To: From: Subject: OfTIcts: SI PaiJ. St. Clood. Rochester end WiUmar. MN • Milwaukee. Wl • CtVeago. IL Wabalte: www.boneslroo com January 12,2005 Tom Kellogg Sherri Buss, M.L.A. Review of Restoration Plan for 2618 Casco Point Road I have reviewed the Restoration Plan for 2618 Casco Point Road, and have the following comments: • The species selection for plantings and seed mix are OK. • The plan docs not indicate the source for the “native seed mix ”. The source and location should be specified, to ensure that seed hardy to our area is selected and planted. Seed should have been grown within 200 miles of the Twin Cities, and preferably within 50 miles. • Maintenance of the native seeding is critical to success, and ensuring that the seeded area does not become a weed patch. The MnDOT Seeding Manual 2003 provides a good schedule for maintenance of areas that are seeded with native mixes. The City should require a maintenance plan for the seeding from the landowner, and require that the owner or his/her contractor provide this maintenance. I have attached the pages from the MnDOT Manual for reference. • Tree planting should include protection from deer and beavers (see note on plan that indicates that beavers arc at work in the area). • A cover crop is a good idea for native seeding. The MnDOT Manual also describes appropriate cover crops to be included in native seed mixes, depending on the season that the seed is applied. • Seeding and planting procedures should generally follow the MnDOT standard.s, including removal of any noxious weeds before seeding or planting. 2335 IVest Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636-1311 \ Maintenance Keniiircment!i Mn/DOT Scciiinf( Manual 200} (Pa^c }4) Ccncral Seed Mixtures 240, 250 and 280 Year I Maintenance after Sprint; «»■ Karly Summer Seeding: 1) Mowing during early Fall may be necessary if weed infeslalion or sliading becomes a |)rol>Icm. 2) Weed C.’ontrol - mowing should help control annual weeds. Spot spray thistles etc. 3) If plants arc growing slowly, you can apply fertili/cr (20-10-10 analysi.s) as necc.s.sary over the top to improve growth. Maintenance after Fall or Dormant >Seediiig: 1) M»)wing in May or June may l)c necessary if weed infestation becomes a problem. 2) Weed Control - mowing should help control annual weeils. Spot spray thistles etc. Long Term Maintenance: 1) Can mow 3 times per year as desired, 2) Spot spray weeds a.s needed. General Seed Mixtures 260 and 270 Year I 1) Frovidc water if necessary to aid establishment 2) Alter turf gra.sses reach a height of 6 inches, initially mow to a height of 2 to 3 inches. Long *reriii 1) Fei tili/e and water as needed. 2) Mow a minimum of once every 2 weeks. Native (;ra.ss and Forb Mixtures (310,330,340,350 and 5IJ tliroiiKli 28B) Year I F.stalilislimcnt (.spring seeding): 1) Prepare site - laitc April - May. 2) Seed - May I - July 1. Maintenance: 1) Mow (6 8 inche.s) every 30 days after planting until September 30. 2) Weed Control - mowing should help control annual weeds. Spot spray thistles etc. F.tlal>li.sliiiienl (fall seeding): 1) Prepare site - Late August - early September. 2) Seed - late September to free/e-up. Maintenance (following season): 1) Mow (6-8 inehc.s) onec in May, June and July. 2) Weed Control - mowing should keep annual weeds down. Spot spray thistles etc. Fvuluation: 1) Cover crop growing within 2 weeks t>f planting (except donnant plantings). 2) Seedlings spaeeil I -6 iiu hes apart ill drill rows. i * [. t J. 3) Native grass seedlings may only be 4-6 inches tall. 4) If there iS a flu.sh of growth from foxtail etc., mow as necessary. Mn/DOT Seeding Manual 2003 (Page 35) Year 2 Maintenance: 1) Mow (6-8 inches) one time between June 1 - August 15 before weeds set seed. 2) Weed Control - mowing should keep annual weeds down. Spot spray thistles etc. 3) Some sites may not require much maintenance the second year. Evaluation: 1) Cover crop will be gone unless winter wheat was used in a fall planting. 2) Grasses forrmng clumps 1-6 inches apart in drill rows, but still short. 3) Some flowers should be blooming (black-eyed Susans, bergamot etc.). 4) If there is a flush of growth from foxtail etc., mow site. Year 3 Maintenance: 1) Mow only if necessary. 3) Weed Control - Spot spray thistles, etc. 4) Sites usually do not require much maintenance the third year. Evaluation: 1) Planting should begin looking like a prairie - tall grasses, flowers etc. Long-term Maintenance: 1) Weed Control - Spot spray thistles etc. 2) Burning (3-5 year rotation) alternate spring and fall if possible. 3) Haying (3-5 year rotation) late summer or early fall. Alternate with burning (may substitute for burning). 4) Burning two years in a row will really “clean up” rough-looking sites. liiiilMiilirth ifiiniii EryH'&iT'P VEGETATION RESTORATION PLAN APPROVAL Reference the attached plan by Markell Laberee Design Group dated December 22, 2004 for 2618 Casco Point Road, Wayzata, MN The City of Orono hereby approves the above referenced plan subjeet to the following additional eonditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The Black Hills Spruce trees proposed for the property’s eastern “point” shall be 12’ in height rather than 8 ’ as proposed; and All of the attached City Engineer recommendations shall be met; and No trees shall be replaced by the Vogstroms on the Essen ’s property; and. The trees proposed on the City right-of-way shall be located further east to be within the Vogstroms’ property or as close as feasible to the property line. The existing ash trees located within the area labeled “stand of buckthorn to be removed” on the property’s eastern “point” sliall not be removed. The property owner shall meet with City staff on the site prior to any tree removals to identify vegetation to be removed and to remain. t;<Hi5iT g: THIS AGREEMENT and RELEASE made and entered into this day of , 2005 by and between the City of Orono, a municipal corporation located in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as City of Orono) and Eric and Elizabeth Vogstrom, owners of the property at 2618 Casco Point Road, Wayzata, MN (hereinafter referred to as tlie Vogstroms). In consideration of the covenants contained herein, and in consideration of the Vogstroms ’ agreement to restore vegetation, on their property and adjacent City of Orono property, as shown on the Vegetation Restoration Plan attached as Exhibit A to this document, to replace trees and undergrowth removed on the Vogstroms ’ property in violation of City Codes and on adjacent property within the City limits of the City of Orono, the parties agree as follows: 1. The legal description of the Vogstrom property is as follows: North 80 feet of Block 3, Winships Subdivision of Lot 1, Spring Park Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter, the Property) 2. Tliis AGREEMENT resolves the dispute related to the unauthorized removal of trees and vegetation from the Properly within 75’ of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka and on adjacent City of Orono property. 3. The City of Orono agrees to discontinue pursuit of legal action against the Vogstroms related to the unauthorized removal of trees and vegetation clear cutting within 75’ of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka, in exchange for the Vogstroms and/or their successors and assigns agreement to plant and maintain the trees, shrubs and groundcovers set out in the Vegetation Restoration Plan which is attached as Exhibit A to this document. The trees and other plantings shall be planted as soon as practicable, but in no case shall a Certificate of Occupancy be issued until the Vegetation Restoration Plan has been fully executed. 4. The trees, shnibs and groundcovers within 75’ of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka shall be planted no later than June 30, 2005. The trees, shrubs and groundcovers to be planted outside the 75’ setback of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka shall be planted prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and no later than September 30,2005. 5. The City of Orono may enter the Property to inspect the planting, in order to determine that the trees, shrubs and groundcoveis arc planted in accordance with file Vegetation Restoration Plan. 6. The Vogstroms and their successors and assigns shall allow an annual inspection by the City of Orono to determine that th.e trees, shrubs and groundcovers are growing, and the Vogstroms and their successors and assigns shall replant any trees, shrubs or groundcovers that are dead or dying, and shall use best efforts to facilitate the file and growth of the trees, shrubs and groundcovers. This 1 I V 1 requirement shnil eontinue in cflcct until each of the trees planted williin 75’ of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka has reaehed a diameter of six inches, or 19 inches in cireumference, at a point measured three feet above the ground. Additionally, this AGREEMENT shall continue in effect for the trees to be planted outside the 75’ setback from the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka for no less than 5 years from their planting. 7. Performance Deposit: For the purposes of assuring to the City that the Improvements will be completed according to the terms of this AGREEMENT, and that the Vogstroms will pay all clain>s for work done and materials and supplies furnished, the Vogstroms have deposited with the City at the time of the execution of this AGREEMEN'I' on irrevocable letter of credit in a form satisfactory to the City providing that the City is able to draw upon such letter of credit in its sole discretion to enter the properly and complete the Improvements if the Vogsroms fail to satisfactorily complete the work prior to the completion date specified in Item 4 above. 'I'he amount of such deposit shall not be reduced before substantial completion of the Improvements. The letter of credit shall expire no sooner than one year aAer the completion date specified in Section 4 above, or no sooner than June 30,2006, whichever is later. 8. llie Vogstroms and their succe.s.sors and assigns shall not trim any of the paits of the trees or shrubs, or remove any of the trees or shrubs, without City of Orono approval. 9. The vegetation within the wetland and within 26 ’ landward of the wetland boundary shall not be mowed. 10. 'fhis AGREEMENT shall remain in effect until both parties agree to amend or terminate this AGREEMEINT. lliis AGRIUiMENT may be enforced by injunctive relief in the courts of the State of Minnc.sota. 11. This AGREEMI-!NT may be filed against the Property. The Vogstroms agree to obtain the con.sent of any other holders of interests in the Property in order to allow this AGRI:EMI:NT and RELEASE to be filed. For the City of Orono For the Vogstroms Ronald J. Moorsc ('ity Administrator l*!ric J. Vogstrom Elizabeth A. Vogstrom m ^ -.mV. w X I MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 10,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. (#04-3p|o Wayzat^^esign & Development, Coijli^d) fron stated G docs to be addn^lfl in tenns ofiptfintenance. C^fTron stated McC^Kcy Tnay want t^imisider beingrmi adjunct meuKT or an assoditfe member o^c homeowners a^ciatiun. GafTron nptra that thisi^n unusualsjt/amn in tliat a pi;^p(n1y that isj^located within tly^ubdivision is beinj^quired to ^the new priun^oad. Ppt^rson move^Sansevere amnded, to direc^tafT to draO^ resolution apprt^ng final plat fn ipplicatioi^004-30l6, LazniarzAVayfata Design j^evelopiiicnt, IZfl^rown Road Soj^ii. VOTE: i>^s4,NaysO ^ 5. #04-3052 ERIC VOGSTROM, 2618 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES Eric Vogstrom, Applicant, was present. Sansevere indicated he is in support of the applicant's revised plan, but that he would prefer the trees be replaced prior to any construction starting on this lot. (Sansevere leaves at 8:10 p.m.) GafTron noted the applicant has submitted a revised plan to reflect a 1,499 square foot building footprint, removal of one parking stall, and a variance request to allow 31.7 percent hardcover within the 7S’-250’ setback zone. Staff is recommending approval of the revised plan and the variance for 31.7 percent hardcover within the 75’-250’ setback zone. GafTron stated the applicant has submitted a revised restoration plan, which is currently under review by Staff, noting that Staff is close to accepting it. Gaffron stated there may need to be some sort of development agreement that goes along with the restoration plan. GaffVon stated the Council has the option to direct Staff to draft a resolution reflecting Council’s action for adoption or to reject the current plan and again provide tiie applicant with guidance. McMillan inquired whether the garage is going to be a tuck-under garage. Vogstrom stated the room on the far right is not a bedroom and is actually a garage. Vogstrom indicated due to the program on his computer he was required to label that as a bedroom rather than garage to arrive at the square footage. White noted this is a four-bedroom house. Peterson inquired whether the deck was counted twice in the hardcover calculation. Gaffron .stated the deck consi.sts of 150 .square feet. Peterson noted there are two decks depicted. Peterson inquired whether the City could delay issuing a building permit until the restoration plan has been implemented and completed. PAGES MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January tO, 2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. (1104-3052 Eric Vogstrom, Continued) Barrett stated the issue is calculating the runoff and that if the City is certain that the removal of the trees impacted runoff, the City could request the applicant provide or demonstrate to the City that he has enforceable agreements with the adjacent property owner requiring planting of the trees or an agreement with the City allowing them to obtain an injunction. Barrett stated that could be made a condition of the variance. Vogstrom noted he has already paid Essen for the trees that were removed. Gaffron stated the applicant is proposing to replace the trees and shrubs that were cut on the north side of the lagoon. Gaffron stated the trees that were cut along the street side of the house consists of three rows of pine trees, with one row being totally witliin the property, one row being along the property line, and one row being within the right-of-way. Gaffron indicated that Staff would be reviewing Casco Point Road in the near future and that the road might need to be expanded sliglitly. Gaffron stated it may make sense for all of the replacement trees to be located on the property rather than within the right-of-way. Gaffron indicated Staff feels tliis is a reasonable plan and tliat Staff is close to accepting it. Gaffron stated the City Engineer would also be reviewing it. White inquired whether Mr. Essen is planning to replace the trees. Peterson inquired what type of trees arc being proposed for along the road. Gaffron stated pine trees arc being propo.scd in that area. Gaffron noted the trees located widiin the right-of-way that were removed were planted by a previous property owner. McMillan inquired wliether the trees arc out of the 0-7S’ /one. Galfron stated tJicy arc not located within the 0-75’ zone and that it is a reasonable request by the City to ask for replacement of the trees even though they are located in the right-of-way. McMillan inquired whether homeowners are allowed to remove trees on their property. Gaffron stated property owners do have the right to remove trees on their property as long as they are not within the 0-75’zone. Peterson inquired whether a drain tile system would be installed. Vog.strom stated a drain tile system is part of the agreement he has with Essen and that gutters and downspouts would also be installed. Vogstrom indicated he is agreeable to putting something in writing it the City requires it concerning the restoration plan but that he would prefer he be allowed to commence construction in the near future due to the intere.st he is incurring on his loan. PAGE 9 'V MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, January 10,2005 7:00 o'clock p.in. (/I04-30S2 Eric Votstrom, Continued) White noted the trees cannot be planted during the wintertime and that if there is an enforceable agreement tliat the applicant will restore this property, iic is in favor of the application. Feterson inquired whether the trees would need to be planted prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. GafTron stated that would be a logical and reasonable solution. Vogstrom stated he is willing to sign an agreement with the city saying that the property would need to be restored prior to a certificate of occupancy being issued. Peterson inquired whether the City would require any guarantee on the longevity of the trees. Gaffron stated that could be included in a developer’s agreement. Barbara Essen, 2048 Casco Point Road, inquired whether that would also encompass future property owners in the event the property is sold. Gaffron stated the agreement would encompass future property owners. Jeff Essen pointed out he received a citation from the city saying that he is subject to litigatior. if the trees arc not replaced and that lie has sent a letter to the City indicating he would replace the trees. Essen staled it was 90 days ago that the trees were cut down and that earlier this afternoon a settlement agreement was signed with Vogstrom and that the trees would be planted in the spring to replace the ones that were removed. lissen stated in tlieir agreement gutters and downspouts are required, along with drain tile and a swale, but that there is no way for him to enforce that language. Essen requested that language be included in the development agreement to ensure that the City has the ability to enforce that agreement. Essen indicated this is the first time he has seen the revised plan and that one of his main areas of concerns is off-street parking. Essen stated he has always been in favor of granting additional hardcover to provide ofl-street parking and that he is supportive of the two-car full-length driveway. R.SSCH stated he is not supportive of the way the house has been twisted, noting that the deck looks down into their bedroom, iissen requested the deck be relocatetl to the other side to preserve their privacy. I'elerson commented it might be necessary to redesign the liouse if that change is made. Vogstrom staled hr '■•ied to take advantage of the best view of the lake in orienting the house on the lot. l’eter.son noletl one of the decks is liK'aled off the master bedroom and Otic is located olfthc dining room. l*eler.son inquired which deck Essen would like re-oriented. PAGE 10 L 1 MINUTES OF THE OKONO C:iTY COUNCIL MEETINC Mondiiy, Junuiiry 10,2005 7:00 o’clock |mii. (#04-3052 Eric VoKilirom, Coiitiiiucd) lisscn staled the upper deck would probalrly not be used for parlies, bul lluit ill his view twisting the house has now given the applicant a clear view to his residence. While iiupiired whether ihe house could be rotated slightly. Vogstroni staled he wouhl prefer to look at Ihe lake and not his nciglibor’s house and that he will nllcinpt to rc-oricnl the bouse slightly to help preserve his neighbor’s privacy. Vogsirrnii staled he diti locate the garage on that lot to lake advantage of the best view of Ihe lake. Vogstroni indicated he al.so would like to preserve his privacy. While iiupiired how far off the lot line the f•.ssen residence is localc«l. Jeff Essen staled their house is located approximately 20 or 25 feel from Ihe property line. Essen staled he also has been in favor of a vai iance on the hardcover, but the fact that the house is proposed 15 feet closer to his property line and is larger than the current structure is the basis for his concerns regarding lunolT. McMillan inquired whether the City has received a grading plan on this project. ( tafiron staled the City has not received anything that could l>c coiisideretl a final grading plan and that it would be required at the time the building permit is applied for. (iaftroii indicated the ('oiincil could require spccillc items relating to drainage. Vogstroni slated he did agree to the downspouts and gutters and that lessen has agreed to replace the shrubs and bushes in between the two homes to help with the privacy. Vogstroni indicated he would not Ik opposed to tho.se two items being included in the development agreement. While moved lo direct StafT to prepare a resolution to accept the current revised plan submitted as part of Application #04-3052, 2618 C’asco I'oint Koud, and to bring Ihe rc.solution buck for approval on .liininiry 24, 2005, with the inclu.sioii ofa requirement for Ihe in.slullalinn of «lown spouts and grading plan. Moorse recommended at the time Ihe C'oimcil appioves the resohilioii on the 24'*', a signed agieemeiit should Ik in place for the la*e replacement. White amended hi.s motion lo include Ihe condition that a signed agreement he .siihmitled lo the City concerning the tree replacement plan. McMillan seconded. VO'I E: Ayc.s 3, Navs 0. l*A(iE 11 Exibit G Dale Application Received: 08-18-04 Hale Appiicalioii Complete: 00-13-04 I20-I)ay Review Period Kitended: 0.1-10-05 KKQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: Jaiuiary 4, 2005 Item No, Department Approval: Name: Melanie Curtis Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Title: City FManner |i/iM Item Description: //04-3052 - F-iie Vogstrom - 2618 Casco Point Road - Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: I-R-IC, One Family Lakcshorc Residential, 0.5 acrc/100’ 0.47 acre/20,561 s.f. 100’ parallel to the shore & 80’ @ 75 ’ setback List of Exhibits: A. Revised Survey dated 12-21 -04 B. Revised Floor Plans and KIcvations C. (’ouncil Memo from 12-07-04 D. Draft Council Minutes from 12-07-04 Application Summary: This application was tabled at your December 13"' meeting in order to provide the applicant a final opportunity to redesign the proposal to rcllcct a 1,500 s.f. maximum building footprint and minimal associated hardcover. 'I'he applicant has submitted a revised plan; the footprint was reduced, one parking stall removed from the plan and now the applicant is proposing a variance for 31.7% hardcover within the 75 ’-250’ setback >.one. I’he new design is reduced from 1,699 s.f. to a 1,499 s.f. building footprint (including a home, 2-car attached garage, and deck) with a total of 2,432 s.f or 31.7% hardcover in the 75 ’-250’ zone. The lloor plans and elevation views submitted appear to match the proposed footprint on the sui-vey and staff feels that this recent proposal is responsive to the Council ’s direction. IManning C.’ommission Recommendation On November 15, 2004, Planning (’ommission voted 5-2 (dissenting ('ommissioners Fritzlcr and Jurgens lelt additional hardcover rciluctions were warranted) to recommend approval of a variance within the 75 ’-250’ zone for 36.8% hardcover or 2,824 s.f and an average lake setback variance to encroach 5’ into the average lake setback in conjunction with land.scape restoration plan to be appiovcd. The Planning Commission has not reviewed the most recent submittal. Plamiiiig Sfiiff Recomnioiidation Although the majority of the Planning Commission concluded that the large 0-75 ’ area and relatively .small 75 ’- 250’ area is a hardship to the property. Council should discuss the merits of this rcc|ue.st and reach a conclusion as to what level of harilcover is appropriate to the site. -T-jjsiaai The applicant has proposed a 1.499 s.f. footprint with an attached 2-stall garage and staff feels tliat he has proposed a plan that meets the direction of the Council. Therefore, Planning Staff recummetuls approval of the hardcover variance request for 31.7% hardcover within the 75 ’-2S0’ setback as well as the average lakeshore setback variance. Restoration Flan The applicant has provided a revised restoration plan which appears to address a majority of staffs concerns. We will provide a full review for you at your next meeting. Council Action Requested Options include: 1. Accept the current plan and direct Staff to draft a resolution reflecting Council ’s action for adoption at your January 24"' meeting; or 2. Reject the current plan and again provide the applicant with guidance. , i \ rrfr y\fi/ \ iV ... tl' €" Utn Stuffip i' i\n •! \S 89'2y00 "I L 2\U0~\ Nofth Hn^ of Block Win^hips • Subd. of Lot 1, SpNng Park 2nd Addition Sfjriicf! i>tump t ' f(v l]V\ •: >. \i f> Odk itump O 12'" pcc ,/■rJ - - . 3"“ if VO Stumm Stump K 6" Um Stump'' rw% ▼ pfA/y Mfj ,^,7 I 6" SprueV Iree stump toLotion shown us per c/tent b’i I “\ not held verified •../ /1 I f2"\Ook : ' / t / /c^;j4 Oa\ 4" Maple Stump ’ ^ 9 s^, 4 " Spruce Stump ,, ■ tuutui TOf> Of WON * !f44 fO-^ I , ^ 3^ fipruce Stump ^y •A h a14 'X V ! I S / * ! i V i - ! 2 fin \ Iree lot. atf< as pet not fn '/ / • \/ / 14' ffm 'Stumppy 6q£ ; \ ■ V. / A\ / // t~~i.L _J I 6mer euMKrioN ' T ~ i rr-'j I > ^ V. fT.-T ■*•1 • .*■ . >• ■'.t; / .''V‘ fasbiihbaa* ^jifcj(ii»aik -■ rj* r - rj- rj- rj* rj -r-w>-wKv^.isw^ -*T*r>f^ VktkSis^a^^VL^ tl 5» ?:»5te5l:5S^^iil5S5iTSc5S-:3L^i iXSISl:sa CIC301^ono Biaaiii Mo^ft BieviATiOKi ._MihM^tt Ife ft Y 4,, <&einn ^itvATwiJ ^^^■*J^J*JtIi'-'**^f-f^f* ‘•■'1i<«M»»»i^^^V^»^»^ V*V 74-V/» ‘ ***f*^*****'ViJtI, V I B B I • • ^- -JBiiiin lAV^ eij^AtlOfsl '— \J \ MASTER BORM SHOWER o o CLOSET 103 iqn so> BEDROOM 157tqll SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1502 sq ft r FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1497 so ft ‘•si I tAHi&iT O l>iilc Applicalion Krcrivcd: UN-IR-ril Mate Appllratioii C*oiiipli*U*: 0<)<l3-04 I20-I>ay Rrvkw Ikrioil F.ilcmird: 03-10-05 RKQDKSI KOK COUNCIL ACTION l^atc: December 7,2004 Item No. Dcparlmcnt Approval: Name: Melanie Ciiiii.s Title: City Planner Adiiiiitisiralor Approval:Anemia Section: Item Deiicription: //04-.10.S2 - Ivrie Vof'.siroin 2618 ('aseo Point Road Varianee.s ZoninR District: Lot Area: Lot Width: l,R-IC, One l•'aInily i^akesliore Residential, 0.5 acre/IOO* 0.47 aLre/2().56l s.f. 100' parallel to the shore & 80’ (h) 75 ’ setback List of Exhibits: A - Rcvi.sed Plans 12-05-04 B-Cotmcil Action Notice 12-02-04 C - C!oimeil Menu) 11-17-04 D Review Period l■xtcnsion 12-01-04 I: Restoration Plan StalT Review Letter 12-08-04 Application Suiiiniao': riiis application was tabled at your Niivember 22"*^ meeting in older to provide the applicant with an opportunity to redesign the proposal to reduce or eliminate the varianee.s requcsied. At that time (.'oiincil directed the applicant to icdcsign the propo.sal to include a 1,500 s.L building footprint and the appropriate hardcover to suppoi t that home. Upon receipt of this ret|uestcd plan the ('mincil would determine the appropriate level of hardcover variance. riic applicant has submitted a ic\ iscd plan, the luune was slightly redesigned and the applicant is now proposing a .v//g/j//g le.sser variance than the 3(>.8% hardcover within the 75 ’-250' setback /one which was proposed previously. I be new design is reduced from 1,884 s.f to a 1,690 s f builiting footprint (including a home, 3-car attached garage, and deck) with a total of .36.0% hardcover in the 75 ’-25()’ /one. 1 he new design propo.ses r»nly a 0 8% hardcover reduction from the previous propo.sal. .Staff leels that the proposal is not responsive to the Councirs direction, and is resulting in e.xeessivc staff time iK'ing spent on the applicalion IMaiiiiiiig ('oiiimissioii Uecommeiidatioii On November 15. ,’004. I’l.inning (’ommi.ssion voted 5-2 (di.s.scnting t’ommi.ssioncrs I'rit/lcr and Jurgens felt additional hardcover leduclions were warranted) to recommend appn>val of a variance within the 75 ’-250' /.one loi 3().8"o h.iulcovci or 2.8.’4 s f. and an average lake .selb.ick variance to encroach 5 ’ into the averag.e lake sclixick in coniunciion with laiul.scape restoration plan to be approved I he Planning ('ommission has not reviewed the nui.st recent submittal. Planning Staff Rccommcmlatioii Although the majority of the Planning Commission concluded that the large 0-75’ area and relatively small 75’- 250’ area is a hardship to the property; SlalT is not convinced that the level of 36.8% or even 36% is warranted for this specific rebuild. Council should discass the merits of this request and reach a conclusion as to what level of hardcover is appropriate to the site. Staff also feels that Council should review this proposal as a “footprint ” rather than a rambler or two-story, as either could be constructed on this property. Planning Department Staff continues to recommend approval of the average lakeshore setback variance. Staff believes that the size of the 75’-250* zone (7,673 s.f.) which at 25% would allow only 1,918 s.f. of hardcover, is an inlicrent hardship, fhe city has generally established that for very small lots, the minimum rea.sonable garage/liouse footprint is 1,500 s.f.. It is likely impossible to construct a 1,500 s.f. house on this site within the 25% limit. I'herefore staff will conceptually support a 1,500 s.f home with the minimal decks, sidewalk and driveway needed to support it, but we think this can be done in the range of 30% hardcover, not 36%. We are not convinced that the 3 ”* garage stall is necessary. Council Action Requested Options include: 1. Accept the current plan and direct Staff to drafi a resolution reflecting Council’s action for adoption at your January meeting; or 2. Reject the current plan and again provide the applicant with guidance; or 3. Otlicr. LU 18 IJ...r § i /J?" Spruce S}Ornp*^^. \ ^0 ’.II s •Si.,'<C>K.7- S9’}j'00l 'i—211.10 ■ Spruce * ** •North tinf of Stock Wtnships ^ Subd of Lot I Spting Pork 2nd Addition / / : ^Aump P * C7) ^ » / . -S‘>- V- J9 7Vvi^'>''^pV - .■•v"*/ <-*7 ’’ A Vi ‘^ / /K>i-.■•■ >• rfe-'v I4f. / 5" Spruce Tree stump location shown as per client o not field verified ^ iS^ I r ro' _ Stump / I / 4' Mbtefe Sturtjp |L J^JS U yJl 6'^' •; \ cf 2 -i / Found //»• benchmark ^,'fOP OF IRON - 944.1077-^------- 161. m t I d“ Spruce Stump /J S;89 ‘2J 0(\ E 14 ’ Elm Stump $ M r ^ 1 / • W f V / /^- (/ /U FoundjBmkm Cv Tim > i: HJ O Jrco stijfi location i os per cl not held /0 / /^0 ^0 mJ0 / / Z' ^0 ^0 ^0 « ^0 ^0 / / /^0 ^0 ^0 / / ADIASCE SI HI EUMJ A EMU.MEHtM: CO. lOiiih /toms kata »•«••••»• —4k» k» ■»— »l n:'•» Wxill 3ik4*.tW»i#»»*lfci*-*r» IT» Wf* afcw >• >•! «> ak.* Mv> •*■•1^ -• ^<* •^‘*'*^ **^• >••«»< MHl» tw*wt* .'*<»<*»»k— >**»••<r<May »IMI- M >-»• kM « »»i>». r« ak* MM t« »4 •»• itR ^ M » ^>1 k- ■»» ail MM -M Am* »m f. .»k« M iA»M —* f.^MI fc* xll«lk l«M« I a*^ ^ a* >*•••/#« (^ •« A««' Ak*r>« f'« • *M Am Mikli «»»■*■*»« *«■ •'• *•«. *»«» • • V«* r%M» A* A*M A .* ■M^.*M —MM. 4««m«mm m —*4 —» Am* » w*A MM— *m> tit mama A< ««B**k«*M*M A«««<<« a J V**M« M« MM* -«••■»*« Mf<^->««**•• A«M*i m**«M • M« mm*m«A - *■>»»* • «a M*»—M *• **A A« .«*».* «< A« r-Ma*- 4 A A*l«to ‘ ^ar ^ ■*! ia •» mm* d •MA M'*.** • *— A*.* kMl*M* M* «m4»-MMii M*M* • a»m »• A,* mm*»J Mr*•>*««* *• • M a*>M^. -• M* • M* W *• > *• I MM M •■* M *M Mt **• HmAa ad Man .»****•« .^ 1^ «*»—**■ *».k^**M A** M A« mim—Am .•*•*>«> a* m -V»m a* a* ia-7*—» •* «»M% « *M*lM«M*M« A* «a. a 0 '(mamM •«•*.*#••—■ »*■ * %<*M«* m A • r*MMA»a*l«a«f«*aMa. MIM • M»«m| lA-aAMa* A*«M «MMA4k**l»**a. |>* vA.*** •4'**^*.mA» d M< •«• It* >W<*MM Am* mm «*a M A« >■*•»**» fA- »A i/a A*»^i» I w ft* • m.ImmA a*4 U« a a Ami m* AAm Lmm iA m •« A* A«f •>•• Ar«^A*| "AM AMAm A«m*m A*»« HUti’. ‘ r£W£?lfc.. *1 ^ •»,lL’ «l<» « « * . • M ’• : I'M IMklfkA^>»| •*• i k«*M l.'t an. M—a PROPOSfD ELEVAVONS or njuMDAfWH • Bit soGAMACt floor • 9il tolownoor • »4/aomrootjm ror moN as snom - »44 AWWO IV4tM ’ tot so FT lAM«AtM*M»«M A*rAM«rA4kdaA"dAAa«*a' »M>a'^a<a, mm <MAa «• A*Ma *—M> «*• *M Mm I M> • >a «*«*< MaMo* *d |aAM*r »i moposiv onH oot JO fl Orw. No 040SJS > r SZT3ACX ZO^Z: (CmCLE ONE) pnrrrsf: HAqn^Q^~?^ zqns o-rr 2i0-5%0*fO^lCCO* A, Hnua Lr=|C» X «« M M m B. Cuix: C Drivw*y D. Sidcwiik X X X Iv Pxiic^Dedc X X m m F. Uodfcipt Clrv^k ir.uWiAiii Vl/fukrUiii By Ptaxiic X X X M ■a 0. othw _£lQnlgi: TOTAL HARDCOVER tN ZONE TOTAL PRfll'ERTY AREA IN ZONE V Q-> fA ^ B 7^7 6 X 100 ;gP WARDCOVER fW ZQWC A- Home _______ * WM X % X Q. Ganixc X C Unvewiv X X O, SMrealk X X B. PKic/Dck 5. Undtrlasi 9y Flisnc K X X a. 0±tr TC7AL iiAPJ3C0VdR W ZONE OTAL PHOTOTAL PSOFERDf AREA IN ZONE • B X ICO - 118A_ 5 - c T W •• • c -•w • 5..-. cCm • c r ^47- S-- S.F. 416 S.F. 55 J-. S.F. 5T. 4^ SJ. S.F '?.0?.Py S.F. A \ S.F. S.F. SJ. SJ. SJ. ROi SJ. SJ. SJ. S.F. I_£l4—sP- S.F. S.F. S.F. S.f. 7764 sj. A 7 6 7 S.F. 3 46.0 V. 1 • i ' * Vogue Homes, Inc Vogttrom Residence Casco Point Road :• mmnmmmm.vst-s&a •>K-:-5'»>5?5ai3!jiG LAKE VIEW ^ Uv*^ _ i515 V5 ;5 V5:p JlT^h \X ;J .5 M U -.1 ^ 4. V5^5:m. V* 1V ‘*5 » ^trJlZlZXM I? i> 5* 55^^55 u?5^:;l44 iX\% 5^54-^*44^45 V- t54i:i5V* 55 55cSi4544V-;: li« 55 55^55454545.55 55 5: 45.5545 55 55^4^4545 55 55 55T 4.^454545 55554545 545545 54*,*-4545 55 .5 4x5545.5 r 55^54^5J 555555454M54555 5 454;54r-5545.5545 C-4545 il^ ^•151454545 515545455*-5^ 455545 w»4X555X515x51554545 51*4 _ 5151415545 55 5145 5V414545 V5 51-5454l:a 554:414545414I45 *4 5l?V !5 55-51414145 5V? U 454;45 55 -5414> 4l4l4;414151414155 51514545 45. :1 514141V-5155 55 U 5141 ? 5 ;5 54-4: 45414X410414541344141 55 55 5X554^! « 0% 0% «%#% 0* • % 0%. ^ J ■ < FIRST FLOOR PLAN 966sqft r < Ujilili^ -40 ’-r 23'-2" SECOND FLOOR PLAN 891 sq ft BCttIBiT MINUTES OF Til K OKONO CITY COUNCIL MEETINO Monday, December 13,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. 9. #04-3052 ERIC VOC.S I ROM, 2618 CASCO POIN T ROAD - VARIANCES Erie Vogslrom, Applicant, and Todd Phelps, Atlorncy-at-l.aw, were present. Curtis noted this npplicniion was tabled at the November 22 “* City Council meeting, with the applicant being requested to redesign the proposal to reduce or eliminate the variances requested The applicant was directed to redesign the proposal to include a maximum 1,500 square foot building footprint and the appropriate hardcover to serve that home. The applicant has submitteil a revised design, with the home proposed to be two-story residence with a 1,699 building footprint, a three-ear attached garage and deck. 1 be applicant is now proposing .^4.5 percent hardcover within the 75 ’-250 ’ /one, which is a 2.3 percent or 176 square foot hardcover reduction from the previous propo.sal. Staff feels the propo.sid <loes not respond fully to Couneirs direction. Although the majority of the Planning Commission concluded that the large 0-75 ’ zone and relatively small 75 -250 ’ zone is a hardship to the property. Staff feels that the 34.5 percent hardcover is not warranted for this lot. Staff continues to recommend approval of the average lakeshore .setback variance. Staff believes that the size of the 75 ’-250 ’ zone, which, at 25 percent would allow only 1,918 square feet ofhardcover, is an inherent bard.ship. The City has generally established that for very small lots the minimum reasonable garage/house footprint is 1,500 square feet. It is likely impossible to construct a 1,500 square foot house rm this site within the 25 percent limit. Therefore, Staff will conceptually support a l,5(K) square foot home with minimal deck.s, sidewalk and ilriveway necried to support it, but Staff feels this can be done in the range of 30 percent hardcover, not 36 percent. Stall is not convinced ll.at the third garage stall is nece.s.sary. ('iirtis slated a letter from received linlay from Timothy Keane, attorney for the applicant, and has been distributed to the Council. F I i MINIJTKSOFTIIK OKONO ( ri’Y COUNCII. MKKIING Momliiy, Dci'cmbcr 13,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. GafTron addressed llie Cily Council concerning ihe si/e of (lie house and r(M)lprinl. GalTron staled (he lot is sloped towards the lake and has approxiinatcly an K-foot dilTctcncc from tlie lakeside of Ihe proposed house to Ihe street side of the proposed house, would ideally accommodate a walk out and a two and a half story house witliout exceeding any height limits and without excess grading. Gaffron stalerl a forrlprint of 1,500 srpiare feel with a two-stall garage coidd In; constructed. If the applicant would like to retain (he three-car garage, (he rir.sl story coidd he reduced by 200 .square feel, for a final sipiare footage of 4,700 s(|uare feel. Gaffron indicated the shape of this lot lends itself to a home up to 55-60' in width and also allows for a home to Ik* angled so that it takes the IksI advantage of lake views. Additionally, the home could be placed with the garage at Ihe 30 ’ minimum setback from the road to minimize driveway hardcover. The additional area of0-7.'>* zone that is non-conliguoiis is a benefit to this property but cannot be considered ns creating a hanfship situation. No hardcover credit should be accrued to this excess lakcshore square footage. .Sansevere iiupiired why the applicant is .so reluctant to agree to 1,500. Sansevere noted he personally would not agree to anything above 1,500. Vogsliom staled he is unclear about some of Ihe items in Staffs report. Vogstrom inilicaled page three ot the memorandum lists a couple of properties Ural are smaller than his lot, both of which were granted a l.irgei footprint Vogstrom pointed out part of the basis for the appioval on lho.se two propeilies was the fact that they are located on a busy road. Vogstrom noted hi.s property is also locateil on a veiy busy road. Vogstioiii staled he meets all requireil setbacks, with (he house being located 85 ’ from the lake, and that he is lequesling the additional hardcover to accommodate a thiid stall on the gaiage. Vogstrom indicated he has leihiced the si/e of the piojioseil residence in older to have a three stall garage Vogstrom slated he is not sure how the cily planner arrived at Ihe squaie footage for Ihe house. p^rw MINUmsOl'TIIK OKONO CITY COUNCIL MIT: I INCi Monday, liccembcr 13,2004 7:00 o’clock pm. McMillan .sinicd Ihc planner indtulcd the garage in the calculation. .Sansevcrc stated the City Council needs to be consistent with their approval-s and that they may .set a precedent iPlhey approve the additional hardcover. Vogstrom stated in his view the Council would be consistent in granting Ihc .34.5 percent hardcover given the other two lots that were granted higher hardcover. Vogstrom stated percent of his lot is located within the U-7S', with one of the examples of hardship cited in the memorandum being the fact that 50 percent of'.he lot was located in the 0-75 ’ zone. Vogstn»m stated iit his opinion some of the hardship crit ;ria found it) the other two applications ap|)ly to his lot. Vogstrom stated even with a 1,500 square fool footprint, minimum size deck, sidewalk, driveway, and a two-stall garage, he would still be at 32.5 percent hardcover. Vogstrom staletl the difference he is proposing i.s two percent, which is the difference between a two-car garage ond a three-car garage. (iaITron slated he is not in agreement with most of the eommetils of the applicant. Gaffron stated the property located at 1690 Shndywood is located on a busy county road and requires a backup apr*m. (iaifron staled he does not believe that the Iratric on ('asco Point Road recpiircs a backup apron. In addition, the second hardship found for the 1690 .Shadywood property was the fact that the location of the adjacent homes would reduce lake views causing a tunnel effect. Third, the nonuplimum lot shape analysis results in juslilication forn 2H9 square foot variance. CiaflVon explained an optimum lot sha|K- analysis formula was utilized in the I.olfler and Switz cases, which was not utilized prior to 2004. In Staffs view, this formula lus some inherent Weakne.s.ses and has contributed in the past yeai to exce.ssive haidcover allowances comparexi to those granted to similar lots in previous years. 8talf is reluctant to continue using the curicnl uplimum lot shape analysis method as a basis for haidcover variances, as it suggests that all lots 3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO Cl I'Y COUNCIL MEEl INC Monday, December 13, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. not meeting the optimum shape should be allowed excess hardcover, which translates to an automatic variance level for almost all existing lots. Gaffron indicated Item 3A illustrates the footprints that were allowed in tlv^ past six years for various properties given their lot area and the amount of the building pad located within the 75 ’- 250’ area and the approved hardcover. GalTron stated based on Hxhibils 3B and 3C, in his opinion the Switz application Is an anomaly and is not consistent with the building footprints typically granted by the City. GalTron indicated he disagrees with the concept that the peninsula found on the Vogstrom lot should b" a factor in determining the amount of hardcover that should be allowed on this lot. Gaffron indicated the Switz lot is located on a much busier road than the Vogstrom property and that hardships two and four do not apply to the Vogstrom property. Gaffron stated approval of hardcover at 34.5 percent would not Ik* consistent with past approvals by the Council. Gaffron pointed out the hardcover reductions being proposed by the applicant are primarily being reduced within the city right-of-way, which is where the majority of the existing driveway is located. Gaffron noted 270 square feet of hardcover is located within the right-of-way and not on the property. GalTron slatetl nxhibit 3A provides information for the last six years for lot area, existing and approved 75 ’-250’ zones, and lot coverage. Cianron staled projKiiics that are shghlly bigger have received a slightly bigger fcMUjirinl but not as much hardcover. Gaffron stated an average Is 30 percent and that 1500 square feet in his opinion is apiuopriale for this lot. Sansevere inquired whether the City is Iving cruisislenl with the 1,500 square feet requirement, Gaffron staled the applieant feels two applications were treated dilTereully in the past year that were not consistent with the ('ity’s past practice. Gaffron sl.ited the question is w hether those should be looked at as a preeedcat or whether they should be considererl amunalies. 4 \ MINtITRSOPTIIK OKONO Cl l Y COUNCIL MEK I INC Monday, December 13, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. Murpliy Cinffron sluted in his perspective the Switz npplication was an anomaly, witli the Lunier a])|)licalioii having an issue with location ofthu house toward the street reducing lake views and causing a tunnel ciTect. GalTron indicated the question is what si/e footprint is appropriate for any given lot and that the hardcover sliould not he based upon the 1,500 sejnare feet. Vogstrom stated with his first proposal at 57.8 percent hardcover, he was nt the 15 percent struetiiral coverage. Vogstrom commented the houses on .Shadywood are large ami look out of place with the neighborhood and that tlv house he is proposing is not out of character with the re.st of this neighlHirhood. Vogstrom statetl lie is asking for the adilitioual hardcover to allow for a third stall on the garage. Sanseveie inquired what type of house the apjilieant is considering constructing on this lot and what the actual .square footage of the proposed residence would be. Sanscvcrc noted the applicant could build living space above the garage. Vogstrom indicate*! there would lie 1000 s*|uare feet on the first level, 1000 stjuare feet for the basement, and 1000 Ibr the second level, which amounts to .1,500 .square feet. V*)gstrom indicated he has reduced the size of the house by 185 sipiare feel hut would still like to maintain the ilin.*'* car garage. Sanseveie noted the applicant was directed l«i reduce the f«K>lprinl to 1,500 .sipiare feel. Sansevere commenli'd he still is puzzled by the applicant's reluctance to reduce the .size of the hou.se to 1,500 .sipiaie feel, especially if ,s|)ace is addetl aluive the gaiage. V*»gsirom st.iied n l.tKM) s*|uare fool house is not extravagant and that tlic extra square footage is for a three-stall gaiage Vogstrom .staled he tlocs not feel the luni.se can Ik* re*luced any further. San.severe r;*i|uesied .Staff recap what tlie applicant is entitled to on this lot. 5 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEE TING Monday, December 13, 2004 7:00 o’clo'.k p.ni. Gaffron stated lot coverage as defined by City Code is 15 percent, which is 2,100 square feet for this lot. Gaffron stated from a hardcover perspective the applicant is allowed 1,918 square feet of hardcover. Approximately 600 square feet is required for a driveway, sidewalk, and deck, which would bring the hardcover to approximately 32 percent with a 1,500 square foot footprint. Vogstrom indicated it is his understanding he is allowed a 1,500 square foot footprint for a lot of record. Vogstrom stated in his opinion Casco .”oint Road is a busier road and that his lot docs constitute a hardship. Barrett stated the 1,500 square feci Is the amount that thf Council will vary up to but it does not mean that the applicant is allowed to exceed the 1,500 square feet. Moorse stated 25 percent hardcover is what the ordinance allows, which is approximately 1,900 square feet. Moorse stated if the applicant is allowed 600 square feet for a driveway, 100 square feet for a sidewalk, and 100 square feet for a deck, the remaining hardcover would be approximately 1,100 square foot. Moorse .stated a variance would be required to allow the additional hardcover. Vogstrom indicated it is his understanding that most people gel a 1,500 square foot footprint. GalTron noted there is a significant number of houses that have been built that arc less than 1,500 square feet. Sansevere staled at the last meeting the Council felt the applicant should be allowed 1,500 squarc feet rather than the 1,000 square feet. Sansevere indicated the 1,500 square feel is fair and that the applicant should not be held to the 25 percent hardcover. Ttnld Phelps, l.eon.ird. Street and Dcinard, stated there appears to be .some preceilent where the City has approved at least two other cases that are similar to this application which merit further MINUTFS OF THF ORONO CITV COUNCIL MEETING Monday, December 13,2004 7:00 o ’elock p.m. exploration on the applicant ’s part. Phelps staled he would like the opportunity to do a rurther detailed analysis of the two eases cited in the memorandum as well as some other properties. Sansevere inquired whether the applicant is asking for his application to be tabled. Phelps indicated he would like the applicant ’s application be approved tonight, but in light of Gaffron’s comments, if the Council platis to deny the application, he would like to do further research. Peterson inquired whether the applicant would like to tairle the application. Phelps stated the applicant would like to have his application approved tonight, but in the alternative, to table the application to allow the applicant to respond to the comments by the City Plfiiiner. Phelps stated one issue that has not been discussed tonight is the merits of this particular application. Phelps stated the letter from Timothy Keane responds to each of the hardship requirements set forth in the Orono City (^ode. Phcljis stated the discussion should center on the hardship criteria outlined in M.S. 462.355 and the Orono City Code. Phelps indicated in hi.<j opinion this is a unique lot and that there are circumstances that merit tlie granting of a variance. Phelps indicated the applicant I uS been attempting to work with the City on developing this lot and is not circumventing the direction of the Council. Sansevere stated at the Inst meeting a good point was made concerning hardcover in that the likelihood for runoff has been increased with the removal of the trees. Phelps iiulicated the applicant is agreeable to restore the vegetation on this lot, but that in his opinion it should be considered us a separate issue. Sansevere stated the removal of the trees does impact the runoff Sansevere noted Council did not have an opportunity to review the letter from the attorney prior to tonight ’s meeiing. Vogstrom stated he would like to get the issues resolved. Peterson inquired whether the applicant would like his application tabled. ‘ 4 • ^ • \ * c* 'V MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, December 13,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. Vogstrom coinmcnlcd it appears the Council is set on a maximum 1,500 square foot footprint, which he is not happy with. Saitsevere indicated he is not witling to approve anything in excess of 1,500 square feet. Peterson indicated she also is in support of a maximum 1,500 squa'-e foot fout|)rint. White stated he is not going to take two extreme cases and say that is the norm but that the City needs to look at the overall picture. White stated the City has to be consistent as much as po.ssiblu when dealing with this type of application and that he would not support any deviation from what the City has consistently approved in the past. Vogstrom stated in his view he is not constructing an enormous hou.se and that the 1,500 square foot is the minimum the City allows. Vogstrom stated his lot consists cf 20,500 square feet and that In his opinion the majority of the 1,500 square foot footprints are on lots that are only 10,000 square feet. Sansevere noted Staff has not been convinced that there is a hardship and that he relies heavily on Staffs recommendatioris in cases like this. San.scvere stated the applicant docs have the right to continue to pursue this application if that is his desire. Vogstrom noted that Gaflron was opposed to the Switz application. San.severe stated he docs not recall the Switz situation. Peterson stated the Switz house is located on Shadywood. Peterson stated she would prefer construction not be commenced on this lot until the trees arc replaced and growing. Vogstrom noted he has submitted a restoration plan. Vogstrom indicated a majority of the frees were IrKated in the 75 ’-250' zone. Vogstrom stated a mistake was made and that he is attempting to restore the property. Murphy staled he suggested at the last n .cling that this application be tabled to allow a plan to be arrived at that meets Stairs approval, which ha.s not been done. Murphy noted he is not in MINUTES OF HIE OKONO CITY COUNCIl. MEETING Monday, December 13, 2004 7:00 o’clock |>.m. support oPlhe 1,500 srpiaru foot rootprint. Murphy stated in his viuv/ a great of research has been done by the applicant and a great amount oi'ertort has been put forth Ly StatT. Murphy iiulieated in light of the research and work that has been done on this matter, the application should move forward. Peterson inquired whether the applicant would like his application be tabled. Vogstrom stated he could live with the 1,500 square feet. Barbara F.ssen, 2648 Ca.sc<» Point Road, statctl the removal of the trees has not enh: need the view of the neighborhood, noting that the trees that were removed on their lot w ere very mature trees and cannot be replaced in their lifetime. .Sansevero inquired how many trees the lessens lost. Hssen indicated they lost two mature tret^s. Peterson inquired whether the applicant would like his application table. Vogstrom indicate; Ite does not want his application to be tabled. McMillan stated she would like some .;aici;lalions for hardcover on the 1,500 square foot footprint, with the decision being up to '.lie applicant on what si/e hou.se he would like and whether he would like a two-stall or a Oircc-stall garage. Ciallion noted a resolution was adi:pti«i by the (’ity listing the imninuim standards fora rlriveway. Barieit stated if ihe (.’otincil is going to deny the application, a denial resolution would need to be dialled. Peterson noted if i|ic application is dutied, the applicant cannot submit a new application for six months (iaff’oM .Mai.ul tlic applicam stili needs some variances at 1,500 square feet. Gaffron stated Ihe denial le.soiulioii would deny Ihe ret|uesl as pre.sently proposed ;«iu' tliat if the afiplicant submits a MINUTES OF TIIK OKONO Cl IV C:OI)NCIL MEETING Mondiiy, Deccnilicr 13, 2004 7:00 u’cliR'k |Mii. Murpiiy slntcil in hi.s view this npplicalion sliuuld be denied tonight .iiid tliat the applicant be given specific direction on what the l,5(Kt K(|tiare feel means. Guflron stated if the applicant comes in with a reciiiesi for a different fimtprint and hardcover variance, the Council could determine that it is a new application and the ap|)licant would not need to wait the six months. CialTron notetl the new a|)plicalion would ncetl to go back before the Planning Commission. Peterson inquired whether the building permit would Ik held until the restoration plan is implemented. Uarrett stated those are two .separate issues. Vogstrom staled he would be willing t<» sign an agreement saying that a certificate of occupancy would not be issued until the restoration plan is approved. Murphy iiujuiied what sle|>s the applicant is taking to adtiress the lost trees on the rissen property. Vogstrom indicated he has spoken with the lissens a number of times and that it is hi.s understanding they are agreeable with the restoratimr plan Murphy moved, While seconded, lo deny Applienliun #3052, Eric Vogstrom, 2918 Casco Point Koad, with the understanding that the applicant can siihmit a new application prior to six months provided he is reipicsting a different hardcover variance. NO VO I E 1AKEN. Hairetf iiu|uiied whether a 1,500 scpiare f<M)t plan would be considered a new application. (iaITron staled it the applicant comes in vsilli a ievi.seil plan l)efoie December 22"^, it would Ik Imnight back before the Council in January. McMillan inquired why tabling is not an option. IVicr.son staled the application could Ik tabled if the applicant requests it. Murphy slated the applicant has indicated three linKs that be docs not wish to i.ibie it 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, December 1.1, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. Vogstrom requested his application be tabled. Peterson moved, San.severe sccunded, to table Appikaiioil #3052,3052 Eric Vogstrom, 2918 Casco Point Road. Murphy withdrev' his motion to deny the application. Moorse stated if the motion is to table the application, prior to the next Council meeting the Applicant should submit n revised plan depicting a 1,500 square foot footprint. Moorse suggested a deadline be given for submittal of that plan to Staff. Gaffron recommended two weeks prior to the (.'ouncil meeting for receipt of the plan. Barrett stated the motion to table would take precedence. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays I, Murphy opposed. bate Application Received: 12«I7>04 Date Application Complete: 01-03-05 60-Day Review Period Eipiration: 03-03-05 COIIMPII MPPTING FEB 1 4 2005 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Dale: February 10, 2005 Item No. 'T Department Approval: Name: Melanie Curtis Title: City Planner V Ilia Iisjj^Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Item Description: ff05-3072 -Orono Public School District #278 - 685 Old Crystal Bay Rd N - Variance & CUP Zoning District: RR-1B, One Family Rural Residential, 2-acre List of Exhibits: A - PC Action Notice dated 01-25-05 B - PC Memo & Exhibits of 01-03-05 Application Summary: T he Orono Public School District is requesting a variance and conditional u.sc permit in order to replace the existing campus monument sign with a new monument sign. The applicant is proposing a 9’ 2” tall X I r wide monument with 56 s.f. of sign face, including a 30 s.f. static electronic readerboard. The proposed sign is to be located at the northwest corner of the intersection Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12 on school district property. Planning Commission Recommendation On January 18,2005, Planning Commission voted 5-1 on a motion to recommend approval of the sign size variance and conditional u.se permit for a new monument sign with the stipulation that the proposed I ’x8* panel to be used as a “sponsor panel ” not be permitted. Commissioner Bremer voted against the motion stating that she supported the variance :uid conditional use permit but would have supported the sponsor panel. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the location and design of the proposed monument sign, as it will replace the existing sign which is showing its age, and should result in reduction or elimination of the variety of temporary signs placed on this corner from time to time announcing school functions. There are no standards within our zoning code to address institutional signs. T he zoning code does not addrc.ss whether a sponsor panel is appropriate for signage serving an institutional use such as a school. Should the Council wish to consider allowing a sponsor panel within the monument sign, it may be appropriate to discu.ss some potential guidelines for the proposed sponsor panel. Depending on the nature of the sponsoring entity the sponsor panel might take on a sliglitly commercial feel, or it may be merely a means to promote a non-profit school support group. For example, a corporate logo or specialized text styles or fonts may suggest a trademark of a business. The purpose of (he sponsor panel is to acknowl^ge a financial donor and not specifically serve as advertising for that donor. Staff would suggest possibly eliminating corporate logos from the sponsor panel or perhaps limiting the style of letters to match those used overall on the monument would minimize the commercial feel of tlie sponsor panel. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Direct Staff to draft a Resolution reflecting Council ’s decision. CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway POB0X66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952.249.4600 ZONING FILE 05>3072 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: January 25,2005 TO: Orono Public Schools #278 ATTN: Neal Lawson 685 Old Crystal Bay Rd Long Lake. MN 55356 COPIES: TYPE OF REQUEST: Variance & Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: January 18,2005 Planning Commission voted on a motion to approve the sign size variance and conditional use pemiit provided that there is no sponsor advertising on the sign copy. VOTE: 5 FOR 1 AGAINST ^Commissioner Bremer opposed the motion as proposed indicating that she had no issue with the sponsor panel portion of the sign. Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Ci^ Council - February 14,2005 - Meeting starts at 7:00 pm If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call City Planner, Melanie Curtis at 952.249.4627. FILE #05-3072 3 January 2005 Page 1 of 5 Dttic Apiilicalioii KcccimI: 12-17*04 Dale Apiilicatioii Consiclcml as C'oiiipletc: 01*03*05 60-Day Review I'criml Kxpircs: 03*03*05 1o:Chair Raljii aiul Plamiiiig Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Melanie Curtis, City Planner January 3,2005 Subject:05-3072, Orono Public School District «278, 685 Old Crystal Bay Road Variance & Conditional Use Permit Amendment Public Hearing inning District: RR-IB, One Family Rural Residential District Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a variance and conditional use pennit in order to replace the existing campus monument sign with a new monument sign. The applicant is proposing a 9’ 2" tall x IT wide monument with 56 s.f. of sign face, including a 30 s.f. static electronic readerboard. The proposed sign is to be located at the northwest comer of the intersection Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12 on school district pro perly. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the sign size variance and conditional use pennit for a new campus monument sign. Hardship: Current Orono sign codes do not address institutional uses within residential districts making it difficult to meet the needs of schools and other institutional uses within K-Districls. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections > See. 78-418. Conditional u.se.s. Within any RR-IB one-family rural residential district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses without a coiHlilional use pennit: (I) Public schools and parochial or private schools which teach a curriculum similar to a public school, provided no building shall be located within 50 feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an R district and a I'encc is erected 15 feel or more from all street lot lines where the abutting use is for open play, and nursery schools providing 50 .square feet of playground space per pupil. V Sec. 78-419. Acccs.sory uses. Within any RR-IB one-lainily rural residential district, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses; (4) Signs, as regulated in this chapter. 1 FILE #05-3072 3 January 2005 Page 2 of 5 > Sec. 78-916. Granting of permit (a) The plunm'ng commission may recommend and the council may grant a conditional use permit as the use pennit was applied for or in modified fonn, if on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted the city makes the following findings: (1) 'I'hat the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of this chapter and the purposes of the distriet in which the site is located and the comprehensive municipal plan; (2) That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operatal or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and (3) That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter. (b) A conditional use permit may be revocable, may be granted for a limited time, or may be granted subject to such conditions as the council may prescribe. (c) A conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions agreed upon arc observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. (d) A certified copy of any conditional use pennit shall be filed with the county recorder or registrar of titles. I'hc conditional use permit shall include the legal description of the property included. V See. 78-1466. Signs as accessory use. Signs are a pennitted accessory u.se in all districts subject to the following regulations: (11) Monument sifins. One monument sign, limited to two faces is allowed per frontage per property, with a maximum of two. The areas of sign base, the supporting background structure, and the sign copy shall be combined for detennining the total .square footage and the height of the monument sign. a. The total allowable square footage shall not exceed 100 square feel per side. The base and supporting material shall constitute at least 25 percent of the total .square footage. b. Tlie base width dimension is 50 percent or more of the greatest width of the sign. c. The sign copy area shall have a minimum clearance of 20 inches almve ground level. d. The sign copy area shall be completely enclosed within the monument materials. e. No portion of the sign or sign structure shall excecil ten feet above ground level. f. rhe monument sign base shall be construc t \l of materials similar in appearance to those of the principal structmc and shall consist of brick, natural stone, stucco, textured east stoi e, or integrally colorerl concrete ma.sonry units. I hc structure surrounding the face of the sign from the base to the top of the sign must be solid. FILE #05-3072 3 January 200b Pago 3 of 5 g- continuous, and consist of the base materials or complementary materials that match the appearance and color of the principal building. The 200 square feet of ground area around the base of the monument sign shall be landscaped with shrubs or perennials. > Sec. 78-1467. Signs in R districts. Within R districts, the following signs arc pennitted: (1) Nameplates. c. One nameplate sign for each permitted use or use by conditional pennit other than residential, and such sign shall not exceed 12 square feet in area per surface. List of Exhibits A. Conditional Use Permit and Variance Applications B. Hardship Documentation Form C. Existing Survey D. Proposed Survey/Site Plans E. Existing School Sign Inventory F. Photo Rendering of Proposed Sign G. Proposed Sign Elevation 11. Property Owners List I. Plat Map Background Orono Public Schools would like to update their current campus sign which is situated along Highway 12 and is approximately 41 s.f. in area. This existing sign also includes a manually changeable readerboard. The applicant is proposing a new campus sign to include a static electronic readerboard to be located at the northwest comer of the intersection of Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12 at a 45 degree angle facing the intersection. Conditional Use Permit Review City Code Section 78-916 stales that the City Council may grant a conditional use pennit based on the following three findings: The proposed locution of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of this chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and the comprehensive municipal plan; the proposed location for the sign meets the specifications and setbacks outlined within the sign regulations. The proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; the sign as propo.sed will not he detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, and will not be materially injurious to the properties in the vicinity and The propo.scd conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this chapter; the sign as proposed will comply will all of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. FILE #05 3072 3 January 2005 Pago 4 of 5 Additionally, Section 78-916 states that a conditional use pcmiit may be revocable, may be granted for a limited time, or may be granted subject to such conditions as lire council may prescribe; and a conditional use permit shall remain in effect as long as the conditions agreed upon arc observed, but nothing in this section shall prevent the city from enacting or amending official controls to change the status of comlitional uses; and a certified copy of any conditional use permit shall be filed with the county recorder or registrar of titles. The conditional use pennit .shall include the legal dc.scription of the properly included. Sign Size Variance The Orono sign ordinance docs not address the needs of institutional uses within residential /ones. Currently the school has a campus sign perpendicular to Highway 12 in front of the tennis courts. The existing sign is approximately 41 s.f. total area and contains a manual readerboard. 'fhe applicant has proposed a moiuimcnl sign ap|)roximately 9’ high and 11* wide. The proposed sign meets City Code Section 78-1466(11) regarding monument signs, fhe proposed sign copy area 56 s.f. with a 30 s.f static elec‘ro'!ic readerboard. The applicant has indicated that this readerboard is to be changed no more frequently than once daily and its purpose is to provide parents and students with relevant school infomiation. The electronic readerboard will eliminate the need for sending a student or staff member out to the sign to physically change the message on the sign and will be more functional for the school. As proposed the static electronic readerboard is not considered a “Hashing illuminated sign" which is not allowed. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation I'crm attached as Hxhibit U, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analy.sis /« considerinn applications for variance, the Hanninp Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the pnhlic safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances nniifne to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. Staff finds that often the needs of the institutional uses within the lesidcntial districts arc not met under the cunent sign regulations. Variances have been consistently granted for the dif ferent sign needs for the varying institutional u.ses within the (hty of Orono in the past, and perhaps this is indicative of the need to update the codes with respect to institutional uses '.vithin residential /ones. r FILE IK)5-3072 3 January 2005 Page 5 of 5 Issues for Consideration 1. Docs the Planning Commission fed (hat the monument sign, readerboard sign and its proposed use are appropriate? 2. Will a static electronic readerboard serve as a distraction to vehicular traffic? 3. Docs the landscaping proposed address the guidelines within Section 78-1467 regarding monument signs? 4. Arc there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the sign size variance and the conditional use permit. - 0(#H8»rA CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION Application# ^ Date Received " l^llllO^/ Amount Paid WirOO Dn PROPERTY LOCATION . Site Address __viu x>iv jJ-. Type of Application to be Filed - Property Identification Number (P.l D.) APPLICANT Name ^roNoou^ ....... ................... Phone (home)___________________Phone(work) ___ Address fl-Lb VV» City C:>V^>)o __2ip_ 5^^-'S ‘67_ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Address Phono (work) City______7-ip Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS $600 00 Residential Accessory Use / _ $600 00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) ___ $600 00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____$600 00 Duplex Credit/Bldg ___ $600.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____$600 00 Land Alteration + Permit _ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PIU - see Fee Schedule $250 00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-tho-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS _____$600 00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ...........$600 00 Vacation _____$600 00 liasoment Vacation _____$100 00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $600 00 Re/oning (PUD - refer to foe schedule) $600.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ____$100 00 Appeals Other - see Foe Schedule •» if ». .• N.,V **«i %>■ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1 . __Completed Application Form. Oooor ibo request iirdetail.2. 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. ^__Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' of the subject property. labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance. Government Center. A-603 300 South e*” Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910). ___Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. ___Attach legal description to application if not included on required su.’'/ey. Topogr ap hie-eurvey (existing- and - proposed-contours)-if-Jand —alteraiiops involve changes' in elevalfOf>-(§fades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s) ^ Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements) y//7 As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (II** X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require scaled drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The ApF licant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete Initials of Clerical Staff:____________________Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. /73. ..0/)^r> Date <^H / OWNER S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. y Owner's signature 12.Date i - 'OH Applicant must have all subTtWtais Irito ihejCity offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting f ? 07' V.* ; »/ / • .* V r..• •»*!* City of Orono Variance Application 'd it SIroet Addross: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mam: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address' P.O Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Application U Date Received: fill Amount Paid: cOP ■ iX) Staff: _ iiUJAUlL-___ Fee; $60 0 _________ Renewal: $300 After-the-fact $1,200 Double Fee This application form must be completed ir fuli. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address: o\it^ Og>f£=gt<Vtx ^g=A,-r >J-_________ _________________ Property Identification Number (PIN): (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): / |S( Yes, I own the adjacent parcels. /KTother ::=*c:AftouPresent use of property: □ Residential Zoning District: _____ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status required for each interested party) Name: ^:g^3^Jc>^^1ei.lo3o)rvtL S» <?7fc»_______________________________ Phone (home): ________________________Phone (wcrk): ^^l*A Address: cjUb? rJ.__ Email:Fax: OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status required for each interested party) Name: og c>tJo dZii2 _____________ _ ______ Phone (home): ___________________Phone (wcrk): Address: aI_________ ______________ Email _______ _____________________ _ Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost Describe the request in detail (attach additional shoots if necessary): ___________ __hteW Cc<*itOuhiil>T—-------------------------- rf ■I rt.- M '• f. «3 fn 'ii Q t •(i REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. 1- Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. ,□ Completed Application Form D Completed Hardship Documentation Form £>5c> 0' Certified Property Owners List - owners within ^0* of the subject property, labels and plat map List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Government Center. A-603 300 South Stieet, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting ail the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8 5" x 11“ or 11’ X 17" for reproduction. Qompieted hardcovero aloutatk)n-wofks n «et 6-(a6 provktod-within4he-var4ar^ee-pad<et) Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations Provide one copy 8.5* x 11" or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of flour and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17"). Additional items may be requested by City Staff dependir.g on the scope of the project. * '□ a- APPLICANT ’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide ail information required or requested by the Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge The applicant recognizes that he/she is solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. Applicant ’s Signature: ____________ Date: j Z -in - Q _____ Applicant's Signature: *_____ Date: ______ ____ OWNER’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation and yep(ication of this request. Owner ’s Signature: *-^C—___________ Date:___________________ Owner's Signature:________ / __ _____________ Date:___________________ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project. 7/ /X' I «<u* « V Vi mstr 6 Pauc I of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM ■■This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not bo considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City, Minnesota Stale Statue Section 394 27. Subdivision 7 requires that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted. The hardship must be unique to the properly as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance Is justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If vou leave something out it will not be considered Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply): 1 “The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls " “The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." VL'C 'T^ .irAt. h-h rijyeem r'pg._ kVsuit> rVyig. JJj'TrT- . niW lot P^ivww7i4i.r "The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality " rjgyj lJtvw_Tr*ATv*J _______ ___ "tconomic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasuiinblu use for the properly exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter," i»‘.• V f J ^ A 'r .* ri*- Page 2 of 3 5. “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to. inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construcrion as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd 2, when in harmony with this Chapter." "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located." 7. "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." 8.“Tne special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining properly." "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." 11. 10. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of tlie applicant." "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair healtii, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code" of- iig • ^ ^./ k ^' '■ St,.' WHi&n o m- ‘ % V *»Hwy 1^- [! i (/) Orn» exfti&iT D ifli !•r. X LI II l«?l. I N yu’lVi-?/' C imA Pi.y.i <ir-v«i/ Illil l Ouy *^0'jil. |.M»i* U«jc M*.' U I. 0 C R r 'J I A L BAY R IJ A D >RONO CAMPUS IMPROVEMENTS AtmeHSOft-JONHSON oiioiio miMJC acNooci A3SSOCUTKX 1.1 oncMo.MMNiaorA LANOaCAMPUlM MC uumcmMemrtcnm • iimmMB • rntm mm •f a mm m *mI Mtf •tal I M#t«l •I I* mm liii». %__X — %' ^ *•. \ ? ’ f 3R0N0 CAMPUS IMPROVEMENTS ANDEMS(W - JOHNSON Assocuns, INC * Wi«l Mto pi«M ••• •r m4t mf «tmI M I Ml • Mir railalMtf iMBBIflUIMMll g.SStrM ____“ \i.HM a*. LOCATtOh! X \ \N EXISTING \ M.$. TRACK Aito:;i».E. .X<»*MUNtTY SOCCER 9TH SOCCER/ROQTBALL U CAHTBAf I \ ’/ '-/KN /\ / PARKING }ALl / y''EXISTING M-S-NP-E. COMMUNITY SOFTB_A l L _N SOCCER practice \ aai:FQH^-x omc \ aoT=c © -^■ s I I I t \ ‘f r ^ ^ ExirmioTiiEEs rnrpH HIGHWAY 12 V M2r -pitoNo puaiic zchoolJ^ ^mopowtomeitLSH^aukak, TRAFFIC UGirr CONTROiUN fit i liJi 6 1 u; 2 2- “ SCALE.r * 100'-0*I ! ! ! _^.._J. \• ! i ...;«.r. © X' / |1 MRTi 7 J- • / u 1 1u,s 1 H r?;-! 'j 1 ^.....■-* iwn.r t .'*1* \v..ur‘Tj^ar,T—' i I 'j I,.- t. ■.• ■. .*, •♦r*; •• ..•■■•> ► _____ '<;■• • '.\\ l\y<‘‘ m'^Wi •v--'••:•:••:.•<mm 1 »t rnrr» llI » . ILa* - a I'J u? L ti. Oi iikL‘1 I"KBM2. ''' ^ X' *' Mft V V.l . (' V '■• X'S'i'SSS^-T -H ,'* 'W^c “ > .. :-• ^ \ r j -Uiii / t/kAr *“ «- .RX^,^7H.II3ii I • ' »* ! > I i ■■ ft4 • I I 4 'Mk :: '* • i I 6i:rtf!3lfpiif| :ip- ^ ® * '/-> k*»t I I *.• ' ^ ■•— • I I 1 • ;l^ m i-.v>mm hr-’*24wrt / __/ ^. t- ' *. • . • • • *• 1 • .,I » |. I > * , % I * i* « t '% •f*T th. If" II* •‘ 0 •■•*• .-» • • .vV V ’ ' * *••w '• . , f ' *• , . « .T*‘ • .i •*. • ' . ;« (}l 4‘% !/• ■ • i/<.* /< •.*►> 4 f* K A ^ ijr"' •* .«<, . ^ «•& »»»:•.* c& & Aim - Orono Public Schools 11/29/04 7*0* 9*-2‘ ir-o* ORONO PUBLIC SCHOOLS HOAtE OF THE SPARTANS f_r?' • «■"■' ,r> . / r r /.• ; ; r # ; ♦ / / / rz] .1 ^ //(_// } f :rr:n SPONSOR PANEL L_^ 1 1 1 L-Z.J„ 1 1 1 I -T^-r 2*-3‘ 3*-9* ro* ^tsorvyBose •of CoxeptO% (rx)f to icoisi Fabricate & Install (1) 7’-0” X 8'-0" S/F Illuininated Monument Si}{n with LED Message Display. SPECTRUM SION SYSTEMS, INC. Rin ELECTROniCS DESIGN ♦ FABRICATION INSTALUTION ♦ SERVICE 2029 0«flM«|r cmcto, Stiff* 2, Centervm, UN. 69030 851-429-9100 (Fax) 867-429-6 790 - jTn* naKr •» RUN DATE \V\Wm4 lltNNFPIN COUNTY PKOPRKTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROI^ERT Y OWNERS LIST PACE: I 38 3311823120002 ROP ADDR 27A3 KELLEY PKWY WNER NAME PROFESSIONAL PROP ORONO LLP AXPAYER PROFESSIONAL PROP ORONO LLP AME/ADDR *35 PARTENWOOD RD LONQl^KEMN 53356 38 3311823120004 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME CIIY OF ORONO TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO NAME/AODR 1335 BROWN RDS WAYZATAMN 55391 38 3311823120007 PROP ADDR 2700 KELLEY PKWY OWNER NAME II R A CITY OF ORONO TAXPAYER H R A CITY OF ORONO NAMI7ADDR 1335 DROWN RD S WAYZATAMN 55391 38 3311823130011 ROP ADDR 2761 WAYZATA BLVD W WNEKNAME VEDA INC ETAL AXPAYER VCI CAPITAL INC AME/ADDR PO BOX 375 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 3311823210001 PROP ADDR 761 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N OWNER NAME SCHOOL DIST NO 11 TAXPAYER ORONO SCHOOL DIST #278 NAME/ADDR 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 331182321000? PROP ADDR 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N OWNER NAME SCHOOL DIST NO 11 TAXPAYER ANOKA HENNEPIN I S D NO 11 NAMI7ADDR 11299 HANSON BLVD N W COON RAPIDS MN 5S433 38 3311823220001 ROP ADDR 3200 WAYZATA BLVD W WNER NAME S L KAPLAN ET AL TRUSTEES AXPAYER iAMES W LUPIENT AME/ADDR 750 PENNSYLVANIA AVE S GOLDEN VALLEY MN 55426 38 331182)230002 PROP ADDR 3025 WAYZATA BLVD W OWNER NAME ROBERT E 4^ KATHRYN DUMAS TAXPAYER ROBERT E A KATHRYN DUMAS NAME/ADDR 3025 WAYZATA BLVD BOX 607 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 3311823240001 PROP ADDR 595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RON OWNER NAME JAMES A WINTERHALTER TAXPAYER JAMES A WINTERHALTER NAMEyADDR 595 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONGUKEMN 55356 38 3311823240002 ROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED •WNER NAME THOMAS F JAMES LTD PERSHP AXPAYER THOMAS F JAMES REALTY LLLP AME/ADDR C/O JUDITH J SCHERER 7707 T STREET LfTTLEROCKAR 72227 5T 5 ICKRTIIY TIIATTIIL I ACre lUiPRtSr.MrUD ARL AN ACtllRA li: AND TRUK REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS TlflS DATE ON TIE RECORpS^ OF TIE lENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPA^T-R SERVICK DEPARTM OFMYKNOWl^DGEANDDEUEF. Ifo/o*-/' DATE TOTIIEBUn _____ / // >’7 r " fr* .V, V // Date Ap|.4icatl(Mi Received: 12-22-04 Dale Applicatioa Coaiidered at Complete: 1-12-05 60-Day Review Period Eipirea: 3-12-05 REQUEST FOR COUNCII. ACTION COllMrii Mrpj((\jQ FEB 1 4 2005 Cll Y Oi- UnuivU Dale: February 10,2005 Item No.: 6 Department Approval: Name: Janice Gundlach]^ Title: City Pltuuicr Adminulrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: /IOS-3079, Peter & Nicole Thomas, 13R5 Orono l.unu. Variances Zoning District: Lot Area: l^t Width: LR - I A, One Family I.akeshorc Residential District (2 acre miniinuin) 1.387 aeres (30,435 .s.f.) 428 feet @ .shoreline; 294 .^ect @ 75 foot .setback List of Exhibits A PC Action Notice 1-19-05 B - PC Memo and Exhibits of 1-13-05 C - PC Minutes of 1-18-05 Meeting AppHcatum Summary: Applicant requests the following variances in order to constmet an 8’ x 1 1 ' lunding/deck above the existing mechanical equipment on tlic lake side of the home; 1. Hardcover variance to pcnnil 10.79% hardcover within the 0-75 ’ lake setback zone when 0% is allowed and lt).79% currently exists. 2. I.akc setback variance to permit the landing/deck to lie located approximately 56’ from the OHWE of the lake when 75 ’ is normally required. Planning Commbsion Recommendation ■flic Planning C'onimis.sion had a tic vote of 3-3 on a motion to <lcny the request. The C'onimi.s.sioners who voted to deny the variances felt that approval of a trade of non-structural hardcover for structural hardcover would not be consistent with piust haidcover variances, fhe Commissioners who would have supported an approval motion fell that because the deck would be wrought iron in order to support the AC mcchaniaU u|uipment underneath, removal of the non- slructunil haixlcover was a better end ivsull in terms of .slorniwalcr inlihration on the lot. Staff Recommendation .Stull recommends approval of the request us the upplicant is ’’ot proposing to incrcu.se the total amount of hardcover within the 0-75 ’ zone. Tlic htodsliips lie in the amount of shoreline the properly contains in addition to tlie location of the era rent house. COIlNni. ACI ION RKQllES I ED Direct stall' to druR cither an approval or denial resolution or advise the applicant of an allernutivc .solution to gain access out of this end of the house. CITYOFORONO ZONING FILE: 05-3079 2750 Kclky Parkway P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Crystal Bay, MN 55323 <951) 249-4600 DATE OF NOTICE:^ J TO: Peter & Nicole Thomas COPIES: James B. Meistcr 1385 Orono Lane 4748 Nicollet Avc. S Wayzata, MN 55391 Minneapolis. MN 55419 TYPE OF APPLICATION: p-75J_H^coyer VariMcej L^e Setback Variance___ DATE OF MEETING: January 18.2005 Plannlag Commission recommended as follows: A motion to deny the application as submitted. VOTE: 3 FOR 3 AGAINST Applicant ’s next meeting is tentatively scheduled for: City Council - Monday, February 14,2005; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they arc available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. #05.1079 January IH, ZOOS l*a|>r I at 4 l>a(r Apiillcallon Krrclvrtl: I2-2Z 04 Male Ap|illrtt(lnii < '(ii»Ulri nt a< 4 'oin|tli'<i‘: 1-12 OS OO-ltny Mrvltw Prrinil KiptM-\: .1-1 2 Its lo:('hail Ualin .'ml i’laiiiiin{> (’oiiiiiii.ssioM Mcmbcis Koii Moor.se, City Adiiiinisirator l''roiii: Janice (iniidlacli. ('ity IMamicr IlMie:Jatuiaiy 1.1, 200.S SiihJtTf:().S-107‘J, Jaiiic.s II. Mci.sicr on hcliall ’of Pcicr <Vt Nicole riioina.s, I IKS Oiono Lane, 0-75’ Hardcover and Lake Setback Variance, I'ublic Hearing /oniiiK Disirfcl: Lol Aren: l.ul Width; I.R I A, One rainily Lake.shorc Kc.sidcntial l)i.strict (2 acre min.) 1.187 acrc« (.10.415 .s.r.) 428’ (ft] shoreline; 204’ {a} 75’ .setback Application Summary: Applicant ieipie.s(.s the following vaiianccs in order lo consirnci a K’ X I r landing/iteck above the existing niecbanical ecpiipinent on the lake side on (be bonic; 1. Ilatdcover variance lo pennil 10.70% hardcover within the 0-75’ lake .sclbiick zone when 0% i.s allowed and 10.70% cnirently exi.sis. 2. Lake .setback variance to pernni the landinp/dcck to be located approximately 56’ (roni the OHWL of the lake when 75’ is noinially mpiirctl. f »S/aJf /tccamtncuilation: .SlaH lecoininends approval of the reipiest as the applicant is not ptoposnig lo increase the total ainonni of hardcover within the 0-75’ /.one. I be bard.sbip.s lie in the aiiionni of sbotelinc the piopeity contains in addition to the loc.ilioii of tlie ciiiient boiisc. Pertinent /.uiiiiiu Ordinance .Sectbni.s See. 7K I2K8. I laid cover bniitalioiis. (a) No haul cover oi ini|)ervioii.s surface shall be placed, located or (oiisliiicled wilbin 75 leel o( the oidinary bii’b waiei level of any lake or tribnlary, except Idr .stairways, lilts, landings .iiid lockboxes as icgiilatcd elscwbcie in Ibis (’ode. (b) Hetwceii 75 leel and 250 b et id the OIIWl., tbere shall be no greater than 25 percent bard cover llclwccn 250 feet ami 500 led of the OIIWL llieie shall be no gieatci than tO peiceiil baidcovci Helweeii 500 leel and 1,000 leel of Ibe OIIWl. tbere shall be no g,i cater than 15 pciccnt baidcovei. (Old No 101 .’ml senes. § l( 10 5(,(|(,)(| )), 2 24 |0‘>2) List orKvIiliiits Lixliibit A Appbcation.s I'ixbibil It llaidsliip Oocniiieiilutiun b'onil I'.xbibil (' |{xisting .Siiivcy Ok r 0050079 Janimry Itt, 2005 PaRC 2 of 4 lixhibit D - Proposed Plan Bxhibit E - Hardcover Calculations P.xhibit F - Removal Plan Exhibit G - Proposed Elevations Itxhibil H - Photographs Exhibit I Adjacent Property Owners ’ Acknowledgement h ’onns F>xhibit J - Property Owners f.ist Exhibit K - Plat Map Background The applicant met with the City’s Building Official several months ago to discuss this project. Planning Department staff was briefly brought into this meeting, however never had a clear view of what was being proposed. The applicant submitted this application on the deadline day without a pre-application incetitig. Staff has since worked with the applicant to understand what exactly is proposed and what variances arc necessary. The applicant received a variance in February, 2001 that pennitted hardcover and grading within 75 ’ of the lake for constmetion and repair of various retaining walls. That request permitted 3,258 s.f. of hardcover when 0 is allowed, 'fhat number varies by 55 s.f. from the cxivSting hardcover level of 3,203 s.f. that was submitted with this request. StalThas detennined that the 0-75 ’ hardcover calcidation submitted with this request should be ujicd in detennining what should be approved. This is because the 3,258 s.f. allowance was based on the need for retaining wall repair and construction. If 3,258 s.f. was not needed for retaining walls, a deck shoiddn ’t be allowed to make up the 55 s.f. dilTcrencc. I OT ANAI.YSIS WORSlIRRT l.ot Area/Width LR-IA l.ot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2.0acrc.s)2(K)’ Actual 57,053 s.f. (1.3 acres)428 ’ @ Shoreline; 294 ’ @ 75 ’ Setback Setbacks 1<Kequired Kxisting Proposed P'ront N/A N/A N/A Rear (street)50 ’117 ’No ("liangc Left Side 30*05 ’No C^hangc Right Side N/A N/A N/A V’ '11 «r0S-.1079 January 18,200S Page 3 of 4 52 ’ house Lakeshore 75 ’45 ’ patio 22 ’ boathouse 56’ proposed deck structural Coverage Total Lot Area 57,053 s.f. (1.3 acres) Total Structural Coverage 'Allowed! 8,558 s.f. (15%) Proposctl: No Change Hardcover Calculations Hardcover Zone 0-75 75 - 250 Totai Area in Zone 29,693 s.f. 27,360 s.f Allowed Hardcover 0s.f (0%) 6,840 s.f (25%) Existing Hardcover 3,203 s.f • (10.79%) 7,433 s.f • (26.76%) Proposed Hardcover No Change No Change * AAer exclusion of fabric or plaslic-lincd land-scapc beds Hardcover Variance 'Ilie applicant wishes to construct a wrought iron deck on the lake side of the existing home, within the 0-75’ hardcover zone. Although the deck consists of wrought iron, the Cities codes and formal hardcover policies consider the entire area of the deck and associated staircase as hardcover. The deck will be placed over the existing air conditioning units, and the chimney shaft located on that side of the home will be removed to accommodate the deck. Also, a set of French doors will be constructed into the eastern wall of the house to provide access to the proposed deck. The existing hardcover level within the 0-75’ zone is 3,203 s.f (10.79%) with the applicant proposing 100 s.f of new hardcover and removal of 100 s.f This constitutes no increase above the current nonconfonning Icvci. However, because the nature of the hardcover is changing, a variance is reouired.m Lake Setback Variance The deck is proposed on the southeastern side of the home. Due to the curve of the shorcFne, the proposed deck and existing home are located within 75 ’ of the lake requiting variance approval. The proposed deck will be setback 56’ from the shoreline when 75 ’ is normally required. Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a brief hardship statement in Exhibit U, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis ___________________________________________ /« consideriiig applications for variance, the Pianninf! Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, exislhifi and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the puttie safety, and the effect on values of property In the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code In Instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and shall recommend approval onty when It Is demonstrated that such acHons will be In keeping with the spirit and intent of the Orono Zoning Code. IOS-3079 Jinuary 18,2005 Pafse 4 of 4 Staff finds that a hardship exists in order to grant the variance request. The property has a significant amount oflakeshorc with only a street frontage and one interior side yard in addition to the 400-f- feet of shoreline. Also, the existing house location further restricts any improvement made to the property as much of it lies within 75 ’ of the lake. Staff finds that due to the proposed removals and no net increase in hardcover is proposed, the variance request should be approved. Issues for Consideration 1. Are there any negative visual impacts from the lake should this be approved? 2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Approvai of the proposed 8 ’ x 11’ deck and 12 s.f. associated staircase subject to removal of 100 square feet of existing 0-75 ’ iiardcover to result in no net increase in hardcover. CAniDII MCity of Orono Variance Application Streot Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Main: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: P.O Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55322-0066 Application # C3 - 501^1 Date Receiveo; iV 17 fC ^I Amount Paid: M Staff: JAmtei Fee: S60 0 _____________ Renewal: $300 After-the-fact: $1,200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in full. App.cant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address;(PftaAJ6 Property Identification Number (PIN); (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year); _______□ Yes. I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: Residential □ Oiher Zoning District; ____________________ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal na.~es and marital status required for each interested party) Name; A. __________________________ Phone (home); ________Phone (work); Oz •• 3 - Address: ______^7*^^ AUcoLLtr- ,s. Email:J/^eis-re^ Fax: OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names 5"d marital status required for each interested party) Name;_____j- Prrut ___________________________ Phone (home):" V_______Phone (work); c:/;3 - Address: ^______________________________________ Email; Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:Estimated Project Cost; $.£3 ^ Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary); R:^rnx\/ iAitXe A/Japt A -n LnUluCr. i'k - am (I /a/I-M >Ac*r (a Ja V htd(L ^ DF SA*^£ yt-c. j^itCHurAl /fp/^AJ an-/a A ___ lA}K*UAJ\r Af'__i«Arta£-__ lAMJtMft-' CoNr x.-v/ KfS/A/ Lir^^ __A ____ _ fJ/j/4^ ^£KilrW^-^ fir4 £^f¥sf £:Ue\/jxr?i^i . ^viN( fV^.A«S.C: //r- rvw . 4- 5>n?PS ~Tk fvtd v'iuc _____ ■A> Ca -h It:>/'^iJ play iaj P<e.oy:«X^tW ~Tn OK-tes, -4 ^Akvv.m>- .__________ > #» ^<nr 4__PHmS % • \JL. -rt------ S (*'■ % •—■ vr ■ /. 9% A.V REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: AM of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for you application to be processed. □ § □ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form Certified Property Owners List - owners within 150' of the subject property, labels and plat map List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Depar tment pf Fina nrp Government Center, A-603 300 South 6’” Street, Minneapolis, telephone 61^-348-5910^/ Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor), meeting-all-the requirement: listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.5" x 11" o 11” X 17" for reproduction. Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet). Topographic survey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8.5" x 11 or 11" X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17"). Additional items may be requested by City Staff depending on the scope of the project. * APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Plannin Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/c consultant expenses incurred in review of this application and certifies that the information supplied i true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant recognizes that he/she is sold responsible for submitting a complete application being aware that upon failure to do so. th staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request fc denial of the request regardless of its potential merit. / -------------------------- Applicant’s Signature; Applicant's Signature; Date; //- Date: OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonabi entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission & Council Members U purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature: Owner ’s Signature: Date: Date: Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commissic Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third Monday of each mont Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission an Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Plann- assigned to your project. '7 t' tj -9 U \ ••• •• • rti.- i . ov/i . I Vil^..\l'cs /^'j City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pro-application meeting *) Stir.et Address- ?7b0 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mniling Addiess: P.O Gox66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-006G I-or Office Use Orly , City Plairner //•/ ' / /' Mam 952-749-4GU0 Fax n5?-249-<5616 Meeting Dnto/Timo. PC Daic )7/:r</ V / -I hjj / ' V. ’■ r.y yyfiaf is the purpose of a pre-application meeting? Pro-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them cf the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address;/;zf. /!* frV; •l-/]})('/ Property Identification Number (PIN); Zoning District; iJ /A____Size of Property; T____ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: □ Average Setback □ Side Yard Setback ^ Hardcover i 7 > ' □ Lot Coverage ^ Other; 'd/'/ _________ □ Rear Yard Setback n Lot Area □ Front Yard Setback □ Lot Width Applicants HARDSHIP: Applicant has received the Hardship Documentation Form. Initials;__understands it as it has been explained to them, and is aware that it must / be completed and submitted in conjunction with their formal variance application. OTHER INFORMATION: ‘Please note; Your variance application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form w.(ll be completed by City staff. Applicant Signature:7 i ' /-- I / /^; • ,4 i/yy] Date: / ifiiyikiiscuL. EXHIBIT B I*agc I of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittal for ALL variance applications. An application will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas until this form is complete and submitted to the City. ____ Minnesota State Statue Section 394.27, Subdivision 7 requites that a hardship be demonstrated in order for a variance to be granted The hardship must be unique to the property as variances run with the land and not the land owner. Personal and economic situations are not considered valid hardships. In order for an application to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? This form has 12 points outlining the basis City stall uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a hardship, address all the relevant points listed below and answer them as clearly as possible. Since you are requesting the code exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance is justified. The information the City receives is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it will not be considered. Please address each of these hardship criteria as they relate to the request (some may not apply); 1."The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls." >•/.' (. J *• ‘»i.*< tj : fy 1-- , f ^-i' ■' i Hi}... _.r‘i ' <' f 'fi-i * . • 2. "The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner." f' tVy / ___<_ t :■ -1 ■ r.- '~i’ ______ P/. /V. - r«. y i / i < A V*♦ ,/A •t < • The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” ^ / 7 V r. "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the te.'ms of the Zoning Chapter." / "• >■ • •* ."r ',.'. , tPy __________________________________________ 5. 7. 8 I’ayc 2 oI‘3 “Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to. inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes. Section 1 16J.06, Subd. 2. when in harmony with this Chapter." _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located " ____L-j '-Ji. *-------------- "The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a tv/o-family dwelling." *■ » ' k -•----i— i. "The special conditions applying to the stmclure or land in question are peculiar to such properly or immediately adjoining property." / ,• yi 1-1^ Ll:.' M u\.. /Ulj___ ____Jh__L r f I.y .'-APi i ___—i___r /.<•,'ry fy ._________ —......... "The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." • The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." . . ;r-'-I l•••> f —'JLJ.— Lii, ___*-£.................................. '.'li ____LL:-'1j.-LL__‘lU.__LixiL^J^L^—--------- "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to Iho intent of the Zoning Cod e _______ Pilgc .> of 3 12. "The granting of sucli variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the -Iri * ’ — —■ ..’i/;i i-.'.... p . f ■ -? * . JlJ J. llL*; ^ • i • — LL.:.'X‘__f-•.U- ‘-t ....'//U'.'-L.i.'/1 V - rnmf^9 4 __/.-.‘ii } if 1 • .* >i • -•* i 14' ** t*i • i • • 4,^ /■ ‘ ^./v # f .r •/» , - • ' , i • .^ t.r.ifsi'f < : 1 r .. * V / •4 . '* ./V .*/i ‘ i • * • ;............ /■ .I • I jI ' * narusnip Diaiemeni Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above criteria, describe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements in the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary): • *• 9* • • • >• •• .•*. ^.i f NOTt. FIATURCS AND TOPOGRAPHY SMOHM AS PfR SURVf Y OONC OCTOeCR 27. 2000 1 CMbMAHV !•(»< MlfJI (im Ul^AKVl • 0|««« *KJlf «^0<aa«MAff fuuiAci (»* UftI MMMItCMi* . S4Sf M rtfl <Y 4Mi MVMCr»*A <Ktaai« 19 iDui UM4 tUVAflQN • fl» 43 F,AKli MINNETONKA viroKnin ••iM lUvttmN - ain«t umttt miimtp w*tfm nrv*iBM • «:i f» •««*44 ••!«« u«ti - «.■••• ••4W (u\Anu« • an • •#iaiM«niB« am pMi MMMMAio* rrnn^B HARO COVFR CALCULATIONS omaas nnocovcii n kmi CATCH DASM SANITAIIV Slim MAHMOir UlCtRlC HCTtR IIIXPHONC RiMM DLNDTtS auililA OiAyf UR GAS MLfLR Sr TRACK /ONt »»-«r m------ iotai hamdcama ai m *«ii» I a« If fMt/ifJPOm OMN (w%i»*r Mmui AOOl MUS A«ra Kf jr» •./ fotai Miopom a#tA a* um • 174» %r tfjm tf ■ tot • MHK 'to tOUk f.Ui tf SXTRACK 70NC Cf n -----SSdJPJSifcSfiUlIL M4------- P4% - — DuSTlNa contour uni rilSTINO ion CON TOUR UNC at9i«» DfNOrCS tUSTINC SI*0I firvATION NCW. muf muti NCI»«A» c Kano «cm lOtH. Vl»« %t%u %r t.»i» tr 1/1 «f • • »f 11 %t lao mi TDTaa lUAPCOlO M tOHt • XMA »/ total Momrv a«tA •* fOiR • »mj i_r X101 / N.Ml a ton > too • *A nc n > 3 0 il*i If ...... C"> Prt • i A PCNOTtS nrUlMNUUS UJHtACr DCNOTn RCCUKD UllfLN!ilON AS PtH HRtVHiUS %/RV|T OR IRIO OTNOTTS yfA^mn) OmCNSMJN TlfS SURVIT RflilSTrRIO I AND !iURVt>OR ; PPOn 55041 itRW^tiai ‘ CAM) SORVITOH HOoRt cuarr %«t tt«t mjovrr. i uA acnait •«« BOi»«Atr a* Mt oo OV *T!**-^’ m^iRtmoN 40c •»^ . tiMOr 1.^ ft MA* unD««D murf^ttt«i4i t tAOta m taan of ti« u i/t.v—«io»a I'RIPARU) fuH PtHR T^AIAS 1.\aS OHONO LANC ORONO. MMNCSOTA SS39I txs to«c/mM«i O 0A1VS I»ai § EXHIBIT D S uepafL'h^Cr- ^ D€.P‘'7>^ ^ ‘ /)/Htr*Vn>6-'l> A/fl -O^ ^ ^ -(Ar)// '; •'r. - f l®tl I ^ / fl s-A« /ex'nrihJO^ S-^'A + Cl£ hCCLfC \ , -7^ V /j?'o * c-t.\/- /a '/ ^ t 9 •* •K,AniOII c. hardcover calculation worksheet SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) /0-t£j 75-250* 250-500 ’ 500-1000’ PXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE X _________ X mH ____A House Lenglh Widih X X 8 S S.F. SF. B Garage C Dnvev/ay X X mmm JJH S.F. SF O SidtwalK X X ES aag“^-C SF SF E. Patio/Deck X X SF SF F LamJscapo Underlain By Plastic X X X G Retaining Walls SF SF. SF SF H. Other js'f TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE rOI AL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A_ _ _ _ _ _ /. 100 _ SF A ■ SF B = 7^:^ % .. • ,ho(A^ ;/“•= r ^^, # .A ' **• . A ti I * '• I '* "\} . > •*> - ^V »r "i*"’ * ■ . ! .* r.' • fit ^ -/■ am7«^ i>»j <- • 1.5 . :;^ r ..^/^I ^ • < • ' • ■ ;■ f j' •‘^il-- li.____ ____ • ■/ ,.^ t u-•■ - ■ • \v<'. jy-^- —- i^=-;i4-r2^ F“\v4^ Jr vrE*vV F-,'-*-. ; ' i-j v..y/rt; *- —— L -5li^ -. ► ' • ftS.. .1^ . A- -V I * ‘ * I.ZI pt“in rr- rr • •-4» »« y*^» ^ j J.iri :• • -- -{[f - • •'. ,T- '5 ^ • ' hi£U) I yy ~~^o CO!^CB£-t,L. S/'oct^^/k ; -j:_:. ■ , J ■-• .r. *«-. i. <• ^ « « ; .wy’I'.-k - '* -. / <pr' , *» * ^ ' j/. L,|. s ■••• . . P* ip i ^ .1 * i “1 L - • r t i ,L. 4 ‘^.;jii- ••. .. i-u .^- i-li'^ •’ ■ ,if; . # I .. .♦.»- . |.»-• ^ ; ■•'*■•' • " • * ■ -r-- ‘ - -s \ \,* ' ^A syr £ La VATia^ —^ • «-• . I.»>■•. ,; H&i** *>/• /*•' fU,X xi /\*.„ 4 />c»A'/A>6-’ UM^af r • '. * v'.a4;_».:. . ' ' ^ / ' V - - \ .. ■ • •»•'•• t * .* •'V ^;,P 4-. 1’ •', . a 1 ■ '> ••.•'■. 'i* a: cLO ^ */• ^ ;*'. * ' ««. ..‘%,*i« • ^ ^j;-% •> .\'. , ,.^ ^,w» i • ■ ‘ •« ' i . • % \ r •rir I- Pfdvide 2 Layers 01151B Fe t Solid Mopped Toflelher 24* Inside EX r Wall Line 36' For Wood Shinjjles Or Shakes IljyA’._ OCJ'' 'o|V. 4|V**i ^ ..... lu A ^’Uv. .SfeU* *' i 1 J 'JJf vV.* IKI fcicif rtu i v.^ A:*..,Air ‘•'vir - — -v**-****.* ~F?f n li' T r----!l ; Ik.□a »- - ( i'n'j I ' •V ' /■■• ■'•■■ ' r - - • ■ - rzr::-:^ X“I!L*'Fi-"*. u_ • ! ! !t:' 1/rttoJ : ’ :...M ti ‘!il-t./;i ■■ i ■■; iii; * i:i i i I 1 .1 M5« / J • • ; , OU' f iJT I t ... • || • |r . U------------------------I ; f ' fI I ; I 1 ‘ , M r —1 : : . ? ..... ^ .'♦».• ^C-. ^ I ; t\r-T sf cr> .T '1 < fi *• ^^•r. ^Tqi ' i* * • •* 4•• • I. • •• t* • . *1 1 » • * *i. -’?•{' • * . IJ < '• ... 4 ’ f % ^ i ‘i !i .Jii_U: 1.- J.l . M jU: ■ I ) il i‘r .t' l:i ‘: I! iJ -••4 » ~i 'H' I ' I f .; L.J. i‘ _ :!^P" I :i T JI-AC 'r^ ''its M- - il! r.-i- fiX’^C^V.w*: * L-\J< F •pA'Ti.i^ t .V. »•' ..1 A... * r»^ ) r*i»^ s'.w^ U^K-THJ u- ^^ h Vr^'i-*/ *•»% ‘ i *;i.f r»« •■ •• - : ‘TL- ■ i . f 1 •if -T ! II -C'f.u lutiOU6^T "TA-OtJ f— C-/yF,)eKAy <^uct€r^£. ^PC; A».\ ^ ‘ • • CITY OPi ORONf PUILOING PCRKIT «i«t»ccTo« oaM____*• □ Af^PC vr* AS^K-^wn<o\ED Af7H -on'?rcT>aN3 AS KOT APP^?0*tD - CCPAsCc & Pb « »•• •• ni»4 7^ <£t>* THIS Hl-AN b£f Cf< WTE AT r ■* * 4 A*; ‘ 'f ‘.U; ■:•'■.■■■>'i•“■ :i'^- •*• •> ItvxmuY. ' * i ‘r-‘! •*.*. »V^‘.i 'i*" C*'*-*^J .* ^• I ^ ^ ic Jxn S • . —,'f •—*^ » .-.V* II M ** ■‘■. .* - . '. *^ •* V '. •'V " '■ >. J ’wJ .........•'^*fI V*»’. •* •.' • ’J‘ ' ■'"**» . i'. V X7= **■ “ ’'■•■•• •■ ■ .: ■ //; \V-,' t* (i Ul'-Tiob. p h^u. b fjiM ,♦. .* • vS ’ .•'X , ^ •; ,i<'‘ . V • :;-v ■• .' ■ V' 1 , • .''X . -v ‘ ,':i'Ks foop:S^;i: .•1 \hl .' . f (Ur>nij<4 wnu^vJrila '^x ■' V . -.1 .!■:■ :■'.' ■‘ - X ' ftvxTW^ *T »?MM >iwj ]«7I -,r„^,V ____W'VTlI^b .KINlWWV'’ J V.-vr!'/h ^" :-r.•V. .>-; —n r: " ^1“'f -nr r- .,.»..^w^';.v jii.u__ii. 11 ■1i I 4. I j . t ti; ivrv4^ ••• ^N^Xc*■ ‘.» «» •» 4i»*-<r:xj :i pi Hk t>' VIM( . vx^!b.—v-r xjlvs. : —r-I-rip “-• f‘ r-' •^!<^X*•:^•^>^■;.l••;itv Juiaj.-fcJ : r r. rtivafc.icrr^'aasht; ““•M \ - ; • V* '■- » w -> ‘ *si ■ \ V.'.•^^3; .'i firVM r W— ^ — -•f -■ !';- J «^al^ , ’ u»>r*iUf {.:: / run tk’M uit v^'; p^pagao Karo -V ,'"*V;**-» *'*'' 1*1* ’ i* •' ’ 'l^k- IV+Jw* fcrfW vii;.f • Wr ^ wiunvMu df <MU. ’ »• ' lOUk r.Aiiimi II V. »• «« jesfVjs., rff I'SS I, »■I ^ar -- --- ;v-'■ im3 . - -.r . A in I v*m ■'? ' »■. >■ T- -‘ ik-,— 1.1* ^•>» , A' . >• ,‘“ir *. n . •:r * *' * 111 c • V'-* tm ^ • ... Tr^^'V. v.w*" 'ir ml I r' iiISxmm I trx.-asannBam^i ILsssaiusriaSEHefil J / iinc EXHIBIT 1 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM 1 (we) )f ti(! IA '> '{, / V /( f\ y ;/, // <y^ (// of //Vc-' / /•/ (print naiiii)(s)| (print ndclress) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at /^.*>*^ also referred to as Land Use Application No.________ I (wo) understand that in execulincj this acknowledgement, I (w<!) am (are) not asked lo dectare approval or disapproval of tlie piopeity or use but merely to conlirm for tiio City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that tlio proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval ' ♦ * ** .' ■ * «!•r* n i ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM 1 (WG) C I I *i (print nain^e(s)l of / )'"! /___( __f- (• (print address) have revised the plans for ttie proposed improvcmGiit or pioporicd use of tfic properly located •If / ^ V-* also roferreri to as Land Use Applicaliori No _________ I (wo) imticrsland that in executing tins ackrowlcogoment. 1 (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to conlirm (or the City Council '.hat I (we) am (are) aware of ttie impiovement plans and that the proposed neighbor ’s protect or use requires Council approval. I // / // '/' / 4 U ✓i DateProperty Owner I /). ; cc— /:) //>./ t V Properly pwner Date ..■i RUN DATE: 12/27/3004 38 0211723340003 PROP AODR I38S ORONO LA OWNER NAME NICOLE MARIE R THOMAS TAXPAYER PETER MR NICOLE M THOMAS VAME/AOOR 1383 ORONO LA WAYZATAMN 33391 38 0211723340011 ^OPAOOR 1325 SHORELlNbOR OWNER NAME BEVERLEY M MILLER TA3(PAYER BEVERLEY M MILLER ^AME/ADDR 1323 SHORELINE DR WAYZATAMN 33391 :) t >■ t Vt? HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAOE;I 38 0211723340004 PROPAOOR 1387 ORONO LA OWNER NAME DOUGLAS C MOEN ET AL TAXPAYER DOUGLAS R JUDITH MOEN NAME/ADDR > 387 ORONO LA WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723340005 PROP AODR 1389 ORONO LA OWNER NAME W V BYARS JR R B S BYARS TA3CPAYER BONNIBEL S R W V BYARS JR NAME/ADDR 1389 ORONO LA WAYZATAMN 55391 38 0211723340012 PROPADDR 1380 ORONO LA OWNER NAME DRM JOHNSON TAXPAYER DOUGLAS D JOHNSON NAME/ADDR 4194 CENTER BOARD USE STUART FL 34997-0176 1 CERTIFY THATTHE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TTIUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMOITSTO THE BESX OFMV»,omEDOE*Nr,BEUEr ,2/t7MC C7DATE H ------ IXOIBIT K », *• H(Muu‘pin ' . • > ■ f * ' | ; ' Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department ;fej n (13) y' t i . ’'I SOJS V 34.34 9 (7) na 8 (6) N88‘45'e to 7 70 cn OJ *1* 8 (S) ...7Q. 5 .-V ..m >18' ^5V'5 a ^ ba \ 7/a 4 3 7 8 (4> 0 (3)- A/88 ‘- 70 .70 '* *----------- PARI Of t o Aun SUBDIVI 1 ION NO 1 !■•c J n K"\ r«-“ . i 7/C’f ; * ‘W> *arce/ information /\ / I ' * 111ircal ID 021172334 House NumOor 1308 Stroot Namo ORONO LA TN$ la not a laoatty raconM map. It npnaenta a compilation of IntOrmaVon amt data from City, County, and Stata road authorltlaa and othar sourcaa. ---- tn 05-3079 NICOLE AND PETER THOMAS, 1385 ORONO LANE - VARIANCE, 6:03 p.m. - 6:26 p.m. Peter lliomas, Applicant, was present. Gundlach stated the applicants are proposing to construct a wrouglit iron deck on (he lakeside uf the existing home within the 0-7S ’ hardcover zone. Gundlach noted a majority of the residence is located within 75* of the lake. The deck will be placed over the existing air conditioning units and the chimney shaft located on that side of the home would be removed to accommodate the deck. In addition, a set of French doors will be constructed into the eastern wall of the house to provide access to the proposed deck. Gundlach indicated the applicants arc requesting a hardcover variance to permit 1 0.79 percent hardcover within the 0-7S* lake setback zone when 0 penxnt is allowed and 10.79 percent currently exists. T'hc applicant is proposing to remove 100 .square feet of driveway within the 0-75 ’ zone to olTsct the 100 square feet of new hardcover being proposed. Staff finds that a hardship exists in order to grant the variance request. Tlie property has a significant amount of lakeshore with only a street fnmtage and one interior side yard in addition to tlie dOO plus feet of shoreline. ’Hiomas indicated they are attempting to improve (he safely of (ho house in an effort to keep a better eye on their tliree young children. Thomas stated his children like to play on a small section of the lakeshore that is relatively flat, with the remainder of the shoreline consisting of a steep bank and not easily accessible. Thomas indicated tlie residence originally consisted of windows on tlie lakeside of tlie house, with one of the previous owners constructing a chimney on (hat side of the house that now blocks their view of the area where his children like to play. rhoinas stated they are proposing to remove the chimney and replace it with windows so they are able to see tlicir children playing as well as improve the access to (hat area by consUuctiiig a wrought iron staircase. 'Ihomas indicated they arc pro|iosing a wrouglit iron deck because it is water penneable and would not alter die runoff in Uiat area. I Thomas stated originally when they submitted (he application tliey did not know that it would be considered as hardcover but that they are now proposing to remove a portion of the driveway to offset the new hardcover. Jurgens noted the Planning Commission typically reviews hardcover on the entire property whenever an application is submitted, and inquired whether the hardcover that was installed in front of the main entranceway has been included in the calculations. Gundlach stated that hardcover was included in (lie calculations. Gundlach indicated the applicants did submit a revised survey that reflects the work that was completed in 2001. Jurgens inquired what was approved in tlic 7S'-2S0* zone. Gundlach stated 7,433 square feet of hardcover was approved in 2001 in (he 7S’-2S0' zone. Jurgens inquired whether that is (he amount that currently exists in (hat zone. Gundlach indicated it is. Gundlach .stated prior approval was al.so received for the 3,203 scpiare feel in the 0-75’ zone. Jurgens stated as long as that hardcover was previously approved, he does not have an issue with it, but tliat he does not believe the amount of lakeshoic constitutes a hardship in this situation. Rahn inquired whether a majority of (lie deck would be above 30 inches, which would be considered structural coverage. Gundlach stated in verifying the elevation of the deck, it was discovered that a railing would be required and that the deck would be considered structural coverage. Kahn noted even witlt (he deck being counted os structural coverage, (his property is well below their structural coverage limit. Rahn commented that it was his understanding the Planning Commission does not like to swap hardcover for structural coverage. Gundlach .stated the .*ti uctural coverage ordinance says (hat if any portion of the deck exceeds six feet in height, it is considered as structural coverage, but that she is sure (he whole deck will not exceed six feet. Ralm stated he does not have a problem with (lie material being proposed to u)ustruct the deck but that he does not like to swap hardcover for structural coverage. Oundlach pointed out the air conditioning equipment would remain ir, (liat area, which requires the wrought iron. Winkey inquired whether the drivc^''ay was originally included in the hardcover calculation for the 0-75 ’ /one or whether that only included the retaining walls that were approved in 2001. Gundlach stated the driveway was allowed to remain in 2001 based on the level of hardship that the Planning Commission found at that time. Gundlach stated the Planning Commission could recommend denial of the application if they find that there is no hardship. Gundlach noted a majority of the house is located within 75 ’ feet of the lake and was at one point restored. Thomas pointed out the driveway as it currently exists is exactly as it was when they purchased the property in 2001. lliomas indicated the property was built in the 1920s, witli the retaining walls also being constructed at that time, lliomas stated they repaired tlic retaining walls due to their deteriorating condition in 2001. Fritzicr stated he can understand the desire to add a door to improve the safety but that he does not sec how adding a deck would add to the safety or security any more tiian the existing window. Fritzlcr stated he would not have an issue with adding a door and a step down but that he is not in favor of adding a deck. I.csiic stated normally the Planning Commission docs not like to exchange structural improvements witii hardcover, but that in this case ho docs not feel it is likely that tliis wrought iron deck would be replaced witli anotlicr material over time due to the air conditioning equipment being located in that area. l.eslic stated although the deck still counts as hardcover, it is not the same type of hardu>ver as the driveway and that he would look more favorably upon approving the deck. Rahil inquired whether the Planning Commission would like to have the size of the deck reduced from eight feet to four feet. L/Csiie inquired whether the amount of driveway to be reduced would tlicn decrease if the size of the deck were to decrease. Kalin stated he would prefer to see 100 square feet of driveway removed even with a reduction in tlie size of the deck. 'lliomas stated the reason the deck was designed in that location is because the house is constructed on a steep hlulT and that location limits the height of the deck. Raiin commented the deck could be reduced to four feet and be considered a landing to service the door. Fritzler stated in his view the deck does not increase the safety. Jurgens noted there currently is a door approximately 10 feet from where the new door is being proposed. Jurgens inquired whether tliere are any walls dividing those two areas. Thomas stated it is all one room. Jurgens stated in his view the location of that other door tends to diminish the need for the deck. 'fhomas stated the location of the new door is a siraighter line to the lakeshore. Jurgeas moved, Prilzler accooded, to recommend denial of Application #05-3079,1385 Orono Lane, a request for a hardcover variance within the 0-75* zone and a lake setback variance. VUTE: Ayes 3, Nays 3, Lxsalk, Bremer, and Wiukey Opposed. Kahn suggested tlie applicant submit a more detailed drawing to the City Council. Rahn stated he voted in favor of recommending denial because of the location of the other door and bccau.se he is not in favor of swapping structural coverage for hardcover. Tliomas inquired wliether a French dcKir in die hKatti^n of the chimney could open up to a small balcony without stairs. Rahn noted the Planning Commissiun has already voted on his application and that the applicant could suggest Uiat to die Council. Kalm inquired whether it would be necessary to submit Uic revised plans to the PlHiining Coinmission. Ciundlach stated die applicant could submit a revised plan prior to the Council meeting, which would ciiuble Stair to make the appropriate CMicuhitions. Ciundlach requested the drawings be .scaled to allow Staif to verify liciglit. ^ i s Date Applicatioa Received: 12-19-05 Date Applicatioa Coniidered aa Complete: 12-19-04 00-Day Review Period Ripires: 2< 19-05 COMM^it MrrriMG FEB 1 4 2005 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION O hono Dale: I'ebruary 10,2005 Item No.: Dcpartmcnl Approval: Name: Janice GundlachJ^ Title: City Planner Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: //05-3080, Intel space-West, Inc., 2060 Wayzata Boulcvaid West General Concept Plan \pprov;;l Zoning Distrkl: Lot Area: Lot Width: B - 6, Highway Conamercial District PUD, Planned Unit Development 2.637 acres (114,868 s f.) 191 feel List of Exhibits A Revised Plan Set B Response to the City Engineer Comments of 1 -11 -05 C - PowerPoint Presentation Slides D - Proposed Associatitm Documents E - Adjoining Property (SW side) Consent Letter to Build Retaining Walls F PC’ Action Notice of 10-22-03 G Applicant Response to PC Action Notice 11 -- PC Memo and Exhibits of 10-16-01 I - PC Mimitc.s from 1-19-03 Meeting Application Sununary: Tlie applicant is requesting the fidlowing in order to corcstiiict 20 units of ofllcc condos on 10 lots and one cominun lot to be known as Sugarwoods Office (’enter: 1. B 6 PUD General Concept Plan approval, 2. Preliminary Plat approval m order to create 10 units lot.s and one eoiuinon lol, 3. (^)mmcrcial Site Plan approval, and lastly 4. Ru.senicnt Vacations in conjunction w ith dedication of new easements. Tlie applicants have proposed development of 20 units of olliec condos on approximately 2.6 acres located at 2060 Way/ata Boulevard West. The proposed condos will be 2-story walkouts containing approxiina'ely 34,186 s.f. of gro.ss square footage Each building will contain a walk out level, a main floor level and a second story mezzanine. Approval of this project wili first require General C'oncept Plan approval, Preliitiiiuay Plat approval and (^-mmcrcial Site Plan approval, fwilowed by General Dcvelcpmcnt Plan, l•'a"emc^t Viicaiion, and Fini.l Plat approvals and an tunendment to PUD Agreement No. 2A.I Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to approve the General Concept Plan in accordance with the staff recommendation with additional stipulations, which are as follows, to be addressed prior to General Development Plan review: 1. The applicant shall illustrate, on a separate plan, the existing easements to be vacated and the new easements that will be dedieated in eonjunction with final plat approval for this site. 2. The applicant shall provide an engineered plan illustrating how medium and larger vehicles can navigate the site, including emergency vehicles. 3. A pedestrian access to Orono Woods and the office complex sidewalk, as well as a connection to the existing sidewalks abutting Highway 12 shall be incorporated into the plans. 4. A landscaping plan in accordance with Section 78-797 (8) shall be . ubmitted for staff review. Elevation views of the retaining walls and how tliey will be screened must be included within that landscape plan. 5. A signage plan shall be submitted showing compliance with the 190 s.f. allowance. A sign at tlie Drown Road shared entrance with Orono Woods shall not be permitted. o. A lighting plan must be submitted illustrating pole location, fixture details, and foot-candle measurements. All lighting affixed to the building should also be included. 7. All engineering matters di.scu.s.scd in the City Engineer memo dated I-l 1-05, and attached to the PC report as Exhibit O, should be incorporated into revised plans. 8. Submittal of market inlbrmation to support full development of thc.se types of offices and the similar. 9. Submittal of assoi '••*ion documents, particularly addressing any control measures put in place for future owue:.. and/or leasers. I Staff nccommendation Staff recommends approval of the General Concept Plan with the following considerations in nisponsc to the 9 stipulations noted above: 1. fhe applicant’s engineer has noted that a drainage, utility, and access (ingress and egress) . -ment will be placed over the entire common lot. Staff finds this to be sufficient. 2. Minor curb cut revisions must be made to the site plan in order to satisfy the rccommcndatioris of the Eire Marshall regarding maneuverability of larger trucks and emergency vehicles within the site. Staff finds these revisions to be minor with the exception that we expect these revisions will result in the loss of 2 parking stalls, wliich must be uceoinmodated elsewhere on the site. 3. The revised plans show pedestrian accesses to both Orono Woods and Highway 12. Staff finds the revisions to be acceptable. 4. A formal landscaping plan must be submitted for General Develop;nent Plan review meeting the standards established under the U - 6 landscaping requirements (78-797 (8)). 5. A formal signage plati, including monument and wall signage, mu.st be .submitted prior to General Development Plan review. Staff also recommends deletion of some signage language appearing in the Association documents which doesn ’t comply with City Ordinances. The applicants should be aware tliat the 190 s.f of signage allowed must include anv exterior wall signage proposed for tlic buildings. Interior signage is not regulated. r A k 6. A formal lighting plan will be required as part of the General Development Plan review process. 7. The City Engineer has reviewed the most recent set of plans. He has not provided any written comments hut is prepared to discuss any engineering issues during the meeting. 8. The applicant w«!i be addressing market information during their presentation. 9. Staff recommends further review of the Association documents submitted and attached to this memo as Exhibit E. The Council may want to discuss whether there is adequate language in policing of acceptable uses within the units as this was the Commission’s primary concern. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED The Council may act on this application under the following scenarios: 1. Direct staff to draft a resolution approving the General Concept Plan implementing the information noted within the above staff recommendation, and any additional stipulations deemed necessary. 2. Direct the applicant to revise the concept plan giving some direction as to what may be acceptable. This may occur through a tabling to allow for re-design or denial if the applicants are not willing to meet the Council’s objections. scAi£ IN n.trr M«MCS *•« A%VtAi|0 *1 o MNOUS «/i «wiM 1 1* •*tm men <1 IMWUUIMI Ul. 4M«*I0 v*»i*A, • MMtiilS mat i«ONuu(Mi ia*o ••» r.. ta^twC ov«. iccc»0__^»2SL NORTtl 30 W SCALE IH FEET MMHn tfC AWMO o •/! tf t. Ml—CD HU* m HMOU% mm mo*m^» Q %I0DM uMaiCtC C«tui MM 1 cuinDi rt (CHl Mil Vi MKD Kir •••'VCM MWOli— vm mmm.\ n UlCItf W4 —Of lUCIDK MMMOU A.mmdk— pmme «. 't-.amtntm or nam *•.»901 CUvAtMM coMiam ----»; -----%fOM si«n ------1 •ahjmmm %----V—UMV VOID - -9-roKIMMI cu« * amiD numme Ml V/* V D IKli— CAUUtMl IK riNCt i«l -. - * * •IDCCKMDMO tUC ________iKXDCmM CDS _____OvtIDCiO ClIC—C L()U( KS l| A ssociates .1——^ l«> V\l*^ • •• * jmi SUCARWOODS OFFICE CENTER Orano. MinnevAa IntofSfXice Wni. Inc. mirnlM WjTi^MNSSni •I -..w... •••., » •< — mmm •# i« mum •f • m*M «i I— m* M*« Wv* IPM'I fiMH* *1 —• r«M** - *. ..M—I rirr? ‘ri- 2^"*’ *• •» »-M—f — n»Mi X *1 •-• u I.Mt* t9«*»M •Mmu mm C.MW-. •• ti, n— n>i--------* m i>9»i»*»>■*-»■ »••«—»«» LT :::r:.rxrs;'^-rrj:?rr. rr --rr-1*T Mi* — Mim— !• *mu* ?,Jr.rrUrj2-^7TI.« »• I.— .* -M —•-* -',z!:zz, zz. -• ’^•z: zz: rrr.r CD-I ■! Wm Dm »im» mu tm fc»»—• «•♦•' ••^ ■ tM M.^ mm m mm« mmi toe _ ^.M. •— iMi*. •• •• —•* mumttm mm%rn% « iw>«i -<» * "• *"**p*M M •• mrnm^n II M •—» »9*I —I •*« • Mr-M. W«*-« muA Dl ir«aa94) 1^ • l•«t<««••«>• l*»»M Ml Mi M •• n» (4fkMi • l>»»«i* • U9 M* •» m»u i > PRELIMINARY PLAT OF: SUGAR WOODS OFFICE CENTER I..1 I V I y\/ s.n!I I ‘V.f \ ^ A '' I 1. -: \.x—I. • •••.•I ...- v-v' Vy.^ V- \ » ✓ V• • • • •• • Ml U ; .*1 —1 —4-X-J-^ ' t •: n I\ % \ "t* —>» W*•#••»•••#••• \ I ' .. / 'I I i'A 'A •:,**■■' / ---------................................/ ' ( ri'fiVyr yM? ** _________ \ / / / I \ * 1 5*:^ 1 t|* •«<1 •• i I f\ A A trvv-'"- <Ci, ff - i [ X '•.. ■w... .. ,. V A r.v''•* f' i"y*el'X >r ,u • > V V*:/ /. ’•' Ps - »- •, // "'''""'"‘II '*• »•« . . *♦•* »4* • ■ ' I •#1"* > j C ■*N •I..*’ ■ ' y Ai-: .:;jk''-'i-.... 'WS**./J y I' ./ '..•.<••... e fA 'V/i^,yr--'^' . ; >V9 I )■<> \ ift' ‘ ' y Mrj., < ‘A':,. I V’h>.V- V '\ l^,'‘ A^^, XvV.^////7/(7'-^^^ . 0VX|W4^4» • im •».» »»• |«M - * Ptft •mrt> )*» AA^vv, ....A/7/7,V/i . —-^!l! it -‘ ' »v V. ' * • \ Wj N 'v \ y.\ W^. ' *r,\ - 1 SMt IUS\ Hmy. Na Of] .1 1 / ■w_A....^# PRELIMINARY PLAT QENeRAL NOTES Ific. P.O. Boa It4 Waytola. MkwtttoU tiSf 1 ft2-24»-11ir tUBVIVOBt lOMclit AtaocMof. Inc. 7200 Hamlocli Lan*. 8mNo 300 Maple Omo.MNS6330 7fM24S#0f Lot 1, eiocli 1, OBONO AMBER, accoftflng to lha raconfad plat lliaraof, HtfMiapifi County. DATB OP MVARATIONi Oacambar 22.2004 OBHCHOIAItHi TOP MUT KYDRANT AT THE NORTH SIDE OP HIOKWAY 12. 200W FCET WEST OP SITE AS SHOWN HEREON ELEVATION • 1011.4 FEET (NOVO 20) Iona (04) PUD loom SONIN 2ona(B4)PUD ^”^AftI?iJ4.7i2 au.a 2.02 acraa LOTARBAW Lot 1 Lot 2 Lots Lot 4 Lots Loll Lot 7 Loll Lott Lot 10 Lot 11 Area S.OOS aq ft O.M acraa Araa. 3,110 aq S. 0 07 acraa Area 3.107 aq ft 0 07 acraa Araa 3,413 aq.S 0.07 acraa Araa: 3,114 aq.fl. 0 01 acraa Araa: 3.7M aq.fl. 0.01 acraa Araa: 3.400 aq ft 0.00 acraa Araa: 3.100 aq ft 0 07 acraa Araa: 3.101 aq.fl. 0 07 acraa Araa: 3.700 aq ft 0.00 acraa Araa: 00.000 aq.R. 1.00 acraa BUILPABLR ARRAi Araa: 114.702 aq ft. 2 03 acraa PROPOSES SUliSINO •ETBACKS PROM EXTERIOR BOUNBARIBSt Profil -30(30)Paa« 8kla(8liaal) ■30(30)Paal SMaCIfilartof) -lOCSOlPaal Raar -30(30)Faat Sat Eacin M paranlhaaaa apply ad)acanl to aO raaMantial atnicturaa. PSOOO SDNR BESIONATfONt TMa proparty la contalnad In Zona X (araa datarminad to ba ouUlda lha 0 2% aniiiMi chanca nntnfirtf*n par Flood Inauranca RaN Map. ComaiunEy Panel No. 27003C0302E. aBaedva data ofSaplafNEaf03,2004. Plaaaa noia dial Uw topography ahoam haraon araa ohiainad from a turvay fry Louefra AaaocMaa dalad January 10.2001, SURVEY LE«:ND - EXISTING CONDiTIONS U 1 > WOBM r) tmtm iMtta MiMa«u a. tcuMaai PfMM u UDO aou M fOBOl POII N aMi wM NORTN ICUaMQMl 8CAU W FlfT a |■^aa^ i/i no* t a ho* am MMai ■«. «mai »tk* SUGAR WOODS OFFICE CENTER INTUSPAaWfST fO ■» IM WAVTAtA. MN I U • < K I ASSOCIATtS I tMmm tt '.'VM I.4.4MV CR.'i.iii:' 4-|nr-i t«w—r«Miii U7TTZZ1L ztJXT^. ^ I*I4 l« njCB7r»4H»A a .-x.'T IKfllMIIMAKV PIAT 04118 I OfcH NiT 3 rf»-i \iumi timiriuNt ^ 1 s; 4nn tia r: UUi 1 d;+ctinin - - Olft N I»«<iia I Ullllff ntftMi iMir j ANUHUt «Mli l«0 UWMN V«IU IMI UKM»lO UuitiiMfft iMMicff or to rwfMMt womthi -iaith IMUy INtIMW. MIIUMlItt SiUMU M«|N StDillU TEiyPORARY ER030N CONTROL AT CATCH BASM OPeWQS mrmrn * ••' • . I !/.'■ M>4ot #in MOt fiM « iAU c»«u i«n • • »^4nt tiw riAti ^ Ni CRMH* ‘i.'(, J ' 'i; j 1 . > • • ill < • » ' RITIIMINOUS PAVING SECTION r - 7 ‘ WA9<0 «oc*t li* uiNaiuy cui orr nrmi to MVMtJizt wiNOff rttou •yit r^trn rAiPC n»«ii m rtAfto »iNW.i» »«*» »< Vot* MOO MN'.«A1ATM WlCA ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE DETAIL L0l ( Ks I A ssociates I "*»(«■«• •n«l'—«r^ »|HI **«*••<•• ■•* 1^. ttM IMMK V>M i«« •M.»«/4i«rt .»• A mI«wW^**** SIICARWOODS orrocLNicR OnmaMirainUa (••liM# m»* «»*«r N««*«A a i|<7 i. r«« 0**t mt M#**<*^ «MN •••Ol ••*•«»••♦< >•«* N»l»% JM. f tdimtt •••!•$ t» n' k*l«» I«»4«M« »tla»>M«t f»•#• I* Atf|M»|t*« ««•>«• •• ("I* I. <) ••«•• "wt «l«»*4 In# nl ■«■>»!4 tiMill k« I I**! •%••# t< ««m4 •■*«/•♦ i »••* •»»#•• IM) t*«« ••«•* On •nnknl** • 4«•# nn# • ••• •••! ••«*# »n«A tl« #••••« »an««>*l«>| %•!•• I*** «•«• «•<!••» All |•t•l« Min#*** !•» ♦••«•* »A«II Aa»« ‘O *iMf »wAA«* f«»kAl» »•#*• IAi«fc«*»» •' *•* |«‘ 4«#IA |n«*««l« lAtiknkIt I Im vnkA 4 •! 4«#IA «4««l4* IN«» 14 mm4 •••nl»««« nilA %*•• 10/10 •««» XI- ft A I /lA#! STANDAgP SAMtlAftY St Vtff MANi»Xf k **' •r u K’ to tH* LilftR fttM.0 4.. I ut nn't «**o f xavaic A 4'a4* IMMHirUUn ftiOtt 114 iM m nnu 1 ATiACii n< to »i» Iaa »ic in iMt vMT MMC( AMO iiiikto II iM’u m i (TAftit wior rnriitf* to lift fOtIt »X*ri4L ANO ri*A»X tiic urn p 'rS a H I iMTAffiitn • '•«» Tr»ri% a »««i ■ onnttfo * M« At klAlt 0A« « OlfttIHU »»IAI#*ilft •AlMXl AXt »fOll*fi KtrMOt iNAii •I NMMAIUf ' 7*nv?.:s '*' Mi l rcHCC n-.^O*. ij. . ©'• ’T'Tn^^r'Trr* ^ >>v Jtt ’lH 5‘* " '* M' . HOC A aroDiNO 0* »w •/■ ovr» ^irt ♦ 7' to 4' IN t.nnn HAlf ftlAI II MAMNIML I*. lAiLIAMlI IlM AS lOluN IN* M AS rt' NItlSVAHV lUVtAMia . Mix toNrMtfO 0’ W »l* <M.ir rin. ^ii*t itr EkHf lu I ftHi- I -o n «• *• 4 0 u*ftr t'/»* MAlF U CVATtQW ^tci ION ft-A. prnrsTRiAN r.uffB rahp _ .4tB0Ariifwr 1 r NAtOMI StANOATO — fVf •Alttft. NUl ,-4i' n«4«* c«»«#riK0( 1'. r .-^.4 1 imtlONM. 1?am 0a *» IkOftAOt roottoo WJULI>*^9 - ■ ■ *' ^ ■ ■■ ■ '1 wftUftUn wp IQO MuTur« _____A:#.. X I (UOK II«I» touvft • lAHOt W LiMJtltl ItfKO li'rfLUb ^ ^ lOinvurN# «*N ^ Ml \tAf««40 IS Alt W - t 10* ATTOUVIO l*nt IK r>Atf VAIVl MUtt UAi( viftvt nttufkit vfNy i»n rw Ai>n*>vLi lUUAI x: COvtf On VAIIIJTIMI tIMtftti «UI4 SAMO nrftpIMS Myt «T NWMftt K'Ni too tAl'IV. Mllftm AMO AOOMIWMI VIA* STANDARD rATCH BASIN !®’fLr mNMiits t»4»i or rAMlHO at UN •• ixuni 'S-iiAjSSiJ hydrant and (W^Tf VAl Vt JNSTAtLAimLN 4* InieofMce WHI, Inc KllmlH WortAAMN^^ni Vw •>«»•> |4»n«M 4 1> Ln*' ■■>w»4*> —n—AnnnAnrf' I nn« AO i •l••4A I •«■> 44 |A»«« A«» i«No^o«o ii. IM» 1 riXAMt C«AM* t«l T* 0-^ Tft.Tac:--------------------fi.OUT' ■ 1/ ' I L/ ![( ^ T |»RtLIMINARY DCTAIl SHEET NnTt(«CnNSTtUlTK1N 04118 fc:.-SILT C8-1 7 February 2005 City of Orono Attn; Michael OafTron - Senior Planning Coordinator PO Box 66 Omno.MN 55323 7200 Ilciiittiik Suiir 30 r ■ MN| Tel 7b\ I’lanning I.III Civil Fngint*f*ring ImIIIM itVIU i IMII l and Surveying W\%\V.tlMli.k«lllii4(VUt LOlir landscape Afchilcc!urc Invironmcnial RE: Sugarwooda Office Center Dear Mr. Gaffron: In response to the January 11 comments from lorn Kellogg at Uonestroo, Kosene, Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects (BKAA) 1 am submitting these responses behalf of the developer Interspace-West, Inc. prior to the city council meeting. |BRAA comments and uur response Snow storage - The revised preliminary site plan does assign areas for snow storage. If this area is not enough then snow removal from the site cmi be an option. Medium to larger delivery and garbage trucks - 'I'his site will not receive large delivery trucks and the parking lot configuration is similar to any small office project. The fire marshal. Bill Meyer, has reviewed the plan set and has indicated that the parking configuration will be satisfactory for fire truck maneuverability. The site meets the parking configuration r<x|uircmcnls .set by the city of Orono • piuking depth of 20 feet and drive lane 24 feet wide. 50 foot long landing of 2% grade - Tom Kellogg lias mentioned that this design would be in an ideal world but tlic city can dismi.ss it and approve a dilTcrent design. I'he previous project for this site was approved witliout this design. Stop sign required I hc site plan has been revised to include a stop sign at the entrance drive lane. Gcotcclmical report A complete report with pavement section recoinmcndations will be submitted for review during fiiiul design. 061 8 curb and gutter - B61 8 curb and gutter will be installed per city requirement. Retaining walls All walls over four feet in height will he designed by an engineer. The details olTlic walls will be produced before final plan review. All casements necessary for the construction of the walls will be obtaincil alter city approval. Emergency ovcrfh)ws - The revi.scti grading plan calls out emergency overflow elcv.iiioti.s that arc at least one foot below tlic upstream ba.scmcnt elevation. Lol C KS affit et. Si I'jiiI 7i()0 lliMiilruk 1.4nc Siiirr 300 . MiitiitMNj Tcl 763.423.^505; l^lannlng 7 February 2005 l4« 761.424/.H22 Civil FoKinifering City of Orono Attn: Michael Oaffron - Senior Planning Coordinator PO Box 66 Orono, MN 55323 illMI l and Surveying %vww lull l.ip,.ifI coiir landscape Archiiccturc Invironmcnial R£: SuKanvoods Office Center Dear Mr. Caffron: In re.spon.se to the January 1 1**', coininciits from Tom Kellogg at Doncstroo, Roscnc, AnJerlik & Associates Engineers & Architects (UKAA) 1 am submitting these responses behalf of the developer Interspace-We.st, Ine. prior to the city council meeting. BRAA comments and our rcspun.se Snow storage - 'Ilic revised preliminary site plan does a.ssign area.s for snow storage. If this area is not enough then snow removal from the site can be an option. Medium Co larger delivery and garbage tnicks - 'Phis site will not receive large delivery trucks and tlie parking lot configuration is similar to any small office project. 1 he fire marshal. Bill Meyer, has reviewed tlic plan set and has indicated that the parking configuration will be satisfactory for fire truck maneuverability. The site meets the parking configuration requirements set by the city of Orono - parking depth of 20 feet and drive lane 24 feel wide. 50 foot long landing of 2% grade - Tom Kellogg has mentioned that this design would be in an ideal world but the city can dismis.s it and approve a different design. I'hc previous project for this site was approved without this design. Strip sign required The site phui has lieen revised to include a stop sign at the entrance drive lane. Gcotecimical report A complete report with pavement section recommendations will be submitted for review during final design. D618 curb and gutter - B618 curb and gutter will be installed per city requirement. Retaining walls All walls over four feet in height will lie designed by on engineer. The details of the walls will lx: produced before final plan review. All eu.seiuent.s neces.sary for the construction of the walls will be obtainal afier city approval. LOI ( Ks limcrgcncy overflows The revised grading plan calls out emergency overtlow elev.itions that arc at least one loot below the upstream basement elevation. aff'uet. Si i*4ul Site plan showing building elevations of the adjacent properties - The architect will be producing a site line drawing that includes the houses to the north through our project so the city can evaluate building heights and appearances. Silt fence and SWPPP - Silt fence will be installed per city and state requirements. A stormwater pollution prevention plan will be submitted to the MPCA for approval. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District - An existing drainage map is included. All calculations necessary for city engineer and watershed district approval will be provided soon after city approval. Storm sewer issues - The storm sewer system of the apartments to the east were designed to accommodate all of the post-developed runoff of this property. Those calculations will be provided upon city approval of project. Sanitary sewer issues - A manhole with a drop section will be added near the existing manhole so that sewer grade will not exceed 1 % and will not enter the existing mh at less than 90 degrees from the outgoing pipe. Services will not enter a manhole directly. Owners will obtain all permits necessary for construction of sanitary sewer including MnDOT and the Minnesota Department of Health. Sanitary sewer will be constructed based on the requirements of the city of Orono. Watermain - Watermain will be constructed based on the requirements of the city of Orono. Easements - Ix)t 11, or what can be referred to as common area, will be defined as drainage and utility easement. Handicap access to the lower level - We have lowered the north end parking area by 4 feet. *rhis revision shortens the handicap walkway to the rear of the buildings These issues should be discussed at the city council meeting and during the a|:q)roval process. Please contact me at (763) 424-S50S if you have any questions. Sincerely, LOUCKS ASSOCIATES Dan R. Lanon, P,E. Civil Engineer Cc: Tom Kellogg - Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associate, Inc. Cc: Gina Carlson - Interspace-West 2 H fi - - - I ,v --.r,rv . M*- • *%• .^ • 4 •• >* i I • ! SUOARWOOOS Office CeNTER » I > r II'J' ♦ . .1 .. i<; ' ^1 4( ■•.,l*>i.|' fe ^ I ^ -^iM^ii I rr- k^3... Id :f7:tuni^' ' i i’V'.v/'.r.rv:'- :.j[■••-• 3-.ujh'i.iuii' ’ nf I) oiMi,^ • «r^ ' (vncf ' otA'^vX’•<>. p r.' - COMMON INTEREST COMMUNITY No. 1504 Planned Community SUGARWOODS OFITCE CENTRE DECLARATION THIS DECLARATION is made as of this oay of February, 2005,INTERSPACE- WEST, INC. a Minnesota corporation, (herein "Declarant") pursuant to the provisions of thr Minnesota Common Interest Ownership Act, Minnesota Statutes Sections 51 SB. 1-101 through 51SB.4-118 (the "Act"), as amended. RECITALS Declarant is the owner of certain real estate located in Hennepin County, Miiuiesota, and legally described as follows: j and___, Block 1, Sugarwoods Office Centre, Hennepin County,Lots 1,__, Minnesota, all of which real estate constitutes and is herein to referred to as the “Real Estate”. Declarant intends to develop the Real Estate as three separate building parcels suitable for office and other uses permitted by City Oxte in a campus setting with certain shared common amenities and with uniform standards of iqipearance and iTiaintenance. Declaran; wishra to rnerve the right to add seven additional building parcels to this Declaration. Declarant has caused Sugarwoods Office C^tre Condominium Association (the “Association ”) to be formed as a Minnesota nonprofit corporation to serve as the statutory association of Unit owners for Sugarwoods Office Centre Condominium . Declarant wishes to establish the Real Estate as a planned Community under the Act NOW THEREFORE, Declarant declares that the Real Estate is and shall be divided, held, transferred, conveyed, sold, leased, occupied and developed subject to the Act and to the covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, charges and liens set forth in this Declaration, which shall run with the Real Estate and be binding upon all parties having any right, title or interest in the Real Estate, their heirs, successors and assigns, and which shall inure to the benefit of each Unit owner, and the heirs, successors and assigns of each Unit owner. Note to Readers Many provisions of the Act which govern this common interest Community ("CIC"), and of the Miiuiesota Nonprofit Corporation Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 317A under which the Association is formed, arc not repeated in this Declaration. This Declaration should be read in conjunction with both sUitutes. I .OO DEFINITIONS **0^ Words defined in the Act shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Act. The following are supplemental definitions. A. “Additional Real Instate” shall mean Lots ,, inclusive. Block 1, Sugarwoods Office Centre, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which may be added to this CIC under the terms of Section 19.01 below. B. C. "Association" shall mean Sugarwoods Office Centre Association, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation. Atrium shall refer to the I.imited Common Element wedgc*plan structure, one of which is located either adjacent to an Office Structure or between two Office Structures. D. H. F. Board of Directors" or "Board" shall mean the board of directors of the Association. “City shall mean the City of Orono, Minnesota. “Common Area' shall mean Lot 1, Block 1, Sugarwoods Office Centre, I lennepin County, Miimesola. G. “Common Elcmcnt.s” are defined in Section 8.0 1 below *>• • t H. "Common Expenses" shall mean expenditures made or liabilities incurred by or oi< behalf of the Association, including those made or incurred with respect to easement rights over adjoining properly which benefit the owners, together with any allocations to reserves. 1."Common Improvements" shall mean those roads, curbs, parking areas, utilities, lighting, duectional signage, and walkways constructed or maintained upon the Common Area for the common benefit or owners and occupants of Units, and the invitees of such owners and occupants. J.“Exterior Landscaping” shall mean all exterior grass, shrubs, trees, flowers and other plantings maintained within the Real Estate. K. “Limited Common Elements” are defined in Section 8.02 below. L. “Oflice Structure” .shall mean the building erected within a Unit. M. “Unit” shall mean any of Lots 2 to 11 , inclusive. Block I, SugarwtHKls Office C^entrc, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 2.00 U)i:NTnT OF REAL C.STATE AND CIC 2.01 This Declaration establishes Common Interest Community No. 1504, Hennepin County, Minnesota, under the name Sugarwoods Office Centre. It is a planned Community (and not a aindominiuni or aM)peralive), and is not subject to a master association. The Real Instate included within this CIC is legally described on the first page hereof. 3.00 CICPLAT 3.01 The plat of Sugarwoods OITicc Centre, rcairded with the Regi.strar of l jtte.s for llemicpin C<»unty, pursuant to Miiuiesota Statutes, Chapter 508, constitutes the CIC Plat for this CIC. 4 00 OWNERS ASSOCIA I ION 4.01 Sugwwoods Office Centre Association lias been incorporated as a Minnesota nonprofit corporation under Minnesota Statutes. Chapter 317A to act as the asstK-iution of owners of Units requirctl by .section 51 5B.3-I0I of the Act. 5.00 .UNITS AND UNI1’ [PI^NTtFinRS 5.01 This CIC consis:** of three f3) Units, namely, Lots _ to inclusive. Block I, Sugarwoods Office Centre, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The Unit identifierofeach Unit sliall be the lot and block numbers and the subdivision name of the CIC Plat. 6.00 BOUNDARIES 6.01 fhe Unit boundaries shall be the boundary lines of the platted lots as designated on the CIC Plat, lire Units have no upper or lower boundaries. 7.01 7.00 USE OF UNITS All Units arc restricted to non-residential use. * COMMON KLF.MENTg ^Np LIMI TED COMMON ELEMENTS * ComtiKm Elymc ais. 1 he Common Elements include the Common Area and those parts of the Real Estate designated as Common Elements in the Act, the Aasociation's and the TTIl below, and the Common Improvements. The Common l-leir.cnts shall be subject to appurtenant easements for scrvicc.s, public and private utilities, access. u.se and enjoyment in favor of each Unit and its owners and occupants; subject to (i) tlic rights of owners and occup^to in Limit^ Common Elements appurtenant to their Units and (ii) the right of the As^iation to establish reasonable Rules and Regulations governing the use of the Real Estate. I he maintcnai^', repair, replacement, control, «’-a.«emcnt and operation of the a>mmon Elements shall be the exclusive rcspon.sibility of the Associatioa Common Expenses for the maintenance, repair, replacement, management and operation of the Common Elements shall be as.sesscd and collected from the owners in accordance with this Declaration. The Limited Common Elements arc tho.se parts of the Common Elements reserved for the exclusive use of the owners and occupents of the Units to which tiKy arc allocated, and the rights to the use and enjoyment theretrf are automatically conveyed with ^ convi^ancc of such Units. Ilic Limited Common Elements allocated to the Units include each tnurn adjacent and allocated to one or two Units (as the ea.se may be), and the water, sewer, natural electrical, tclephoiur. data and other utility pipes, wires, conduits and fixtures Unxited in the Common Area but serving fewer than all of the Units. 9.00 allqc a noNj)jLy Qj iNO i*ower and common ex penses 9.01 Comn^iijvxpen^. l-ach of the Units is hereby allocated on equal share of the C ommon E.xpcnses of the A.s.sociation. I lowevcr, certain expemses may be asscs.scd on a different basis, or against one Unit or fewer than all Units, under the following circumstances: A. B. C. E. F. O. H. I. Any common expense associated with the maintenance, repair, or replacement of a Limited Common Element undertaken by the Association shall be assessed exclusively against the Unit or Units to which that Limited Common Element is assigned, and if it is assigned to more than one Unit, on the basis of (i) equality, (ii) square footage of the area being maintained, repaired or replac^, or (iii) the actual cost incurred with respect to each Unit. Any common expense or portion thereof benefiting fewer than all of the Units may be ass<»sed exclusively against the Unit or Units beneftted, and if more than one Unit is benefited, on the basis of (i) equality, (ii) square footage of the area being maintained, repaired or replaced, or (iii) the actual cost incurred with respect to each Unit. The costs of insurance may be assessed in proportion to value, risk or coverage, and the costs of utilities may be assessed in proportion to usage. Reasonable attorneys fees and other costs incur ed by the Association in connection with (i) the collection of asses.sments and (ii) the enforcement of the Declaration, Bylaws, the Act, or the Rules and Regulations, against an owner or occupant or their guests, may be assessed against the ow-ncr's Unit. Fees, charges, late charges, fines and interest may be assessed as provided in Section SISB.3-116(a) of the Act. Assessments levied under Section 515B.3-116 of MCIOA to pay a judgment against the Association may be levied only against the Units existing at the time the judgment was entered, in proportion to their common expense liabilities. If any damage to the Common Elements or another Unit is caused by the act or omission of any owner or occupant, or their invitees, the Asiiociation may assess the costs of repairing the damage exclusively against the owner's Unit to the extent not covered by insurance. If any installment of an assessment becomes more than 30 days past dt», then the Association may, upon 10 days written notice of the owner, declare the entire amount of the assessment immediately due and payable in full. Expenses relating to the maintenance, repair, replacement or operation of all or any part or component of a common element or limited common clement may be assessed against Units on the basis of use. which may either be measured or rcason^ly estiinated. J.If common expense liabilities are reallocated for any purpose authorized by the Act, Common Expense assessments and any installment thereof not yet due shall be recalculated in accordance with the reallocated common expense liabilities. Assessments described in Subsections 9.01,A-I shall not be considered special assessments as described in Section 10.03. 9.02 Votins. Each of the Units is allocated one vote in the Association. 9.03 Reasonable Estimates. Whenever an expense that is allocable to Units to which a Limited Common Element is assigned under Section 9.01 .A, to certain benefited Units under Section 9.01 .B, or to certain Units on the basis of use of utilities under Section 9.01 .C, is not separately metered or cannot otherwise be precisely measured, the Association may make a reasonable estimate thereof, and based on such estimate, may adopt for convenience a simple flat fee per each such Unit. 9.04 Formula. The allocation of interests specified in Section 9.01 above is based on equality. 10.00 ASSESSMENI^ 10.01 General Provisions. Section SiSB.3-1 IS of the Act specifics how asses*'~<cnts arc assessed and collected. Section SI SB.3-1 16 specifics how the lien for assessments is created and enforced, and to which interests it is cither superior or subordinate. 10.02 Annual Assessments. Annual Asses.sments shall be established and levied by the Board. Each annual assessment shall cover all of the anticipated Common Expenses of the Association for that year. Annual assessments may provide, among other things, for contributions to a separate reserve fund sufficient to cover the periodic cost of maintenance, repair and replacement of the Common Improvements and those parts of the Units for which the Association is responsible, in accordance with the Association’s reserve plan. The plan may assume that a portion of Uic future costs will be funded by future special assessments. 19-03 Special Assessments. In addition to the annual assessments authorized above, the Association may levy, in any assessment year, a special assessment payable over one or several assessment years for the purpose of defirajring, in whole or in part, the cost of any unforeseen or unbudgeted common expense, including without limitation the unexpected construction, rccon.struction, repair or replacement ofa capital improvement and including fixtures and personal property related thereto, provided that any such asscs.smcnt shall have the assent of not less than a majority of the Units. 10.04 Maintenance Assessments. In addition to annual and .special assessments, the As.sociulion, by the vote of a majority of the Units, may levy in any assessment year a maintenance assessment for the purpose of defraying in whole or in part the cost of curing a violation of a covenant or failure to perform a condition contained in this Declaration after notice as provided in Sections 13.01 and 22.07 below. The assessment shall be a personal obligation of the owner and a lien against the Unit with the same priority and enforceability as any lien for annual or special assessments. 10.05 Commencement of Initial Ann«p»l AMfissmanig ilic annual assessments provided for heiein shall commence as to all Units not later than one month after the first conveyance of a Unit to an owner other than Declanuit. The first annual assessment shall be adjusted according to the munber of months remaining in the calendar year. 10.06 Commencement of Annual Assessments. By November 30 ofeach year the Board shall fix the amount of annual assessments against each Unit for the following fiscal year and .shall send written notice thereof to each owner. The due date for payment of annual assessments shall be as set by the Board. At the time the Board fixes the amount of annual assessments it shall adopt a budget for the following fiscal year and cause a copy of such budget in reasonable detail to be furnished to each owner. 10.07 Lien Priority: Foreclosure . A lien under this Section is prior to all other liens end encumbrances on a Unit except (i) liens and encumbrances recorded before the Declaration, (ii) any first mortgage on the Unit, and (iii) liens for real estate taxes and other governmental assessments or charges against the Unit. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if a first mortgage on a Unit is foreclosed, the first mortgage was recorded on or after June 1,1994, and no owner redeems during the owner's period of redemption provided by Chapters 580, 581, and 582, then the holder of the shciifTs certificate of sale fiom the foreclosure of the first mortgage shall take title to the Unit subject to unpaid assessments for Common Expenses levied pursuant to Section 515B.3-115(a), (eX 1) to (3), (f), and (i) of the Act which became due, without acceleration, during the six months immediately preceding the first day following the end of the owner's period of redemption. 10.08 Voluntary Conveyances: Statement of Assessments. In a voluntary conveyance of a Unit the buyer shall not be personally liable for any unpaid assessments and o ther charges made by the Association against the seller or the seller's Unit prior to the time of conveyance to the buyer, unless expressly assumed by the buyer. However, the lien of such assc.ssments shall remain against the Unit until satisfied. Any seller or buyer .shall be entitled to a statement, in recordable form, fittm the Association setting forth the amount of the unpaid assessments against the Unit, including all asses.sments payable in the Association's current fiscal year, which statement shall be binding on the Association, seller and buyer. 10.09 Alternative Assessment Program. The Declarant hereby establishes an alternative assessment program ofthe type described in Section 515B.3-115(aXl)oftheAcL Specifically, ifa common expense assessment has been levied, any Unit owned by Dwlarant for initial sale shall be assessed at the rate of 25% of the assessment levied on other Units of the same type until a certificate of occupancy has been issued with respect to such Unit by the municipality in which the Unit is located. Ihereafter, such Unit will be assessed at the full rate. Tliis reduced assessment shall apply to each Unit owned by Declarant at the time that the Unit is created, and shall continue as to each such Unit until the issuance of the certificate of occupancy as previously described. In any event, this allemute assessment program shall end on the fifth anniversary of the reeording of (his Declaration. There ore no assurances that this alternative assessment program will have no effect on the level of services for items set forth in the Association's budget. 11.00 EASEMEN I S 11.01 Easement for Maintenance. Repair. Replacement and Reconstruction, fiach Unit shall be subject to the rights of the Association to a non-exclusive easement on and over the Units to the extent necessary to fulfill the As.sociation's obligations under this Declaration or the Act, including without limitation, to maintain the Common Elements, the l^xtcrior l.andscaping, the Common Improvements, the Atriums and the Office Structures. 11.02 Deylarant's F.a8cments . Declarant shall be the beneficiaiy of the casements for construction and sales activity desorihed below. 11.03 Right of Enjoyment over the Common Area . Every owner and lawful occupant of a Unit, and the invitees of any such, shall have the non-cxetusive right to u.se and enjoy the Common Area for ingress aitd egress, parking, utility access, and enjoyment of open spaces, subject to reasonable rules and regulations adopted from time to time by the Board. Nothing herein shall be construed as a grant of easement rights to the public. I l.(M Recorded Easements . 1'hc Real Estate .shall he subject to such other ca.semcnts ns may be recorded against it or shown on tlic CIC Plat. 11.05 Permanent Easements . All casements described in this Declaration ore permanent easements, running with the land, and are appurtenant. They shall at all times inure to the bcncHt of and be binding on the owner and the mortgagee, front time to time, of any Unit, and their respective heirs, successors, personal representatives or assigns. Subject to the restrictions set forth herein, on owner may delegate the right of enjoyment of an easement to tenants. 11 >06 Continuation and Scone of Easements . Notwithstanding anything in this Declaration to the contrary, in no event shall on owner or occupant be denied reasonable access to its Unit or the right to utility services thereto. Ihc easements set forth in this Article 11.00 shall supplement and not limit any easements described cl.scwhcre in this Declaration or otherwise recorded, and shall include reasoiuble access to the Common Elements through the Units as rea.sonably necessary fur pur|H)ses of maintenance, repair, replacement and recon.struction. 12.00 ASSOCIATION MAIN l l-NANCE Rf-SPONSIBim Y 1I Common Elqncnts: Exterior l.andseapine: Snow Plowing. In order to preserve the uniform and high standard of fimction and appearance of the Real Estate, the Association shall have die exclusive rc.sponsibiiity for the maintenance and repair of the Common Elements (including the Common Improvements), the exterior surfaces of the Atriums and Office Structures, tmd the Exterior 1 midscaping, which res|Kmsibility shall include, but not be limited to, the resurfacing and striping of paved areas; maintenance, repair, painting and replacement oflighting flxtures, directional signage; planting, removing, mowing, trimming, replanting, raking and fertilizing of grass, shrubs, trees and other {dantings; the ntaintenance and repair of exterior surfaces of all buildings on the Real Estate, including, without limitation, the painting and staining of same as often as necessary, the replacement of trim and caulking, the maintenance and repair of roofs, gutters, downspouts and overhangs, the maintenance and repair of exterior windows and doors, and the painting and decorating of the exterior surface of exterior doors and exterior window sashes. The Association shall not be responsible for washing windows. In addition, the Association shall be responsible for snowplowing all driveways, parking areas and paved walkways throughout the Real Kstate. In the event that the need for maintenance or repair is caused through the willful or negligent act or omission of an owner or the owner's tenants or invitees, the cost of such maintenance or repair shall be added to and become a part of the assessment to which such Unit is subject. 12.02 Services . The Association may obtain and pay for the services of any persons or entities, to manage its affairs, or any part thereof, to the extent it deems advisable, as well as such other personnel as the Association shall determine to be necessary or desirable for the proper operation of the Real Estate, whether such personnel arc furnished or employed directly by the Association w by any person or entity with whom or which it contracts, fhe Association may obtain and pay for legal and accounting services necessary or desirable in connection with the operation of the Real Estate or the enforcement of this Declaration. The Association may arrange with others to furnish trash collection and other common services to each Unit. 12.03 Personal PropeHv and Real Estate for Com mon Use. The Association may acquire and hold for the use and benefit of all of the owners tangible and intangible personal property and real estate and may dispose of the same by sale or otherwise. Such beneficial interest shall not be transferable except with the transfer of title to a Unit, provided that an owner may delegate its right of ef\)oyment of such property to tenants ofits Unit. A transfer of title to a Unit shall transfer to the transferee ownership of the transferor ’s beneficial interest in such property in accordance with the purpose for which it is intended, without hindering or encroaching upon the lawful rights of other owners. The transfer of title to a Unit under foreclosure shall entitle the purchaser to the beneficial interest in such property associated with the foreclosed Unit. 12.04 Utilities. The Association shall maintain, replace and repair only those sewer ami water lines and other utilities which (i) serve only the Common Area or (ii) are not maintained by tlic City or a utility aimpany. 13.00 0WN1:RS' MAINTI:NANCE 13.01 Upkeep and Mainterumcc . Except only as such work is provided by the Association, all maintenance, repair and replacement of all Office Structures, Atriums and other fixtures located with a Unit shall be the .sole obligation and expense of the owner thereof (or in the case of a shared Atrium, the adjoining owners), who shall maintain the same in a reasonably clean, neat, attractive and safe exterior comlition and in accordance with the architectural standards established by this ncclaralion. failing which the Association, on thirty (30) days* prior written notice, may (but is nol required to) enter the Unit and perform some or all of the neglected work at the expense of such owner. 14.00 INSURANCE 14.01 Association's Policies. The Association shall maintain casualty insurance coverage and general liability coverage on the Common Elements and Common impre 'emerts. The Association may also cany any other insurance it reasonably considers appropriate. All such insurance premiums shall be a common expense. The Association may enter into binding agreements with one or more holders, insurers or guarantors of moitgages obligating the Association to keep specified coverages in effect for specified periods and to notify a holder, insurer or guarantor of any changes to coverage. The Association shall adjust losses under any such policies and shall use casualty insurance proceeds to rebuild Common Improvements to original standards or to a functional equivalent, unless otherwise directed by vote of a majority of the Units. 14.02 Owners' Individual Policies. Each owner should cany insurance for its own benefit insuring its property, provided that all such policies shall contain waivers of subrogation and further provided that the liability of the carriers issuing insurance obtained by the Association shall not be affected or diminished ^ mson of any such additional insurance carried by any owner, that is, owner's policies shall be "without contribution" agaiast Association policies. 15.00 ARCHITECTURAL RESTRICTIONS 15.01 Review of Building Plans. No improvement shall be erected, placed, or altered on any Unit until the building or other improvement plan.s, specifications (including front elevation and/or architects rendering) and a plot plan showing the locations of such improvements on the particular Unit have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Architectural Control Committee as to conformity and harmony of external design with existing structures in the development, and as to location of the im|vovements on tte Unit, giving due regard to the anticipated use thereof as same may affect adjoining structures, uses and operations, and as to location of the improvements with respect to topography, grade, and finished ground elevation. The Architectural Control Committee and Declarant shall not be liable to anyone in damages so submitting plans for approval, or to any owner by reason of mistake in judgment, negligence, or nonfeasance of itself, its agents, or employee, arising out of or in such plans. Likewise, anyone so submitting plans to the Architectural Control Committee for approval, by submitting of such plans, and any party becoming an owner, agrees that it will not bring any action or suit to recover for any such damages against the Architectural Control Committee or Declarant. In the event the Architectural Control Committee fails to approve or disiqjprove such plans and specifications in writing within thirty days after they have been submitted to the Architectural Control Conunittee, the plans and specifications will be deemed accepted by the Architectural Control Committee. If an improvement is begun in violation of the terms and conditions hereof, or without written approval as required, and no suit to enjoin the erection, establishment, or alteration of such improvement luc been commenced prior to the completion thereof, this covenant shall be deemed to be fulfilled and in compliance. The Board, on request, will issue a certificate as to the state of compliance or noncompliancc of a particular Unit, ami any such certificate will be binding as to third parties. Any deviation from said plans and specifications os approved wliich in the judgment of the said Committee is a substantial change or a detriment to the appearance of the structure or of the surrounding area shall be corrected to conform to the plans and specifications ns submitted. 15.02 Standards for Certain Exterior Improvements . The Architectural ConU-ol Committee shall maintain and enforce specifications for the design, materials, colors, appearance and quality of all exterior directional signage, lighting fixtures, retaining walls, edging materials ased around plantings, paving nuitcrial.s, outdoor seating and tables, awnings, umbrellas and all otlier exterior fixtures and furniture ftiraishcd by an owner or tenant and used on the exterior of a Unit, matching those which the Association acquires and maintains os Common Improvements. The Architectural Control Committee may revise and add to these standards from time to time, but may not require rqrlaoement solely to achieve a different appearance, except with the consent of the vote of three of the four Units. 15.03 Standards for Plantings. The Architectural Control Committee shall maintain and enforce specifications for the species, color, placement and si/e of all plantings within the Real Estate. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, it may disapprove di.sharmonious flower bods and other plantings. 15.04 l>eclafant*s Rights. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to prohibit Declarant from making changes to the plans, specifications, and appearance of buildings constructed form time to time on vocant Units, but all buildings .shall be consi.stcnt in terms of quality and harmonious in general appearance with prcvioasly constructed buildings. During the period of Declarant conUol, the decisions of the Architectural Control Committee mu.st have the written approval of the Declarant. 15.05 Compo.sition of Committe e. 11ie Architectural C'ontrol Committee shall be tlie Hoard t>f Directors of the Association, nr a committee of three or more persons so designated by tlic Hoard. 15.06 Sinns. All advertising signs and devices shall have prior written approval of the Architectural C'ontrol Committee and shall conform to the following: 11k* total advertising .square f(K>tagc shall not exceed the urea permitted by tlie ordinances of tiic City. b. No single surface of a sign shall exceed 600 square fex't. c..Signs shall only identify the owners or tenants of a building and may not advertise iWiKlucts or .services not related to the building. d. No signs .shall be painted directly on a building. c. No signs shall contain a rotating light beam or a flashing light .sy.stein. f. No signs shall be located on the roof of a building. 16.00 CiRNKRAL RHS1RICTIONS 16.01 Prohibition of Damage and Certain Activities . No damage to, or wa.stc of, the exterior of the Real Estate and buildings shall be committed by any owner or any invitee of any owner, and each owner shall indemnify and hold the Association and the other owners harmless against all loss resulting from any such damage or waste caused to the Association or other owners by such owner or the owner's invitees. No noxious, destructive or offensive activity shall be allowed on any Units or any part thereof, nor shall anything be done thereon which may be or may become an unreasonable nui.saiice to any other owner «>r to any other person at any time lawfully on the Real Estate. No hazardous substances shall be generated, stored or used on the Real E.statc other than reasonable quantities of usual cleaning and office supplies. 16.02 Animals. Any cat or dog brought upon the Real Estate must be kept under the direct control of the pet owner or another person able to control the pet. The person in charge of the pet must clean up after it. Ilie Board may adopt more specific rules and penalties not inconsistent with the foregoing. 16.03 Prohibited Structures. No structure of a temponuy character, trailer, tent or shack sliall be constructed, placed, or maintained upon the property, cxeept aeecssory to and during construction of permanent buildings. 16.04 General Storage . Storage of all materials, products, cither in process of con.struetion or in completed form, equipment, 11 VAC equipment, or other necessary tools or articles outside of any building shall be in an urea designated for such purpose and enclosed by a fence or other appropriate enclosure wliich shall screen such storage from public view. Phuis for such storage arrangements mast be approved by the Architectural Control Committee in writing. The storage or collection of rubbish of any character whatsoever, any material that emits foul or obnoxious odors, and the harboring of the source of any noise or activity which disturbs the peace, comfort or serenity oflawful occupants is prohibited. Usual trash and garbage shall be regularly collected and may be kept outside only if in sanitary containers which are so screened. 16.05 Puirking. No truck or automobile parking shall be permitted on driveway easements. No boats, snowmobiles, trailers, camping vehicles, buses, camper tops, "all-terrain vehicles", troctor/trailers, trucks in excess of 9,000 pounds gross weight, or unlicensed or inoperable vehicles shall at any time be stored on tlic Real Estate outside of a building witiumt the cxpres.s written approval of the Board, which may be withheld without stated reason. 16.06 Additional IJnits. A Unit owned by the Declarant may be subdivided or converted into two or more Units, Limited Common Elements, Common Elements, or a combination of Units, Limitcnl Common Elements or C'omraon Elements under the authority of Section 515B.2-112 of the Act. In such ca.se, the common expense liability and Common Element interest formerly allocated to ^ Unit so subdivided or converted will be reallocated to the resulting new Units in proportion to relative land area, and the voting power of the entire Association shall be reidlocated based on the relative rentable floor area of each building. 16.07 No Tiroe Shares. Time shares, as defined in the Act, are not permitted in this CIC. 16.08 Rules and Regulations. The Board shall have the exclusive authority to adopt from time to time such other rules and regulations governing the administration of the affairs of the Association, the use, maintenance and enjoyment of the Real Estate, and the conduct of persons using the Real Estate, as the Board in its reasonable discretion deems desirable or necessary to implement the intent of this Declaration. New or amended rules and regulations shall be effective only after reasonable notice thereof has been given to the owners. 17.00 FIRST MORTGAGEES 17.01 Agreements with Mortgage Holders. The Board may enter into binding agreements with holders and guarantors of mortgages secured by interests in a Unit, obligating the Association to give specified notice or other rights to such holders and guarantors. 18.00 SPECIAL DECLARANT RIGHTS 16.01 Special Declarant Rights. Declarant hereby reserves the following rights (referred to in MClOA as Special Declarant Rights) for its benefit: A. the right to create Units by this Declaration; B. the right to construct and complete improvements; C. the right to maintain sales office, management office, signs advertising the CIC, and models, provided that no more than one combined sales and management office will be maintained at any one time; D. the right to use easements through the Common Elements for the purpose of making improvements within the CIC; and E. the right to tqipoint or remove any officer or director of the Association during the period of declarant control, which shall expire on the earliest of the following events: 1. surrender of the right of control by the Declarant; 2. 60 days after the conveyance of 75% of the Units to Owners other than Declarant; and 3.three years fifom tfie first conv^ance of a Unit to an Owner other than Declarant F. the right to add Additional Real Estate as set out in Section 19.01 below. 19.00 A1 AL REAL ESTATE 19.01 Declarant ’s Riyhts to Add Additional Real Estate . Declarant hereby expressly reserves the right to add the Additional Real Estate to the Real Estate, by unilateral action under Section S15B.2- 111 of MClOA, subject to the following conditions: A. B. C. D. E. The right of Declarant to add the Additional Real Estate to the CIC shall terminate ten (10) years after the date of recording of this Declaration or upon earlier express written withdrawal of such right to Declarant or a successor Declarant, unless extended by a vote of the owners pursuant to Section S1SB.2-106(2) of MClOA. There are no odier limitations on Declarant's rights hereunder, except as may be imposed by law. The Additional Real Estate is described in Section 1.10. The Additional Real Estate may be added to the Real Estate in one or more parcels and may be designated as any combination of units, common elements and limited common elements. There are no assurances as to the times at t^ich all or any part of the Additional Real Estate will be added to the Real Estate, the order in whidi it will be added, the number of parcels per phase nor the size of the parcels. Declarant is under no obligation to add the Additional Real Estate to the Real Estate, and the Additional Real Estate may be developed by Declarant or its successors in interest for other purposes, subject only to approvd by the appropriate governmental authorities. The maximum number of Units that may be created within the Real Estate and the Additional Real Restate together is ten (10). Any buildings erected upon the Additional Real Estate, when and if added, shall be compatible with the buildings on the other Units which are part of the Real Estate in terms of architectural style, quality of construction, priiKipal materials employed in construction and size; subject (i) to any changes required by governmental authorities or lenders and (ii) to any interior and minor exterior changes made by Declarant to meet changes in the market and the needs of users. F. All covenants and restrictions contained in this Declaration affecting the use and occupancy ofUnits shall an>ly to all Units created on the Additional Real Estate. All such Units will be restricted to non-residential use. G. The common expense liability and voting power in the CIC shall be reallocated eflective upon the lecofding of the amendment adding such parcel of Additional Real Estate. Common expense liability shall be reallocated equally among all Units, and voting power shall Im allocated one vote per Unit H. All improvements intended for further phases will be substantially completed prior to annexation of that phase. I. J. In the event additional Real Estate is added to this CIC, the ownen; of Units in all phases will share easement rights in the Common Elements of all phases to the same extent as owners in the Real Estate included within this original E)cclaration share such easements in the original Common Elements. The assurances made in subsections C through I above shall not apply to any Additional Real Estate which is not added to the Real Estate. 19.02 Easement for Use of the Driveways and Parking Area . Ilie three Units which arc initially constituted a CIC by the recording of this Declaration and the other seven Units to be located on the Additional Real Estate will share the driveways and parking area located on the C'ommon Area. These driveways and paricing areas are part of the Common Elements of this CIC, but the owners and occupants of any such Units which may be built but are not port of this CIC also need the right to u.se the driveways and parking areas jointly with the Owners and Occupants of this CIC. A. Now therefore. Declarant, as owner of both the Real Estate and the Additional Real Estate, hereby declares that the owners of all or any part of the Additional Real Estate shall have a perpetual, non-cxclusivc easement, ^purtenant to their land, in, over and upon the Common Area for access and parking purposes for themselves, their tenants and their invitees. B. The Association shall at all times maintain the Common Area in good and attractive condition and repair, including periodic sealcoating, striping, signage renewal, and lawn and plant maintenance, and shall keep the paved areas reasonably clear of snow and iec. The owners of those portioas of the Additional Real Estate which have not then been added to this CIC shall reimburse the Association promptly on invoicing for the reasonable cost thereof, in proportion to the number of Units then within and without the CIC. C. In the event the Association neglects any such maintenance to the point that safety and reasonable standards of appearance are affected, the owners of the Additional Real Estate may, after IS days written notice to the Association, undertake such work and invoice the Association for its proportionate share. In the case of a pattern of gross neglect of snow removal responsibilities, the owners of the Additional Real Estate may undertake such work upon reasonable notice to the Association. D. Both the Association and the owners of the Additional Real Estate shall keep in IS 21.03 Riyht to Cure. In the event that any owner violates any covenant or fails to perform any condition contained in this Declaration, the Association may perform the act, remove the defect or correct the violation upon thirty (30) days written notice to the owner. If the Association so acts on behalf of an owner, the Association may levy an assessment against the owner's Unit for the cost of the performance or correction as a Maintenance Assessment as provided in Section 10.04. 21.04 Sanctions and Remedies. In addition to any othci remedies or sanctions, expressed or impiied, administrative or legal, the Association shall have the right, but not the obligation, to implement any one or more of the following actiorts against owners and occupants and/or their guests, who violate the provisions of the Declaration or Bylaws, the Rules and Regulations or the Act: A. Commence legal action for damages or equit^le relief in any court of competent jurisdiction. B. Impose late charges of up to 15% of each late payment of an assessment or installment thereof. C.In the event of default of more than 30 days in the payment of any assessment or installment thereof, all remaining installments of assessments assessed against the Unit owned by the defaulting owner may be accelerated and shall then be payable in full if all delinquent assessments, together with all costs of collection and late charges, are not paid in full prior to the effective date of the acceleration. Rcasionablc advance written notice of the enbetive date of the acceleration shall be given to the defaulting owner. D.Impose reasonable fines, penalties or charges for each violation of the Act, the Declaration or Bylaws, or the Rules and Regulations of the Association. E.Restore any portions of the Commem Elements or Limited Common Elements damaged or altered, or allowed to be damaged or altered, by any owner or occupant or their invitees in violation of the Declaration or Bylaws, and to assess the cost of such restoration against the responsible owners and their Units. V.Foreclose any lien arising under the provisions of the Declaration or Bylaws or under law, in the manner provided for the foreclosure of mortgages by action or under a power of sale in Minnesota. 21.05 Lien for Charges. Penalties. Etc. Any assessments, charges, flnes, penalties, or interest imposed under this Article shall be a lien against the Unit of the owner against whom the same are imposed and the personal obligation of such owner in the same manner and with the same priority and effect as assessments under Article 10.00. The lien shall attach as of the date of J imposition of the remedy. All remedies shall be cumulative, and the exercise of, or failure to !, any remedy shall not be deemed a waiver of the right to pursue any others.exercise, expenses inc^ inconnecUon with such enforcement, including without prrrf^ly imposed by the Association, reasonable attorneys, fees, and interest (at the highest rate allowed by law) on the delinquent amounts owed to the Association. 21 07 I for Owners* and Occupants' Acts. An owner shall be liable for the expense of any niaintcnancc, repair or replacement ofthe Property rendered necessaiy by suchowner-sacts or omissions, or by that of tenants or invitees in the owner's Unit, to the extent that such expense is not covered by the proceeds of insurance carried by the Association or such owrier or tenant. Hoover any insurance deductible amount and/or increase in insurance rates, resulting from the owiicr's acte or oi4»sions may be assessed against the owner responsible for the condition and against its Unit. 21 08 ^ The provisions of this Section shall not limit or impair the independent rights of other owners to enforce the provisions of the Declaration, Bylaws, the Rules and Regulations, and the Act as provided therein. 22.00 MISCELLANEOUS 22 01 Acts thiQUiih Board. The power and authority of the Association ^ provided in the appUcablc Statutes, the Declaration, Bylaws, and Rules and Regulations shidl ^ vested in a Board of Directors elected by the owners in accordance with the Bylaws^ the Association. The Association shall act through the Board of Directors and tlie officers elected by the Board; accordingly, all references in the Declaration and Bylaws to action by the Asswiation shall mean the Board of Directors acting for the Association, unl^ action by the vote of the owners, members or mortgagees is expressly required by the Declaration, Bylaws, or the Act. 22.02 Notices . Any notice required to be sent to any owner or the Association under the provisions of this Declaration shall be deemed to have been received sent when mail^, postage picpaid, to the last known address of such member appearing on the records of the Association at the time of such mailing or to the address of the Association, except that a notice changing the a a member shall be effective on receipt by the .\ssociation. In the case of multiple owners of a Unit notice to any one of such owners shall be dccnicd notice to all. 22.03 qaptions. The headings in this Declaration are intended for convenience only and shall not be given any substantive effK-it. 22 04 Construction . In the event ofan apparent conflict between this Declaration^^d the Bylaws, the provisions of this Declaration shall govern. The use of pronouns such as “it”, “its”. "his**, "he" and "him" are for litenuy purposes and mean whenever ^plicable the plural male and female forms. 22.05 Not Subject to Ordinance . This CIC is not a conversion of existing buildings to a CIC within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes Section S1 SB. 1 -106(c), and is therefore not subject to any ordinance of the type authorized or permitted by said statute. 22.06 Declarant ’s Rights and Obligations . The Declarant shall enjoy the same rights and shall be deemed to have assumed the same duties with respect to its unsold Units in the CIC as any other owner, except as modified or extended by the alternate assessment program and the special declarant rights described in this Declaration. 22.07 Right to Cure. In the event that any owner violates any covenant or fails to perform any condition contained in this declaration, the Association may perform the act, remove the defect or correct the violation upon thirty (30) days written notice to the owner. If the Association so acts on behalf of an owner, the Association may levy an assessment against the owner's Unit for the cost of the performance or correction as a Maintenance Assessment as provided in Section 10.04. 22.08 Public Agency Easements . The City is hereby declared to have the right and easement to enter the Common Elements for public safety purposes. 22.09 Clean and Neat Appearance of Grounds. The City is not responsible for any mowing, landscape mainteiuuice or cleaning of the Common Elements. The Association is obligated by this Declaration to maintain the same at all times in a clean and neat condition at its expense. 22.10 City May Assess for Curative Work. If the Association fails to perform any of the maintenance referred to in Section 22.09 above, or to keep the access and utilities reasonably open and fiinctioning, the City may enter the Real Estate and perform curative work (but is under absolutely no obligation to do so), in which case the City may assess the Units within this CIC for the cost thereof. 22.11 Unresolved Disputes. In the event of an unresolved dispute between the Unit owners, or a split decision by the Association or Directors, and such dispute shall not be resolved within thirty (30) days, then the matter shall be submitted to binding and final arbitration under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 572, by application to Hennepin County District Court, which shall appoint a neutral arbitrator. Such arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the rules and procedures of the American Arbitration Association. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant has caused this Declaration to be executed as of the day and year recited on the first page hereof. INTERSPACE-WEST. INC. Philip L. Carlson, President STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) )ss. ) The foregoing hutnunefit was acknowledgod before nw this___day of 2005 by Philip L. CariMm, the President of INTERSPACE-WEST. INC., a Miniicsota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. THIS DOCUMENT DRAFTED BY: N. Waller OndT Best & Flanagan LLP 223 South Sixth Street. Suite 4000 Minaeopolis. Minnesota SS402-4690 (612)339-7121 Notary Public 0i727inS000l/MS9S9.l ♦ U^L interspace -west. INC. P.O. B ok 1M WiVSilAMN5S39l (992)249-1117 F«bnwy7, Hillowp^y Sbofvmg C cb MT, LLC 7141 AwHHwhoo A vcwk E*w,MN 55439 Um am WayaaiiBniltfwi W,Oft»t»Mi nitii LaiiM and OcotlMMn: The City of Oranoi. ai a ccNidiiMm to Ito aiviDwal of oir dcvdapmiiit. icquiies thtt liuccspKe. Its cxpCMA toMM te faeacnt icIaHiiat toril locaied on fhe 2120 PiiMl, aad t ondentoi^ that HiltoiM9 «mI Wav lie aftoaMe to our doing 90. The City icqaiics Ihot diii aadentmding be 2120 iitlfca. at to expeato^ to lanNve the imaeollhiiber rctainiiii wall on the r dw ftohoa off-sto in acw dMXX whh all aMtoMe laws and ____ hr the a«ne location, nainf hnerlocking cnaento hiocto The deaiin and loeadon oT Wa tohnilt wall anal be i|i|iro«cd b auMng in by yyPr-Tt Waai and too City- Tito toboUt wan win be bnih in .................la waaMr, andi ' the cimiiniGlkm period, or caMO to oonMcton to baip in coving naadog Hiltoway and Wear aa addnhaMl inaonda. to hold WDoway and Wear I will haap in foice during ce. feaionable puMic lUbility fttmmfK f»|t2 ha «r*t «»ar*a 212P fimllir w«kt mAhf trahr* INTEWACE- wmMj ^0 h'- f I L<'. CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kcll^ Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE: 05-3080 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: January 21,2005 TO: Interspace-West, Inc. P.O. Box 184 Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: General Concept Plan DATE OF MEETING:Tanum-^lK2005' Planning Commission recommended as follows: The Planning Commission voted to approve the request as submitted with the following stipiilations: 1. The applicant shall illustrate, on a separate plan, the existing casements to be vacated and the new easements that will be dedicated in conjunction with final plat approval for this site. 2. The applicant shall provide an engineered plan illustrating how medium and larger vehicles can navigate the site, including emergency vehicles. 3. A pedestrian access to Orono Woods and the otfice complex sidewalk, as well as a connection to the existing sidewalks abutting Highway 12 shall be incorporated into the plans. 4. A landscaping plan in accordance with Section 78-797 (8) shall be submitted for staff review. Elevation views of the retaining walls and how they will be screened must be included witltin that landscape plan. 5. A signage plan shall be submitted showing compliance with the 190 s.f. allowance. A sign at the Brown Road shared entrance with Orono Woods shall not be permitted. 6. A lighting plan a oe submitted illustrating pole location, fixture details, and foot-candle measurements. All lighting affixed to the building should also be included. 7. All engineering matters discussed in the City Engineer memo dated 1-11-05, and attached to the PC report as Exhibit O, should be incorporated into revised plans. 8. Submittal of market information to support full development of these types of oBlces and the similar. 9. Submittal of association documents, particularly addressing any control measures put in place for future owners and/or leasers. VOTE: FOR AGAINSl' Applicant’s next meeting is tentatively scheduled for: City Council - Monday, February 14,2005; meeting starts at 7:00 p.iii. (This schedule relies on tlie applicant providing the materials requested by the Planning Commission by Monday, February 7,2005.) If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission or Council minutes, they arc available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach at 952-249-4623. ^ ♦ 4*/ % • INTERSPACE-WEST, INC. P.O. BOX 1H WAYZATA, MN 663t1 PHONE: t82-24S-1117 FAX: 982-24S-1118 February 7,2005 CilyorOrono 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 PH: 962-249-4600 Fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: POB0X66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 RE: Property: 2060 Wayzata Blvd. WOst, Orono, MN 55356 PID« 34-116-23-21-0035 MEMORANDUM - attaches to the letter from Citv of 1-21-05 After reviewing the criteria from the memo of 1-18-05. we met with the City Planners and respond as follows: 1.Wait until later. The easemerXs information will be part of the construction documents. Loucks (our engineer) reviewed this with the Orono Fire Marshall (see letter from them) that approves the plan. 3.See revised site plan from Loucks showing sidewalk connection as requested. a. See PowerPoint presentation information that addresses the issue of the north and south property line landscaping with a Site Section, and Photographs. As shown, the forested residential cxjtlot provides a significant visual barrier from this commercial site. b. The engineering plans show the boundary information in plan. Note the wans are not as high, due to the lowering of the overall site top from 1020 to 1018 foot elevation. c. A Lst|s£ regarding the retaining wall along the property at 2120 Wayzata Blvd. is attached (see letter addressed to Hitioway Shopping Center) granting permission for placement as drawn. 5.See PowerPoint presentation showing the monument that addresses signage, according to City Code requirements. 6. 7. a. 9. Wait until Mer. The lighting plan will be part of the constnjctiondocumanti. Lights In the parking lot will be downlights so as not to interfars with the neighbors. See Latter from Loucks that addresses the engineering issues. PowerPoint presentatian ir>dudes a market analysis as requested. The Association documents are attached, as requested. We understand there is a concern about the build process. We want to assure the residertts of Orono that the project win not be scathed and left undone. Our dMigenoe in having a successful project outcome, and the strong market proves otherwise. The construction is scheduled as one process. The road, utilities and sitework will ait be done fksL including the 10 building peds. The Units themselves wiH be built in dusters of 3,4, and 3 as shoam. The first duster wHI start as soon as pads are ready for construction. As to the sates of houses to housing developments, not all units are buHt at once. They are built as buyers are seoaed. The same applies here. Landscaping wHI happen during the first available season for planttog, and after large equipment is no longer on>site to wreck H. CXie to the custom buHd-out of the Unit Interiors, they wHI be buiit-out when the Owners specifications are known. The market research shows that there is a need for an tocrease of 82,000 square feet of offioe space to Orono/Long Lake by the year 2010. Only approximate a fourth of twt has been built The approximate 35,000 square foot prqjed we propose is still below the offioe space market projeions. That, along with the viable offioe/condo market Indicates aN units will be sold within this first year. The construction process should be completed wHhin 24-months of receipt of the toitial buildtog permits from the City. The plan is to start as soon as we gd approvals, now, to preparation for oonstiuction start this spring 2005. We look fonaard to having a suooessftil project that provides a sigr^icant tax base for the City ofOrono. END Respectfuly submitted, Interspace-West toe. Gina Carlson Phip Carlson CITY OF ORONO ZONING FILE: 05-3080 2750 Kelky Pariiway P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Ciyitel Bay, MN 55323 (952)249-4600 DATE OF NOTICE: January 21,2005 TO: Interspace-West, Inc. COPIES: P.O.Box 184 Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: General Concept Plan DATE OF meeting ":""""j"anuaiyT872005"..................................................... Planning Commission recommended as follows: The Planning Commission voted to a|^ve the request as submitted with the following stipulations: 1. The applicant shall illustrate, on a separate plan, the existing easements to be vacated and the new easements that will be dedicated in conjunction with final plat approval for this site. 2. The applicant shall provide an engineered plan illustrating how medium and larger vehicles can navigate the site, including emergency vehicles. 3. A pedestrian access to Orono Woods and the office complex sidewalk, as well as a connection to the existing sidewalks abutting Highway 12 shall be incorporated into the plans. 4. A lands^ing plan in accordance with Section 78-797 (8) shall be submitted for staff review. Elevation views of the retaining walls and how they will be screened must be included within that landsctqie plan. 5. A signage plan shall be submitted showing compliance with the 190 s.f. allowance. A sign at the Brown Road shared entrance with Orono Woods shall not be permitted. 6. A lighting plan must be submitted illustrating pole location, fixture details, and foot-candle measurements. All lighting affixed to the building should also be included. 7. All engineering matters discussed in the City Engineer memo dated 1-11-05, and attached to the PC report as Exhibit O, should be incorporated into revised plans. 8. Submittal of maricet information to support full development of these types of offices and the similar. 9. Submittal of association documents, particularly addressing any control measures put in place for future owners and/or leasers. VOTE: 6 FOR 0 ' AGAINST Applicant’s next meeting is tentatively scheduled for: City Council - Monday, February 14,2005; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. (This schedule relies on the applicant providing the materials requested by the Planning Commission by Monday, February 7,2005.) If you desire certified copies of the official Plaiming Commission or Council minutes, they arc available from the City Recorder after review and ^proval by the Plaiuiing Commission or Council. If you have questions, please call City Planner Janice Gundlach r- #05-3080 January 18,2005 Page I of to Dale Application Received: 12-19-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 12-19-04 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 2-19-05 To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Rahn and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Mike Gaffron, Planning Director Janice Gundlach, City Planner^ January 14, 2005 05-3080, Interspace-West Inc. on behalf of Philip Carlson and Robert Foster, 2000 Wayzata Boulevard West, PUD Amendment, Preliminary Plat, Commercial Site Plan w/Hascmenl Vacations, Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: B - 6, Highway Commercial District PUI3, Planned Unit Development 2.637 acres (114,868 s.f.) 191 feet Application Summary: The applicant is requesting the following in order to construct 20 units of office condos on 10 lots and one common lot to be known as Sugai^voods Olficc Center: 1. B - 6 PUD General Concept Plan approval, 2. Preliminary Plat approval in order to create 10 units lots and one common lot, 3. Commercial Site Plan approval in order to obtain a building permit, and lastly 4. Easement Vacations in conjunction with dedication of new easements. The applicants have proposed development of 20 units of office condos on appro.ximatcly 2.6 acres located at 2060 Way/ata Boulevard West. The proposed condos will be 2-story walkouts containing approximately 34,186 s.f. of gross square footage. Each building will contain a walk-out level, a mam floor level and a second story mezzanine. Approval of this project will first require General Concept Plan approval. Preliminary Plat approval and Commercial Site Plan approval, followed by General Development Plan, Easement Vacation, and Final Plat approvals and an amendment to PUD Aareemeiit No. 2A. Staff Recomnmutation: Staff recommends that the application be tabled so that the applicants are able to address the City Engineer comments as well as submittal of a land.scape, lighting and signage plan. ► » \ ■4 ^05*3080 January 18,2005 Page 2 of 10 Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections B-6 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) Sec. 78-642. Permit application. All applications for a building permit in any B-1 retail sales business district shall be reviewed by the council and may be refened to the planning commission for review. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applications Exhibit B - Site Context Exhibit C - Site Plan and Focus Area Exhibit D - Building Interior Exhibit E - Building Exterior Exhibit F - Building Section & Details Exhibit G - Building Systems Exhibit H - Unit Descriptions/Codc biformation Exhibit I -CI-1, Existing Conditions Exhibit J - CI-2, Removals & Erosion Control Exhibit K - C2 1, Preliminary Site Plan Exhibit L - C3-1 , Preliminary Grading & Drainage Plan Exhibit M - C4-1, Preliminary Utility Plan Exhibit N - C6-1, Preliminary Plat Exhibit O - City Engineer Memo dated 1-11-05 Exhibit P - Neighbor Comments Exhibit Q - Property Owners List Exhibit R ~ Plat Map Site Background The property was part of a 7-acrc tract that was platted into two lots for development in 2001. The easterly lot (Lot 2, 4.5 acres) was rezoned to RPUD and is now the site of Orono Woods Senior Housing. The west 2.6 acres became Lot I, Orono Ambar, and was re/.oned to B 6, Highway Commercial District. Lot 1 is subject of the current application. Development of a 25,000 s.f. olficc building on Lot I, Orono Ambar was granted General Development Plan Approval via Resolution No. 4704 on October 22, 2001, subject to Uie provisions of Planned Unit Development Agreement No. 2A. PUD Agreement No. 2A established that the only pemiitted principal stnicture on Lot I is a 25,000 gross s.f. 2- story office building with underground and surface parking per the approved site plan, Pcnnilted uses of that building arc general office uses which may include business and professional offices of a general nature, and may include a clinic for human care on an outpatient basis only. The building may not be used for general retail use, but accessory retail uses could occur in up to 20% of the gross floor area of the building. Developer Frank Dunbar subsequently concluded that there was insufficient demand for the office building, and filed Application No. 02-2771 with the City in March 2002, #05-3080 January 18» 2005 Page 3 of 10 proposed a SO-unit Phase II of Orono Woods senior housing for Loi 1. That application resulted in a public hearing during which (he adjoining neighborhood expressed significant opposition to the project based on the size, orientation and intensity of the proposal. Dunbar did not proceed with that application and sold the property. Ravia Real Estate in spring 2003 proposed an office-condo development on the site, with a site layout (hat included buildings with south and east-facing walkouts. While (hat plan was generally looked upon favorably by the Planning Commission and Council, the applicants ultimately concluded they could not reduce the number of units or square footage in order to meet the parking stall minimums established for their proposed use. Ravia withdrew their application in summer 2003. Surrounding Land Use Directly to the north of the subject property is tlie residential neighborhood “Sugarwoods ”. There is a 40 ’ wide platted outlot between the applicant ’s property and the residential use serving as a buffer. This 40 ’ wide platted outlot is owned by the Sugarwoods Homeowners Association. Restrictions were placed on each lot within Sugarwoods that prohibit removal of trees greater than 2” in diameter within the rear setback for those lots located closest to the proposed development. The 40 ’ buffer outlot is generally wooded. The subject property is located on Highway 12 adjacent to the Orono Ambar senior housing development, located to the direct east. The parcel directly to the west consists of a nonconforming residential and industrial use including a large building fomicrly used as a welding shop. It appears that the current use is storage of vehicles. The parcel located to the west of the nonconfonning use was developed as the Orono Shopping Ccnter/Conoco gas station. Both of these adjacent properties are zoned B - 1, Retail Sales Business District. Future redevelopment of the adjacent welding shop parcel and the nonconfomiing residence is anticipated under a B - 1 use. U.S. Highway I? is in the process of being relocated to the soutli and the existing Highway 12 will cveutuaiiy be ' aimed back ” to Hennepin County. Part of the proposed Highway 12 relocation includes a change to tlie existing 12 and Brown Road intersection. Currently, Brown Road Nonl ends at a T-intersection with 12. Brown Road south of 12 will be realigned to create • cross intcr.'cction with existing 12 directly across from Brown Road North and signal light will be installed at that intersection. Consistency with Orono 2000-2020 CIVIP Usc.5 within the PUD may include only those uses designated by the official Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The 2000-2020 Community Management Plan has guided the property for commercial use. The proposed use would comply with the goals of the CMP and be considered a permitted use in the underlying land use designation (or zoning) for the site. I #05-3080 Jamniry IK, 2005 Page 4 of 10 General Concept Plan Review The General Concept Plan approval is required as part of the Highway 12 PUD rezoning and development process. A General Concept Plan approval would be similar to a Preliminary Plat approval without actually approving the Preliminary Plat until other issues have been resolved. Review of this applieation will foeus primarily on the following areas: - Impact on adjoining properties - Building location, height, architectural materials and building design Landscaping and screening - Traffic flow, road system impacts and needs Parking arrangement The 3 clusters of proposed offiee buildings are all onc-and-a-half story walkouts with approximately 3,000 s.f. of gross floor space in each building; 1,500 s.f per unit. The 3 clusters, containing 3, 4, and 3 buildings each, contain 2 units per building for a total of 20 units. 1'he applicants have submitted a list of 5 types of units and how their square footages arc split up, altaehcd as Exhibit 11. Imr the purposes of discussion the 3 clusters will be referred to, based on location on the site, as follows: West Cluster, Northeast Cluster, and Southeast Cluster Lot Arca/Width and Setback Requirements B-6 Required Existing l^>t Area 2 acres 2.64 acres Lot Width 1 00 ’1 90 ’ Building Setbacks Required Proposed Front 30 ’94 ’ Rear (adjacent to K district)35’48 ’ Side (adjacent to R uistrict)35’47 ’ Side (adjacent to D di.striet)lO’80 ’ Parking Setbacks Required Proposed front 15 ’“20’ Rear 10 ’io’ 0 ’ tiini-around Side (cast)10 ’105 ’ Side (we.st)5’5’ J #05-3080 January 18,2005 Page 5 of 10 Building Height Building height is regulated similar to other zoning districts throughout the City. A maximum height of 30’, measured from the highest point of the existing grade, and a 2 'A story maximum is required. The applicants liave proposed 1 'A story walkouts with unconventional roof lines. High Side Measurement The highest point of the existing grade at the proposed building sites for the west and northeast cluster is approximately 1024 and at the southeast cluster approximately 1020. The applicants have proposed first floor elevations (FFE) of 1020, 1019, and 1014.5 for the west, northeast and southeast cluster respectively. At the high side to the peak the buildings measure approximately 31 feet. Because the applicants have proposed to lower the sites at the high side of the buildings approximately 4 feet at the western cluster, 4.5 feet at the northeastern cluster, and 5.5 feet at the southeastern cluster, the actual defined heights (again on the high side) are only 27 feet, 26.5 feet and 25.5 feet. This meets Zoning Ordinance requirements for building height. Walk-Out or Low Side Measurement Although the high side measurement dctcmiincs the defined building height, staff thought it would be appropriate to discuss the walk-out or low side height measurement as the buildings appear much taller due to the sloped roof lines. The proposed basement elevations are 1009.4, 1008.8, and 1003.9 for the west, northeast and southeast clusters respectively. From the basement elevation to the peak the buildings measure approximately 41 feet. However, staff finds that the walk-out facade of the building will appear somewhat shorter as berming and retaining is proposed to the edge of the property boundaries to lessen the impacts of adjoining neighbors. For example, the proposed grade at the northern property boundary (adjoining Sugarwoods) is 1024 which would have the visual appearance that approximately 15 feet of the facade is hidden. At the northeast comer of the site, bemiing will go to 1018 visually hiding approximately 9 feet of the facade. The southeastern walk-out facades will be the most visible with respect to total fii9ade exposure. Parking Requirements Location As noted above the property nearly meets all required setbacks. All stalls will be located on the west side of the building, 5 feet from the lot line adjacent to the business zoned properties to the west. The applicants have shown a turn-around at the end of the most northwesterly parking area. This tum-around docs not meet the required 10 ’ setback, but provides a necessary function for tnis dead-end lot, and is located so as to be usable for a future service road comicction to the west. Number of Stalls The Zoning Ordinance requires i stall for ever 200 s.f. of floor area for all professional of fice uses. Under this calculation Uic City would require 171 stalls to be constructed for 1^'r";»i #05-3080 January 18,2005 Page 6 of 10 this site (34,186 / 200 = 170.93). However, the City has reviewed applieations for this site in the past \^ith similar proposed uses where a reduction of the total number of required parking was approved by Council. For example, starting in April 2003 tlic City reviewed an application for 39,000 s.f. of office condos for this site. After consulting with the City tingincer and the City’s planning consultant a parking requirement of 3 5 stalls per 1,000 s.f. using 85% of the gross floor area was accepted by Council. The applicants for this proposal were advised to use that calculation and have met the parking standard (34,186 s.f. / 1000 x .85 = 101.70 stalls). The proposed number of stalls shown on the plan is 103. Surface Water Management Plan All roof and parking lot runoff will be collected via catch basins and transported via underground storm sewers to the existing storm sewer system serving the Orono Woods senior housing site, discharging to the existing NURP pond located at the northwest comer of Brown Road North and existing Highway 12. Capacity and design of the pond were previously deemed acceptable by MnDOT, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City for development of this site for office use under the PUD No. 2 approvals. The City Eingincer has requested that u drainage area map and stonn sewer calculations be provided by the applicants, as well as evidence that the downstream storm sewer has the capacity to serve the projioscd use. At least one additional catch basin is requested by the City Engineer to contain runoff from within the site. Additional engineering comments are listed in the City Engineer’s memo dated January 11, 2005 and attached to this report as Exhibit O. 1'opography Impacts Lot 1 is significantly higher than the adjacent parcels on cither side, with its high point near the northeast comer. The land slopes to the northeast, southeast and southwest from this point. Existing grade level rises 28’ from the southeast comer of Lot 1 to the high point at the rear. The grade elevation of the existing home in Sugar Woods directly behind Lot 1 is at or slightly above the highest elevation on I.ot 1. The west and northeast clusters will walk out on the north side. Proposed walkout floor elevation for the west and northeast Clusters is 1009’^ or about 15 ’ below the high point of the hill, requiring significant excavation of an ea.st-west ditch parallel with the rear lot line, supported by a retaining wall system. First story lloor elevations for these two clusters will be as much as 5 ’ below the crest of the hill in some locations along the rear of the property, helping to lower their visual impact as viewed from the north. Due to the northeasterly slope, the northeast facade of the northeast cluster will be fairly visible from the northeast, although some bemiing is also proposed in the northeast corner of the site as screening. Both no 'hcast and southeast clusters will expose their entire easterly facades to the Senior Housing site to the east. This will be accomplished by .some fairly deep cuts into the east facing sideslope along the east lot line. A low berm will be left along the cast lot line that will provide minimal screening of the lower facatles as viewed from the east. #05-3080 January 18» 2005 Page 7 of 10 In order to meet parking lot and driving lane grade limits, and to accommodate the proposed walkouts, the site will be undergoing fairly substantial overall grade reductions. The high ground in the south half of the property will be lowered approximately 4’-8’ on average, while the walkout corridor along the north and east lot lines result in cuts averaging 10 ’-15 ’ or more. The parking area north of the welding shop building will be elevated about 8’ above the adjacent welding shop site, requiring an east-west 6’ retaining wall. This wall will continue north and south along the westerly boundaries of the site. Applicants should provide a detailed description of how these walls will be designed so that their visual impacts as viewed from off-site can be assessed. Utilities/Easement Vacations The property has municipal sewer and water available, which was installed approximately 15 years ago. No sewer or water assessments will be due for the proposed office uses, as the property has previously been fully assessed. Additional comments regarding the utility plan can be found in attached Exhibit O. The portions of utility/drainage easements that likely need to be vacated were granted as part of the site plan approval for the office building under prior approvals, and will conflict with the current site plan in certain areas. Those easements contain no utilities at this point, and staff recommends approval for their vacation subject to appropriate replacement easements being granted. Road and Pedestrian Access Exterior Site Access Access to the site was established during the approval process for PUD No. 2, and consists of a shared right-in/right-out driveway access directly to Highway 12, and a shared driveway access eastward through the Orono Woods site to Brown Road North. Future access potential to the west exists at the northwest comer of the site where it abuts Outlot D, Sugarwoods. Outlet D was platted as a potential service road corridor behind the Orono Shopping Center and Service 800 buildings, with possible connections southward to 12/Brimhall, or west through the Otten Brothers property to Willow Drive. At this time the City has no plans to develop Outlot D for this use, but it remains available for future use. The applicants arc proposing a connection to Outlot D. Existing Highway 12 will be turned over to Hennepin County when Highway 12 is relocated. Brown Road south of 12 will be realigned to create an intersection with existing 12 directly across from Brown Road North and a semaphore is intended for installation at that intersection, 'flic schedule for installation of that stoplight is still being discussed with MnDOT, but it may be delayed until the realignment of South Brown is completed. #05-3080 January 18,2005 Page 8 of 10 The City’s traffic consultant reviewed the prior office proposal for a 23,000 s.f. office building and 70 unit Orono Woods senior housing building in November of 2000. Based on standardized trip generation rates, a 70 unit building was expected to generate 120 trips in and 120 trips out per day on weekdays, less on weekends, where the medical office use as approved would be expected to generate 130-in/130-out weekdays and significantly less on weekends. Total trip generation would then have been 250-in/250- out on weekdays. The current pioposal does not specifically contemplate medical office use, and it does not contemplate any retail use. Absent a further review by tlie City’s traffic engineer, staff believes the proposed office use will not significatolly differ in traffic generation from the earlier reviewed uses. Lastly, the City Engineer has requested plans illustrating that medium to larger trucks will be able to navigate within the site. Pedestrian Access Sidewalks arc proposed to connect between the individual units and the parking lots, as well as a continuous service walk along the walkout side of the buildings, and handicap ramps at the southeast and northwest ends of the site. Staff finds that it would be appropriate to provide for pedestrian access connecting Orono Woods and the office complex sidewalk, as well as a connection to the existing sidewalks abutting Highway 12. It was detennined during the review of Orono Woods that walking trail connections to the northwest comer of the property had little value at this time because they would not connect to any existing or planned trail system. Landscaping The applicants have not provided a landscape plan at this time. Stall would recommend that a landscape plan be submitted prior to a Plamiing Commission recommendation to the City Council. The B - 6, Highway Commercial District regulations specify land.scaping requirements under Section 78-797 (8). 'Ihe minimum landscaping requirements depend on the project value. For example, a projected project value of one to two million dollars requires a minimum landscaping allowance of $20,000 plus 1% of the project value in exce.ss of one million. Additional regulations exist such as practicable preservation, minimum caliper requirements for trees, sod, underground sprinkler systems, interior parking lot landscaping, screening and buffering of residential areas, species variety and maintenance must be addressed and incorporated into a landscaping plan prior to City Council review. Site C'ovcrage/Open Space Calrulalions While the B - 6 standards do not currently establish minimum green space and/or building percentages, the City has consistently looked lor a minimum of 25% green space. Al.so, the site exceeds the 1.99 acre requirement for structural coverage regulations and therefore is not restrictcil on building coverage. Ihc pervious to impervious percentages break down as follows; 1^05-3080 Jiiiiuary 18, 2005 Page 9 of 10 Impervious Area 1.60 AC Pervious Area Total Site Area 1.03 AC 2.63 AC 61% 39% 100% Staff finds tlie open space calculation of 39% to be higher than pervious development applications for tliis site. Signage Pro|K).scd plans for signage have nut been submitted at this time. The subject property is allowed 190 s.f. of signage, based on the Code standard of “aggregate square footage of sign space per lot shall not exceed the sum of one .square foot for each front foot of building, plus one square foot for each front foo; of lot not occupied by a building”. 'I'he front footage of the site is 190 feet along Highway 12, permitting a total amount of monument and building signage of 190 square feet combined, 'fhe sign Code Amendment adopted on April 26, 2004 would pemiit a monument sign maximum of 100 s.f. leaving 90 s.f. for building signage or approximately 4.5 s.f. per unit, 'fhe applicant should be required to submit a signage plan meeting these requirements. Lighting A lighting plan has not been submitted at this time. The a|)plicants will be required to comply with Zoning Ordinance Section 78-1573 which states “any use requiring an operation producing an intense heat or light transmission shall be perfonned with the necessary shielding to prevent such heat or light from being detectable at the lot line of the site on which the use is located. Lighting in all instances shall be dilTused or directed away from R districts and public streets.” Staff recommends that the submitted lighting plan include pole location, fixture details, and foot-candle measurements. Lighting on the buildings should also be indicated. Building Quality & Materials The applicants have submitted building elevations illustrating the proposed exterior finish materials. The applicants will also provide a model for di.scussion purposes at the public hearing. The fa9ade materials include a light and dark color stucco material, metal grills affixed directly to the fayades, and glass. All roofing materials wi • metal. The applicants has used a theme of Yin-Yang as a thought process in Uc*doping these propo.sed materials, which they will di.seu.ss at the meeting. Staff finds that the materials proposed meet the standards established uiuler Section 78-797 (9) of the B 6 regidations with respect to architectural standards. All mechanical equipment will be located in the interior rather than on the roof and no accessory buildings are proposed. The Planning Cornmi.ssion may want to di.scuss the unconventional building designs to detenmne if they are sensitive to the natural landscape. Issues for l)iscu.s.siun 1. Should pedestrian access to Orono Womls and Highway 12 be required? 2. The connection to Outlet D, Sugarwoods, at the northwest corner of the site, also creates a turn-around at the dead-end portion of the parking lot. Because a sci’vicc I #05-3080 January 18,2005 Page 10 or 10 road does not currently exist a variance may be required to allow a parking lot encroachment to the 10’ setback requirement. Is this reasonable? 3. Is an open space calculation of 39% adequate? Does the architecture proposed have a positive impact on the landscape? Staff RecommeDdation Table. The applicant should provide the following for review at the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting: 1. The applicant shall illustrate, on a separate plan, the existing easements to be vacated and the new easements that will be dedicated in conjunction with final plat approval for this site. 2. The applicant shall provide an engineered plan illustrating how medium and larger vehicles can navigate the site. 3. A pedestrian access to Orono Woods and the office complex sidewalk, as well as a connection to the existing sidewalks abutting Highway 12 shall be incorporated into the plans. 4. A landscaping plan in accordance with Section 78-797 (8) shall be submitted for staff review. 5. A signage plan shall be submitted showing compliance with the 190 s.f allowance. 6. A lighting plan must be submitted illustrating pole location, fixture details, and foot-candle measurements. All lighting affixed to the building should also be included. 7. All engineering matters discussed is the City Engineer memo dated 1-11-05, and attached as Exhibit O, should be incorporated into revised plans. ii 1 * -y -fr • EXHIBIT A CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION Application# 05 - ^^0 Date Received /Z/j? nU*/ Amount Paid PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 0 'B^r Type of Application to be Filed _________ _______ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^ ^ — g/ —<gg> APPLICANT Name pOC,. Phone (horne)^____. __________ Address ____ Phone(worlj) //J y _ City OWNER (if ^^r^ than^^^c^pp^^ Phone Phone (work)____ -Jm... //f City JiMg^Address Date ProjDerty Acquired il, tiaP4— I (do)(mo rio^also own the adjacent parcels of land. ^ Zip '^S^^9/ ___(month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $600.00 Residential Accessory Use $600.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $600.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments $600.00 Duplex Credit/Dldg $600 00 Commercial/Industrial Use $600.00 Land Alteration + Permit ____ Grad ng and filling • designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd, or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - sec Fee Schedule $250.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) Afler-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS ______$600.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) ______$600 00 Vacation ______$600.00 Easement Vacation _____$100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____ _ $600.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _______$600.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ______$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule iiii V''*J 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS Compteted Application Form. ____Ddtcflbolequeot In detail. Certified Properly Owners List of owners wilhir* 35(7 of the suojcct property, lebele ernl pint map. List, labels and map may bo obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Govenwnenl (Center. A-603 300 South 6 Street. Minrwapolis, telophooe 612-348-5Q10). ____Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed eurveyoO - mfer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land ailerations involva changes in atevation (grades). ____.Uat of the legal names (include marital status) of aH persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applic8nt(s) if nol current owner(s). ____Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). ____As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 3 COPES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (It” X17** OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff wM require scaled drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application Is not complete U the above biformation has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:_________________________^Date______________ APPUCANTS SIGNATURE The applicant her^y agrees to provide ail friformation required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional ffaos (staff lime not covered by original fee payment) andlor unusual expenses IrKurred in review of this appIcaUon. and certifies (hat the information supplied is true and coned to the best of his/lwr knowledge. Applicant's signature Date yC OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowiedoes and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by CHy staff, conaultanb. agents, commission membars, and CouncU members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request Date y'f) hgCeinmMsion MnOngi Owner's signature AppncsrX must heMartiuhaiBdsNeTReC% offices 2S days bshmewFiannim Ccmmssion pisnninpcofiNiiiMionMeeiingssrsnaUonthoNRiMoniloyoreodiinonm. Apsiewm must tie prmehi at all sdwduM review meeSnoa of tio Placing CammiMlon and council. If an eppficent a unablo to allarai a MlwSutod meetirHi. pIsBM make arrangomems to have an suawrtMd egant attcrvi in four place end advlM the Buildtog ft Zoning once or Hus cher^e prior is the mtoiing rnm. p.a*? REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Completed Application Form. Describe request in detail. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' of the subject property, labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hennepin County Department of Finance, Government Center. A-603 300 South 6 Street, Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed suiveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS AND 1 COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require scaled drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff;____________________________Date_________________ APPLICANTS SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide ail information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature ____________Date OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before *..ie Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your piace and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. o City of Orono Pre-Application Meeting Form (This form is to be completed by a City Planner during your pre-application n'.eeting *) Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono. MN 55356 Mailing Address P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323-0066 For Office Use Only City Planner: jAA'iC-G__ Meeting Date/Time; Main: 952-249-4600 Fax: 952-249-4616 PC Dale jlin. pc /lie^pii»j // ‘Vs rlA-l What is the purpose of a pro-application meeting? Pre-application meetings aid the applicant in preparing a complete proposal, inform them of the procedures and requirements of the city code, and identify policies or regulations that create opportunities or problems for the proposal. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Site Address; Property Identification Number (PIN): 3^ Zoning District: . ___ Size of Property: ^ . 03 y ~ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: □ Res. Access. Use □ Institutional □ Comm / Indust Use □ PRD / PID □ Guest House/Guest Apt □ Duplex Credit/Bidg □ Land Alteration □ Comm Site Plan Review OTHER INFORMATION: l/ArA,r7 />J fOllfUlLei ‘Please note: Your application will NOT be accepted without a pre-application meeting during which this form will be completed by City staff. Applicant Signature:Date f i ^ v. ' -i L u m Him Q 0 <1^ ?"??r I7TH a (S STORY) TOMM9C/OFriCe IS KMC USED AS T>C HOST TOR CmOKOW IMTS ON * fCN SitE. TOWNHOME ETHICAL ASSERTIONS immn. m tji Tl»( nmtL n» imrntmm mMMfeMiibliMliai I—Itofi lifi fliftM Mw pifeM tov flp pvpnB^ SITE klifeii • 4 S ■-} ■* !rx:/ f ,al^ i \V 1 .\X ^ ■.. ! pi>( i»( '•J s xi \ AREA MAP 1 NIiW HIHEWAY liXTKNSlON I-394 2 WA'VZATA BEVD. 3 WIULOWDRIVE 4 BROVTNROAD 5 SUGARWOODS RiiSIDKNI lAI. 6 AREA IS CITY OF ORONO 7 I.ONCLAJCE 8 ORONO WOODS SENIOR IIOUSING 9 AREA IS CITY OP LONG LAKi; to INDUSTRIAL/RETAIL 11 SUGARWOODS OFFICE SITE 12 RETAIL STRIP MALL - » X 4S^4^ ’i-iW‘ \si I M » a a i)RA(iON , ’.EAST . ' BLDG, tigi:k wi-srRRAR ••»♦-i-*- iI ’ BLACK TOrrOTSH : NOR in FOREST CHINLSI*: COMPASS - SOU J11 IS AT TllR POP BA-GUA MAP r? L null DING A Uf^iTS I THRU 6 HUH DING B UNITS 7 THRU 14 PHASE II BA GUA IS O'ER IHt Gl C)MI TRIG GRID BUILDING C UNI IS 15 THRU 20 SITE PLAJ^ l ocus AREA POSn IM- CHI AUSPICIOUS SITE YIN-YANG IN B.\L,\NCE BUILDINGS-YANG ‘f EARTH sn E -yin; /V ■# —p Vt A I I lU EATl RE- j IN INNER I CORNER ■ i i - )< n i-j I ”j— LEVEL? yC.MJi 1/4" = IMj" ./ \1N - PRIVATE YIN/YANG - SEMI-PUBLIC YANG - PUBLIC •i: I M i: !• seam «nr. .1; \! < \L I )/--/ t / 2 ,A ■/ ,, J j Kg.] /' 'iir< ( • t ♦. . ♦ * .,i '* FOCUS AREA Y BUILDING PLAN \ YIN- ENCLOSED HORIZONTAL, DARK, QUIET, INWARD FOCUS YANG- OPEN, UGHT, VERTICAL, BOLD, OUTWARD FOCUS 5 - ELEMENTS (CONSTRUCTIVE CYCLE) EARTH - TEXTL1R1:L' WALLS, UPHOLSTERY, CARPET METAL - FRAMING DETAIL, FURNITURE WATER - GLASS, TR/\NSLUCENT SHOTI SCREENS WOOD - FLOORS, FRAMI^:G & DETAII, FIRE - DAYLIGHT PENETRATIONS \ \ \ \ \ 1 .r * k i f'<ii, , ,tiI,i •• ■> FOCUS AREA X BUILDING PLAN \ YIN- ENCLOSED HORIZONTAL, DARK, QUIET, INWARD FOCUS YANG- OPEN, LIGHT, VERTICAL, BOLD, OUTWARD FOCUS YIN - YANG YIN - LOWKK I.EVFL CARVED IN mi EARTH VAN(, UOOIMNE PROJECTING EPW AIOJ rO THE SK\ 5 ELKMENl S EAP III * (ADOBl ) STUCCO SIDING METAL GRIEE, & ROUE WATER GI..VS.S WOOD - rRHYMING EIRE - DAYLIGHT I ----- •• -•I . » ,i. J: JOS^t .r «. » ,»T Tt.lO; IwMlil N O RTH ®> i : _______ w i > v iO^ f - !r-i’ 5 - ELEMENTS (CONSTRliCTIVE CYCLE) EARTH - TEXTURED WALLS, UPHOI-STERY, CARPET METAL - FRAMING DETAIL, FURNITURE WATER - GIASS, TRANSLUCENT SHOT’ SCREENS WOOD - FLOORS, FRAMING & DETAIL FIRE - DA'iXIGHT PENETRATIONS i'l.i ll'-;- iilSm mmmi ■ T 1 N •■ ,C:v.s 'kM c ^ mi ’•f! >- i -VVb SOUTH ••’-f - ■•. . c ‘.S; .w-t ‘ . » • *r-x.i' IMu 1 'v \r ^ ¥1 l l.iSUi IC\ I lU.N i.UNUGIIT I’LNLTItV I IU> 5CAI r-1/4- • r o- I MUCCO ! Mil WlRftD SfAlANT J •• MIT omp CCMVKK UrifOKM OuriNfi CONT Tmhuv VAU riASMING i I scaii' i/2-» r r* 1/r Mio Diflunr f ART M> scorn KMtnS lYP PlAWU.\)StD f0f.fs %tWD5 CAW.K >l*^P •camiN. coNNscroa, w.%u. awning /m;|BCTEO windows poa CaDta VENTILATION (NOETH TO SOUTH) • Ik , ■ V \ \ V \ \ \ i. *’■ \ \ \ \ ^ ■ I } ‘ » K 4' Vr^2>. / \ i\u \ i. * » r 1 % ' \ \ \ 1^ ' .'J BUILDING 1 - PERSPECTIVE SOLUTION: W/. + DIRECT VT.NT FURNACE VAN-EE . ENERGY RECOVERY VEN I1LATOR 15+ SEER AIR CONUITONER A SpM SyftlMn t« • comtotnaiion ol an outdoa^ unit (ali cotwMloncf or hMl pomp) w unA (furnoct or pir hornPor). Loom rtHW* > v 0000:BirrrR eesT; C»olmf niji liv to 11 frPA Cnorvv Star# l^otfuct Camlort *'* Cwl Cooling >iU Suptff fffioomy XI141 Up to sfpn tno«g>- Moi » ProduU Comfort ' Co»t CooUrtf Xi UAio CfAci XUIt up to 17 1% ^1 fnorgi Si«r « Comfort •*• Co Hooiinf XV Two Stogo voitoUo Sptod C»Ol Purruict KVBO •ox* Annual Puot Mooting XV T’ro XtaoP VArtiblo Xpood Got PumiK* Mooting XV T'-iu f.i«Qi G«« CurrtaiR St IS>OU I RI SSES \ \iii,n i»< I iijx,. i i/ - * tm' ittiiy '/ '' SCALE 1/8” = r-0’ MECHANICAL- Clutiolc overage I Number of doyo / year 'U ‘ obuve 75* y , Number of doyo / yeoi & *" beioto 40* •*B* Typical hot doyo temperature 8J 3 P Typical cold dayi temperature HI’II.DING: 2-I/I SHIUMl, 2.500 St^UAItE FEET. G.\S HIM' CONCERNS. HUMIDITY 4.(. ROOMS I'ER I UIJ. EmoR CODE REVIEW PROJECT; SUGARWOODS OFFICE CENTRE TYPE I BLOG. CONST. BUILDING USE: TYPE; USABLE SF REQ. Type "A" End Unit w/ Private Stair EXHIBIT II STAIR RENTABLE OCC FACTOR OCCUPANCY 2 EXIT Lower Level B 1153 315 1468 100 11.77 YES Main Level B 1285 128 1413 100 13.74 NO Upper Level B 694 128 622 100 6 88 NO Total 3132 571 3703 100 32.39 Typo "A" UNIT Lower Level B 1022 262 1284 100 1208 YES Main Level B 1170 90 1260 100 14.05 NO Upper Level B 672 90 762 100 6.92 NO Total 2864 442 3306 100 33.05 Type "A* End Unit w/ Shared Stair Lower Level B 1C65 762 1327 100 11 77 YfS Main Level B 1214 90 1304 100 1374 NO Upper Level B 668 90 758 ICO 7.01 NO Total ?947 442 3389 100 32.52 Typo "B" End Unit w/ Shared Stair Lower Level B 1022 262 1234 100 9 81 YES Main Level B 1170 9U 1260 too 11.78 NO Upper Level B 672 90 762 100 743 NO Total 2B64 442 3306 100 29 02 Type "B" UNIT w/ Shared Stair Lower Level B 1065 262 1327 100 11 73 YES Main Level B 1214 90 1304 100 13 7 NO Upper Level B 666 90 758 100 7.43 NO Total 2947 442 3369 100 32.86 APPLICABLE CODES IBC 2000 MN STATE BLDG CODE 2000 OCCUPANCY REQ. Fire £prit)kfer Protection Folly sprinkled ZONING REVIEW AMENDED PUD ZONING B-6 OFFICE USE: OFFICE/CONDO PARKING 34.106/1000 X 3 5 X 85 = 101.70 = 102 STALLS STALLS PER PLAN = 103 STALLS HANDICAP = 1/50 STALLS 4 HC INCL STALL SIZE" ff X 20'L DRIVEWAY WIDTH- 24' DRIVEWAY; PAVED 9% SLOPE/4% FOR PARKING UTILITIES DUMPSTER (SCRFFNFD) DRAINAGE TO POND (EAST) ELECTRIC OFF STREF.T FRONT ACCESS (UNDERGROUND) WATER/SEWER CONNECTIONS MATCH EXISTING RETAINING WALLS WALLS OF nt LOS I ONE - NO GP.bAlTR Tl lAN 4--0" HT (OTHERWISE ENGINEERED PER CODE) ^LANIINGS TO UL SELECTED GRLENSPACL IS 39% ACCESS; ENTRANCE IS FROM ORONO SR HOUSING ALL UNITS ARE HC ACCESSIBLE •. I I » % ►< / / %/■^.—^# « % « % ^ /‘ f 5 ; .J Si If f \ -------^^•■••^__________ t *■:------—I—/--------i\\ > 1 ^ \ - ~Y ‘x'x - - \ HA-(a-. J.lli \ \ \ \ ,.r- \ ^‘^'X-AAC . I'i \ \ \ \ .,...^\ ''\ i \ ■■■■■•> I •' ■^, ',1 \ \ X -X' \ \ \ \\l (T] % \ \ 'i \ ( j \ i ) A!' i 'I;\ i\ y J '-' “■ ^ HI > sseyrasr ‘t;---------" s-:y'v„'.....,./ ;::■ "- "^,1 \ \ c\v. N — j *; \ \ \ X¥|-v.'- ''X', l''i \ 'V \ V J ^ I Iv ' \ \ '\v-.V'‘ --- liiJjJfei "ajjp* ftr < y ri» . \ .-4Mi ■ U**‘ •■V.*;* • •v^l ’ I • 1 I 1 i *1 »--iU. .Y^-J•• x| * ------- - -.. -• !’ } • ^ 'jiL:^ Mk. ^ _ ■in.o»cm»c« ( r -j I . ----------- ------------ C‘‘. .' / - ' - ■ “““S^iMB irUdQi lait ^ Jcly! vOio - •‘•li I ----------- ------------*5‘ - *• • ' ». I I ' ___ f ,_ ^ _ Xj LT* AJ ' r ** •'y -■ ^MB lCHdQi lait ' ^ " / w.rji »f irTT^'^li y , ,. ’••/ ^ r- i--iy S^’* ^ ¥ ••*. --------------------^ 4i? -'' ^ \ ;-r. 7-/' - X -' *. ^ n - ,. Ar. /.#• 4 ^ ^ or su£«t *2^*^' *'* « ^ //. 4* 0«c %!• /544/AJ ~ ----- •/K'yt-Uh w ^■" 1 ; I J4i Sowl* (< dC*4A •rt riA* Ml *MMCO o • tOMlif l/f MM I M MCM MM I Ml. «MMU ‘mt J»n«* «i.u o 4v » ft m m I —------ «M •—— m fir'— ggiv-j ima^'. \;y;4iiaa8ai^‘^ j Vr^ 5»tAIA IN HlKI ■ MMa MV AUlMIO O Hmift >/t MU* ■ »« HCW «V MIMVMI 1ft. «MtMfO l«% M>9«* • OlMlilt mt9* MOnaf Ml tokM n c>r% *1* v» »• V Ul« tlfC M4« wc IMI t €xm ■it CAf N CNTM « CHADINC. DtAINACf A f ROSIQN CONTIIOI NOI * Ml M SM mm% tm Mi« •* —«> *iA *Ml ffMtt «i«*w»a «M M « I «••• »• mmm mmmm •« • bmim at 2 >»• « arW4 •9 !• M« r< MptaM fM»« >M •MtaKMAw. •* M »•>• k«*« tiapaaiMi Ur a»f •—ifii ii ««^w4 *»«»*««• t^mt M MM mrnmt* • *«• •■ ■• M* M *■» llii>. aw *>■—M M a*v« •• fiaMMal l**M« ««»tr<« «»aM«a taM»«a »• »t«9 •^•^aa*«n ^aataM. *« «.% M «Mi «M *««paa«M A» «—•••*<• 9* WM «"• W«Ml» •« « M aw M mM »• (MaM •• *WM M«a • Im tanMi ««»• ftta «Mf ^ m, m tamumimt 0m»mmmmm m mt »• a«Ma ••«*• M «• **••■*•• *••••» MMwM • * rnmm «— * «»•*«*«■ •« «k«i aai^ • »«• •» M 9«»At M IMM M *•• »• grrnm* •<•• *«ta (aarwi M ••• «» Ma *«.a«a> M »• W a»M C»>< at ■« * (*MAM SNI laMaitaM— «■»«.« <»««a»<*a »• —Ta-i~aa m> •al^cir**'* **** **” Ckf V •• aa»«i«M «M«•<«•••» »f t»« liit >• A* «-*f t*a«aa atiai »• aiwa»i ■«# • tea a»*<, te «a««a »>• t>««. aait ■ tka aM*aaia> *aMi aM *aM# mm *m aMa«.««f a«« taa>a» te •« <^MMa •« anasaa- » «ai«>«a (1 •«# taac«ai« Ml kaa4 a« aii «kaa »a a^ v«a^ k»rfa g-, - **■* M twii««M»wa ai«a«»a Mi t.mm0f mm Ite *wM • I m (Ml AC ••kB*aa1 •• IM t*-aaa*«a. a« «aa ate »tete m* te—« a «aa«te«te« aatte • k«w • ••ailute tete te^gv ai a»a*aa» Ml aa a»ai tea te ■« <«a la tea ^a*i VI a« M-a •> teaap teaaii av a tea* avva v aa w lateatt te (Oa a«ate« — 100' i mos' mo V 1 SCAU! IN fV.KT KMMC« m o WMOfs *n MO* I M Mcit ttcm MOMMIMf Ul. UMKIP • mcm foo« *»»r I 15 0 -]______1 [ PAAKMO SCtBAOl IMC 300*1 1 1 1 1 •Vv,. HU **^.w miMc cnwj icctNO miqposo C r -r- '# •V «.>Cf ■ .1. r •» » • ••• • • KHl »0U MU Kn iflRilt iMawaf tiicf«c MMMcir HtHOCa^ r«hONC fMKChoN Of r\cM UM • (Ml If* *(I«M«C ••U MUia« UICMCMI (•« rtMO la* (MGiaCIKKMP ttiC tfCracMWO cat rucrac ^oyzata Na SITl riAN CCNCKAL MOT15 (umnwn PARKING CAlCUUTiON3 PANKINCltt(AnMU lUi P^MKtNT. fW >V1|ICI) in? OPtN SPACC CAICUATH IMPtXVKJUS^A 1 to AC ItICVliJUSAIIlA 103 AC tfllN SHI mLA 2tl*AC ' **«««»»«( >> XS •* «• • '*% ■• , * » » « « %'% « •» *I 4 mi/MN|NO- «MUl .M J • t* * • I \ I :;U‘ I / / ’ , frir.f sTAii: iM FFrr QIMHIC*. »m «VA*«D u WM)lf\ •/! MM ■ •« MM M»l UUMUMNI Ml UMafO Hit Ml}«* • OfMl'IV •(•« WOMLMkil fOMO r \ t ^ -ft V ••• - » II -* H -- *• .T %•# •*»* M uni fifC MMC VO « 1 CUi Ml Ufi f IMM CMM CMAm^C, DRA»*AC;r A CROStONCOKTR Oi I !•.• (•*•>•■«•* '•*•• •• M Mr CMi •* >■«»»■ f» « ••4 »«rtft*« i»*r MMWPt rMflMr a M »• I*•to* t««4 iMl* *••• «*>Ui k« ••«•>•« »( Hw ■»• K«4«| iw4»w««r i III* (MOMlar MM »«»* «■ ^M«»n*M a*r*«»*r( t* W90H*^ p>m^K9* ■*• («>M%4i«« M*** *1 *»*M ►*•* »*l*MtMi Mr *r>f *»My*« M «IM>* M*M M «M« MM*! 4 tmm tmmttmtm •* *• r** M» •« h«ra««M »*r»<i* » ^ai»wiai •< •••Ma ■iia'a «•«•••*• Ma*»a*m a< Mata «**•* »a*a**» pri*r »• Ml MW—I !••••* **«a*tl MM tMMra UaaMlal* *a*irta>*«»< M liaantMl**** »llM«» ft M *i(a>*araa a<t» *aatr My *tlM*aU c*r«**««taaM *r*iWy» MMy aa* ••aa^^My ray*M»»* Mr law—MH «n Ma *• •<* »•>»■•• M* »>*»••» «ara>* *M*^■■**«* V M* a«>* taat «M*WMi>i*y CM M*t »• MMy* %» aar»«i aarWf «MM« ft My *< M* a"M»* * Ma a» I la caa*M« ««a«l taP*r*«lM« a aa* aiaa*a* *• irMaa •*.a* al «M «aa4>a«lai* MMy raaaaMa* •. ar aaar laa canatrackaa »a* I IMary ft.|wwan lyayUadMa MM ««a*r*tMr vaM wy>M • ' Mft al M |Ma»«« al «aMM «t4 ftara MM *••««« »4« \*U narl arawiaan* ky *«# taalrati* Mr ika MaMaw a< «*a *ra*<l ft* Cl-I M «M «r«^M ttm* • fraaaa an* laMaataiaai »aaaa a.aaa*a» taa* ka •»•«** •4k •« • 1 ^ k^aa ttMraaiaalk •*«■ Mn lyrai I MmI*M O OHflftft VMM M IMM CO>l M V* M*#M ftMM • ka a*«raa«a« yiryik —» M i4t tkaart ka *a>Mr •I M* «4f m* MMWM VMft ft* r««MMM« Mr M MM*ft ft fty ftftft <4y <0 Va a«*4y |ft*a *m *mmm fta««ft •aftarMft m* «aa«> ft Ik* yyaOrayMr inftft mtfm M (M»a ftraa I* y iaaa«»aift « ■laala a aaM Ma«a M ftka <kaaa*a a« taaaiaaaMvi arlM(«a ti Nm •aMratM ftM* Matt r*M ftakaftaa m <ka yaMft MM« Va» car»»aa*«M» Mbaft** 4M caaM aMi laa «« arftft U •* ••«fta H laMaiaU) r* a aMvafta ft r« iftw I raanaiir al Ma kla ft*M« aa* yaaai» a «»«*iatM kaak a la^Mara* aaM >wr«ayir at iw^mat aatf k* yaai *« « ‘ a •• •4a ira4> i ara ai tkaaa Ift .aaaa %«•**«• Ml J Wy r«*ft fti V raa ift»il« V Cfty aH* • I y SCAI£ *11 t 1 r •k f ♦ C a •4 t »-0 • r » \ • stun I ' { Ml* 1001 3J ‘‘ M1 11 1 COWrCT TO iBiSfMC MM MN MV-«94f ^ ,-------------— ^^yxata <“s M,y. Afa IN m AT O UNOUT tft MCA ■ I uonuutMl Ut. MAM • nHOMT MON MOM« tmtrnc CIVIL LECiND \ .iMMfik* UMMAl o MOMM UAikiai CAtiN MAkM $cuviai 0 MitMAMi 11 CAlCVAivC »-4.*tOCAlOk VMVf CJ tiui4C*€ uMMa.1 uikitf uMMtac •0 CUCtKC MMM4QIC UMIAT* U«« —-»»»—».i — StOUl «««• MAMkMMI roacfuAM* OM k CAiftt*M. .. _ .lAMwCNI l*<-- —•INtl iMt — rat (^CCHCHOkMO Ckt —- —-. _OVCIMCAO UC.IMC UmiTY PIAN CINIRAl NOTIS • *• MM4*f M* •• •>« M M»Mi M k* SM JT ) M I* •wiA il>«« k« pm »• C4* l>w C»f M >■!—» t> — ^(tl m « ««U «• •m* mmrntm^ kMlMa ■»*•«« *W <«^4f ■< •«■ • »*.« MM *«Mv LOMMM tiAll 9M C«l M < Mrt* M MWI *»«■ !• M«f m 4 *'• cw>4>«ltai MM Um •««>«« •• vaM an« t*ar« MM M M»M>**M MMMM M MM MM M-M M Mmm » T IM MiMMi mpm tMi <M k* T M «l f % M« M k Mi ■■ MU tlMl.***. »«•> P4t0m «M ^MM M MMMM MM tMM» MM M ■« <«»4t M M<« M T4>M*w«a kMBk MM« M pm 104 mmm mmM mmmI ■«r»> •« i-r-xr—X _ J. \ M (u£ 1^. ih " ',p#iT •W »* o no« ts« W«y«aU. MlniMisota S5391 957 749 1117 t***u rMMiitucn «.««•«• Mapla Grove. MN SS330 743 424 5505 LEGAL OeSCNirilOMt tol 1, lUocIi 1. OHONU AMHI H, acconjing to the re< onJriS plal tltaraol, Hetmepin County DATE or rRErARATIOM: Prreif»l>#f ??. 2004 BINCHMARK; TOP NUT HYDRANT AT THE NORTH SfOt OF HIGHWAY 12, 200»7 FEET WEST OF SITE AS SHOWN HEREONf lEVATIONs 1011 4 FEET (NGVf) 29) EXISTING ZONING: ^onm (04) PUD BROPOSEO ZONING: /on«(B«) PUD TOTAL AREA: Atm 114.762 tq ft. 2 43 acr«« LOT AREAS: Loll An»a: 3.603 SQ A 0 OS «crM Lot 7 An» 3.130 sq A 0 07 acrJt I 013 Araa: 3,107sqA. 0 07acm Lot 4 Araa; 3,413 SQ A. 0 07 aerva Lot 5 Araar 3.614 sq A. 0 00 acres Lot 6 Area: 1.759 sq A 0^ turn Loi 7 Area 3.499 sq A. 0 00 acrvis Lot • Area 1.166 sq N 6 67 acias Lot 9 Area: 3.151 sq A. 0 07 acres Lot 10 Area 3.766 »qA 0 06 acres Lot II Ar*a iO.500 sq A. 1 66 acres ■UILDABLE AREA: Area 114.767 sq A 7 63 acres PROROSEO BUILOINO SETBACKS ERCMB EXTERIOR BOUNDARIES: Front «• 30 (35) Fast Sifit (Street) 30 (35) Feel Side (Irrlenor) > 10 (35) Feet Rear * 30 (35) Feel Set backs in parentheses apptf ad)acent to aX resManUa) structures ELOOil ZONE DESIGNATION: This property is cot aiined m Zone X («rsa Oataimiiwd to be outside the 0^ annual chance Toodpiain par Flood inaurarvre Rale Map^ Csmnuf Panai No. 2705JC0J62L. affacUva data of Saptambar 02. 2004. NOTE: Plaasa ruita that lha topography shown ?»areon eras obtained from a survey by Loucks Associates dated January 10. 2001 SURVEY LEGEND - EXIS.ING CONDITIONS r )p) carpr m&m ifom wee«)ic L> vaaiMtv wvMUi o a«tia wvMi M Niteraas r^nvis 0 iGNl emf »> posis eoic Sfoaw siaca <>MlAirr MW* • • - aana mm m UNM ecaouiA) rumoc •- vaarurv roact mm •** uMisecauJWi CMS (MB»4ao uflitts NORTH OUMbS Wi J/ J Bonestroo ROsene Andertlk & IvJl Associates Engineers & ArchItecU III lucirn-. 1IV i i 3 1 I EXHIBIT O 2335 West Highwiiy 36 • St Pmjl. MN 55113 Office: 651-636-4600 • Fax: 65I-636-I3II www.bonestroo.com p. 1 I. J. January 11, 2005 Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Senior Planning Coordinator City of Orono Post OfTice Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re; Sugarwoods Office Center File No. 139-05-000 Plat No. 05-3080 DearMike. ' ^rno w^nll! ^0 proposed Sugarwoods Office Center. The site is located just ^ Woods Phase 1 m the northwest quadrant of Wayzata Boulevard (T.H. 12) and North Brown engteen^“> Tramc: The propos^ parking lot and access road layout generates several concerns. The site has very httle snow stora^ The applicant should show how medium to larger delivery and garbage tmeSS rnr»?n J"r P‘“" ^e Submitted to the fire marshafto review hydrant bcations and fue vehicle access. It would be preferable that a 50 foot long landing at a maximum or>»/! grade be provided at the base of the access road. Stop signs should be installed for vehicles exiting the poking lot to the short service road to Highway 12. A geotechnical report with pavement section ^rniTdluher." for review. All strecu and parking areas shall have B618 concrete Se proposed parking lot is to be constructed near the existing retaining wall along portiors of tl c site. The existing wall is constructed of timber and appears to be in disrepair in several legations Tlie plans propose to repine the existing wall. All retaining walls over 4-feet in height require an engiiKWttl design Md details. The applicant will be responsible for obtaining any easements necS^vto recimstmcl the rolammg wall and grading along the north and cast property lines Fmergenev route. Overland a .ergency overfiow points should be a minimum of one foot lower than he upstreiSn uilding 8 lowc.st opening. All silt fence rau.st be in place prior to any grading activity Inc anplicHnt should provide an overall site plan showing building elevations ohhe adjacent p^erties sll the City cun evaluate building heights and appearance from the ea.st and south. The applicimt should provide the Cty with the project S WPPP for the Phase II Construction Site Permit and a L^if the N^ce of Siteol d'^-tails° “"‘I sediment Sons sT/ “ “"d inlet protection, stockpilelocations, silt fence maintenance requirements, construction entrances, and any other issues rclatme to erosion and sediment cortrol should be clearly shown on the final plans: The final idemiS i.Jsucr"*' «"K>neering contact person regarding erosion and sediment control m“ku are.a map and storm sewer calculations should be provided for our review Plan.s should be submitted to the .Minnehaha Creek V/alerslicd District for their review, --he applicant should ______________St f aul. St -loud. Boch( stcT. U/ill.’Ti.-ir. MN • Mrlwaukce. Wl • Chicago. IL ^0 AffHm«ilvv Adion/Cqs'^l Opportuntfy employer mnd employee Owned J«n li£ iiUUb 8:a&BOriESTROO R0SEI1E RNOERLIK 6516361311 p.2 provide evidence that the downstream stoi m sewer has the capacity to serve the new proposed use. There should be a catch basin added to the west of CB 11 to reduce drainage across the parking lut at the low point 4. Utilities: The horizontal and vertical aligiuner.t of the sanitary sewer between the existing manhole and MH 1 needs to be revised. The new sanitary sewer grade should not exceed 1% and should enter the existing manhole closer to 90 degrees from the out going pipe to the east A drop manhole upstream of the existing line seems to be the preferred solution. Sanitary sewer services arc not allowed to enter manholes as shown at MH 3. The applicant will be responsible for obtaining permits related to t)>e connection to the existing sanitary sewer manhole located within the Miimesota Department of Transportation right-of-way. The sanitary sewer must be located at least 18 inches below the existing water main at their crossings. The City should be notified prior to connections being made to exi.-:ting utilities. The proposed water main coruiections shall be by cutting in a tee, no wet taps are permitted. Final plans should include utility plan and profile vi;;ws. Hydrants should be located at all dead end lines and at all high points. 5. Easements: The proposed easement vacations appear appropriate. New utility easements will need to be provided for all constructed water main, sanitary and storm sewer. Drainage casemeiits should be provided across any existing or proposed drainage ways. Drainage and utility easements should be provided 10-feet wide along all common lot lines. All of the lots encroach into the backyard drainage ways and some cover utility lines. There are also no casements provided along lot lines. The lot dimensions should be evised or casements provided os described above. 6. Financial Guarantee: When the final plans arc completed we will prepare an estimated cost for site improvements to determine the amount of financial guarantee required. 7. Miacellaneous: City standard deuiils must be used for this project. The handicap access to the lower le> of the buildings approaches 400’ in length. The city should review and comment on the length of this access. Please contact me at (65 1) 604-4863 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg cc: Oreg Gappa. City of Orono V •>.. V EXHIBIT P January 10,2005 > * ;d/). ^ITY OP O/VqJN(j To: CityofOrono Planning Commission Attn: Michael B. Gaffron RE: #05-3080 Interspace-West, Inc. 2060 Wayzata Blvd. Since we are unable to attend the January 18"' meeting regarding the above planned project we are submitting in writing our concerns to you. 1. As Sugar Woods homeowners (2106 Sugar Woods Drive) wc are stro.igly against Interspace-West using our neighborhood name for its office complex name, regardless of how tl. 7 spell it. Whether the use is to enhance their project or to identify with this area, the olTice complex has no relationship in any way to the Sugar Woods neighborhood, nor do we want or need the implication of an oflice connection. 2. We also trust that you will determine that the overall size of this office complex, that is, the number of buildings, the height of each building mainly the “Loft ” height, the square footage, the parking spaces per unit and. non-obtrusive lighting to the neighborhood are all conducive with the nature of the Orono community Plea.se advi.se us of the next meeting regarding tliis project as we hope we will be able to attend. Thank you. ? r f ^ I Richard and Evelyn Schommer Residents at 2106 Sugar Woods Drive Oreno, .Minnesota 55356 RUNDMr . tJ/l7/.lK)4 1* MIHI272I0002 I’KOPADDH 2l(i0 WAYZAIA BLVIJ W OWNUK NAMI. WII.UAM W WI.AR & WII C taapaylr william w wear NAMI7ADDR 2160 WAYZATA DLVD »30(i LONG LAKE MN 65356 3li 34II8232IOOI8 I’ROPAUDR 7103 SUGAR WOOD OR OWNER NAME T WINKEY 4 1. WINKEY rAXI'AY LR TRAVIS & USA WINKEY NAMUADDR 2103 SUGARW(X3U DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 3411823710022 PROPADDR 2104 SDGARWOOO OR OWNER NAME E S KOOKY & A M CHAEOUI.IAS 1AXPAYER EREDERICK S KOIJRY NAMDADDR ANN M CHAEOUI.IAS 2104 SUGARW(X)U DR U3NGLAKEMN 55356 38 341 1823210025 PROPADDR 7110 SUGARW(K)0 DR OWNER NAME C E MILCUSNIC 4 M MIIEUSNIC TAXPAYER GEORGE E 4 MARILYN MIU 'J.SNir NAME/ADDR 2110 SOGARWOOD OR LONGIAKEMN 55356 38 34IIB732I0028 PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSIONEO OWNER NAME SUGAR WO(3DS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC TAXPAYER SUGAR WOODS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC NAME/ADOR C«) RICHARD APPI I 7101 SOGARWOOOS OR ORONOMN 55356 38 3411823210035 PROP AOOR 2060 WAYZATA BLVD W OWNER NAME UNROD ASSOCIATES U.C TAXPAYER UNROB ASSfK IATFS LLC NAME/ADOR CTO ROBERT2 POSTER ESQ 2855 ANTHONY LA «20l STAmHONYMN 5541 • HrNNI.IMN COUNTY PRON lU Y INIOUMA I ION SYS I I M PROI^LRTYOWNLUS LIST 3X 34IIH2V2IOOI6 l*KOI*AI)l)K 210/ SUGARWCK)D l>K OWNLKNAMfi TJAVASMIIH TAXPAYr.R THOMAS J SMITH NAMIMUDR 2107 SUGARWCX)D DR lONGLAKRMN 55356 3K I4II82I7IOOI9 PROPADDR 2101 SUGAHWOOD DR OWNF.RNAME RICHARD J & CONNIE L APPLE I AXPAYER RICHARD J & CONNIE APPLE NAMI7ADDR 2101 SUCARWOOO DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 3411873210021 PROPADDR 2106 SUGAR WOOD DR OWNER name R M SCHOMMER S^iiM SCMOMMER I AXPAYER R M SCHOMMER A E M SCHOMMER NAML/ADDR 2106 SUGAR WOOD DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 PROP ADDR 38 341187)210026 2112 SUGAR WOOD DR OWNER NAME K G BERG & K M D BERG TAXPAYER NAMP/ADDR KCiBERGAKMDl.ERG 2112 SUGAR WOOD DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 341I8232IOOMI PROPADDR 38 ADDRESS UNASSKiNID OWNl R NAM! SUGAR WCK)DS HOMI OWNERS ASSOC SUGAR W(K)DS HOMEUW NERS ASSOC (YO REBEKS CONS IRUC' I ION CO 3525 WEBSTER AVL MPLSMN 55416 TAXPAYER NAMDADDR 38 3411823710036 PROP ADDR 2040 WAYZATA lU VD W OWNER NAME ORONO HSG A KDVIPI ATHY TAXP • YER ORONO HSG A RUVITT Al MY NAMDADDR 2750 KELLEY PKWY ORONOMN 55356 38 341187)21001/ PROP ADDR 2105 SUGARWOt»D DR OWNER NAME THOMAS J A VIRGINIA A SMITH TAXPAYER THOMAS J A VIRCi'MA A SMIl M NAME/ADDR 2105 SUGARWOOD DR LONC'iLAKI MN 55356 38 '«II8232I002I PROPADDR 2102 SUGARWOOD DR OWNER NAME T M I IMMES A A E KIMMES TAXPAYER TODD M A ANITA E KIMMES NAME/ADDR 2107 SUGARWOOD DR LONGL. KCMN N5156 38 34II87J2I0024 PROPADDR 2108 SUGARWOOD DR OWNER NAME M L RICKS A J M RICKS TAXPAYER MICHAEL 12JACOOCLINE M RICKS NAME2ADDR 2108 SUGARWOOD DR LONG LAKE MN 55)56 38 3411823710027 PROPADDR 2114 SUGARWOOD DR OWNER NAME G J SYMINGTON/G T SYMINGTON TAXPAYER GINGER A GARY SYMINGTON JR NAMF7ADDR 2IHSUG/ /OOD DR lONGl-^KEMN 5 5356 18 3411823?10033 PROP ADDR 71^0 WAYZATA BLVD W OWNER NAME GREEN VALLEY ASSOCIATES INC TAXPAYER GREEN VALLEY ASSCKUATES INC NAME/ADDR 1*0 BOX 800 2190 WAYZATA DLVD W lONGlJ^KEMN 55356 38 341 18;37200 1 5 PROPADDR 38 Al^DRESS UNASSIGNEU OWNI RNAML CALOriLN TAXPAYER CUrrORO A LOUISE OFTEN NAMF/ADDR BOX 249 LONG LAKE MN 55356 PAGE I •. fc ^> ' - ■; t- . i Vi •l V I .1 I • 6-* 1-’. .‘'■ V . ‘■“-•A*:'< tO •t;4; ; r I ■ RUN DATE: 12/17/3D04 }8 3411822220020 PROP AOOR 38 ADDRESS UNASSICNEO OWNER NAME C&LOTTEN TAXPAYER CUFTORI) & LOUISE OTIEN NAME/ADDR BOX 249 IX)NGLAKEMN 553!6 72 3411823240026 PROPADDR S4S VIRGINIA AVE OWNER NAME D CREAR £ M B CREAK TAXPAYER dan CREAR NAME/ADOR I9*'> SPATES AVE W YZATAMN J539I 72 3411823240039 PROP ADDR 2045 WAYZATA DLVD W OWNER NAME i £ M INVESTMENTS TAXPAYER J£M INVESTMENTS NAME/ADDR W41 KINOSVIEW LA N MAPLE GROVE MN 55311 72 3411873240067 PROPADDR I PREMIER DR OWNER NAME RIR HOLDINGS CO INC TAXPAYER R3R HOLDINGS CO INC NAML/ADDK I PREMIER DR lONGI>KEMN 55356 HENNEI IN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPIiRTY OWNERS LIST PAGE: 1 38 34II8232400JI PROPADDR 2120 WAYZATA REVO W OWNER NAME WIU.IAM WEAK ETAI. TAXPAYER WILUAM W WEAR NAME/ADDR 36 HACXBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55356 7? 3411823240025 PROPADDR 2045 WAY/AIABI.VDW OWNI.RNAME DCRLAR&MBCRF.AR TAXPAYC. dan CREAR NAME/ADDR 1980 SPATtS AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 72 3411823240027 PROP ADDR 535 VIRGINIA AVF. OWNER NAME KEITH D MILLER TAXPAYER KEITH D MILLER NAME/ADDR 535 ’ IROINIA AVE LONl i LAKE MN 55356 72 3411823240036 PROP ADDR 2069 WAYZAl A BLVD W OWNER NAME HIRAM ENTERPRISES LLC TAXPAYER HIRAM ENTERPRISF.S LLC NAMI7ADDR :865 WATERTOWN RD U3NGLAKEMN 55356 72 3411823240040 PROPADDR 2065 WAYZATA BLVDW OWNER NAME IKLGRODPliC TAXPAYER IKEGROUP Lie NAME/ADDR '7413 303RD AVE PRINCETON MN 55371 V 3411823240052 PROPADDR 2085 DANIELS ST OWNER NAME QPN LLC ET AL TAXPAYER QPN LLC NAME ADDR OO JIIX A IIL'NZ 7272 32NDSTSE BUFFAIX)MN 55: 3 72 34118232*0068 PROPADDR 2073 WAYZATA BLVDW OWNER NAME FORD CUFF UC TAXPAYER ML LONG lAKE UC NAME/ADDR -MX) HOLLY lANt N *100 PL3MOUTHMN 55447 72 3411823240069 PROP ADDR 509 SHAUGHNFSSY AVE OWNf RNAME FORD CUFF UC T/5XPAYER ML IjONG LAKE LLC NAMI7ADDR 3600 HOUY LANE F *100 PLYMOUTH MN 55447 I CERTHY THAT lUl: I'ACIS RI PRESl-NTEU ARiv AN ACCURATE AND TRUE Rl PRESFJ4TATIONOF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS TICS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF HIE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT.^ JHE BEST ^ OFMYKNOWU^DGEANDBEUEF W ''jDATL»r/iiZr/by / ^10 OS-3080INTERSPACE-WKST, INC, 2060 WAVZATA BOULEVARD - PUD AMENDMENT, FINAL PLAT, 9:01 p.m. -10:16 p.m. Gina Carlson, Interspace, Philip Carlson, Interspace, and Dan I .arson, Engineer, were present. Oundlach the applicant is requesting a B>6 PUD General Concept Plan approval, preliminary plat approval, commercial site plan approval, and casement vacations in order to construct 20 units of office condominiums on 10 lots and one common lot to be known as Sugarwoods Office Center. The property consists of 2.6 acres and is located ju.st west of the Orono Woods Senior Housing Development. The proposed condos will be two-story walkouts containing approximately 34,186 sqiiprc feel of gross square footage. Each building will contain a walkout level, a main floor level, and a second story mezzanine. Gundlach indicated approval of this project first requires general concept plan approval, preliminar/ plat approval and commercial site plan approval, followed by general development plan, ea.sement vacation, and final plat approvals and an amendment to PUD Agreement No. 2A. Gundlach noted in tlie spring of 2003 an office-condo development was proposed fur the site, witli a site layout that included buildings with south and east-facing walkouts. While that plan was generally looked upon favorably by the Planning Commission and Council, the applicants ultimately concluded tliey could not reduce the number of uni& or square footage in order to meet the parking stall minimums established for their proposed use. Gundlach stated the proposed plan does comply with the goals of tlie Community Management Plan and Comprehensive Plan. TItc proposal meets the requirements for lot area, lot width, and setback requirements. Tlie applicant also complies witli building hciglit regulations. Gundlach noted the applicant would be lowering the site four to eight feet with some cuts as large as 10 to 15 fed. The site will be lowered overall and carved out in the rear to create a walkout situation. In addition, berming nnd retaining walls arc proposed for the north end to lessen the impacts of adjoining neighbors. The applicants have proposed 103 parking stalls, which is in compliance with the 3.5 stalls |)ci 1000 square feet recommended by die City Engineer and planning consultant. Gundlach noted this is not the actual regubition in the City’s current zoning ordinance, which does not uddi css this type of use. F-V .. Gundlach indicated all stormwater will be collected via catch basins and transported via underground storm sewers to the existing storm sewer system serving the Orono Woods senior housing site, discharging to the existing NURl* pond located at the nortliwest comer of Brown Road North and existing Highway 12. Access to the site consists of a shared right-in/right*out driveway access directly to Highway 12 and a shared driveway access eastward tlu*ough the Orono Woods site to Brown Road North. The applicant has submitted proposed exterior finish materials consisting of a light and dark color stucco material, metal grills affixed directly to the facades, and glass, with an all-metal roof. Stall finds that tliu materials proposed meet the standards established of the B *6 code. Gundlach stated issues for discussion should include the following: 1. Should pedestrian access to Orono Woods and Highway 12 be required. 2. The coimection to Outlot D, Sugarwoods, at the northwest corner of die site, also creates a turn-around at the dead-end portion of the parking lot. Because a service road docs not currently exist, a variance may be required to allow a parking lot encroacliincnt to the 10-foot setback requirement. 3. Is an open space calculation of 39 percent adequate. A. Does tlie aichitccture proposed have a positive impact on tlie landscape. Staff is recommending this application be tabled (o address the seven items outlined in January 18,2005 Planner's Report. Ciundlach noted a landscape plan, signage plan, and a lighting plan must be submitted. Gundlach indicated should the Planning Commission find all the plans to be acceptable with the exception of the lighting, signage, and hnid.scaping plan, a favorable recommendation to the council could he taken, with the seven stipulations being addressed prior to tJic council review or prior to the final plat application. Gina ('arlson addrc.sscd the City Council regarding the proposal, noting that they arc taking the concept of n townhome and turning it into office lownhomes where the (kmsoii would own the building as well as the ground undemcath. Carlson Indicated 10 bulldirip aie proposed lor tliis site, witli tlic potential for 10 difTerent owners. Carlson stated the units arc clustered in two groups of three and one group of four, willi the end units each having their own private stairwell and tlic other uni^ having a shared stairwell. Carlson indicated the project was designed based ott the theory of Feng Shiii, which deals with the natural flow of the land. Carlson stated the site is L-shaped with a curved driveway, with tiic buildings being designed to incorporate the five elements of Feng Shui. Carlson reviewed the proposed design of the buildings, noting that the buildings would consist of stucco, metal, and glass. Carlson stated the back of the site abutting the residential neighborhood would consist of four-foot berm tiers, resulting in a gradual berm, with plantings being proposed for the berm. Rahn asked for public comments. Michael Ricks. 2108 Sugarwood Drive, indicated he did meet with the developers and tliat they have taken into consideration the residential property abutting tiic back of this site. Ricks expressed concern tliat if a lot of dirt is removed from this site, the residential area would be more exposed to Highway 12. Ricks requested the natural height of tlie hilltop be maintained to keep the differentiation between tlie residential neighborhood and the commercial development. Rahn inquired what alterations would be made along the property line. Dan l^son stated the highest point on the properly is 1024*. witli the first floor elevations of the two northern units being 1019* and 1020*. I .arson stated there would be two stories on top of that, which should obstruct the siglit lines to Higliway 12. Mrs. Carlson indicated each floor from floor to ceiling is 10* T\ with the walkout level being below tlio berm. Carlson stated tlie berm would come to approximately mid point on the first main level, with the rest of the building being approximately 15 feet above tlie top level of the berm. Carlson stated the trees would create a barrier between the residential neighboriiood and the buildings. Kalin inquired whether the applicants have had time to address the Issues raised in Staffs report. Mr. Carlson noted they only received the report today due to the holiday. Carlson indicated the lighting, landscaping, and signage plans are almost complete and should be completed by the end of tlie week. Carlson stated they would prefer this application not be tabled. Ralui inquired whether the Planning Commission could give it preliminary approval without those items. Oaffron stated since this application will appear before the Planning Commission once final plans arc submitted, the Planning Commission could make a recommendation to the Council. GafTron indicated the Planning Commission could give general concept approval to the plan. Winkey inquired whether the concept of purchasing office space has been done elsewhere. Winkcy inquired whether these units would be purchased by someone and then subleased out. Mr. Carlson stated to their knowledge this is a new concept and is not being done elsewhere. Carlson indicated tlie opportunity to own the ofRce townhome and land is a great selling point. Winkey noted based on the footprint, Uicse buildings are being marketed to small businesses. Mr. Carlson stated they are also marketing investors who might be interested in purchasing the building and then sublease them out. Winkey inquired whether the applicants are proposing to clear the entire site prior to knowing whether the buildings will be sold. Mr. Carlson stated it is their intent to have a couple of the buildings sold prior to clearing the site. Mrs. Carlson pointed out the site needs to be cleared in order to construct the road and install the utilities. Mr. Carlson commented they are not worried about selling the buildings. Gaffron noted all vegetation on this site would be removed due to the grading ol'thc site except for the northeast comer. Winkey stated the total clearing of the site is one of his concerns, noting that tlie vegetation on die site at die present time does provide some shelter to the residential area located to the back of diis site. Winkey indicated he has a concern with this development using the name of Sugarwoods and the likelihood of people confusing the entry off of Brown Road and going into the residential neighborhood rather than the office development. Winkey noted Sugarwoods does not have much traffic currently and tliat there is a large number of young children who reside in the neighborhood. Winkey inquired whether die developers would be willing to consider renaming this development. I . > Mrs. Carlson indicated they have already been marketing this development under the name of Sugarwoods. Mr. Carlson stated they do have a lot of costs associated with the printing of the brochures and marketing of the development. Winkey noted the concern with using the Sugarwoods name was expressed at the very beginning. Mr. Carlson noted it was approximately two weeks ago that they had their first meeting with staff concerning this proposal. Winkey commented he does like the appearance of the buildings but that he does have a concern with the name and the clear-cutting of this site in advance of selling any of the buildings. Winkey inquired whether the top of the berm is 1024’. Mr. Carlson stated it is. Winkey inquired whether that elevation would be maintained. Mr. Carlson stated it would. GaHron stated since a portion of the access is through the senior housing development, one option might be to post a sign at that entrance stating that it is the Sugarwoods Office Center. Winkey pointed out the senior housing development can also be accessed off of Brown Road, which is approximately 15 feet from the entrance into the Sugarwoods residential area. Mr. Carlson pointed out the majority of their signage would be located along Highway 12 and their address would be Wayzata Boulevard. Leslie commented he is having a hard time envisioning this project from the street and that it appears the view from the street will be one of a lot of rooflines. Leslie stated he would like to see an elevation view of tile entire development from tlie street. Leslie stated he has a concern that there will be a wave of metal buildings from the street and how that might impact the planning for the old Highway 12 corridor. I Mrs. Carlson stated the buildings toward the rear of the property would not be visible from tiie street and that tiie elevation at the road is 995* and 1010* at the entrance to the property. I. Mr. Carlson indicated the majority of what would be seen from Highway 12 would be the landscaping and the monument sign. Mrs. Carlson illustrated on the architectural drawing the portions of the building that would be visible from Highway 12, noting the front entrance and glass stairwell would be the portion most visible. Jurgens inquired what color schemes were planned for the roofs. Mrs. Carlson slated the roofs would bo an earth tone and not a shiny metal. Carlson indicated the exact color selections have not been determined at this time. Richard Apple, 2101 Sugarwoods Drive, indicated he also has the same concerns expressed by Commissioner Winkey with the use of the name Sugarwoods and the amount of traffic that could mistakenly turn into tlte residential area. Apple stated in light of the amount of money being spent to develop this project, the brochures could be changed to reflect a new name. Apple inquired about the parking requirements for this development. Gundlach indicated the parking standards adopted in the City’s zoning ordinance were adopted in approximately 1974 and it uses a general office designation. Gundlach stated due to the number of office condo developments that have been constructed, the parking requirements arc fairly well understood and the city’s planning consultant determined that 3.S parking stalls are needed per 1000 square feet. Apple inquired about the maintenance of these buildings since they will be independently owned. Mrs. Carlson indicated there would be an office owners association that dictates that the buildings remain uniform and retain their original color scheme. Carlson stated tlie roofs would be similar to those on the city office buildings. Winkey noted the parking standards were based on the fact that there would not be a medical clinic or other higli trairic use located on this site. Winkey inquired whether tliose types of businesses would be restricted from owning one of the units. Gundlach stated when it was originally zone R-6 RPUD, the parking requirements were reviewed in relation to a medical ofnee since that is what was originally proposed, and it was determined that the site could handle the traffic generated by a medical office. Gundlach stated if the businesses located in this development are not primarily medical, the consultant felt the amount of traffic generated would be less. Gaffron stated the justification for the 3.5 stalls rather than 5 per 1000 square feet is tliat the site is not conducive to retail and that the primary business would not be a medical ofFice. Gaffron stated to his knowledge the types of businesses Uiat would be located in this development would typically not generate many visitors to the building. I Winkey inquired whether there would be restrictions on medical busines^s. Gaffron stated that probably is an office management issue but that the City should look into that issue further. Gaffron stated he is unsure whether the City can identify the types of businesses that would generate more traffic and parking needs. Mr. Carlson stated they are expecting that this type of concept would attract professionals rather than telemarketers or similar types of businesses. Winkey stated that docs not address tlie issue of a number of doctors coming in and purchasing one or more of the buildings. Mr. Carlson stated they are not planning on having a medical office park but that there is the possibility that a chiropractor would be interested in owning one of these buildings. Carlson indicated tlicy would need to look at the parking requirements for a particular business prior to purchase. Gaffron inquired whether the developer would have any control over resale. Mrs. Carlson stated tlic office townhome association would have control over resale and that their attorney is in the process of drafting up the necessary paperwork to address these types of issues. Gaffron suggested that it might be useful if the Planning Comnii.ssion reviewed the association's covenants and restrictions. Le.slie inquired whether a certain number of parking stalls would be assigned per unit or whether it would be general parking. Mrs. Carlson indicated they were thinking it would be general parking in oMcr to keep the handicap stalls available for tlie lower units. # Leslie suggested considering assigning a certain number of stalls to each building. Mr. Carlson indicated they would consider assigning a certain number of parking stalls to each tenant but that he would like to avoid erecting a number of signs designating the assigned parking. Apple commented one of the problems with assigned parking is that the customers are not aware of the parking restrictions. Mrs. Carlson pointed out that the ofllce space has not been designed to accommodate a large volume of people. Jac(|ueline Ricks, 2108 Sugarwuod Drive, expressed a concern regarding the clear-cutting of the lot and the possibility that these units may not be sold as well as the lunited amount of parking available for this ofTlce development. Ricks staled .she also has a concern with the removal of trees near tlie residential area and how that would impact Uieir visibility of Highway 12. Rahn inquired who at the city reviews the parking issues. GatTron indicated the City has employed Shelly Juliiusoii from Boncstroo 8c Associates, who is very familiar with the parking needs for this type of use. Gaffron stated anotlicr consultant employed by the City was Wally Case with DSU. Gaffron indicated both consultants arrived at 3.5 parking stalls per 1000 square feet. Gaffron stated since tlie City docs not have a history of this type of use that they can look at to determine tlie parking needs of this site, they have employed the services of Uic consultants. Gaffron slated it is difTicult to determine the paiking requirements for this type of u.sc since the businesses located within the development would vary. Fritzter commented he likes Uic conceptual design of the buildings, but that he has a concern witli the policing of the tenants tlmt purchase tlicsc buildings. Mr. Carlson .staled that would be one of the things Uiat would need to be addressed in their covenants. Fritzicr recommended that the association's covenants be very clear conceiuing tlie criteria that tlie tenants would need to comply with. GalTron stated tlie City's zoning code for business districts is outdated in terms of listing uses. CaiTron slated one option would be to bring before the Planning Commission the businesses llial are interested in r ----- purchasing one of these lots but noted that option may become time-consuming if there is a high amount of turnover. Gsffron siated he is unsure whether the City wants to be involved in who is allowed to be a tenant in tliis development once the project has been approved. Fritzler commented in his view the City should not be involved in that type of review process. Fritzlcr expressed a concern that if there is a high number of unoccupied buildings, the homeowner's association may approve tenants that are not ideally suited for this type of development. Rahn requested that the association ’s covenants be submitted to the City for review. Jurgens pointed out the association ’s covenants will dictate what happens on this site in the future and that the City should review that prior to final approval. Bremer indicated she has a concern regarding the clear-cutting of the site and the potential that these units will remain unsold for a period of time. Bremer stated she would like to sec some analysis or research showing that this is a marketable concept. Bremer commented she would like to see this project be successful but that she would like some reassurance that there is a market for this typo of development. Mrs. Carlson stated they have looked at that issue, noting that they did look at I^ng I .akc’s Comprehensive Plan and other oCtico developments along 394. Carlson indicated their last project was fully leased prior to completion of construction. Carlson stated they are hopeful that this project would be completed within two to three years. Bremer inquired whether the buildings would be constructed separately or in groups. Mr. Carlson stated they would be constructing more than one building at a time due to the shared stairwell as well as to keep costs down on the project. Winkey inquired whether the applicant has any marketing studies concerning this type of concept and tlie viability of the project. Mr. Carlson noted condominiums are a hot marketing concept at the present time in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area as well as the suburbs. GalTroii requested tlic Planning Commission address additional screening between the office park and the residential neighborhood. Gaffron noted it is not possible to accomplish that additional screening on this site, but that the applicants should give some consideration to the option of providing additional screening within the Sugarwoods outlot. Gaffron indicated another concern deals with the retaining walls that range from one foot to six feet right up against the property line. GalTron noted there is not room to screen those walls and that the Planning Commission should discuss whether screening is necessary in that area. Rahn stated he would like to see an elevation view of both of those areas as well as the landscaping plan. which could be done prior to final plat approval. Rahn indicated he is not willing to approve anything at this point that mentions the words building permit. Gundlach stated that language is based on the commercial site plan regulation for the B-l District. Gaffron noted final plat drawings would show the individual building puds. Rahn inquired whether the Planning Commission would need to approve or deny all four items listed in the January 18,2005 Planner’s Report. Gaffron stated they would be acting on all four items. Rahn noted the applicants have indicated that diey feel tlie outstanding items can be addressed in a relatively short time. Kahn indicated he is not opposed to moving this forward to the council for their input, noting that this plan would come back before die Piaiming Commission for final plat approval. Kali'i recommended submittal ofthe association’s covenants also be made a condition of approval. Apple inquired what action would be taken on die use of the name Sugai*woods and the potential for additional traffic to be generated into the residential neighborhood. Rahn recommended the Sugarwoods homeowners attend the City Council meeting and voice their concerns. Rahn stated he is unsure what power the Planning Commission has over the name of the project. Bremer stated die Planning Commission could require certain signage. Gaffron stated since this is a PUD, the Couucil could possibly request that die name be changed if they feel it is a big enough issue. Rahn moved, Leslie seconded, to recommend approval of AppllcatioD B-6 PUD general concept plan approval, preliminary plat approval in order to create 10 unit lots and one common .i lot> coniMrdftl tile plan approval ia order to obtain a bnUdlng, and Eaaeoicnt Vacations in co^Jnnctlon with dedication of new easements, for the property located at 2060 Wayzata Boulevard West, subject to the conditions ontlined in the January 18,200S Planner’s Report being addressed # prior to the Council meeting, and further subject to elevation views and the homeowners association covenants being submitted by the applicant. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Application Submitted: December 22,2004 Incomplete Letter: January 4,200S Application Complete: January 10,2005 60>Day Review Eipiratlon (Site PUn): March 11,2005 120 Day Review Expiration (Subdivixion): May 20. 2005 FEB 1 4 2005 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO Date: February 10, 2005 Item No.: 8 Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Planning Director Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #05-3081 “Stonebay Lofts'’ - Oiitlol E. STONEBAY (“2670 Kelley Parkway ”) 1) RPUD Amendment / Site Pian & Building Plan Approval 2) Final Plat Approval Zoning District: Lot Area: RPUD 2.55 Acres Gross; Approx. 2.50 acres excluding wetland Summary of Request Applicants request an amendment of the Stonebay RPUD for changes to the owner-occupied condominium (“Lofts”) building and site plan, requesting final site plan and building plan approvals as well as final plat approval forOutlot E(now to also include a small portion of Outlot F) as a single 2.5 acre lot for the condominium building. This site was originally approved for a 62-unit condominium in January 2003. The approved plans had included 2 separated buildings connected by an underground parking area. A plan for a single 62-unit building was reviewed for Jolm Temmce Homes by the Planning Commission in October 2004. Tliat plan did not proceed to the Council for review, at the request ofthe applicant. Since then, ZB Construction (Amie Zachman) has efiected a purchase agreement for the property, and proposes to construct a single building similar to the single 3-story building proposal Planning Commission reviewed last October; However, pursuant to the Planning Commission’s January recommendations, the current applicant has reduced the building in length by 48' and reduced from 62 units to 57 units. Properly Owner: ZB Construction, Inc. - Arnie Zachman (purchase agreement with John Terrance Homes LLC) Planncr/Eiigincer: Laiulfonii Architect: Bnicc Lchrcr Staff Recommendation: Council should review the Planning Commission recommendation (see IkIow) and detemhne whether Council agrees with the Planning Commission’s conclusions. If so, tlicn direction to slalTto draft a resolution for Amendment to General Development Plan Approval and Final Plat Approval would be in order, for consideration and adoption at your February 28 meeting. A Developers Agreement between ZB Constmetion and the City will also be drafted for approval I »OS-308I Sfonebay Lofts February 10.200S PaRcI l^ist of Exhibits A - Notice of Planning Commission Action 1-31-05 B - Draft Minutes of 2-2-05 PC Work Session and January 18 PC Meeting C - Updated Preliminary Plat Drawing (Now Includes Portion of Slonebay Oullot I^) D - Revised Plans - Revised Final Plat Drawing - Revised Site Plan sliccts: CO. / - Title Shed CI.J - Kxistin^ Conditions C2. / - Site Plan C3.1 - Grading Plan C4. / - Driveway Plan and Profile L2. / - Preliminary Landscape Plan - Revised Building Plan sheets: A~2: building T’loor Plans A-3: Building Elevation Views li - PC Memos and lixfiibits of 1-28-05 and 1-13-05 Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission recommends approval of the site plan and building plans, subject to the following findings and/or conditions: I) Applicant to submit final grading and drainage plans satisfactory to the City lingineer. 2) Applicant & City to review the need for additional sidewalks around the building for emergency access and general pedestrian circulation. 3) Applicant to submit signage and lighting plans. 4) Subiect to Fure Marshal review; determine whetlier any existing codes would prohibit or limit grilling on the individual unit decks. 5) hxterior elements and linislics to be consistent with applicant ’s description and sample.s as presented. Applicant to submit landscaping plan. All above to be su!)mitted by l-ebruary 7 to allow for review prior to I’ebriuay 14 Council meeting. Planning ( omniission concluded it does not need further review of this application as long as the above conditions arc met and the statt, lingineer and I*ire Marshal concerns are satisfied. #05-3081 Sloncbay Lofts February 10. 2005 I*agc3 Review of Current Proposal A. General Building Location and Design Chaimcs (Compared to 2002 Approvals) The current proposal by applicant’s architect Bruce Ixhrcr includes many of the elements of a plan reviewed by the Planning Commission in October 2004, but also incoiporates a numberof design revisions that were suggested during the October review and the more recent January review. Note that: 1) Building Length. Bui and Massing . The original approval was for two buildings connected only by the underground parking level, with a lemice level providing significant separation between the two buildings. The current plan connects the two wings above ground. What originally ap(rearcd as two separated perpendicular buildings will now appear as a single L-shaped building. To address the Planning Commission ’s comments about reducing the perceived building height and massing, the applicant has redesigned the building as follows: a) the profileoftlie soutlieni facade has been reduced to two levels at the west and east ends, varying peak heights have been added to break up the length, and vertical porcli/deck bumpouts are incorporated to provide an additional measure of visual relief; and b) the south wing has been shortened by 48 feet, reducing the project from 62 units to 57 units; the entire building has shi fled slightly westward on the site but still leaving a 118' setback to die Public Works site, which is much better than the 80' originally approved. Total building length parallel to Kelley Parkway is now 327'. Planning Commission has concluded that the above elements, plus the facade asymmetry and the variety of stone vs. stucco panel faces are sufficient to reduce the visual massing. 2) Building Height. Higliest building peak height, at elev. 107r,isslightlyhiglicrthanthc 106? peak originally approved in 2002, due in pail to the use of 9' ceilings and in part to site drainage considerations that required the lowest lloor elevation be raised 3 feet. rhecuiTcnt plan’s highest individual peak is 3 feet lower than thecontiiuious peak reviewed in October. 1 he plan tioes meet the 38' height limit established in the onginal approval, measured from the high side final grade to the average ol the highest gable, fhe 12/12 roof pitches give the building a residential character and reduce the blockincss oftlie originally approved building. Planning Commission concluded that the height as proposed is acceptable. 3) Parking. The garage level now hasasinglecntrance/exit point, at the cast end of the building. A lower- level party room, patio, and hot tub room have been incoipoi ated at the interior comer of the garage level, reducing the nuniberorintcriorparkingstalls. Requned parking reduces to 112 stalls(2.0 stalls per unit required x 56 units excluding the guest unit), of which 82 arc provided in the underground parking, 23 are in the outside dedicated parking lot, and 7 arc in the adjacent street parallel parking, for a total of 112 stalls. While the City liiigineer has recommended that a second garage access be added, the Fire Marshal has indicated there is no code requirement for a second entrance. «0S>3081 Stoncbay Lofts February 10,2005 Face 4 Buildiiifi Materials. The soulli- and casl-facing building facades arc depicted in Plan Sheet A-2, showing 40-60% coverage by two ty|Ks oftextured cultured stone (applicaitUo confirm that the south facade porch bumpouts are a different stone than the remainder ofthe huUdinfi stone - applicant to have samples aimlable for the meetinf>) with the balance to be of fiber cement stucco panel siding (James I lardi products). Soflil, fascia and Uiin will be maintenance free prc-fini.shcd metal, shingles will be commercial grade asphalt shadow line (PlanningCommission and staff s expectation is that these will be the laminated, raised textured shadow line, not the painted shadow line) iuid windows lu e pro|K)sed ius pre-linished metal clad wikm I ‘single hung’ (my assumption is that these are casements or sliders) divided and shaped as shown on Sheet A-2. Applicant is aware of the City ’s past issues with the post-approval design changes that went on with the Stonebay 2-slory townhomes. 'fhe City’s expectation and requirement will be to include aJJ ofdic detail elements as .shown on the renderings and elevation views, in the final building construction. i Visual nieinent.s. The architectural renderings show basically two window styles used througlioul the building - a larger picture window system with ai\»led upper comers, and single, double or triple windows with a vertically divided upper hair. icsc window elements add to the character and visual acceptability of the design. The main entrance features pillars and a half-moon leature. Gable ends each ap|x;ar to include a louvered panel feature. The variation in design elements, such as bump-outs, offset gables, varied levels ofstone versus siding, along the length of the building should help to decrease the perception of length. FoundationGrading, Retaining Walls, 'fhe applicants have propo.scd to grade 3:1 or flatter slopes along the north wall of the west wing and the northerly 3 sides of the north wing, rather than using retaining walls per prior plans. 'Hiis will involve .some filling within the 26’ wetland .setback where no fill is normally allowed, and filling within the MCWD’s buffer; however, there is no fill propo.sed in the wetland it.sclf. 'Ilie building tbotprint and balconies will not encroach cither Orono’s .setback or M( ’WD’s buffer. 'I his filling was anticipated during the earlier PUD approvals, and is acceptable subject to returning it to a vegetated state after construction is completed. Priorplans for this site have propo.scd retaining walls to provide fora building perimeter sidewalk and individual unit direct accc.ss to grade. Thccurrcnl propo.sal will not provide accc.ss to grade from the first story balconies. Retaining wal Is are proposed in the area of the garage entrance. The City Ihigineer notes that i f any ol the.se walls end up exceeding 4' in height, and a .separate engineered design and detail will be required. fi) Ifgde.striaijjeuh^>n. llie site has been provided with sidewalks as nece.s.sary to provide for lire safetyand toallow easypede.strianacce.ss to the Kelley Parkwaysidewalks. fhe sidewalks on site will have to be maintained in all .seasons forfirc salcty puipose.s. r t #05-3081 Stonebay Loftt February 10,2005 Pages Landscaping. Review of the landscape plan by staffindicates an acceptable level ofplanlings of trees and shrubs. In general, the 37,300 s.f building footprint requires 1 ovcrslory tree per 1,000 s.f. footprint, or 37 sueh trees. At least 30% of required overstory trees must be coniferous. Applicants propose 2 American linden, 6 ash, 4 maple, 7 quaking aspen, 12 white spruce and 6 Japanese larch, plus 10 ornamental trees (which count 2-1 toward the overstory requirement); doing the math, the total reaches 42. The 37,300 s. f. building would also require 124 shrubs as a minimum; this standard is more than met, with approximately 220 slmibs shown on the plan Tlicbcmibetwceti the condo building and the public works site will be heavily plantal with with a mix oftrees, primarily evergreens. The Landscape Plan, Sheet L2.1 , appears to show additional tree plantings that were to be part of the overall Stonebay project, both along Kelley Parkway and onthetopofthewestendbenn. Our assumption is that these berm plantings are still intended; this will have to be clarified, as the planting schedule does not include them. 8)Ligliting. Applicant has verbally indicated the ligliting for this building and this site will be relatively minimal. Prior to Council approval of tlie final development plan, applicant mu.st provide a lighting plan to confirm that all outdoor fixtures are shielded as required by code. 9) Signage. The developer should indicate any identification signage intended for the building, wliich will require Council approval. Site traffic signage is noted on Sheet C2.1. For a more detailed review of the issues considered by the Planning Commission at their January and February meetings, please see the memos of January 13 and January 28, as well as the drafi minutes of the January 18 and February 2 Planning Commission meetings. Engineer*s Comments Applicants have addressed the City Engineer’s comments noted in Tom Kel logg’s letter of January 11 . Review of the most recent plans has generated a question of how will roof drainage be handled - applicant should address this, as the sidewalks and parking areas arc quite close to the building. tin it Types and Mix Sheet A-2 indicates there will be four unit sizes/'styles: 24 units:‘Oakwood’- 1362 s.f. -1+ bedrooms, 2 hath 3 units;‘Birch’- 1549 s.f.-2 bedrooms, 2 baths 18 units:‘Elmwood’- 1591 s.f.-2 bedrooms, 2 baths 11 units:‘Aspen*- 1653 s.f-2 r bedrooms, 1 bath 1 unit: 57 units Guest suite - 1250 sf± Applicants have indicated the starling price range will be in the low .S200s. »0S-3081 Sloncbay Lofts February 10« 200S Pace 6 Final Plat Outlet E was created specifically for the Lx)fls, and must be final platted as a Lot in order for it lo be used as a building site. The final platting process establishes the necessary perimeter drainage and utility easements which were not required of it as an outlet. The required wetland Conservation and Flowagc Easement was established during tlie earlier subdivision approvals, so that need not be required; however, the wetlands will be shown on the new plat drawings. The proposed final plat will include a re-plat of Outlots E and F in order to incorporate the non-wetland area northwest of the building where tlie patio is proposed. This has no impact on the future development of Outlot F (which will now become Outlot A of Stonebay Second Addition) but will ensure that ownership of the common amenities serving the Lofts will he under the control of the Lofts homeowners. This approval process is ftinctionally approval ofPhase 2 ofthe Stonebay residential development. Phase 2 final plat approval will include payment ofpark fees, sewer and water collection fees, and stormwater & drainage trunk fees established within Exhibit M of the PUD 4 Agreement. Is.sues for Consideration Council should review the site plan and buildingplans to identify any specific concerns you believe need to be addressed. As a minimum, Council should address the following: 1. Acceptability ofbuildingconversion from 2 buildings to one - visual impacts, other impacts. Arc the design elements proposed by the developer (in response to Planning Commission’s direction) sufficient to satisfy past concerns regarding building bulk, height, length and massing? 2. Acceptability of proposed building materials and building design. 3. Any other issues of interest or concern. Staff RecommcDdatlon A, I Stairrccommeiuls conceptual approval, subject to satisfaction ofany minor issues noted in this memo. If Council accepts tlie pro|X)scd site tuul building plans, staff will draft a Resolution for General Dcvelopnienl Plan Approval Amendment and F inal Plat Approval for adoption at your February 28 meeting. Tlie project will also result in a new Developers Agreement, between Orono and ZB Construction. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESI Ell Review the proposed Lofts plans and if acceptable, direct staff to draft final approval documents for adoption on February 28. 4 CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE ^04-3081 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: Januaiy 31, 2005 TO:ZB Construction, Inc. - Amie Zaclinian COPIES: Jolin Terrance Homes 10300 10th Avenue North 2500 Kelley Parkway Plymouth, MN 55441 Orono, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: RPUD Site Plan & Final Plat Review DATE OF MEETING: January 18, 2005 Motion: Table to February 2nd Work Session. Vote: 5 111 Favor 1 Against Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: Planning Commission - Wednesday, February 2, 2005; meeting starts at 5:30 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, tliey are available from tlie City Recorder after review and approval by the Council. If you have questions, please contact Planning Director Mike Gaflron at 952-249-4600. :!>'C : V - MINUTES OF THE ORONO Pl.ANNINC COMMISSION WORK SESSION Wednesday, February 2,2005 5:30 p.rii. ROLI. The Commission met in a woi k session on llic above mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Dave Rahil, Commissioners J. Mark l*rit/Jer, Ralph Kempf, Roland Jurgens, and I ravis Winkey. Rc|ircsenlingslatTwcrc Planning Director Mike Gaflion, and Plaiineis Melanie Folh and Janice Waalaja Alternate Commissioner I Jz Hawn was piesent in the audience. Commissioners (.’ynthia Bi cnier and J im Leslie were absent. Chair Rahn called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. (#1) «05-308I /B CONSTRUCTION, INC., Oli l LOT E, STONEBAY (“2d70 KELLEY PARKWAY”) - CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC IIEARINC Rahn noted that this was the time and place for continuation of the public hearing regarding the Stonebay J^fts proposal, fhe applicant, Arne Ziicliman of ZB Constmetion, was present along with his architect, Bmce Lchrcr and engineer, Steve Johnston of Landform. Gatfron brielly intrtKluced the revi.sed plans submitted in rc.spon.se to Plajiiiing C\)mniission comments from the Januaty 18 meeting. Applicant Amie Z^ichman noted that they have reduced the length of the building by 48 feet, leaving a much greater setback to the public works site, and they have reduced the number of units from 62 to 57. Johnston noted they also moved the building 5' fuither hack from the road. Rahn indicated he was plca.scd with the proposed revisions, and had a question regarding the a.sphalt shingles proposed - are they a GAl* style 3 dimensional shingle, or merely a .shadow line. Zaehman noted they arc a 3-dimcnsional shingle. Winkey indicated he felt they did a good job of shoilening the building. It Wiis noted that the reduction did not result in decreased amenities, bu t was ju.st a reduction ol'the live units, b'rit/.lcr questioned the number of handicap parking stalls, which was found to be six. Kahn noted that a revised landscape plan reflecting the shorter building should be submitted, as well as lighting and signmage plans. Johnston noted that the berm between the buihling and the Public Works site had not been relocated, but could beslightlyhighcr with the greater setback. Galfion indicated that mo.st oftheberm was within the applicant’s property and it would be land.scaped to provide a visual barrier. Kempf asked how the porches would be constructed. Z,«ichman noted they would incldeadeckoiione side and a four-.sca.son room on the other. Bach unit would have a small deck. Access to the enclosed porch would be wide open from each unit. Page 1 of 3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION Wednesday, February 2,2005 5:30 p.m. Zachman noted that the exterior materials would include a variety of stone (not brick) per the samples provided at the last meeting. The upper areas not in stone would be a concrete-board ‘Hardi-paneP in a stucco finish, rather than lap siding. He noted an example of useofthis was two new buildings constructed on the west side of Hwy 169 just south of394. Rahn indicated this was a much more stable product than the old masonite paneling. Rahn indicated this was a public hearing and asked forpublic comments on the application. I here were no comments from the public. Gaffron noted the City Engineer and Fire Marshal were reviewing the plans. The Fire Marshal had indicated preliminarily that there was no code requiring a second vehicle entrance to the garage. Gaffron reviewed the City Engineer’s comments with the Commission, and noted that there are no apparent unsolvable issues. Kempf asked how the parking shortage was resolved. Gaffron indicated that the combination of 82 basement stalls, 23 dedicated outside stalls on site, and 7 adjacent street parking stalls added up to 112 stalls or 2.0 per unit for 56 units (excluding the guest unit). Fritzler asked what the deck materials would be. Zachman indicated they decking would be the maintenance-free plastic material that doesn’t stain. Discussion ensued as to whether the City has or should have ordinances regarding grilling on decks for multi-family buildings. Zachman noted this varies from city to city. Gaffron stated there is no zoning restriction in place, but he would have to review this with the building inspector with regards to the fire code. Rahn suggested we discuss tliis furtlier in a work session, as we will have future multi-family projects. Zachman noted that barbecue grill on natural gas will be placed on the lower patio level. Jurgens suggested that the 3' wide path around the back of the building should be wider if possible to provide better emergency access. Ralin noted this would likely be looked at as part of the building plan review. Gaffron described how the steeply sloped grading around the north sides of the bui Iding would make widening the sidewalk more complex, perhaps needing retaining walls. Rahn itulicated that all the .above issues should be addressed by the lime thi.s goes to the Council, c.spccially if the Planning Commission will not have oppoitunity for further review. GalVron reviewed the next steps, which could exclude furUier Planning Commission review if the Commission felt that there was noneetl for their additional review. Rahil moved, Fritzler .seconded, to recommend approval of application ^05-3081 for the Stonebay Lofts, Outlot E, Stoneba:, 2670 Kelley Parkway, for the proposed RPlJI) amcndiiieiit, and site Page 2 of3 ---- MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION Wednesday, February 2,2005 5:30 p.m. plan and building design approval, and final plat approval, conditioned on submittal of plans suitably addressing the concerns of the City Engineer and Fire Marshal, with the exterior elements and flnishvi^ consistent with the elevation drawings provided, submittal of adequate landscaping, signage and lighting plans, provided to s^aff a week prior to the council meeting. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. AMOURNMENT IRahn moved, Jurgens seconded, to adjourn the Planning Commission Work Session at 6:05 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Dave Rahn, Chair Page 3 of 3 ........ MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, January 18,2005 6:00 o'clock p.m. prior (o the Coun^ M meeting, and further subject to elevation views and the homeowners association covenants being submitted by the applicant. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. m 05-3081 ZB CONSIRUCI ION, INC., OUI LOI E, STONEBAY, RPUD AMENDMENT, BUILDING PLAN, FINAL PLAT, 10:17 p.m. - 11:23 p.iii. Arnic Zachman, ZB Constmclion; Bruce Heller, Project M mager ibi Bruce Lchicr Architects; and Steve Johnston, Landforin; were present. CjafTroil addressed the City Council regarding the applicants* rcijucsl for an amendment of the Stonebay RPUD for changes to the owner-occupied condominium building and site plan, fmal site plan approval, and building plan approvals as well a.s final plat approval for Outlet H as a single 2.5 acre lot for the condominium building. Gaffron stated the new propo.sal is somewhat similar to the three-story building that was proposed la.st fall, (iaffron inquired whether 61 units is the total number of units being proposed. Heller indicated there are 61 units, with one guest unit, fora total of62 units. Gaffron stated the current proposal is for a single lv-.shapcd building with virtually the same footprint as the originally propo.scd garage level but filing in of the open terrace space with building. The applicants claim that this allows for larger individual units and provides spaces for certain amenities not provided in tile original concept. 'I'hese include .i raay rooin/hot tub/exercise room at the rear of the garage level; an undefined common space, and other amenities, fhe propo.sed 62 individual dwelling units range from 1400 square feet to 1700 .sriuarc feel in area. Ciaffron stated due to the addition of the amenities and the incicased living space, the applicants arc proposing one building rather than two separate building.s. (iaffron indicated in 2002, at (he time of Uic approval of the lots, there was a di.scu.ssion regarding allowing a provision ba.scd on final grade as opposed to existing high side grade, which was determined to be 18 feel. Ihe applicants have since added three feel to the height of the building, due to the increased ceiling licighl, the height of the undeiground garage ceiling, and the pitch of the roorsy.slcins. I he npplicanl.s are proposing o peak height of 1071.33 ’, with the original approval being for 1066*. which MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, January 18,200S 6:00 o ’clock p.m. results in the building being five feel higher in general. GanVon indicated there was a discussion at the time of the original approval centering around options to reduce the massing and the size of the building. Gaffron requested the Planning Commission give direction to the applicant concerning the size and massing of the proposed building and the visual impacts of tlic added height in light of the proposed location of the building and the other uses proposed along Kelley Parkway. Gaffron noted the applicants have submitted a plan that meets the parking requirements for this site and a stonnwater management plan, which illustrates an above-ground storm sewer system with the majority of the drainage directed to the north. Gaffron indicated the City Engineer has reviewed the stormwater management plan and has made some recommendations. In addition, the applicants are proposing some retaining walls that are slightly different than what was originally approved, with the City Engineer requesting that all retaining walls above eight feet in height be engineered. Gaffron staled the fire marshal has been asked to comment on the layout, the single access to the site, and location of hydrants. Gaffron requested the Planning Commission review the landscape plan for this site. Preliminary review by staff indicates an acceptable level of plantings of trees and shrubs. The developer should also be asked to describe all outside lighting proposed for this building other than the typical street lights, and provide a lighting plan sheet for such lighting. The developer also needs to indicate any identification signage intended for the building. Gaffron noted the impervious surface coverage for this site is limited to 50 percent, which is not an issue in Staffs opinion. Gaffron requested the Planning Commission address the following items: 1. Acceptability of building expansion and the conversion from two buildings to one. 2.Acceptability of increased building height. 3. Acceptability of propo.scd building materials and building design. 4. Signage and building lighting. 5. Acceptability of landscape plan. PAGE 43 •> ! ; k F MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, January 18,2005 6:00 o’clock p.m. Gaffron stated if the Planning Commission concludes that the proposed site plan and building plans arc Acceptable, then a recommendation for approval would be in order, subject to any conditions that the Planning Commission feels are warranted. If the Planning Commission concludes that one or more of tlic above topics requires further consideration, then tabling may be appropriate. Za.chman staled they are attempting to go from the two buildings down to one building in an effori to achieve a larger square footage within the units and to also incorporate some amenities that would help make the units more marketable. 2^chman stated with the two buildings, the size of the units is reduced to 1400 to 2000 square feet, which, in their experience, does not sell as well as the larger units. Zachman indicated they would like to include a party room, hot tub area, exercise room, and storage areas. Zachman indicated they have attempted to reduce the heiglit of the building at both ends to help reduce the appearance of massing. Heller stated they have reduced the height of the building in tlie middle and on both ends and have attempted to minimize the visual impact by varying the heights of the different brick colors comprising the fapade. Heller indicated they are proposing darker stone on the vertical uprights to also reduce the impact. Heller staled the materials being proposed for this building are virtually maintenance-free for 30 years. Zachman commented they are incorporating a stucco look and stone look rather than lap siding. Zachman stated as it relates to lighting, there will be an entrance-way chandelier, lighting for the parking lot area, lighting for the exterior fire escapes, and a light over the garage door. Gaffron inquired whether (he individual balconies would also have lighting of some type. Zachman staled llicre would be a light for each balcony probably consisting ol a 60-wall bulb. Kahn inquired what comments the commissioners have relating to (he size of the building. Rahn inquired what the length of the proposed building is. Heller indicated it is 376 feet long. Rulm stated he personally would prefer a taller loof with a steeper pitch fur aesthetic reasons. PAGE 44 r \' h’ ’.1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, January 18,2005 6:00 o’clock p.m. Johnston indicated the originn) building peak was at 966.8*, with the new plan calling for a peak lieight of 971.33, which is four and a half feet higher. Johnston pointed out that 3.5 feet in the height is as a result of the need to raise the underground ceiling and issues relating to stormwater. Johnston stated overall the building is one>foot higher if stormwater is not factored into the calculation. Rahn commented he likes the stepped roof and the steepness of the roofs, but that he lias a concern with the length of the building. Rahn noted the original concept plan had less square footage proposed than this proposal and that the applicant needs to consider reducing the number of units in order to keep the amount of square footage down to what was originally approved. Johnston inquired what the length of the senior housing building is. Gaffron slated that it is close to 500 feet. Rahn noted that the City did receive a number of phone calls regarding the size of that structure. Leslie stated he understands the need to make it one building given the issues related to constructing two buildings on this site. Leslie stated in his opinion the number of units could be reduced in an effort to reduce the massing. Leslie noted the City had approved the building at a certain square footage and not a number of units. Zacliman staled due to the location of the building and street, it would be difficult to get a direct view of the building. Zachman noted there would be commercial development acro.ss the street. Leslie pointed out the homeowners located behind this structure would be able to see the full length of the building. Zachman stated the L-shape design of the building will help break up the view and that only one end should be visible. Heller staled the Public Works Department would have the most direct view of the building and that in his opinion this structure should not be that visible from Willow Drive. Fritzicr indicated he is in agreement with Commissioner Leslie’s comments concerning the size of the structure and that there should be a reduction in the size of llie units. PAGE 45 1 MINUTKS OF HIE ORONO 1‘LANNING COMMISSION MEEIING Tuesday, January 18,2005 6:00 o*clock p.ro. Bremer commented she prefers the nine-fool ceilings and thai she does not have an issue with the increase in hciglit ns a result of the raised ceilings. Bremer indicated in her view the building would be more visually attructive with the taller roofs, but that she has a concern with the size of the one building. Bremer encouraged the developcf to reduce the size of the building. Rahn staled he wmdd like the size of the building reduced to the rimonni of square fooinge that was originally approved. Rahn inquired whether any outdoor amenities are being proposed. Johnston stated they have looked at some outdoor amenities bin have decided not to include them due to the maintenance issues ussociated with a pool and the close pi o.xiinity of tennis courts to this site. John.ston indicated in his opinion this proposal i.s a bettci looking plan and noted that one unit was removed from the previous proposal. Willkcy coiTuncnlcd the units are more likely to be leased with the amenities but that in his opinion the costs a.ssociatcd with the amenities with this projrosal versus (he pieviou.s proposal have not eliangcd dramatically and tliat a higher rent could be charged for the larger units. Joluiston noted some square footage was added to make the building deeper. Zacbman indicated they did increa.se the size of the parking stalls to allow easier acce.s.s for full-size cars. Winkey stated it is his understanding (be number of larger units has been increased and that in his opinion this project would be economically teasible even with a reduction in the number ot units. Jurgens commented it is difTicult to imagine the visual inipact tlii.s building will have. Jurgens inquired whelliei the first lltHM elevation is .seven to eight feel above the curb line of the c.xi.sting road. (Jatfron staled llie road is at 1022 ’, with the fust Hour level being .seven to eight feel above the road. Jurgens inquired how it would be transitioned from the loadway to leducc the appearance that this building towers over you. Jiilmsioii staled the slope as it exists now would remain for the mo.st part, with the parking lot located :n heiween the road and the building. Jurgens inquired bow far back llie building is situated from the cuib. page: 46 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, January 18, 2005 6:00 o’clock p.ni. Gaflron stated tlie building would be located approximately 60 to 80 feet from the curb. Jurgens indicated he still has a concern regarding the length of the building and iiKjuired whether the focal point of the structure could change somehow to try to lessen the visual impact. Heller indicated the vertical uprights come out four feet, with the fagade being broken up with different shades. Heller stated a 3-D picture would help to better illustrate how the building will appear. Rahn stated he prefers the step-down appearance of the building. Rahn recommended the apjdicant review their plans to see how the building can be reduced in length. Zachman iiugiired whether the Planning Commission would like to see the end units clipped off Leslie staled he would like to see the top unit also clipped near the end cap so there would still be a .step down. Leslie encouraged the applicant to review his options for reducing the size of the building. Jurgens inquired whether a patio is being constructed off the back of the building. Johnston stated the patio could be accomplished with an easement. Gaffron stated the patio ends up being located in one of the common areas. Johnston stated the outlets could possibly be replattcd to avoid the need for an easement. Johnston noted commercial development will be going up in the area in front of tliis building and would also help reduce the appearance of the building. Rahn inquired whether there were any public comments regarding this application. There were no public comments. Winkey moved, Bremer seconded, lo recommend approval of Application #05-3081, Sloiii bay Lofts, with the understanding that the propo.sed revisioirs arc acceptable and that a revised plan would be .submitted prior to the Council meeting. V01E: Ayes 2, Nays 4, Rahn, Jurgens, Leslie and Fritzler Oppo.scd. MOTION FAILED. Rnhn indicated he was opposed lo the motion because he would like lo see some reduction made in the size of (he structure. Bremer sug^’csled this application l>c discussed at the next Planning Commission work sc.ssion. FACE 47 I........... MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, January 18, 2005 6:00 o'clock p.m. GafFron noted the next work session is scheduled for February 2nd. Fritzier moved, Ralin seconded, to table Application ^05*3081, Stonebay Lots, to tbe next Planning Commission work session scheduled for February 2"^. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays I, Bremer Opposed. Johnston inquired wJiethcrthey would be allowed to attend the work session. ■ Rahn noted the work session is a public meeting and that i! would be helpful if the applicar’! alicnded ’he work session. Rahn stated the Planning Commission would need to limit the applicant to 15 minutes. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS #12 REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES A TI ENDINf; COUNCIL MEETINGS NOVEMBER 22, DECEMBER 13,2004, AND J.LNUARY 10,200f. Winkey gave an update on the November 22"^ Council meeting. Leslie gave a brief update on the December 13, 2004 Council meeting, noting that the Vogstrom application was tabled. Gaffron stated the Vogstrom application was given conceptual approval for 31.9 percent hardcover at the January lO"' Council meeting and would be finalized at the January 24“' meeting. #13 OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION None #14 PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 15, 2004 Bremer moved, Ralin seconded, to approve the minutes of the November 15, 2004 Planning Contmi.ssion meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. PAGE 48 KNOW AIX THRSr FRRSFKT.^ Tfcii lohn Tmaiict nomn. fxr. a Minntiola IlmlUd liability company, fee cmpotittoo. mmlAtAft of fdlcmloK dmtlbtd pfopttty .ilMClnl In Iht Coiuily of H Jncpin^lL of Qdtol e aaif Oallol r. STONF.H A V. * u! «*d ptallcd at STONES AY SECX5ND ADDITIOM tutl do hcicW Uoiiaif md dcdlcalc lu the ImiMIc fot imidic ime fwtvtt IIm didoafic tad iillllly taacmenlt aa iboivB on tht plat. eowpaay, bu cauacd thcaa prcttnfi lo ba dised by JOHN TERRANCE HOMES. LLC. • MUmraMa Niullttl linSMIy rmisaity .Uaddcrilaniiti STA rr or _ COUNTY or Tbt fwatoiiit InilnMianl mao adnioiHf4|td btfbrc ma Siia. — -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------- , o ____________ ■ coiapaay. on babalf of Iht company. .. 200 ____. by .. lobn Tcnaact Nomaa^ LLC, a Mlnntaola limitad llahHiry Notaiy Public,________ bfy rontiaiaiion Eaplita. .county. N»|^"^c«**IbU*^ "*** **“*!!!? CoiRoialion. a Minmiota CDipoiaSan baa cauacd thcac piractila fu be a{|ncd by lit.clay of ,200 MARSHALL INVESTMENT C*ORI*UKA l ION STATE or COUNTY of Iba foccftomt Indnantai »ac acboowtcdiiad before me iMa________day of________________. 200 . by —------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N ar^ail bivmUiiciil Corporalioo on babalf of Iba corporatiou. Notary PnMtr,_________ My Commiaaion Etplrca. .County, 1 baraby coNliy Mai 1 btva ■inmynd and pINttd Ma laid denertbad on fbla plat 118T0HEBA Y SECOND ADDITION; that fbli plat la a coctarrt la^taantaUan of lha anrvty, Ibal atl Mdoncta ort conttfly Mono on (bo plol in fttl and bundrtdUia of a fool, that all ^annmanla bata t«an cncfrctty placad In Ibe pr^nd aa abonn nr will he placed aa reqalrcd hy Iba local povernmtotal onlt and thatsrssns - ■" "* “ Soaamd W. Rogatn, LandSweym MlnnaoMa Utanaa Nn ItMS STONEBAY SECOND ADDITION CHYaTAll CRtiSTj^ 0/iONO SCHOOL rypANSiOH 5drst*dd*# WiiiOW view ?3S.§§ I \ y N*N •, • . ;• •1* •' I :*• •' '* •w *j / / {H-Tl.OT OUTUrt A f- -WfllANO 17 — MdflMAJ*^man j OUTI.C'T V. LOT 1 1 /■ J /j iff'*' I____ t7$.94 !’A:-:kw AY * sar04'ss’B .^•‘•ao.~o0~ I------------------------------------ tt-c n r 0 N {I i: A Y \ CR DOC. NO. NORTH 100 200 SCAIR IN FEET BLAMNCS ARE ASSUMED ^ DCNOTTS 1/2 INCH IRON PIPE SEI ^ MARKED R1 S 10945 • DENOTES FOUND 1/2 INCH IRON PIPE ORANAGE AND UTIUTY EASEMENTS ARC SHOWN AS THUS (HOI TO **,CAIC) i-^to I_____ BEING 10 nCT IN MIOTH AND ADJOKWIG LOT ONES UNLCSS OTNENNfSE MOtCATED AND 0CINC 10 mr IN MOTH AND AOdOINNC RICNf Of WAY LINES UNLESS OTHtRmS£ MOICATEO STATE UFMINNES01A COUNTY or MKNNKPIN Tbf foratoint SnrvtyarY CattiflcMa vat acbnovtt4|ad btforr ma Ibii Ifovafd W Hoptfa, I.and9nrtffyar.. 200 .. b> Nalaiy PubNa. Natmapia Cono^. Mlnntaola My CiMfimioilfin Enpiren fontinry SI, 2010 ORONCH MINNESOTA ^ __________ . ---- ^ I* appIkoWo, dia villtcn cuumictaa and i. by Mbimot. 5I.IhIw, aavgyyHtvp nttbuy Qr.cKgNu. a ®y„ - __________- - _ _______.Mayor RY________________________________ Off! I AX PAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. Hemicpb County, bfloociota I hereby c.itMy tbM imm ptyriil, j,-------------ud prtor ye«i biv. heei, jreid for hnd dtmibed on lb>. pM I>.led ............_.-<tarof. ____________,*00____. Palrich; H OT^oonor. Hranapia County Audrtnr, By ------------------------------------------------ Ocpuly SURVEY DIVISION, fltnncpm County. Minnranin I* MiMtMtn SMul.. lIJR S.s (|9««) ihi. plat b« been ^iproved Ibi.__ Willi.in P nmm.rounlyRiirveyor, By ________ ____day af______________ C OIJN l\ HE(*0MDEK. Htonapki Coun^, Minnatoli I btfcby camly that the plat of STONEBAY waa filfd bi Ibii aincf (bit at_________oYlock M. Michael H Cimaiir. Couaty Recorder, By ____day of.__________________. 200____. Depoiy LANDFORM niNwrAnot. la-OMorNi n 'VWJCPTSSfS ARfiA U)CATION MAP(mmsasusm STONEBAY CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA OMICt JOHNTERRANa'HOMEaiLC MAK ASKION iiMSAitnnucuifE onoNQ. MMftNarA aasH lUHaBiMi CONItACT fUtaiASf KAXmom tAOttlAW MOninB GMAWfS loa i0rHAfC.n KfM0UIHA«tB44l mmmm na rA«MM iHt arr CMflHItTMTa cm tM MHl Wft cii .caitunAAMi Cf '*l| UMI Ml mutMTi c»M»i. n«H C4I i«ti«»Mi:i iNiiii n*M/ r**KAt« «ifat f\tf A i^i m<.*kJMrr f**.. I ABBREVIATIONS KW&Tg>gBT!(BDDRAWING SYMDOLS(CnumiTY SYMBOLS *»• >** I*a KK P4 »A« Ll Ltit >l.v rr H i»lU K^; C II • I IS •It t I <1 u A a*% IM •1* P 9 ••t w»l felt MHI.r «»< f a**• •AO •*•« l»Mil Arm^ A m A* hnb AO»A»i •A»i>w» A4|bm / A«jm> A* »*»4p« II« Sr*<««fe A«»»«k« Ani ^ <.«• C'«* M ^ *«fe AilXI •*••' A»«r«i«l (A«M«» C4 m ••« fem r*- TmM jfe« M« A.«, CM «:«« t»* (airt 9mm Caarfe A m* N***» (•M A m r•>r«MMA !«•« ^ *. •••ri** tm A»m«im laM IA n la^^A l«« A*«MM •law IMI *mmr t^rntt 9>0m £«««••> i.rnm> U C«iiM AA ot •mm •'•M HwMMPfeA MM f%»M» tWlfe>*M 0i« A MM* «•«•«•« A* i •i»A^ Si>* U^tM.— lA «r i« liAl l<MC It IIMN MAI ISII. tm$ t«t«t*r t»« l»4 till »«i* rv«Of i«» lU II •tic ir »* B!#«• M«« Mfet lAfel OCva titu 0AKI <MK Ofe OC ri tfelr ri » r/\ 0|t» r>» oti r Irvr o»i *>V I «u* *v%r m%\%4 mmjm ir% r««M ■4ur till V rp, • t »% rt I'll* .tv V.4I OiHf » »/w •• It tt Vlail l»l SMi "VIC VI VIIM -.IP TMMlf t I «.tl t oya•/'*' It tots* kr. ► »» ItA fetri ht’.t W iroi It»I A» I ¥ .1 fe*t IM S iMt IrtI W *•' IfeMt HM (•• 0m« / OMiA m ImA tMMMtM U m ilAM / llf«fe« tiMMat tlKfeMiP IWA m tWVMIAM tWp* / IWt tV|MIMA A flMtfMW •WfeM / iitAAr tWA« .4*«l •feau mtrn4 •«■ fe. CtMtan • A.W* MfiAi • M> •• VA» tAfev* ••■r Ht«M«l tk»*m rnmm t«Mi I* <S«M (Wm*« <S*.fe*iA 1*4 \»9l\ u> ®ry.© A., , 1 •\ * y .** y ctv m;r»i ixm tVMMlt • VAMfek. tifeii i(Atr1 t*Od S4tl niTM. ClXHOhAII OtHP PIvtBiM ' MCiJMlttn lie Mvoip Mf* (t»«) lAXf) • itWcA ci*r«ri»»f GOLEGAL DESCRIPTION cuHiM I 5tai »Ai t«iitni ctunt. t*»*MiA -injmti w fiRtA'TivAt^ rw* * - ISITE SYMBOLS! f •«••«; ^A mt. iAP Vmm iMtl I'm. at CM.MM* t'Ma «t !«»■*•<«* t^MI *A*«a. VMm ****** *"* f-Mlfe Of Wt ».*» •WA. IV w. S* Ofaa tt Imm«i« A fet««IM I mmmrn* •’«« «t !••••• fe.a>M.MM IM. M IVt.p •>A»»* /■ OHim'Mi OM, v»^-.:ia»«a «>**t 0»aaMi lAaa.a* (CWafet r*t«a * •A r»w t .Mr* ■*n>* Oatet iVa OMte.rl 0*a I V# V# ^ 0*«a>*« t«M«>irl * •m»*4* •»*** / • t.Ma<r«M lA* » M* at Wa, CZIIID r Ma. tA ? ***** t» • ^ Cl © 4 IS# ID '© %•#»'cz- I'A III J-A l.« *M IV *aM*a TaaittaiM conMB 9001 CUVAKM BbUVK unov'BiMe 9wucn.*i RAtBOAO ((ir till OffiSURVEY ■nUBRVS oAmt tclAOIH CIAY a liM> <» t'Avmirt 9»l#l MBCHAI • ItiAIK V f lJUAfel' RAA BdAiBB m ttmmr. vau 1b till .*MlB 90b. BOBtlC KurvAt B Mibimi cibACA tna.9 BlO tKktf siAfUAni V oobib ocii # iim oit«ofik.i 9tmtK Stau CIVM xc iMU >C«r CBlAi • BCUAC0 _ ~ *»- «. • tUam itmta MMP'VtSU tiliOl IMI ttpUA PKAM Stflftl VAWOtlAAl fCI !•• t> IttfeOfellJ t«i ittoAoiivm ftfeM'iaai mr«»r« waw * CUHOI « IMI ^CWkl CAi Itt SJt niWi>*AM HUtAC ■<%»•>• AO MK tttc -tAacCTiXPO ftum»B - (MAAAO i| 11 OfeO* >VCMMUJ 0 |A m« tOtlAUO 4iAAvf ISITE/UTIUTY CONTACTS! SKRVKC C0Ui*ANII3 CONTJkCTJ 9»i*1l 9M10 SAttlACf MVtO * VAItB CMI Ot ilBOII 40S) 1(1111 l‘AOI«Al op B.*# *4 U»lim BAl, 1*1 1M7I COfC CAOOA 0( (<» (A lUB IIWM 1* llt( 997-.'41-4«.J<l tA» 197-741 *A« liidtv •I'fl 00 Bit 91 tVIBAOiAS IM 99140 MCH mc*94Bi4 l(l» 997-4lp.||7l imtvoB 0<t*9l 1IUO 9U4I0V IM| Opto anuMK IM 9*447 PCI J3\4im4i KUt ttCABt# Itlt^ Mi 9J9BJB9 MtrURM CA9 ctiiumBM naact/ mtBCAace BOP lAIAUt AfeftU 00 BOt 9VW IBABAOlUl IM 99419 OdJB (MB* IVkIKM mi bi»-l7»-94i9 >At Ai7-17l-99ri •ti»i%mtarwM UtAittt •/? fet •* Or m tt.V PdM IO«lOii1 til Mil CAM*K> m*> A 01 AIK >.A0 tiAino iMo cn»t« itr*% OImMII IA a O «CH lUMBtif ojMo txni IBM uuitf oni t«fl« O/T «Mt Btmi iKitt mtr»o4 Bot VIOIABI 9«t« t«M4A« CAIOt BA»I 91001 «•«« nOMM CAIB VM.VB t«i *mmmt •All* i«tMAB <MBfe«Aft intJM 19BB i»U0fejNiLiii ittcror UMOiXOAO MlltAAAO UMOtPOAO CAS unccBOAO (Mu/rv WAIKVMN iUMtAPl «*€• fItUBi «»t« OMV OAI (ESDOESIGN CONTACTS IWm.% SarArl S»vl.r« t«aa#r •#>* t'#»a»' «al tfe««MM lat # O* at «# IrraMV. Ifeal i I^.M MB II OliaiaM Vm# BA'm Vvi»M < • M Vat, b l(tf *-t. VVK# *•*♦#» •#A •ar«M 0«aa b iM at* lAbt VMaai AM .M • rllsa •mo* ••A»«# « ' nrBBlH COIWA NWt IStMIVCP) WtBBtM CONMWI Mt«n pOAOf I0lt> tOMJHMtl I'AHt* BASM IIWBtB OBOOtlMI OfliBBNCIlMARKSI n tor 111 i» t« .tiVOAiP •! BB IC»I*«A9I OUAPMWfl «• «•€ MIOSKWI iO MlilB OMM A«l iBA^I C HevAl*«*abt/9PA till sornce COHrAKICt C0»ITACT3 tugiiiPti. IAI0VA49 AOtllltCtUOl iA«iO(Atn AVI aimio itMM VP <91 AntM lURM 414BI#0U| ttl VMvM lAtCBtHI ' ' bVi sunt* MoriM 9*0 nt AftiM 1100114 lltBAme IN 994<»J 9IIV* AbaPItfei r* IMi ill 717-HIIp lAi AC 79/ Ml FI 7*«»M»V|IMir l\A AMA mi M7 .*9/ VIP lAJ MF .»97 %m Aoo4iiciua Hlltt OMTil i*flp Avtii (orii lUil iViCB IM 9»N7 BOUlt liUlO Brwj Iti«t0 mi i9;-B/i*9*fei I At A4* -4t«- KV MA mmc LAiAa(«nl •VI »>n|0 IKTIM 9AI ei AlUfeB lOClM IblAAOUa. Ill 99441.1 tlliVA ItlUrt jio llll A*F-7V M'lp »At «47 F9F-4P7I 9UK9BI lAriAibItl VM mjint irvni v(* ei Anui lAMiti IIMI^-Aa. Ill •i>4v;i iUl niBiMII 191 mi M7-.'97 WP (At Atf 79/ Mill IICAI U1 vfi ai«i l(li««fl(0 iM10t~ 4*>iCM i riA.1 IP t »M 9ii«(l SUM 7«P0 71 I'AU. 1*4 V^<.4*0| SII0»««l • KX94 Mil b9*-FF7~AI7« (A* AM 7.V OMTI UcM U70IB0I mUMt M KMt 1 AII4MIBY At lAV 9A>* meBti AiBfM •••BICfeCA. I«l 99HS-4M •blMli H .A.tAf nil 1V-4I4 - 444M *A« 1V-4»4-97l4> _ -_ _ ^ Biruir 1 ^Ai«UC |iA1tc*tB4t1M *»4tH9 cavAtti •VI09 HP «PM 1*,* 9A.WM1A1I IM 99J5* r«BB IJAMMA. mo 197-«Ot-(»»9» (At 9V Ck)pher State One Cali labi (III AOfA > AM IAAI|labi (III AOfA > US AM IAAI| VBi titt • l•MO-/)0-ahi iiMBiONieratY — 07/01/09 tOf coum MiirwfM «tl ftUJUT MAIMCIC RCMOir CUIVCATttN '«#••««% tM MaiM aap^M % a# • ^ a • • i I . it :i I I \ CITV COUMCIi- S U »Iv^ I-TT.A4. i_ FEBRUARY7,2009 nuuKii STONEBAY OHONO* MINNESO rA LANDFORM NINNeAPOLIS-PHOCNIM rmemi nuuciMX coonwom TnU SHEET CO.l N1NNC AFAl1 ft • PNOt M1» —Him—*w»SgSiS|B« -------- rtIMAMI C^MUQUMO fvajKtiia IRNOOUK EM9TM0 CONPItItMO Cl.l • ^ '. Vk k i V- }•%! • NOTES .' f ;iflMc*'(Virr 4<<FW?;'jr?rv" •?>: v ’x^' t iurrcfjt/f> •i<w>ttn*i iwfti titi*i ijr(iu»A«^4: Vi^i» nr*iMt{» Pi ifiM^xi »kif »**^ rviMjki lym\ »oi '>ii*«iUf MOi\i«4 *#c%i»Mm »Htwi '•fc'i iTkf.tut* Pi kf xtl t* vmtl tiX4K»A 1(7 N ••tP Vtifli'IV«« III MCAVAit»i/cc»nu\t lui t t4H c«>irfr*4*.i) m« iciuf. ihi fiMtItf >KA«P M MttUlltl l«MI«0 ter f vf n Aixi' ««« r«i»c«fi()pi rxtioa; mp mip UK.4IIP •! ia»OtV1l (rtJMI* II MkllM*. I»»« t»0 MMI *1 IvdiMr :<»tfi tn»« «T«M 11(4 rii«4c« PI ttiMi'M ivMiMirvi PMii i*%«iniir .Hyi.i ( (»(«t»>M V«7MI UI ImA n«l4 10 MW.I (» «.UCB tt$f (flUTOT »(4( IP i4At4V W4IU luiip ini«r«ii( « t»« tirrtio t«>i«t lu. PMCM cftm floiAtov iroi »c iMurir a Id M in*(I Mr *tt t.k>tiioivi>Ai MM»au «k t»«(( o tm (ecp«f«<fe|^ OMMIM |»H4( fldP «(P l*« MJIM Ul% (*rf. m7I( t nr.i(ip MhiMini Mr n* jidi»iii ii« (iMiinii^ M (»i i*<. n»*i **(* uM IK (iMiai »t( *4iau M CiirMip Ip i.« UAH innk.H%iH. «A»n rrer lo mk»»; M-IMU3 iia PARKING SUMMARY mua»PMnc t»aui rfOArtftMi IIMM U.I9 7 A smit/uif 44 liMM 5IM14 noU4(P V 14 m*iLasaiti StMCMflP 4IMI4 M«4l) MUiWttag 5IM4MP 9IKI> 4CUMU »I*U« 4*114 1 SfMIlMV )tMl9 14* W| r lA lom rAniic oiaih «\irfap ■7 lA JO )IMi4A*« BSaSITC PLAN SURFACE SUMMARY E tFi£kUa.AOA AAU AXi7lU.»U pnn 9PACA «THMin BIX »lilt. •kMtn ilBU X ap. im 40 m 9 » n, pOktn 0 r# i‘Mi CMdim 0 V 0»P. »IM» C(M« PAtaii.)rwi K r«*». MMI4 4VK V 4 0. l*am/HPi(iA avM IP a/*. "xaipiiA AI.M) •AllHA » rietiMi <* ipiM.Mia aoiA 40 BA OMNn JOHN TERRANCE H MAKAvmjn UMONQ MMMOarA H» fUMMMI EaiLC CONIKACf nUCHAafUDCmOfPt uamu» MonnicoiVAiiiES MM ivm AVC. H PLyMOnHAMMAI aiM.»HfrfMDix CO* »At ftni von rii liTMif: MStMiia i\A«r C7I l«tt«PMO» *••• KVI CU ntKUMPI WlAnK P|«M Cn l«tl*»«APl PIIMI •\«l|/ tAVAio CKCir (AMI 4 rrcru III »r(l«»M»f lAKKClPI lAMI ItVWONMMfOfY aifOJtm <m cokax %juvim. mojia MMWXI RIMBW GM1VKA110N • M -U . ! Ill < ^ 1. • &rssr^»to< anrr oouisioiu SLJ OfS^IT^ySU FEPKUAKY7,2Q0B nOJKTi STONEBAY OKONO. MINNESO rA O ____30 00 Rn_j stale in micr CSopher State One Cal •tfHCUta«ia *•«<*»«.tfuae MAI. Met > «oa 7AI ^ LANDFORM HIMNfA^OLlft>^HOtNI» rtf MAAC nojKTNa ODnoauMO nXMXXLBK. am PLAN C2.1 /r / / / ^0 )^ — —Mllf AllU W1UAlf>----------- r ( 1 ^H-^'\ ii»f>[r^ r I r' \ 'll t A v'—.^'V-v h It ii*««i /Al G) » ji'B ■ 'T—rI aiw •» -^, fg) i?:: ‘'--’V BViii* irv c r‘ t-t*¥^0 «yt»i KM «ua ••ni»« 1 -" ■ ------------------------------~ (!>l»>' 0*f|CASCADE CIRCLE ^AgB>N rTTr-rriTTir-: Ti KELLEY PAAKlUAr 41XE0 HKlG^rr Mi!:sic SKF.D MIX(■B!MlgifaB.a tM* »•» 4m> r« t^»iy n<n •«. AMM*#* ^atcwm^ro i4«Mt«n ms »»»•. 9« iM»n osm^ M^wtttit* ivmttMAi n* |«M. < MMtftik tnr r>t 'U 5* M ».» r»*» >»’ «*n *»»M| « t »«ut <% MJA4-w^»i *« .r*»u>i n» ^<r. •«Ml. m p« MAM I«*UMK4« •« n*:t%<r«k> •*! «y M tHC«0 *f « •«<• IV • iVt /*!«• ft> ••jrH«r («»tM I MC' !»• •II fVMM in li« »t«ll*tl»IL •KIVtP'M# %ic4n %«*• n mvtif .■iT, iHtt'iH 1»C*«|||A I«u*>%l*v Mr«..a«M< <.IMil »**%^-* strt, iiMtrtiMi ,'*fK «>]l|ivt< IKWk^ HWCmAi IlH •«*••• AMlf lAnHI* IMktMtl UK »!»♦ llt««M' H I'KitttA) J-«^. t4MMMP m IC|«(« (f« «»•»•! 1 M4Ml|in*> 4«K t >l«Ul ti* I •« |*«it»'Vt r<K. IkrtM ,i^€ |tl**Ut/A >.«lt1AI*| %«*\ i.4.A*«i*m ^iA« iuAi*T» *•«»»; »♦*•> iMi AA»« MM iiatiir- r•iHli.•VlMHl*| '•K mr lent frn/i *»t WP WrXAItM t««tMr«'« MVtUiAAl •«••» iVAMi iilirtc- m«« AftMiui • «r. KMl^l (Vl** itaVtil IK IMitllltM l<» >«••• H.m KtKA IUX',EN1) tiiJ ner. nui I IIP «ntvi>iM II'. tai'Ai <M.ti«>ri«' i*<it«>*vj ifi.VAirvi uK IKAU' inki >A4^i riA«r%.ait5> I IT. nu# fV|t»» tiM. <•«>•« ..iHniJHr iVAflAcl* VVlWli cm I^MTi lirirAM |tU«Mm tick 1*1 IIV. fUl«*« »\M*i (•«*<«• *\ir\fl trVvMltlJ 4 01, cailH UMAifkVt (fUl* MWI*) Ml M KM 10 at III * I2*lt tf a im /MM vtcui ■««(»«: *M* tiiitr »««>« i«Kr «to mt Mti» »»»ot *1 r*n i» • MXMK nr m.»i mil UM\P •iMiirirtrt ti r««i <» « M«* n.~vi mr iKtri imi* u%t« in» a ftc*i*n «i ,v »m*ik Kfc* **K CZE PERENNIAL PLANT LIST I^AlUlM r\MIII III at l.tlTlMPCt tM I^XUtWC ••‘llti U4*UI NKt ^dft. tHU Mt>r> 1 vftrvt mil tnr i ittiiiMta 'MMA a Ml I ii A%a» ti VM MU a KU tV) «M wa titIA Ul*M tut* HU Hi>t«r HMI Vt •> !>*<*•*»* wr MIAAt *#0 I MIA'I* Wtp • *4»t(l W» *•««• IM luct'* «.*«>«• 1 vr n* *'»U« "Vf 3MI MM %«’ nr.NTta AMrutu* H.kit t»tr It# A vr • AiXIlMCVA MKHWkn • \A HiAMl INOTESI i f*<iAV>Aic ttiXtiAikK lAiiMU'oi k*v.t*Kc <-rvii riMivtir 1*1 «All*.VIII14.’tarnI trtp an fvuit mtmom ifimMiiki N*0«'i «A> i«ry««i> pt lit t/Aiitf oil i« (Vi»i> «<|i (>itii Asvxaiia uiim urAirAn ii> ci itui mmip ifrv It* inMrAii»i/((»ni«\ v«up « ll•(•Allll i»*«nti uv iiSAimai KB LANDSCAPE NOTES I IMAKCMf . i»lir«4.1.S* %Wli Itll IM t«t IV4» l|» VMtII**. * IH.» l«>PI(-1| lA'IlAC kltn V« >*|*frai5 til ml'VAI'f fiirti'M.itV WMi »a*l Alt •*Mrv;r<\*r imimh iar*MP i p«a it» m<* ia .wia ; t*f i*»i ”. *4i tcktim top «>*hi tKm*a*i tPIMIAKrit ailH Cnat'M CtAtirMleA' 7 Alt IIAIil miUVI^ vail <|*>14*| Mlt* IM *4*It Ml *tti« IMItl <» •il’'4Pil«*l U*4l Alt*) MA> HHt M t* H*I1*I »K* I UM ifili ii*««*4 cMiwAi m> iWAiiunM I iitri a a uviiimici Mf«itii i»t iaimv i> hami ) ai at im aaa * i»t *Ainu >»nai tai i»t n*4i M hah sail u >vii'h fY> MA ‘vtui win vwii H»¥t *«Mt* riariP N»U9 i»»ai uiaai pi«i« >«u * mim itui Hin miai fOMl iMi^ *t»i HAifu waM A rk«ta h - «.*t: mp •Aaii »***i A *i4A |4| »t>if lUM ffp vAiiMi* OAtt ivirw (t** miAiiK* APtwfi mt IV will KX.A*. n Muaip mn i»i*t m)i iin*iit> w wiii Mt> m-iai iui >% oaiAkrt hi 'aiip 1 IM umif *i»f ‘MMi M 1'n.Aiii* auH Ml w(«tc*.?cn m.*n»i muiii tu ir'iiii %**n « (t *J«i* Pi «*t r*4.AUti IIIIIVA liW IM AVAHlil (lAlMM IO» B 111 'AMII V«»» PV*t«A Ol n*t*l»A| U V.K *U> IM UAItAll H»' li» llrtk P» IMAn AM MtallCI trt-V IP imAllAflAI mr.AIV*i CMllrAcll* l> n* Itlf U1 tin HUeUL t£«*5 Alt« nUiMlaiJta ^mci4 10 It Hut irt lAV :»«tu«p HAtlMVa* PAM lUl *« II Atl VAUI HP A01A1 Q^iiac ** 10 H ivd -r»«ti tr ri mmi vciutp hamiicup oam hc ^w m mi itn ACtA\ [^Mi fi0* *rtAn cniiVMO ti vOiim* t«»i mi ■ ‘«xvif> on Mttii* *mai io at v«mp m ii 4*it m'Iip aaiai txiAiia tt«*i Jl HHIO *MA% Ml H AMA*. X.MO II vi tiiMi M fT^ni HMIf lalMIM A tp H UMII* a** (•! tliNIP UIMPlItl t*M|P .ll HMP tOtPUl am tplM UlMlllltlHt? (tvjl niPPAe Ilk' rt IP HM# HAilH *< OVtM. IP lAiH*l VIMfVUtr WAAii: lit ACtA ltt.AMP AlV lit UTIkCUJ 0» f\MM5 >*Ml LiMni lt*M iMAfOnO IMP UUMIIU I II flMM V*«4VA< hi HMrtAV x% *0* OMi ftiti: numic mt immi atmti a hmm io «mcp mas h ««4 accip immi oi mutn ct (Ottoivt AlP 1/1 lAilV IV MAI |«*U9 Mtf IIOA* lAPP ■ Ml itM««Ai« MO AM*9 AM IP Aiiiari 74’ iivui PiP»H (V u*4itii« vk icam ip h Ann*. iMOicAH caifi'M iiv n ttt foaniNAit km utaaM lo itmrt mai l•^a.n u ’ami am rti ai nietao oi umim . hmi u* omi i ii V lit IMW Alt tiAItVAIIiW a 10 A«\UM Ml IAa A'VAM HIA a I A1 UAltl PtltMI«» ItMtO CTI HAtO £5^ IMP tatlJM A5 llt'AIIO P l4HAt> Ul Vtl I Ml iVIWt «lt-1 ifMI |>I U« rMIA<l MMI M CIVIftO IP M It fVAtVMA |»V AS SMfitp) ic«:n 01 t*« MHi'.ti* im* tkVfMitirt ASVkkAiiAi iikvi MviiantAitun vtotiir. t»« ivr.ti m t»n tto A lo m H-iVMP tP III IA*4>VM1 A4HXII, I At UAni V la M H1A* IP intMlAlKII OAH Ml|0 IP V«(frA4U*l tKXtIII lOA' MU* IV SMIAS Alt* IVAMTUtiP IVMHIS U iHrtaiw iijh A IP iiSieor All HAnVi; •r-iP'r i<»i AiA'tiiH *i i i*pi •1 tai’tOtiSi'V in ii*Pir'*<if.i t« 4ii' (miim ** iMiiti* ti ua'Pi Mlthi. lauM ;<A>u OMNU JOHNTERRANCEHOMKliJC MAJKASKnVI ittfiAHOvronc um (jNoim MjuMUKii A aaam mmurntm C0N11AC1 fUKCHAaO/OmLOnff lAOIAAN MOnUtOMrAMU WMivniAn: namoinKMtaBtti _ - r- CMlfl«€CTNPa CPI iht »ni >ai I ni I •Pin: . .tnrifrt HAM I 71 IVlIHIAJ* ’P| hah til mirtari H M til HH*ii*ai HI It* 11 a 1/ lAi.ift vtfilf nai I IVJMf l.’i iM(iA»*4*< lai'K Ml Hin A t*i4r. *«t tl’ttv 'itj^ 1 l(«H >7|M|U» liV (Skim.UP *•• ’<«»■*) Itl ..A«B lAxtv M14C Ai ao«ii »i i«nv*M tt ittn lAiti 1*1*1 PiMpni' «l I *1 V) HMHM4 um fii^iii*« ii**p *4ii':tA»i At; • t«W|«»ai*ai ha *ii *vM*Aiai o»it hmp it» **«t it'lui mini ai 'iumii oi h A*r‘> i**r-scAM A«0«l|(l VII itVK-ItVIl MiHIMlAiAM I OIPI'AI lOT IP HVICI H4«tf VUtlU tp IH • OlffepllCaUa A*f> IP U1 1 iMl MPwtitmi PRELIMINARY PUNT SCHEDULE*GJSSSCi .V*;V«i*Vf.'.v.aassmsssa scale •caoTve *vr« DKCIOUOU9 TKKKS 7 AIVM.MIlfXtll I»|A AHirrAlM HMtnS 7f CM- aoM I ntnM CM 1 m (*• 0^MAfUBf OCA 4WM . 4<Ht rOfO »Mi iiS.V ACIptl •\wm A«* u'AiiiH nrniMU Acmni rxvHt »V CM OAO StJP * MV EXD Ml* a*ntt laHI A.'I0 HMUl AVAtA sate 7V iM 040 SPM • lev [D>E> OUMIM AV«M ac»um nnuaits 7V CM *MI 0PM 1 SOW EXI> lAH rite* iMVcnrii (MPI »M» ettiV HtUPVt CONtrtfMIUS TRftS OHNAMCi.TAl. IKKSS « w«t« VCU.C i j*. uav i*ta • HUA UMJCM lACa IMUMtCI » 10 *M » C Ml •cn ton • 4p • O '» Vkic ».M ia«0 laiifl wia ; viHr o ' VCMIlltAVl ahimcmm * 0CMMA if CM IV IM. tfMaiONliBfOtY 07/0tin <Nl lOUAA SMUIM flOJXT UAMAfitt fflVOV M IP crxTvcAnaN • aM»4pa«vai=r=i:KaA“TTTT(Tr :sTs: rOfiQ mivuiiii CITY COUMCIU & LJ B tvi r L FEDEUAItY7.2006 *'*0Jf£T STONEBAY LiXi> •*“OHONO, MINNESO PA {D(E> **** OBaOUOllS StiRUOS 19 m*M tJffPHMi 1 1 ’AiMMr iMrvi •tVAiAlt iHCm •MIUI } CM MH EO •19 M« Aicn caaumi MaMiMi HCHAtl liUttfiJ 0A0.IWU 1 CM rm IH . 4 *n>E> o 4/CM 1)1 rrac*-*! ■All* VVAIA JATtlaA uini ioa C'S » CM Ata ?H . I*(DE> O •1>**M MO f«%0 l/A^Ajir i(jva.a HticA -• CM AVI E>G> IMl oktW AMI o\dv • Ml visnt • Ml uhi« MlT-NaM I rm 1*11* mni I am AMMaaiM lAUMOM nv lA-HVO * Mli |K1*I* AAViKA i*aaa lUMA lA <•*•41*449 iMIlt UMMI lAtPA • HCM lAlAPCtI HA tp.iv EMi!> HU m, ^w ro(7^ HM AP.t. GXD 00$ fH. 4* LEX^ LANDFORM NINNfAPOLIi PHOCMIM pfRcmnALs L*Z1 HCKIAM •a* *1M>I«M> H**n lAI fDCi> cRAssra ANP cRowcoyiia AlAntO WM0 CVAVl CMMao^iMlfl AtUlfiiV* I AVI A-trui* > CM 00$ 40 * $9 IKQK IMl iMOa KKITT art Ma imbi aMMaafe oi ■STSma Sm ■no* MM rmf NAMT ixnvaumt ntojtriNO WO$OtXJBQ PRELMNARY LAND6CATE PLAN L2.1 £ Si I UNDER&ROUND-PARKINS r«3cr ___ <si »H ^ irl A_9 Application Submitted: December 22, 2004 Incomplete Luttcr: January 4, 2005 Application romplctc: Januar)’ 10,2005 60-l)ay Review Expiration (Site Plan ): March 11, 2005 120 Day Review Kxpiratinii (.Siiliilivision): May 20,2005 To: rrom: Date: Subject: Chair Ralin & Planning Conmiission Members Ron Moorsc, City Administrator Mike Gaffron, Planning I^irector^^jj^^. Jamiai*y 28, 2005 ^05-3081 “Stonebay Lofts** - Outlot 1*, STONLBAY (“2670 Kelley Parkway”) - Public Hearing: Continuation: Review revised site and building plans List of Exhibits A - Revised Plans (4 Sheets) - Full size and 11x17 B - Memo and Selected Exhibits of l-i3-05 The applicant has revised the proposed building by reducing it from 62 units to 57 units, by eliminating the west 48'. 1 his provides for a much shorter building frontage, and leaves a greater setback to Public Works, which staff feels is a plus. Required parking reduces to 112 stalls (excluding the guest unit), of which 82 arc provided in the underground parking, 23 are in the outside dedicated parking lot, and 7 arc in the adjacent street parallel parking, for a total of 112 stalls. The grading plan may need some additional refinement, and the Fire Marshal is reviewing the need for access doors, additional sidewalks, etc. However, in general, the revised plans appear to be responsive to many of the concerns noted by the Plaiuiing Commission on January 18. Issues for Consideration Flanning Conunission should review the site plan to identify any specific concerns you believe need to be addressed with the site plan. As a minimum. Planning Commission slunild address the following: 1. Acceptability of building design, materials, length, ht.^ tc. 2. Signage, building lighting. 3. Acceptability of laiul.scapc plan. 4. Any other issues of interest or concern. Staff Rcconinicndatioii im.'inninj’ Commission coiicimic.s lli.il llic proposed silc plan and Iniilding plans arc acceptable then a i ccoinmcndation Cor approval would be in order, siibjeel lo any conditions you leel are tippropriatc. If I'lanninc, Commission concludes that one or more of llie above lojiics rei|uircs fnrllicr consideiatioii then lablnii; may be appropriate. Provide the ai.plicani with clear <lircclion icjtardmB any cliaimes von conclude arc nccc.ssary. ^ ^ ' C33 sorts K»4 rM»>- •4TV«-> •••-•«.' •-• • k4 ^ a%-' kA>«»« M • •«# MM» a« •* —«a«»^t «• ••*»i>a ■ *•«*«• a ••< «A a»i.ar . I m»K^ a« a.M*a« •• «*<»< ar •%« fcr^iisi r«r I t* tan-* r«-. ••« -«.'• r»> ■ n’-H« *»«• m >a>M < a •> <M •* «w lav'twan^ •'-•a «ra««* • mt »»■«»»II 11» •'««a M k« •ai M*.•»*• »at»l aafea.* •• a M>4a »-*— a W« « — -♦ a **m>* *W • <a«»ia X «a -*• »x_ a-. •wt IMl S INM tPAlIXIIC SUUMARYl v*«. *«*-x. I w tkcau « M »-»aaa aa^J •«•••aa*MW »xa>4 <*H~ •••♦a* fs*« ft?»asnaj t • I tnal r t m •*. t •• a*a *aaa »■«>« nan* asm PUK suafAce slkuajiy Qccj,«»iMa < f*«a* •!■*»$• «<4to« M« rM« •a** 19 »a :i7r *9% <«• **9 •* hj » M t» flTT mmpjxztasiw: ■Will' ■—n. ■,=m-T. woKfc aeeoiON fl» U D N*^ I'P TaK L. >ptuArrtiooB a«JB« STONEBAY 0*l0t<x MiNNCaOri A LANDFORM •Tf^AM ® C2.1 r mm t mtmrn*9 -«%••«# • • *m * «N# «•# • • • •« »**«^- • <« «•. w ••« ••• ««f• «^ • •• «•• • » «««»••«•• *«• %« • MW • «v%4««» • ^ •« ••1^* 9 «*#*«• »«• 9 •^4i • M.M • ^ «#• «• -M ^ W, »« •. *zr7^r:r • •• *4 • »M»A4 •*•# M«l Ml »%.• I r«« *" « » • #»M* »«• •»• t • *.*«»•• ••• Ml • W# « H« '»• W%4i?fc •«*• "l» *«« • «M» *%* I *•»••••♦ • !•■« «9 • •« « • ••« ^0mi*% •»• Mf'« w*Mi«# I #•»«•»• W« !«•<• M ^ HI « mt% «4f»% • c^««^ »«i4l I « mr^— • »«|S« «•%«« ••• «l^.«^ Mfl p«i|«« • !■«••: H% I »>. H*-4i # !.«• »«#«• 9 IH H* •• »•* M •!•• kll • M II Hwa K* H«« M H IMIH 9I«M m0 N •••* •« «*• f» tfil'i.f-vpk4^ «#^ « W» « <|iW #• W 9M ** « ••••« I M ■ ««HMi iM. $$ !»>•• 9-1 feH Ajm IM MM** tf • «!#«# «# • • ••!«« Ih« 49»* •49* •' «• m4m HH'WI •H « M rilHimi Mw 4* « •# M MS - .J^r ^ 4 w. *0^^ i» •!••« 1-^ M ir«Mi mm •# Ht M' MtrM • ^9 -« •Mi» f <• W* •• « «^4 t— % fIM* Millie## — «HIH| % 4 Mil# • *M* «M4ri^ M 444 M*. • »M» ^ $09^ IM ^ MM Hi MH»l «*^ll • 4fH« •« M 94IM M.l M M |. ^4 H <|» H .f HI »•#• 4 WM »«9 •■ MM 0^0 toWM t< »# Hh. HM H *i *4 7i»^il|p| ■> Gofjhif »•*• Ont Cal "»* *•■ «•• «» «»»- -* «• M« •• ^ •«bw4^pv^4PM« r* t WOKK toKO«»lOM ito u ea K41 *T~r I natuAjtT^KJoa Mv*;« Sl'ONFBAY UHOMCX Ml r«NClU I A Z9M lANDFORM •^£* U««4 rarar <IMM><VM C3.1 F' rr\ THiR9-rL(%?‘5^-LEVEL-]fc:W!T^i:6y^^ TZV~r,le-------------— — — \n»-o V ^ li aB Od 0 (D UJz gvn a« ^ 5- 9»jV 5 ^ A- r l‘ -♦ v:ti^«k|ulli ss,:r;;:-’:ill|:;;^:V^*£;^^i im iiii istl ^iililll I_______:3Bl:.Tr^ -*-------- L— i»i «Ma €_^--------- jwgg fNiM»**a f ^ /V\ EA5T-ELEVATiON ^‘jJ-cnr-—“ EXTLRIOR FINISH MATERIALS DAMV ^rrTNT -f^AIMif! f'U»'F or !30Ltr!l«» ^Towe L»0»^T ^rjCCO PA^L^ JAMf*k l4AI«£7i PPrXXICT^ A«i|PiAa.T SMISdLP.5 K' »HADC?H LlKf l-< AND COLD* TO WC DPTTRKAINPO ' *4 < > .f », .. .V^ I «kM roM ••«< InlB3!l?ss:.Ml55MiniTnlM5a?£s:.M.li!!5Mini L.....,r.j^ I___ja»*aa.-«^ ^ _rrp#^ 2e^rai*2f Li i>£5T-t:LEVATiOH »%«• iSM « ssiViilli a. i^^r}«B^iSiiir ?/»Vg8!4il|i.^ 177- • r»i c, # A *1/^ iil|V|»||^|^^ iiii'lyjj^i .••■•-ss ■■ill '7fiil iiil g|gg«iiiliyi!.M<nT. flii S!il:i|||is ’^'.ii.w'i AtAjt. ^ L_i___ vn»-o tovlg41 § o CD lUzgvn ll!l! I ii II A- A|i|iliCBlloii Siilmilticil: December 22,2004 Incoiiiplete letter: January 4,2005 A|i|illcatloii Complclc: January 10, 2005 60-Day Review Ripiralioii (Site I'lan): March 11,2005 120 Day Review expiration (SubtlivUioii): May 20,2005 To: rroiii: Date: Subject: (Jhair Ralin & Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Adminislralor Mike Gaffron, Planning Diiectoiy^j^j^^ January 13, 2005 1/05-308 1 “Stonebay LoHs*’ - Onllot E, S FONEBAY ("2670 Kelley Parkway") - Public Hearing: 1) RPUD Amendment / Site Plan & Building Plan Approval 2) Final Plat Approval Summary of Request New applicants request an amendment ofthc Stonebay RPUD for changes to the owner-occupied coiKlominium (‘‘Lolls ’*) building and site plan, requesting final site plan and building plan approvals as well as final plat approval for Outlot li as a single 2.5 acre lot for tlic condominium building. With a new builder and a new architect, this new proposal is similar to the single 3-story building proposal IManiiingConuni.ssionrcvicwedlastOctober.l'hesubrnitledplansidentifyfil units rather than tlie 62 units originally approved. Property Owner: ZB Constniction, Inc. - Arnic Zachiiian (purchase agreement with John Terrance Homes LLC) Planner/F^nglnccn ' Lnndfomi ----------------------- ---------------------- Architect: Bruce Lchrcr Staff Kccoiiimeiidatioii: Planning (?ommi.s.sion .should review tlie list ofpotcntinl issues and detcnninc wI»cthcrthcsc and/or additional issues raiuii c discussion. An option is to review this site plan fuilhci at your I'ebmary 2 work .se.ssion. Key to your review is to detei inine whether the major levisions ai e acceptable, especially the conversion from two buildings to one building . IfPlanning Coinniission amcludes that the |)roj)oscd revisions are acceptable, then a recommendation tor approval would be in order. If Planning Commission concludes that one or more of the topics identified in this memo icquircs further considciatioii. then tabling would be appropriate. #05-3081 Slmebiy LoRf January 13* 2005 Pace 2 Lilt of Exhibits A - Application B - Nairalive C * Applicants Submittals: Site Plan sheets: CO.l - Title Sheet Cl. I - Existing Conditions C2.1 - Site Plan C3.J - Grading Plan C4.1 - Driveway Plan and Profile L2.1 - Preliminary Landscape Plan Building Plan sheets: A~2: Building Floor Plans A-2: Building Elevation Views D - City Engineer Comments 1-11-05 E - Excerpts fiom Original Stonebay RPUD Approvals: 1 - Document Excerpts b) General Development Plan Approval Resolution No. 4915 c) PUD 4 Agreement 2 - Plan Excerpts F - Plat Map G - Property Owners List H - Plamiing Commission Minutes of October 18,2004 (Application /#04-3062)i t f i #05*3081 Stoiicbay Lofts January 13,200S Pace 3 Building Location and Design Changes Tills new proposal by applicant’s architect Bruce Lelu cr includes many of the elements of llie plan reviewed by the Planning Commission in October2004, but also incoiporales a number of design revisions that were suggested during the October review. Note that: The original approval was for two buildings connected only by the underground parking level, with aterrace level providing significant separation between the two buildings. Tlie current plan, similar to the October2004 plan, connects the two wings above ground. Wliat originally appeared as two separated perpendicular buildings will now appear as a single L-shaped building. To address the Planning Commission’s past comments about reducing the perceived building height and massing, the profile of the southerly wing has been reduced to two levels at the west and east ends, and varyingpeak heights have been added. Highest building peak hei^it, at elev. 1071.33 ’, is liigher tlian tlie 1066.8' peak originally approved in 2002, due in part to the use of 9' ceilings and in part to site drainage considerations that required the lowest floor elevation be raised 3 feet. The current plan’s higliest individual peak is 3 feet lower than the continuous peak reviewed in October. 3) The elevation plans incorporate a variety of facade elements and materials wliich help to visually break up the 376' length of the building. The garage level now has a single entrance/exit point, at the east end of the building. A lower- level party room, patio, exercise room and hot tub room have been incoiporated at the interior comer of the garage level, reducing the possible number of stalls in the garage level. 5) The west wing completely meets the 80' setback from the adjacent Public Works site as was originally required, with no encroachment of building elements oi decks. Building Design and Location One Building vsTwo Buildings. Tlie two originally proposed 3-story buildings were perpendicular, the fiont building parallel to Kelley Parkway being approximately 260' long by 75' wide, and the peipendicular building being approximately230'x 75'. These were to share a below-grade garage that connected the two buildings, but were visually separated by a distance of about 40-45' above ground. The layout provided for a tciracc between the two buildings, over the garage, providing clear visual separation between the two buildings, which helped to reduce the visual bulk and massing of the two structures. #05-3081 Stoncbay Lorti January 13,2005 Page 4 The current proposal is for a single L-sliaped building, in virtually the same footprint as llic originally pro|X)scd garage level, but filing in the open terrace space with building. Tlie applicants note that thi.s allows for laiger individual units and provides spaces for certain amenities not provided in the original concept. These include a partyroom/hottub/cxercise room at the rear of the garage level; an undefined common space and a party room at the southeast comer of the first floor level; and an undefined common space (individual storage? mechanical?) above that of the first floor. The lobby is located along the south facade, 100' from the east end of the building. The proposed 62 individual dwelling units range from 1400 sf to 1700 sf in area. The proposed building will have a visual fiont (south) facade of376'and an cast facade of about 240'. The soutliciist outside comer is angled to parallel the angled street lot line, with a setback ofaboul 18* from the adjacent street. The overall building is proposed in approximately the same location with generally the same setbacks as originally approved. Plamiing Commission should discuss the pluses and minuses of the one-building proposal as compared to the two separated buildings, in temis of amenities gained or lost, visual impact, etc. Site Circulation^ Parking . While the exterior parking layout and circulation is generally as originally approved, access to the garages has been sigiuficantly revised. Rather than an entrance/exit at each end, the garage will now have a single entrance/exit at the soutlieast comer of the bu i Iding, accessing directly to Cascade Lane. The City Engineer has recommended that a second garage access be developed. The Orono Fire Marshal has been asked to comment on this, and we expect to have his conunents before the meeting. The exterior front parking lot ranges from 3 to 5 feet above street level, with a 3:1 landscaped slope between the street sidewalk and the parking area. Tlie frant parking lot is one-way, with angled stalls, and meets the required 20’ lot line setback. 'file City has a parking requirement of 2.0 stalls per unit. The plan layout shows a total of 78 standard and 4 HC accessible stalls in the garage level; and 2 1 standard and 2 accessible stalls in the defined parking area on site. Adding tb- 7 paral lei stalls directly abutting the site on Kelley Parkway, the total is 112 stalls or 1.81 per unit, rather tlian the 2.1 indicated on the plans, 'fhe City requirement is 2.0 stalls per unit, or a total of 122; the plan appears to be 10 stalls short. Applicant must define where an adctitiuiial 10 .Ntalfs can be foiiiid. Sla/Twill not support a variance to the minimum parking requirement. I #05-3081 Stoiicbay LoRs January 13,2005 Pages Foundation Gradinjg. Retaining Walls, The applicants have proposed to grade 3:1 or flatter slopes along tlic nortli wall of the west wing and Uic northerly 3 sides of the north wing, rather than using retaining walls per prior plans. This will involve some filling within the 26' wetland setback where no fill is normally allowed, and filling within the MCWD’s 35' buffer; however, there is no fill proposed in tlie wetltind itscl f. The building footprint and balconies will not encroach either Orono ’s setback or MCWD’s buffer. This filling was anticipated during the earlier PUD approvals, and is acceptable subject to returning it to a vegetated state after construction is completed. Priorplans for this site have prop' retaining walls lo provide fora building perimeter sidewalk and individual unit direct access to grade. The current proposal will not provide access to grade from the first story balconies. Retaining walls arc proposed in the area of the garage entrance. I'he City Engineer notes that some of these walls will exceed 4' in height, and a separate engineered design and detail must be provided by the applicant. The proposed 3' wide sidewalk along the west and north sides of the west wing does not appear to be completely compatible with the gr ading plan. It is on a 3:1 slope at the rear o f the bui Iding and may require a section of 1' retaining wall to maintain slopes no greater than 3:1. At the west end of the building, proposed grading must be changed so that the sidewalk docs not function as a drainageway. Building Height Original Approval. The Lofts building was originally granted a var iance to the 30' RF UD height limit, allowing a 3 8'defined height. The building height as originally reviewed by staff used an estimated garage floor level of 1019' and a peak roof elevation at approximately 1066' I. The original PUD approval grants a height variance for tliis plan for a defined height of 3 8' measur ed fronr “fiiral average grade at liiglr side ”. Because this is a Rl^UD, and due to the topograpliic issues with the iirleirl to revise grade over much of the site, the height variance was deeirred appropriate. New Proposal . The current proposal has a variety ofroof peak elevations, with the highest peak, at the center of the west wing, labeled on lire plan at an assuirred 41'7" above the first floor. This translates to a peak height of 1 071.3' (altliougb the plan scales to nearly 1074'), or approximately 5-7' higher than the original approvals. 'Phis is due to two apparent factors - the addition of at least 3' in height due to increasiirg unit ceiling heights fronr 8' to 9', aird lire need to have a nriniiniim garage floor elevation of 1 020' as a rcsiiU of final grading/slonrrvvater systcirr overHow parameters for lire development. 1 ‘roiir stafTsperspective, the faclois that have resulted in the overall height incr ease arc not unreasonable, and iir (he case of lire 1020' garage level, not avoidable. This accounts for perhaps 4' of the 5-7'. The applicants have provided a varied transition ofpeak heights with peak height reductions at the west and cast ends of the west wiirg, as was suggested by Planning Commission to the prior applicants. r #05>3081 S'toncbay Loftf January 13,2005 Page 6 One way to reduce Ihc height would be to reduce the roof pilclics to less than 12/12. As designed, the building will have a (not visible) ncarly-Hat roofbehind the pitched sections, at about the same !:cight as the peaks to allow for runofTand avoid snow accumulation. Reducing tlie roofpitch could potentially reduce the peak heights (i.c. reducing to 8/12 would reduce llicm by 4') but may ultimately be less allraclivc... Purely from a numerical perspective, the proposal has a defintd height of about 37', based on an average of highest gable at 1065.08' and a high side finished grade of 1028'. This meets the numerical parameter of the original approval. From a visual perspective. Planning Commission should consider whether the peak heights being generally 5-7' higher than originally approved, are jusli fied by the site stormwater constraints, by the market demand for 9' ceilings, and by the design elements incorporated to reduce the impact of th.^ added height. Planning Commission should also consider whether the visual impacts ofthe added height are positivciyor negatively affected by tlic increased length ofthe bui Iding. Also consider whether the location witliin the development and the other uses proposed along Kelley Parkway have an efi'ect on the visual impact of this building. If Planning Commission concludes for some reason that tlie peak height increase of 5-7' is unacceptable, this should be discussed with the developer to determine what measures can be taken to reduce the height or its impacts. ujilding Material.^ facade. Tlicbuilding f :adcs are intended to include 40-60% coverage by two types of iextured cultured stone, with the balance to be of fiber cement horizontal siding (‘Hardy-board* ty}i.) u-ing bnth textured lap and cedar shingle styles. Soffit, fascia and trim will be maintenance ficepre-finished metal, shingles will be commercial grade asphalt, and wbrinxv' are proposed as pre-finished metal clad wood ‘single Ivang’ (my assumption is that these are casements or sliders). Visual .Rlcmcpts The architectural i ciulei ings show basically two window styles used tin oughoiit the building - a larger picture window syulem with angled iij)j)cr comers, and single, double or triple windows willi a veitically divided upper l.al f 'fhese window elements add to the cliaracter and visual acccplabi lity ofthe design. The main entrance features pillars and a half-moon feature. Gable ends each appear to include a louvcird panel feature 'fhe variation in design elements, such as bump-outs, offset gables, varied levels ofslonc vcisus siding, along the length ofthe building sliould help to deeiease the perception of length. ft sliould be made clear to tlie applicants (hat the City’s expectation and requirement will be to include cdj ofthe detail elements as .shown on the renderings and elevation views, in die final biiiidi.v^ construction. #05-309 1 Sfoitcbiy LfOfls January 13,2005 Pace? Landscaping, Lighting, Signage Landscape Plan . Planning Commission should review Uic landscape plan. Preliminary review hystaff indicates an acceptable level ofplantings of trees and slirubs. The City's landscaping consultant will be asked to conunent. In general, the 41,000 s.f. building footprint requires 1 overstory tree per l,000s.f. footprint, or 41 such trees. At least J0% of required overstory trees must be coniferous. Applicants propose 5 ash, 10 maple, 15 quaking aspen, and 4 weeping willo^v, olus 3 spruce and 12 omainental trees (wliich count 2-1 toward tlie overstory requirement); doing the math, luc total reaches 43, although tlic mix should include more conifers. Tlie41,000s.f building would also require 137shnibsasamininuun;lhis standard is more than met, with approximately 300 slnubs shown on the plan. Ligiiting . llic developer should be asked to describe all outside lighting proposed for tliis building otlier dian the typical street lights, and provide a lighting plan sheet for such lighting. Signage . 'Ilic developer sliould indicate any identi fication signage intended for the building. Some site traffic signage is noted on Sheet C2.U Impervious Siu~face Coverage . Impei-vious surface coverage in thcRPUD District is limited to 50%. Wliilc Sheet C2.1 indicates the Lofts site has 52.4%jcrvious area, the Stonebay project in its entirety has an impervious area well below the 50% limit, so this is not an issue in staffs opinion. Engineer’s Comments Please review the City Engineer's comments. Exhibit D. Final Plat Oullot E was created spec* -tally for the Lofts, and must be final platted a.s a Ix)t in order for it to be used as a building site. The finai ,.latti.ig process establishes the neccssaiy perimeter drainage and utility casements which were not required of it as an oiitlot. The required wetland Conservation and Klowagc Easement was established during the eaiiiersubdivision aj)j)iovals, so tliat need not be ruiuired; however, the wetlands should be shown on the new plat drawings. No plat drawings have been submitted by the applicant at this time. Tliis approval process is fiinctionally appreval ofPha.se 2 of the Stonebay residential development. Phase 2 final plat approval will include pa^/inent ofpark fees, sewer and wata* connection fees, and storinwalcr Sc drainage trunk fees csfablishcd within Exhibit M of the PUD 4 Agreement. r #05*3081 Sfoncbay Lofts January 13,2005 Page 8 Issues for Consideration Planning Commission should review the site plan to identify any specific concerns you believe need to be addressed with the site plan. As a minimum, Planning Commission should address the following: 1. Acceptability of building expansion and the convereion from 2 buildings to one - visual impacts, other impacts. 2. Acceptability of increased building height. 3. Acceptability of proposed building materials and building design. 4. Whether a parking variance is merited; if not, applicant must provide 10 additional stalls witliin the site. 5. Signage, building lighting. 6. Acceptabi lity of landscape plan. 7. Any otlier issues of interest or concern. Staff Recoinmeodation If Planning Conunission concludes (hat (lie proposed site plan and building plans are acceptable, then a recoimiiendation for approval would be in order, subject to any conditions you feel are appropriate. If Plamiing Commission concludes that one or more of the above topics requires flirtlier consideration, then tabling may be appiopiiate. Provide the applicant witli clear direction regarding any changes you conclude arc necessary. r *1 - .• .aeii .'nHN'HJJJLMIHuWiLjC <la «t« «vk »•« K S’ K V O U e> fv-« iT~r^ L. - >**CT***m a too* STONKBAY OHONO. ><Mi*««lLSOr A landform ■ »>•!« •ZJZTJT ruiAVMt'' LMfiKVirvMi T 1 I mB<;nestroo i^osene i|r||Anclerfik& Associates Engineers & Architects 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul. MN 55II3 Office; 651-636-4600 • Fax; 65I-636-I3II www.honestroo.com b January 11,2005 • Mr. Mike GafTron Planning Director City ofOrono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Re: Stonebay Lofls File No. 139-05-000 Plat No. 05-3081 Dear Mike: Wc have reviewed the revised plans for the proposed Sloncbay Ixjfts Development. Tlic site is located along the westerly side of the Stonebay subdivision north of Kelley Parkway and adjacent to the City’s Public Works Building. Wc have the following comments with regards to engineering matter.*;: • Sheet C3.1 shows proposed retaining wall con.struction at the underground parking entrance. This wall shown exceeds 8-fect in height. All retaining walls that exceed 4-fcct in height require a separate engineered design and detail submittal for review and approval. • The revised plans show only one access to the underground parking, whereas the previous submittal had two. We would rcconunend that a second access to the underground parking be added. Stop signs should be added for outbound traffic from the underground parking. The plans should include a pedestrian crossing sign at the crossing .shown near the middle of the outdoor parking area. The applicant should provide the City with the project S WPPP for the Pha.se II Construction Site Pcmiit and a copy of the Notice of Coverage Certificate prior to starting work on site. The grading plan should include erosion and sediment control details and notes. Items such as fiber blanket installation and location, inlet protection, stockpile locations, silt fence maintenance requirements, construction entrances, and any otlici issues relating to erosion and .sediment control should be clearly shown on the final plans. The final plans should identify the name and phone number for engineering contact person regarding erosion and sediment control issues. The 3-foot wide sidewalk on the west side of the building is u drainage way. The applicant should provide calculaltuiis justifying that tlic 6-iiicli sauitaiy uud water services arc adequate for the proposed building. Final plans should include provision.s for managing sump pump and roof drain water. Parking lot and new roadways arc to have B618 curb and gutter Plans should be submitted to the fire marshal for review of fire hydrant coverage and tire vehicle accc.ss to the site. 1; patios instead of balconies arc instullcd on the ground level, the gi admg plan .should be levised to eliminate tlic steeper slopes cuiTcnlly .shown along the north side of the building. • Si. r.iul. St. Cloud. Kochejtcr. Willmar, MN ■ Mllw.iukee. Wl • Chicago. IL Affirni^tlvv Afllon/rqu#l Opporiunit/ tmpioyer #nd k'mp.'oyee Oi»n«cl f i f If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENB, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono r«i .. ... .. 1 • # CITYof ORONO cr:*- f ^ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO..^1 3. 4. Provision of evidence to the City of Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) drainage permit approval for construction of the regional stuiTn water pond within Mn/DOT right-of-way, andofMn/DOT permit approval for construction of public street, street amenities and utilities within the Mn/DOT right-of-way. Payment to the City of Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fees for the development of the Property in the amount established in the Development Fees Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B. Payment of Sewer and Water Connection Charges in the amount established in the Development Fees Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B. 5. Payment of Park Dedication Fee in the amount established in the Development Fees . Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B. WHEREAS, the CityCoimcil,Citystc»Jand consultants have reviewed the plans for this PUD application and hereby specify approval of each Plan Sheet attached within Exhibit F and identify them as part of the official record for Planned Unit Development No. 4. ionNOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based on the findings of Rcsoluti^.. No. 4S52 and on the findings enumerated in this Resolution, the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby grant Preliminary Plat Approval and General Development Plan Approval for Planned Unit Development No. 4, subject to die following conditions: 1.General DcvelopmeDt Plan Approval is granted subject to conditions established within Resolution 4852 and enunierated herein, and subject to the conditions to be established within the Plaimed Unit Development No. 4 Agreement and other pertinent documents. RPUD Development Standards and General Conditions. a) The total number of residential dw'cliing units shall be 162 units including 62 Lofts units, 47 two-story tow^nliomes and 53 rambler towiiliomes, as configured on die approved site plan, Sheet C2.1, Revised Site Plan dated 1-24-03. Page 4 of 18 n • . mm CITY of ORONO -I" RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4 9) r.___ Street ligliting along Kelley Parkway adjacent to the property shall be provided by the Developer and shall be of a style, number, height and location approved by the City Council. Public street lighting along Kelley Parkway shall be installed and maintained by the utility company through a standard agreement between the City and the appropriate public utility company. Interior private street lighting shall be at a low level consistent with the surrounding rural residential character while providing the neccs.sary level of security. Such lighting shall be of a style, number, height and location approved by the City Council. Interior street ligliting shall be maintained by tlie homeowners association. Final decisions by the Developer regarding cjlors, types and qualities of building materials shall be subject to City staff approval, and shall be in confoimity with the sample colors, types and qualities documented by reference in Exhibit C. Final building designs shall be reviewed by the Planning Director prior to issuance of building permits to ensure compliance with the architectural standards of the RPUD District. The separation distances between townhome buildings arc acceptable as shown on the approved General Development Plan, with the majority being at least 15' at the nearest point with greater separation as the building walls diverge. Within each Phase of development, if any changes to plans result in separations Ic.ss than 15', such plans shall be subject to review by the City Council and Developer shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council lliat suitable architectural styling, building orientation or other methods will be used to mitigate the lack of separation. Anyrevisions to building separations, hydrant locations or fixturesizes/types deemed necessary by the Orono Fire Marshal as required for fire-protection piiipn.scs shall be made by the Developer. I he berm along the Public Works site cast boundary may be extended eastward as shown on Sheet C2.3 to a.ssist in cstablisliing a buffer to the Lolls; however, any buffer walls, plantings or other im|)roveinciits shall be located on the Lofts site as shown in the approved General Development Plan. The Developer shall liikc extraordinary efforts to minimize impacts on existing vegetation and enhance screening and buffering in the area northwest Page 5 of 18 r CITYofORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL g) i) NO.4 ^ ^ of the Lofts west building. The City’s Public Works operation may be a 24- hour operation dependent on weather and other emergency situations A disclosure regarding the Lofts buildings proximity to Public Works shall be required of Lofts buyers to help limit the expected complaints about City , activity and noise from the Public Works site. All residential buildings including the Lofts shall have pitched roofs as shown on Sheets AL2, A2.2 and A3.2 to maintain a rural residential character. Roofs for the Lofts units shall be low-pitched rather than steeply pitched to decrease the impact of excess building height. Developer shali submit proposed conditions for developme nt of the commercial outlots to maintain the natural amenity values of the pond and protect the perimeter of the pond from encroachment by commercial development. Final landscaping plans shall be subject to the recommendations of Wallace Case as enumerated in his letter dated 1 1/6/02 as revised or amended per the Memorandum by Tom Kirby dated Januaiy 17, 2003. The pertinent Homeowners Association(s) shall be responsible foi permanent maintenance of landscaping per the Landscaping provisions of the RPUD District. As a condition of the PUD No. 4 Agreement, Developer shall provide landscape pcrfoimancc security as required in the RPUD District standards. j) The following variance to the RJ^UD development standards is hereby granted: Building height variaiice for Lofts building from 30’ to 38' defined height (menn; ‘d from final average grade at higli side) Building setback for tumbler townhomc Unit 27 to be 20' from the north property boundary and for rambler towrJtome Units 28-29 to be 10' from the iioith boundary where a 35' setback is the standard, as depicted on Sheet 2.1, Revised Site Plan dated 1-24-03.. Page 6 of 18 e Cixy OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT NO. 4 AGREEMENT “2550" WAYZATA BOULEVARD DEVELOPER: DAHLSTROM DEVELOPMENT CORPORA! ION LLC NAME OF DEVELOPMENT: STONEUAY THIS AGKKKMENT, made and entered into this day of ____2003, by and betAveen the City of Orono, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter called “City”), and Daldstrom Development Corporation LLC, a Minnesota Corporation, its heirs, successors and assigns (hereinafter called “Developer”). WITNESSE aH: WHEREAS, the Developer has made application to the City Council for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezoning and tormal plat application for property located at “2550" Wayzata Boulevard, such dcvelopiiient to include tlie following dements: 1. Rezoning of the portion of the Property north of Kelley Parkway from RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential District to RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development District for construction of 162 residentiril multi-family dwelling units on a portion of the site comprising approximately 41 acres, such development to be known as “STONEDAY”. 2. Creation of two commercial outlots south of Kelley Parkway to be rezoned and developed at a later date. 3. As part of the residential development, construction of Kelley Parkway as a public street, as well as construction of municipal sewer, water, and storm sewer systems to serve the proposed development; and WHEREAS, on January 27, 2003 the City Council granted General Development Plan Approval for the proposed development subject to conditions per Resolution No. 4915, on the condition that the Developer enter into this agreement to provide for conlormance with the City’s Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinances, and to provide for the installation of and establish responsibilities for maintenance of improvements associated with the development. NOW, TIIEREFORl^, in consideration of the premises, and of the actual promises and conditions hereinafter contained, it is hereby agreed as follows: A. General Terms atid Conditioii.s 1. I’ropcity Description. This Planned LInit Development No. 4 Agreement for Dalilstrom Development Coq)oratioii LLC applies to the following described property located in llcimcpin County, Minnesota: •• • . ■ Developer InitiaUl i • t ; r- vi i ; t, '■ i ; > r ..Xity Clcrk ? f; r 2. 3. 4. 4^ Outlet B, Willow Properties Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except Parcel 201 and 201a Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 27-57 (hereinafter the "Property"). Property Descriptions after Platting. The property descriptions after platting and dedication of right-of-ways for Kelley Parkway, Willow Drive and Highway 12 sliall be as follows: Lots 1 through 46, Block 1; Lots I througli 10, Block 2; and Outlots A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, 1, J and K, STONEBAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Zoning. Ihe portion of the Property located north of Kelley Parkway, comprising Lots 1 through 46, Block 1, Lots 1 tlirough 10, Block 2, and Outlots E, F, G, H, I, J and K is zoned Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) District. The portion of the Property located south of Kelley Parkway, including Kelley Parkway and Outlots A, 13, C and D is zoned RK-IB (PUD) Single Family Rural Residential District, and shall remain zoned RR-IB (PUD) until such time that the City approves a rezoning. Permitted Uses. Within the Property the perrrutted uses arc as follows: a) Within Lot 46, Block 1 and Lot 10, Block 2, the permitted uses shall be common open spaces, private streets and driveways, utility systems, sidewalks, retaining walls and other landscaping features ancillary to the residential development^ including approved signage and lighting. No acc-’.ssory buildings except as indicated on the approved plans shall be allowed within Lot 46, Block 1 or Lot 10, Block 2. b) Within Lots 1 through 45, Block 1, and Lots I througli 9, Block 2, the permitted uses shall be attached residential dwelling units. c) Outlots E, F, G and H shall not be used until they are platted in:o Lots and Blocks. After such platting has been completed, within the designated commons Lots permitted uses shall include common open spaces, private streets and driveways, utility systems, sidewalks, retaining walls and other landscaping features ancillary to the residential development including approved signage and iigiitiiig. No accessory buildings except as indicated on the approved plans shalfbe alirwed within the commons Lots. Within the areas to be platted for individual ownership, the pennitted uses shall be attached residential dwelling units. i) The maximum numbers of residential dwelling units within the residcntially zoned portions of the property north of Kelley Parkway are 62 LoTs units, 49 two-story towniiomes, and 51 rambler townhorncs. Page 2 of 19 Developer Initial*^ f ^ City Clerk Initial i/j 5. e) Outlots A and D shall not be used except for public recreational trail use until such time that they arc platted into Lots, at which time their permitted uses will be further designated; except that Outlot A may be used for a temporary sales trailer and parking area h)r the residential portion of development until such time that the trailer can be moved onto the residential puition of the property. f) Outlots B and C shall be used for regional stomiwater ponding purposes and public recreational trail purposes. No other uses will be pennitted for Outlets B and C. Other uses shall not be allowed except by amendment of this PUD agreement. Site Access. The only residential access to adjoining public streets shall be onto Kelley Parkway, except that future development within Outlot H shall be allowed one shared driveway access onto Willow Drive. Access driveway locations shall be as shown on the approved site plan. Exhibit A. A righl-ia/righl-out access from Willow Drive to Outlot A may be used to access the parking area for the temporary sales trailer until such time that the trailer is moved onto the residential perPon of the property. Future long-term access to Outlot A from Willow Drive shall be determined at the time Outlot A is developed. Future access to Outlot D shall be solely from Kelley Parkway. No direct access from Outlots A and D shall be allowed to Highway 12. Internal circulation for the Property shall be via private driveways, sidewalks and parking areas within the defined common areas. Duildine Design and Construction. All residential buildings on the Property shall be constructed according to final plans which shall first be certified by the Planning Director as being in conformity with the approved plans attached as Exhibit G to ensure compliance with the architectural standards of the KPUD District. Final decisions by the Developer regarding colors, types and qualities of building materials .shall be subject to City staff approval to confirm their conformity with the approved sample colors, types and qualities documented by reference in Exhibit G. Construction of all buildings shall be in conformance with the building codes and regulations adopted by the City of Orono. Any substantial changes to the gross square footage, footprint/wall/roof dimensions or ocfincd building heights shall require a prior amendment to this Agreement. “Substantial changes” shall include, but not be limited to, (1) an increase in gross square footage or foolprint/vvaliyroof dimensions of any unit so as to require a rcplatting to keep the unit within its ownership Lot; (2) any increase in building height for rambler townlioine units or two-story townhome units that would result in the need for a variance to the standard 30' height limit; or (3) a one foot or greater increase in height of the loft building above the 38' defined height approved per Resolution No. 4915. The separation distances between lowuhome buildings shall be a minimum of 15* c.<ccpt where specifically shown as less than 15' cn the approved General DeveU pmeut P»an. Within each Phase of development, if any changes to plans icsult in building sopaialioias less Hum 15', such plans shall be sul-yect to prior review and approval by ihc City Council. Page 3 of 19 Developer Initial ^ City Clerk Initial A/7 7. LandscapiiiK. The approved landscaping plan attached to this Agreement as Exhibit E shall be strictly adhered to, with the following conditions: a) The beiiTi along the Public Works site cast boundary may be extended as siiown on Sheet C2.3 to assist in establishing a buffer to the Lofts; however, any buffer walls, plantings or otiier improvcinents shall be located on the Lofts site as show*i in the approved General Development Plan. The Developer shall take extraordinary efforts to inininiize impacts on existing vegetation and enhance screening and buffering in the area northv/est of the Lofts west building. b) Final landscaping plans shall be subject to the recommendations of Wallace Case as enumerated in his letter dated 11/6/02 as revised or amended per the Memorandum by Tom Kirb^ dated January 17, 2003. d*hc Homeowners Association(s) shall be responsible for permanent maintenance of landscaping per the Landscaping provisions of the RI*UD District. c) Prior to commencement of each Phase of development, Developer hi. .11 provide Landscaping Performance Security fer the land.scaping associated with that Phase in the form of a Letter of Credit in an amount equal to one and one-half times the value of such landscaping improvements as determined by the City. I'hc letter of credit shall provide for reimbursement :o the City of all expense, incuned by the City for engineering, legal, contracting or other fees in comiection with making or completing such improvements should the Developer fail to complete them. In the event that construction of the project is not completed within the time prescribed by building pennits and other approvals, the city may, at its option, complete the work required at the expense of the Developer and the surety. The Letter of Credit .shall be provided prior to th** issuance of any residential building permits and sh».il be valid for a period of time equal to two (2) hill growing sCi.sons after the dale of installation of the landscaping. The City may allow an extended period cf time for completion of all lancKscaping if the delay is due to conditions which are reasonably beyond the control of the developer. Extensions which may not exceed nine iiioiuus, may be granted due to seasonal or weather conditions. When an cxtciusion is granted, the city shall require such additional security as it deems appropriate. 8- LiKhting. Site lighting shall adhere to the approved lighting plan attached to this agreement as Exhibit II. Street lighting along Kelley Parkway adjacent to the property .shall be provided by the Developer and shall be of a style, number, height and location approved by the City Council. Public street lighting along Kelley Parkway shill be installed and maintained by the utility company through a standard agieernenl be ween the City and the appropriate public utility corunariy. Interior private street lighting .shall be at a low level consistent with the sunounding rural residential cliaracler while providing the necessary level of security. Such lighting shall be of a .style, iminbcr, hciglit and location approved by the City Council. Interior street lighting shall be maintained by *he homeowners association. Page 4 of 19 Developer Initial City Clerk Liitia? ^5.Signage. Signage on the site shall be limited to the required traffic control signage, building designation signs, and the approved monument signs as shown on the approved Signage Plan attached hereto as Exhibit I. Parking and traffic control signage shall be installed subject to City strff and City Engineer approval. 10. Additional Conditions of Approval are documented in tlic Special Conditions Memo attached to tliis Agreement as Exhibit K. B. Development Phasing 1. 2. 4. STONEBAY is intended to be developed in a '.umber of sequential Phar.es over a period of 3-4 years. The various Phases have been designated as Phase One and hiiture Phase j A through D, per the Phasing Plan attached hereto as Exhibit L. Th'. sequential order of development of the various Future Phases has not been absolutely established, but relies to some extent on market conditions and demand. Therefore, tliis Agreement will pertain primarily to the Phase One improvements, and shall be amended as necessary prior to commencement of iinproveiiicnts fc<r each Future Phase. The Pnase One improvements include the construction of Kelley Parkway and associated curb £.nd gutter, sidewalks, lighting, signage and landscaping; construction of municipal sewer and water mains and facilities within the right-of-way of Kelley Parkway; construction of stormwater piping and facilities including the regional pond south of Kelley Parkway; construction of private roads and driveways as well as private and public sewer and water lines and facilities within the area designated as Phase One as shown on Exhibit L; and general site grading for Phase 1 and future Phases. Phase One of the development includes the construction of 28 two-story tewnhome units and 26 rambler townhome units. Commencement of Phase One improvements shall not occur unth Developer has made payment to the City of the prorated portion of the Development Fees (Park Dedication Fee. Stonn Water and Drainage Trunk Fee, and Sewer and Water Connection Charges) for Phase One. Commencement of Future Phase improvements shall not occur until Developer has made payment to the City of the prorated portion of the Development Fee; associated with said Future Phase. The Development Fees for each Phase shall be based on the proportional acreage or number of units within each Phase depending on the method of calculation of each fee, relative to the total project. I'he schedule of Development Fees is attached hereto as Exhibit M. Nothing in tliis Agreement is intended to proliibit the commencement of Future Phases prior to completion of earlier Phases, nor to establish a specific sequence for the various Phases. Completion of Phase I improvements shall be required before commencement of any Future Phase, except that Phase 2 grading and utilities may be commenced prior to completion of Phase 1 improvements. Page 5 of 19 Developer Initial City Clerk Initial <; C. Covenants 2. 3. 4. 5 6. The Developer shall establish covenants governing the development and containing as a minimum the following elements: 1. Creation of Homeowners Association(s). Establishing rights & responsibilities of HA(s) and/or others. Granting of the various required easements as noted within this and otlier approval documents. Addressing property maintenance responsibilities, including maintenance of the common areas, piivate roads and other facilities, and the storiiiwater pond. Establishing use restrictions. Establisliing architectural and landscaping standards, including maintenance thereof Establishing specific covenants to address the following: a. The City ’s Public Works operation may be a 24-!:our operation dependent on weather and other emergency situations. Covenants shall include a provision requiring disclosure to Ixifts unit buyers regarding the Lofts buildings proximity to Public Works to help limit the expected complaints about City activity and noise from the Public Works site. FuiUier, a disclosure regarding the proximity to potential Public Works operations of the most northwesterly units of the rambler townhomes shall be required of the buyers of said units to help limit the expected complaints about City activity and noise from such operations. Language should be incorporated that documents police department accessibility (right-of-entry) and rights to enforce parking or other laws or ordinances on private roads or common areas. Incorporate into the language an acceptable definition of “Drainage and Utilities Easement** as used on the plat drawings. c. P_v Installation and Maintenance of Improvements 1.Immyenients: In accordance with the policies and ordinances of the City of Orono, the following described public or private improvements (hereinafter collectively called the “Improvements**) shall be constructed and installed by the Developer according to the terms and conditions contained in this PUD Agreement. Maintenance of all improvements shall be as described under item 13 of this section. Specifically: (a) Phase I improvcincnts shall be as outlined in section B.2. of this document. (b) Site grading, streets, driveways, concrete curb and gutter, parking lots, sidewalks, retaining walls if required and all necessary erosion control measures per the Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan attached hereto as Exhibit H (hereinafter called "site grading improvements"); Page 6 of 19 Developer City Clerk hiitial REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION FE6 1 4 2005 DATE: ITEM NO.: 9 ^ Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services AdministraKfl* Reviewed: A Agenda Section: Public Services Director ’s Report Item Description: Approve Purchase of Mbfic Works Street Sweeper rhe 2005 Stormwater Fund budget includes $150,000 for the replacement of the 1989 public works street sweeper. This sweeper is in poor condition and is becoming expensive to maintain. We have tested several different brands and models of street sweepers and arc recommending the purchase of an Elgin Broom Bear truck mounted sweeper. The sweeper unit is mounted on a standard truck chassis which has advantages versus the existing sweeper, including the ability to travel at regular speeds when not sweeping, increased maneuverability, and the cost for parts and service on a standard truck chassis is less expensive than purchasing specialized parts for the existing sweeper chassis, 'fhe truck chassis will have dual controls to enable driving the unit from cither side, fhe total cost which is greater than the $150,000 budgeted amount is the result of the recent increase in steel prices. This sweeper will be purchased from Mac Queen Equipment Inc. St. Paul Minnesota through the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program. Sweeper Mac Queen Equipment State Bid Price $166,557 1989 Sweeper Trade In Allowance ($13,000) Radio, Strobe Lights, & Safety Equipment $1,200 r.icense $160 6.5% MN Sales Tax Paid at Time of Licensing $9,983 T otal Cost $164,900 Ilic current balance in the Stormwater Fund is $130,000 with revenues in the near future of $54,000 due from the recently approved Creckside Subdivision. ITie next phases in the StoncBay Development will generate another $200,000 in Stormwater Fee revenue, fhere is $34,000 available from the 2004 budget equipment certificates, as several items were purchased for less than the budgeted amount. We are recommending purchasing the street sweeper with funds from both the Stormwater F'und and Equipment Outlay Fund budgets as described below in order to preserve Stormwater Funds for future projects. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approve purcha.se of public works replacement 2005 Elgin Broom Bear Street Sweeper from Mac Queen Equipment Inc. St. Paul, Minnesota at a total cost of $164,900 to be funded as described. • $35,000 transfer from the Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund 2004 I’quipment Certificates with a budget adjustment to reficct this transfer. • $129,900 fiora the year 2005 Stormwater Fund budget. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ^ ClIYUFOROfvo BAI'E: February 14,2005 ITEM NO: IQ Department Approvah/^ . Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name Tom Kuehn/^^,Ai^u^^ City Administrator ’s Title Finance Director Report Item Description: Appoint Auditor for Fiscal Year 2004 We have requested a cost estimate from the audit firm of Malloy, Kamowski, Radosevich & Company for performing the 2004 fiscal year audits, 'fhe estimated cost for the 2004 fiscal year audits, including the Minnesota legal compliance audit, and assistance with the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Program, is $24,900 excluding direct expenses. For the fiscal year 2004 the City is also required to implement changes mandated by Government Accounting Standards Hoard (GASH) Statement No. 34 as an addition to the comprehensive annual financial report. As this will involve significant relbrmatting of the financial statements and the redoing of notes, among other things, the auditor has estimated an additional cost related to the implementation of $3,000 to $6,000. The total audit expense for the 2004 fiscal year is expected to be between $27,900 and $30,900, plus direct expenses of approximately $750 to $800. 1 he total cost for the 2003 audit, related services, and direct expenses was $28,421, by compari.son. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Coiuicil appointment of the audit firm of Malloy, Kamowski, Radosevich & Co., P. A. to jx:rform the required audits for the 2004 fiscal year records, including the implementation of GASH Statement No. 34, at an estimated maximum cost of $30,900, excluding direct expenses. |ll SWnrt wfH • • • REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION •k 1/^ tCU I q »*fE:r*TOlW ITEM NO: Department Approval: Nime Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Adminjal^ Itor Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Long Lake Fire Station Application and Certificate for Payment No. 14 ___________________________________ _____________________ Rochon Corporation, the general contractor for the Long Lake Fire Station has submitted Application for Payment No. 14 in the amount of $38,663.21. The application has been certified for payment by both the architect and the project manager and a lien waiver has been provided. Applieation for Payment No. 14, if approved as submitted, would complete payment on the contract. All punch list and warranty items are complete with the major exception of reworking the epoxy floor in the apparatus bay. The epoxy floor is scheduled to be resurfaced in May of this year when weather conditions allow. The City has been withholding $17,548.21 due to the epoxy floor issues. Given this information, it is recommended that only partial payment, in the amount of $21,115.00 be made to Rochon at this time, with the remaining $17,548.21 continuing to be withheld. Payment will be made from the Joint Fire Station Construction Account. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve partial payment in the amount of $21,115.00, related to Application for Payment No. 14 from Rochon Corporation, to be funded from the Joint Fire Station Construction Account. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COl FEB I 4 2005 DATE: FcbWS^Qf.qilOSO ITEM NO: 12 Department Approval: Name Koii Moorsc Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Long Lake Fire Station /Change Order No. 8 Attached is the final change order for the Long l^kc Fire Station construction project (Change Order No. 8). This change order reflects higher costs associated with the final pavement wear course for the Fire Station parking lot. 1*his work was originally intended to be done in the fall of 2002, but Rochon was not allowed to do the work because of the cold weather at that time. The increased costs of $5,665, as reflected in this change order, relate to remobilization costs and increased material and labor costs as a result of doing the work nearly two years later than originally planned. Even with the additional mobilization cost, Rochon’s fee to complete the work was still significantly below a second estimate *hat was obtained by stafTin the spring of2004. Therefore, staff requested that Rochon perfomi the work at the revised cost and the parking lot is now complete. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Long Lake Fire Station Change Order No. 8 in the amount of $5,665. Attached for your execution and routing are live (5) copies of Change Order No. 8 for the Long Lake Fire Station. This is the change order that added the final mobilization for installing the asphalt this past spring 2004. Please sign this change order and forward it to Orono for their signature. When it is fully executed, please return ono copy for my files. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, CONSTRUCTIVE IDEAS, INC. "ilham A. Wolters President /oww Enclosures 901 Jfeffcpson Suite 300 • Si. Paul, MN 55J02 • (651) 225*4740 • Fax (651) 225-4741 www.torsifuctivcideasiiic.coni Ptm • « •» •• • •# rt%tsifnfs»9 finfstsm Hwtrt il Ij i jHOth ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR FIELD OTHER OMPLETION OR MODIFICATION 1401. •ROJECT:Loofl Lak« Fire Station 340 Willow Drive Long Lake. MN ro CONTRACTOR: Rochon C 'rporation Suite 120 3650 Annapolis Lane Ncith Plymouth, MN 55447 CHANGE ORDER NO.: EIGHT (B) FINAL p^yg. Juno 29| 2004 ARCHITECTS PROJECT #: 1516.01 CONTRACT DATE: CONTRACT FOR: Complete construction fhe contract Is chanoed as follows: 1. Allow thflContmctofonaidditlonilmobltlMtion to complete pavino operations (n 2004 $ 5.665.00 (Owner requested) __________ Total of Hem # 1. Includinp Contractor's overhead & profit $ 5,665.00 The original Contract Sum was Nat changa by previously authorized Change Orders The new Conlrad Sum including this Change Order will be $ 1.981.000.00 $ 250,291 49 8 2,231.291.49 $ 5,665.00 S 2,236.956.49 The Contract time will be Increesed by 0 days. hmn euihoflaed by Construction Change Directive Authorized; architkjl _____—------- Bbarman Kroos Vogel Group, Inc. Address OWNER 222 N. 2nd St^et Minneapolis. BY r SSSFi cSmT Qiy of kpno UKfi Suite IPO. 3650 Annapolis Lane North 1664 Park Ave. Plymouth. MN SS447 Long Lake. MN -j356 ilClT«E P.O. Boy^ 6® Crystal Bay. MN 553P3 BY JUL ' 7 2004 -Kni"CONSTRUCTIVE IDEAS, INC. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Q.ll5lS6I\BUsncOB.DOC > e e • «• • •■ ••• lA e • « e» • * COIlMru McrPTING m \ A 2005REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE:Fcb^rLVr^^lW ITEM NO:13 DcpaHncit Approval: Nsint RonMoorie Title City Administrslor AdmiBistmtor Reviewed: IteBi Deecriptioa: Nivarre Firefighter^ear Purchaie Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report The Excelsior Fire District has been very successful in recruiting new firefighters for the Navarre fire station. In addition to the eight firefighters who have completed Firefighter I training, there are fourteen new recruits who are currently in Firefighter I training. These new recruHs each need a set of gear to enable them to participate in training, and ultimately to enable them to respond to fire calls. The gear includes turn-out gear (bunker pants, jacket, and suspenders) a nomex protective hood, gloves, boots, helmet. SCBA mask, and spanner wrench. The total cost of this gear, per firefighter, is $2,078. The total cost to equip 14 firefighters is $29,092 (plus sales tax) COUNCIL ACTION KKQUESTED: Motion to approve the purchase of gear for the new Navarre Firefighters, in the amount of $30,983, and to amend the General Fund budget to reflect the expenditure. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION cm iMr.,, ..rcTiNQ DATE: February 10. £665 1 4 2005 ITEM NO: 14 OF ORONO Department Approval: NatiM LinVoe Title City Clerk ppru Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: CRT Waste - Rc^lution Agenda Section: City Adminislrator's Report Electronic wastes are a growing concern for local governments that arc involved with solid waste and recycling programs. The State has acknowledged the environmental problems associated with electronic waste (£• waste) and adopted legislation to prohibit the disposal of CRTs (cathode ray tubes) in the mixed waste stream effective on July 1,2005. Although state and local governments have worked with manufacturers and retailers for at least five years to study a range of possible solutions for disposal of CRTs, no consensus has been reached. lliis year Hennepin County, along with other member counties of the Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board (SWMCB), arc supporting legislation to ensure that recycling options are available to all Minnesotans and that lead from discarded electronics does not end up in Minnesota's air and water. The proposed legislation incorporates shared responsibility among manufacturers, retailers, and generators; reliable and convenient collection options; responsible recycling of CR I's; a mechanism to address the ba'^.klog of CRTs; and a preference for cost internalization or advance recycling fees over end ’-of-Ufe fees and without relying on local government. Attached is a resolution in support of the SWMCB’s legislative initiative regarding CRT waste for Council's consideration. COUNCIL ACTION RRQUESTICD: Motion to adopt the attached resolution in support of the S WMCB's legislative initiative regarding CR f waste. A RES01.UTI0N SUPPORTING LEGISLATION REGARDING CRT (CATHODE RAY TUBE) WASTE WHEREAS, technological advances is the areas of computers and televisions has created an inadvertent environmental problem when electronic products need to be disposed: and WHEREAS, this waste stream, called E-waste, includes old TVs and computer monitors that have picture tubes or cathode ray tubes containing 2 to 8 pounds of lead per tube; and WHEREAS, thasc items contribute to lead in our water, air, and soil when disposed with other mixed wastes, and WHEREAS, the City of Orono supports efforts to ensure a long-term and sustainable system to ensure the proper management of old TVs and computers without reliance on government-only solutions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, Uiat the Orono City Council supports the Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board's legislative initiative to create a viable solution for electronic waste before the legislative prohibition on placement of products with cathode ray tubes (televisions aj.d computer monitors) becomes effective on July 1,2005; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that legislation to solve this problem should include provisions to require manufacturer responsibility, reliable and convenient collection options, responsible recycling of CRTs, a mechanism to address the backlog of CRTs, and a funding method that does not require substantial cnd-of-life fees. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held or February 14,2005. ATTEST; Lindas. Vcc, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 1 of 1 1 I ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR COUNCH. ACTION Date: 02/14/05 item No: COMM''II MIrrTIIIJQ FEB 1 4 2005 Cl rv OF ORONO Dcpaitnicnt Approval Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Name: Title: Kurt Erickson Sergeant r Item Description: Forfeited Vehicles - Authorization to Sell Exhibits: DISCUSSION; The police department has come info possession of four vehicles through the DWl fori'cilure process. City Attorney Ken Potts has successfully completed the forfeitures pursuant to the forfeiture law. Titles for these vehicles have been transfcn*cd to the City of Orono. 'Hiese vehicles have no functional value to the City of Orono. It is requested that authorization be granted to offer the.se vehicles for sale through n competitive bid or auction. These cars nie: 1. 1991 Chevrolet. Bcrrcta 2. 1995 Dodge, Caravan 3. 1991 Mazda. 626 4. 1995 Jeep. Wrangler COUNCIL ACTION RKQUESI ED; Motion to approve, the sale of the above forfeited vehicles. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Departmcnl Approval: Name Ron Moorsc Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: t EB 1 4 2005 DATE: February 11,2005 CITY Of- OHONO ITEM NO: 16 Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item DescriDtion: On-Site Septie Manaaer Position Revision and Reclassification Cha nges in Septic Insp ector Workload and Duties I hc Septic Inspector duties have changed substantially in recent years, as the duties related specifically to the City’s individual sewage treatment system (IS I S) program have required less time, llicrc arc a number of reasons for this, including the sewering of a number of neighborhoods, the completion of a project through which IS'fS maps were prepared for each property with an IS'fS, and the automation of IS rs compliance inspection records. rhe IS'l'S program now requires approximately 50% of the inspector’s time. 1 he remainder of the inspector’s time has been allocated to priority needs in the Building and Zoning area, partially based on the specific abilities of the person in the position. For example, because Matt Boltcrman had a background in the use of automated mapping sofiwarc (GIS), he was involved in developing the City’s mapping capabilities. rhe resignation of Matt provided the opportunity to take a new look at the Septic Inspector duties in terms of the workload needs of the Building and Zoning area. The result is a revised job description that focases on the IS’fS program and assisting with the building inspection workload. Buildinu Inspection Workload lncr ca.se The building inspection workload has been increasing in recent years, as large new projects have Iwcn added to the nonnal level of residential development, 'fhis includes the StoncBay townhou.se development, and the major remodeling of the Way/iita Country Club, fhe 65 unit condo building in the StoncBay development is currently in the development review process. Also, Spring Park has approved two condo developments with a total of about 150 condo units. Orono provides plan review and building inspection .services to the City of Spring Park, fhe.se large projects will require additional building inspection staffing. Optipnsjpr Handli ng Buildin g Inspection Workload 'fhe discussion regarding the septic iiuspection duties included a review of a number ol‘options for providing a number of services, particularly building inspections and IS'fS ins|)eclions. fhe City has, in the past, used a retired building inspector to handle temporary building inspection workload needs, fhe building staff is recommending that the additional building inspection workload be added to the Septic Ins|x:ctor position for a number of rca.sons. ITe availability of the retired building inspector on a longer term basis is uncertain. Also, a number of services that occur less frequently, such as sewer coimection ins|?cctions and nuisance r inspectionH, can be accomplished more efficiently when they arc built into the daily schedule of the scpt>'' inspector/building ins|>cctor. Options for ISI S Program Admiiiistratioii In regards to the administration of the (’ity’s ISTtS program, the option ofconlnicling with the County was discussed. Hennepin County has IS I S stall who administer ISTS regulations where a ('ity docs not provide its own program, 'fhe concern about contracting with the ('ounty is that the County's philosophy regarding ISTS regulations is different from the City's philosophy. Particularly, the ('ounty is much more open to experimental systems tlian is the City. 'I hc option of hiring a summer intern to do IS'fS compliance inspcclions was also discu.sscd. This could free up a fK)rtion of the full-time position's time in the summer, and the intern pay rate would be significantly lower than the Septic inspector rate. However, the compliance ins|)cctions arc generally the only time the property owner makes an elTort to ask questions about the IS I S. I his is a very good opportunity to educate propi!rty owncr.s about the care and maintenance of the IS IS. It is much better to have .someone with a strong background in IS I S, and an understanding of the (!ity's IS'fS ordinance and philo.sophy, as well as the ability to communicate well with a broad range of people, in order to take the best advanlag.e of the.se opportunities. KccomnicfKlation Many of the duties the Septic Inspector may take on can be learned through on-the- job training. I lowcvcr, the two key duties that retjuirc specific technical training and ex|)eiience are the IS'fS in.s|Kction and building inspection. Hy hiring a Iverson who is qualified in both ofthc.se areas, we will have the greatest amount of flexibility in terms of responding to changing workkmd needs. Position Rccln.ssificntion 'fhe addition of the building inspection duties suggc.sts a rccla.ssification of the position to n new *':*vcl in the City's pay system, fhe Septic Inspector position is currently at level I of the Supervi.sory/Adniinistralive pay schedule, which has a pay range of .11*12,300 to S49,K00. 'fhe Muilding Inspector position is at level 2 of the pay .schedule, which has a pay rang,c of $4S,I00 to .1i.S3,IOO. Hecau.se the tH)sition will now involve building inspection duties, which involve a higher level of training and res|M)nsibiIity, the pay level needs to be adjusted to reflect this training and experience. It is rcc«)mmcndcd that the |K)sitiuii be reclassified to level 2 of the pay .schedule. rOllNCil. ACTION KKOIIKS ITI): Motiiiii Id u|i|>nive Ihe revisiiiii.s tii Ihe Se|i(ie IVf unager position duties and rc.sponsiliilitirs, and to approve a rccla.ssifi€a(ion of Ihe posiliun froiti slep 1 to step 2 of (ho pay schedule. »«ircTiM(5 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACriON FED 1 4 2005 DATE: FcbniaryHTo^^SMjO ITEM NO: 17 Dcpartniciit Approval: Name LinVee Title City Clerk r Admin Item DcscriptloB: Amend 2005 Offidlal Meeting Schedule r Reviewed: Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Attachment: Amended 2005 Orono Caicndar/Mccting Schedule At their February 7,2005 Park Conunission meeting, the Park Commissioners discussed starting their meetings at 7:00 p.m. rather than 7:15 p.m. The Park Commissioners agreed that the meetings should begin at 7:00 p.m. ^ Since the 2005 OfTicial Meeting Schedule was adopted at the December 13,2004 Council meeting with the Park Commission meeting time set at 7:15 p.m., stalT is requesting the OfRcial Meeting Schedule beainended te change the Park Commission meeting time to 7:00 p.m. At their January 10,2005 meeting, the Council established Wednesday, April 20,2005 at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time for the Local Board of Appeal and Hquali/ation. This date has also been added to the meeting schedule. COUNCIL ACnON REQUESTED: Motion to amend the 2005 OfTicial Meeting Schedule by changing the Park Conunission meeting time to 7:00 p.m., and adding the Local Board of Appeal and Hquali/ation which is scheduled for April 20,2005. j 2005 City of Orono Meeting Schedule Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway S M T W T F S^ mm 'Wl 6 7 8 11EE 13 14 15 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 263BE 28 29 30 31 S M T W T mlOU ITflS 24 25 26 F 1 SflB 7 8 12 1^» 15 ignTi 22 29 of S 2 9 16 23 30 _ 7 10 J15 12 13^ ITM 19 20 21 24 25 26 27^ 31 F 1 8 16 22 29 S 2 9 16 23 30 9 1 23 30 4Hi_6 7 14 21 28 10 11 12^ 18 19 20 24 25 31 S 1 8 15 22 29 :J ] S M T W 13 14 2C 27 28 I '*1- (i/i T F S 3 4 5 8 9^ 11 12 15 16 17 18 19 23 24 25 26 S M T W_T F __ 4 6|| 8 9 10 11 13 14: 15 I^E 18 20B 22 23 24 25 S 5 12 19 26 27 28 29 30^ s 1 8 1 22 2i M T W T F S 5 6 7 11^ 13 14 18 19 20 21 253B 27 28 i 10 17 24 31 S M T W T 4 10^7 8 9 14|H 16 21 22 23 28 29 30 17 18 F 5 12 19 26 5 6 13 20 27 '-^-1. I - S M F 4 T W T lli 3 _ 8 9 1C_ 13 14 15 16^ 18 20BI 22 23 27 28 29 30 s 5 12 19 26 S M T W T BiB 2 7 8 9 13 14 15^ 21 22 23 12 1^ F 3 10 17 24 S 4 11 18 25 26 27 28 29=3Q I \ \ S M F _ _ _ _ _ 1 2 6 9 11 12 13 14^ 16 18|g 20 21 22 23 S 3 10 17 24 25 26 27 28^ 30 S M T 4 11 18m F S 5 enan 910 12 13 14^ 16 17 _19 20 21~2^H 24 27 28 29 30 31 Park Cuiiiiiiissioii Meeting, lit Monday, 7:00 pin rH Council Meeting, 2nd &. 4tli Monday, 7:00 pin H Planning C.'oniinissiuii Meeting, 3rd Monday, 6:00 pin I omcial Holiday B other Kveiit 5 Council Work Session, 5:45 pin B Planning Commission Work Session. 5:30 pin ♦PLANNING COMMISSION - May throiigli October - 1st Tuesday is an alternate meeting date. Adopted: Amended: 12/13/04 02/14/05 ¥ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION OOl ■•'^CTIKJG fed 1 4 2005 DATE: Febniaiy 11,2005 *:iTyCiTy OF ORONO ITEMNO: 18 Dcpartmeat Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Adniinittrator Aitetida Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE L Bob Sansevere 745 Orchard Park Road 2.Gayle Talbot 80 Luce Line Ridge SPECIAL EVENT 3.Applicant: Event: Location: Date: Time: John 'rcrrance Homes, Jeremy Jordet 2005 Spring Preview Parade of Homes Stonebay - 2462 Sandstone Lane and 659 Sandstone Circle February 12 > March 20,2005, Mondays through Sundays 12:00 p.m. Noon - 6 p.m. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approvc/deny the above listed licenses. o o rity of Orono 1*0 UoxM 77W Kelley |*ailaviy \ 'i J'. / <*»y»UllUy.MN^5123 FOHriTJW'SKONI.Y aj K emM;l InipeclBil lly; _ {^ h ^ 0*l« Intficeled' ** / *■ _^^onuiwid»; . J^pprovel ^ OKONO KKNNKL LIC'KNSK APPlJCAl'ION J;fTective January I. 2(K)5 to Doccmbcr 31,2005 DenUi □ Owner Property Address: Orchard Park Road. Orono, MN 55356 (include city and zip) Mailing Address (if dlfferciil): PllOilo: (home) J[W2) 404.9638 (work) J61 2)384-0279 RRSIDRNTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum # of dogs to be kept at one time- 3 Maximum #ofcats to be kept at one time: ‘ Principal Ureed(s); H»xcr ___ Purpose for more than 2 doga/cats: *l*Wrd un« hoiunga lo mothef-in-law Dogi nonnally kepi: / inaidc, kennel stniclure Cara nofmally kept. . i„,|de____kennel Mruetuto COMMERCIAL Kcimel IJccme Pec; SISO.OO (payment must accompany applicotion) Name of Business:__ Buiinosi Activities: ^ ~ . (over 6 montlis of age) (over 6 months of age) (example: boarding, lirecding, veterinary care, re(aii”cto.) Normal Business lloum:______ AOcr Hours Contact: (mime)_____ (phone)___ Dog lum/exercliie ucos are:____imide ouiside both muhorily to violate «,y proviiioli ofwv C3 T 1 ""'y g«m any f.iiinls the City peimiaslon lo iiupeci the nremiwa nni>r i **i' ** *** ™ '•>' undeisigned hereby d»rn.g .he liec^ dura J. Z'l* I'rg^^ Xtnbir.h''"' .“r.s,s:z:7" ‘ Applicant •w«|%saiviiivuu ui munjcipai kx> iposcd by the City Council at part 2L —/ —O S Date RnootForm city of Orono P.O. Box 66 2750 Kellev Paikunv Cr)5lal Day. MN 55323 (952)349-4600 FOR CfYV USE only / J Bv: V. fKennel Inspected By: Date Inspected: Recommends: Appfova) /-(T-Jf Denial D ORONO KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION Effective January 1,2005 to December 31,2005 Owner: Property Address: (include city arra zir deceived 0 7 2004 &ZirfO ORONO Mailing Address (if difTcrem): Phone: (home) ^-53 (work) RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00 (payment must accompany application) Maximum # of dogs to be kept at one time: Maximum # of cats to be kept at one time: (over 6 months of age) (over 6 months of age) Principal Brecd(s): A/^u/j£/irJ4/U) Purpose for more than 2 dogs/cats: ___ Dogs normally kept: inside____ kennel structure Cats nonnally kept: inside. inside kennel stnicture COMMERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00 (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities: (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name) (phone) Dog runs/cxercise areas are:____inside____outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form, the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and docs not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigned hereby giants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Cude Ch apter 62 Article HI, Division 3; including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. ' ) CITY OF ORONO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT Dite ffsucd: Ditc of Event: Time: February 14,2005 February 12 - March 20,2005 Noon - 6:00 p.m. Mondays through Sundays Name of Per«on(s) And/or Organization Sponsoring this Event: Jeremy Jordet John Terrance Homes 2500 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 Phone: 952-473-1971 Location of Event; 2462 Sandstone Lane 659 Sandstone Circle Aft Type of Event:2005 Spring Preview Parade of Homes The foUowing documents arc required and on file at the City Administrative Offlccs: • Approval from Orono Police Department • Approval from Orono Building and Zoning Department The following conditions have been placed on this event: By acceptance of this special event permit, the permit holder, on behalf of any and all organizations and pnvate persona, grants authority to operate under the special event peratit, and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless tlic City of Orono from all claims arising from said event. The permit holder, all organizations and private persons exercising authority under tliis permit, do waive and release all claims against the City of Orono, its officers or employees for any damage to person or property arising from the exercise of privileges granted by this permit and agrees to hold harmless the City of Orono, its employees and ofTiccrs from any such claim. • The Orono Police DeparUnent and its officers are empowered to revoke this special event pcmiit at any time for any safety concerns that arc not immediately resolved by the permit holder or a representative of the revocaUon shall cause die immediate canccUaUon of tlic event originally authorized by • All signs will be removed at the end of the event. • Any debris created by the event will be cleaned up on a daily basis by the permit holder. • 1 he City Council has adopted a new policy requiring shuttle service for all home tour events unless the pemut holder provides a parking plan demonstrating that parking can be provided in a safe nianncr and without impacts on the neighborhood. • The name and phone number of a person who has authority to act on behalf of the pcmiit holder will be provided to the O*oiio Police Dcpaitmciil. The phone number sliaU be to a live person and not voice mail. Approved at City Council meeting on: February 14,2005 (City Seal) Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator 19 CITY OF ORONO Clwcli Numbtr Emptoyoo Nam* 004031 004032 004033 004034 004035 004036 004037 004038 004039 004040 004041 004042 004043 004045 004046 004047 004046 004040 004050 004051 004052 004053 004054 004055 004056 004057 004058 004050 004060 004061 004062 004063 004064 004065 004066 004067 054822 054623 054624 054625 054626 054627 054628 054629 054630 054631 054632 054633 054634 054635 054636 054637 054636 054639 054640 054641 054642 054643 MOOR8E. RONALD J.. SILUS. BARBARA O. VEE. UNOAS. KUEHN. THOMAS M. OLSON. RONALD J. PETTIT. SANDRA K. ANDERSON. BRDCE L BOBZIEN. SUE A. BORIS. SCOTT W. BUOIO. STACIE M. CORNfCK. JAMES L DAY. SUSAN J. DEMBOUSK1.JAYC. FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K. OOOO.STEPHANVa MCNICHOL8. DAVID L. RUS8ETH. KYLE M. 8CHOENHOFF. JOHN B. STENSRUO.CHAOa TOEWE. KIMBERLY D. TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. TOMCZYK.MARKW. WHITE, ANTHONY J. WITTKE. ANTHONY A. KL1SZCZ.DAVIDA. PHARO. CHRISTOPHER M. CURTIS. MELANIE GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. QAPPA. GREGORY A. GUNOLACH. JANICE J. OMAN. LYLE E. DEBAERE. DONALD L. HANSEN. STEVEN OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G. OBRIEN. RANDY L. PALMER. GREGORY A. RATMBL i, BARRY J. DODGE. RACHEL M. LESKINEN. DENISE M. BOBZIEN. SUE A. BORIS. SCOTT W. ERICKSON. KURT R FARNIOK. CORREY L. FISCHENICH. DAN T. MAOSON. ADRIENNE M. MCNICHOLS, DAVID L. MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES PERSELL, WILLIAM R. TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. OMAN. LYLE E. VANG. BRUCE L GREGORY. JAMES D. HANSEN. STEVEN OBRIEN. RANDY L PALMER. GREGORY A. RATHBUN. BARRY J. SKREEN. DALE 8. ROSS. JOHN A. Pay Pariod 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 check register 02A>2/a5 10:t6AM Pag* 1 ChMlt Amount $2,555.95 $544.66 $1,110.33 $1,409.03 $1,231.03 $1.095 69 $1,645.32 $630.00 $20.00 $649.76 $2,173.16 $1,403.36 $1.769 27 $1.639 50 $2,026.12 $1,100.00 $1,373.59 $1,607.66 $1,403.66 $1,219.60 $900.00 $1,466.90 $1,255.18 $1,458.33 $371.49 $866.00 $1,182.05 $125 00 $1,794.10 $1,302.47 $1,400.00 $1,476.69 $875.00 $1,478.81 $550.00 $400.00 $200.00 $1.089 79 $936.90 $93.77 $1,538.61 $1,649.05 $2,136.03 $1,723 39 $711 38 $661.40 $1,839.67 $521.29 $552.05 $1,440.87 $356.68 $1,384.98 $1,077.42 $546.86 $627.01 $1,036.11 $1,529.28 $1,517.22 $105.40 Check Date Chech Btatue 2/2/2005 Outatandino 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2006 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outatanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/2/2005 Outstanding 2/20005 OutstaiKfing FEB 1 4 2005 ciry OH OHONo ^ « i-k ^ I 1^ n ■ 1 CITY OF ORONO cheek legieter 02n2/0910:10 AM Pag«2 Chtcit Numbtr EmpioyM N«n« 054844 STEFfENKAOEN, RONALD Pay PmM Chack Amount ChacA Data Chack Statue $1,409.13 189.021.43 2/2/2005 Outstandino s CITYOFORONO *Check Detail Register® 01/31/05 9:54 AM Pagol JANUARY 2008 10100 Primwyimujuni 0101-20200 Accounts Payable 0101-20200 Accounts Payable Total MINNESOTA UC FUND 1701.67 7980288 ($701.87) 7989288 10.00 Unamptoynient - CarNon VoM Check 80114 MJciik«6hn50 1/31/2005 HENNEPIN COUNlYTREASURER-ACCr E 101-41000-201 Offloosuppfloa $100.00 Notary E 101-41000-201 Offlca supplies $100.00 Notary E 101-42110-201 Offloa supplias $100.00 Notary Total HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-ACCT $300.00^ mm MUi m\m dep^ 6i^ kivEmm--------------- 0813-20808 Due to Oovta-Stata Sales Tax $4.00 SIsTx 0601-20008 Due to Oo¥(s-Stat0 Sales Tax $62.00 SIsTx 0101-20008 Due to Oovts-State Sales Tax ^12.00 SIsTx Total MNOEPTOFREVBIUE $278.00 Notary Regiitration - Vee Notary Registration - Leskinen Notary Registrallon - Sales Tax 12/2004 Sales Tax 12/2004 Sales Tax 12/2004 10100 Primary Cash $578.00 Fund Summary 101 OENERAL FUND 801 WATER OPERATINO FUND 813 OOLF COURSE 10100 Primary Cash $512.00 $82.00 $4.00 $578.00 CITY OF ORONO 'Check Detail Regietei® 02/02/05 10:45 AM Pegol FEBRUARY 2008 Cheek Amt 10100 RHmwvCiCaeh 'IrltW.[ii FIRST iIA tkmial bank of lakes 0101-21701 Federal WRhholding 0101-21703 FICA Tax WRhholding 0101-21703 FICA Tax WRhholding Total FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES $11,328.62 $4,884.93 $4.884 93 MdChkf 000153 0101-21705 Other Retirement $21,096.48 ICMAf^TIREliBIT TRUST-487 $951.62 Total tCMARETIRElieNT TRUST-467 $951.62 PaMChh# 080154 2/2/2005 rr OF REVENUE 0101-21702 Stale WRhholding Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $4,637.60 $4,63760 Paid ChkS 080156 2/2/200^ MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM 0101-21718 Poet Employment HeaRh $323.50 TotM MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM Tsmaram IriyWi $323.50 nationwide retirement SOLUTION 0101-21705 Other Retirement 0101-21705 Other Retirement Total NATIONWIDERETIREMENTSOLUTION $2,022.00 $10.06 $2,032.06 V^ay 6o6l 57 2/^/2605 ORCHARD TRUST c67fR'bsTEecusT 0101-21708 Other Retirement $3,002.68 Total ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEEM:U8T $3,002.66 '/wwr«PaMChkf 080198 0101-21704 PERA 0101-21704 PERA PUBUC EMPLOVI RETIREMENT $7,534.50 $5,807.82 Total PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIRBRENT $13,342.32~ Paid Chid! 080159 2/2/2005 UNITED WAY 0101-21706 United Way $86.00 Total UNITED WAY $86.00 10100 Primary Cash $45,474.26 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 10100 Primary Cash $45.474 26 $45,474.26 FEDERAL W/l. FICA & MEDICARE W/H FICA A MEDCR CITY SHARE DEFERRED COMP-302030 8TATETAXW/H poet retirement USCM - ENTITY 2339 OBRA92343 MN STATE RETIREMENT PERA CITY SHARE PERA EMPLOYEE W/H CHARITY DONATIONS CITY OF ORONO 'Check Detail Register® 02/11/05 1.15 PM Page 1 FEBRUARY 200$ Check Amt Invoice Comment J»ald Chk# 080160 2/14/2005 AJ. GALLAGHER & CO OF MN. INC E 101-41900*370 Insurance Agent of Record $640.00 30840 E 101-42110-370 Insurance Agent of Record $1,060.00 30840 E 613-49030-370 Insurance Agent of Record $90.00 30840 E 601-49400-370 Insurance Agent of Record $95.00 30848 E 602-49450-370 Insurance Agent of Record $215.00 30640 Total AJ. GALLAGHER A CO OF MN. INC $2,100.00 1st Qlr Ins Agent Foe 1st Qlr ins Agent Fee 1st Qtr Ins Agent Fee 1st Qlr Ins Agent Fee 1st Qlr Ins Agent Fee Pew Chk# 080161 2/14/2005 A.T.O.M. E 101-42110-433 Memberships & Subscriptions $175.00 1/15/05 2005 ATOM Membership Total A.T.O.M.$175.00 PaWChk# 080162 2/14/2005 ACCURINT E 101-42110-311 Data Processing Communication $30.00 20050131 January 2005 Total ACCURINT $3-00 dhki 0M163 2/14/2005 AMERICAN TRAINCO E 601-49400J37 Training A Development $790.00 Gregory Basic Electricity E 602-49450437 Training A DevelopmonI $790 00 Oberalnger Basic Electricity E 602-49450-437 Training A Development $790.00 Skreen Basic Electricity Total AMERICAN TRAINCO $2,370.00 PaW Chk« 080164 2/14/:!005 ANCHOR PAPER E 101-41900201 Offico supplies $562.32 156859101 Copy Paper Total ANCHOR PAPER $56232 PaW Chk« 080165 2/14/2005 ANDERSON. KRISTI E 101-45200319 Other Professional Services $145 00 2/7/05 Park Minutes 2/7 E 101-41300319 Other Professional Services $145.00 2/7/05 CC Minutes 1/24 E 101-45200319 Other Protossional Services __$5.00 2/7/05 Adi-1/3A)5 2005 Rate Tout ANDERSON. KRISTI $295.00 PaWChk# 080166 2/14/2005 APPLIED ECOLOGICAL SERVICES G 101-20200 Accounts Payablo $125.00 10315 Rural Oasis G 101-20200 Accounts Payable $2,476.23 10502 Rural Oasis Total APPLIED ECOLOGICAL SERVICES $2,601 23 PaW Chk# 080167 2/14^005 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES E 101-41900201 Office supplies $117.75 6013-450109 Coffee E 101-42110201 Office supplies $114 95 6013J50110 Coffee E 101-41900201 Office supplies $114 95 6013-450111 Coffee Total ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES $347 65 Paid Chk# 080166 2/14/2005 ASPEN EQUIPMENT E 101-43000222 Vehicle Equipment A Paris $69 92 1030561 Bearing. Seal kit Total ASPEN EQUIPMENT $69.92 Paid Chk# 060169 2/14/2005 AUTO ELECTRIC SPECIALISTS E 101-43000-403 Repairs/Maint-Mlsc. Equip $124.13 7941 Generator Repair Tout AUTO ELECTRIC SPECIALISTS $124.13 Paid Chk# 000170 2/14/2005 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO. E 602-49450403 RepairsAtaint-Misc. Equip $156.00 16547 SCADA Maint E 601-49400403 RepairsAtaint-Misc. Equip $15600 16547 SCAOA Maim Tot^ AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS CO.$31200 CITY OF ORONO 'Check Detail Register® 02/11/05 1:15 PM Page? II FEBRUARY 200S Chech Amt Invoice CommtnL *aKf Chk# 080171 2/14/2005 BANYOM DATA SYSTEMS E 101-41900^1 Repairs/Malnt-Offlce Equip Totol BANYON DATA SYSTEMS I400.M $400.14 12197 Support • Invoicing Paid Chki' 6m172 2/14/2005 BEARCOM E 101-42260*240 SmaB Toote and Minor Equip Total BEARCOM $5,760.99 3000234 Pagers - Navarre Fire $5,760.99 P^ Chki 060173-----2/14/2005 BFI OF MINNESOTA, INC E 101-45200-404 RepaIrs/Malnl-DIdgs/Grounds E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Malnl-Bldgs/Orounds E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Malnt-Bldos/Gfoonds E 613-49830-404 Repalra/Malnt-Bldgs/Grounds E 101-42260-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total BFI OF MINNESOTA. INC $90.39 1307115 $75.49 1307214 $285.66 1307420 $32.49 1307461 $56.16 1347632 $540.23 Waste Service 2/2005 Waste Service 2/2005 Waste Service 2/2005 Waste Service 2/2005 Waste Service 2/2005 Paid Chki OroiTi 2/14/2005 BIFFS INC. E 101-45200-415 Other Equipment Rentals Total BIFFS INC. $62.41 W246420 $62.41 Portable - Bederwood Paid Chki 060175 2/14/2005 BOBZIEN. SUE E 101-42110-437 Training & Development Total BOBZIEN, SUE $6.60 27//05 Lunch - BCA Training $6.60 BORIS, SCOTT E 101-42110-437 Training & Development Total BORIS, SCOTT $54.96 1/24/OS $54.96 Paid Chki' 060177 2/14/Z0Ud BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. G101-20200 Accounts Payable _—14287 Total BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC. $302.03 Parking/Meals - Training 3/4 Minus Rock Pakidhkti 060*78 2/14/2005 BUDGET PRINTING E 001-49400-322 Postage E 101-42110-201 Office supplies E 101-42110-322 Postage Total BUDGET PRINTING $8.42 2/1/5 $10 01 2699 $16.82 2806 $3^25 Shipping - Water Samples Paper Shipping Charges Paid Chki 080179 2/14/2005 CECE'S SIGNS E 101-45200-223 Bkfg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Total CECE'S SIGNS $100.00 2067 Signs • No Dogs $100.00 Chki 080180 2/14/2005 CENTERPOINT ENERGY E 101-41900-381 Gas & Electric E 602-49450-381 Gas 8 Electric E 602-49450-381 Gas 8 Electric E 613-49830-381 Gas 8 Electric E 101-42260-381 Gas 8 Electric E 601-49400-381 Gas 8 Electric t 601-49400-381 Gas 8 Electric E 101-41900-38t Gas 8 Electric E 101-42110-381 Gas 8 Electric Total CENTERPOINT ENERGY $1,144 08 •1.209 00 $132.30 $477 13 $1,313.79 $403 00 $1,764.47 $2,418.77 $936.06 $9.798 60 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service 060006750600 Gas Service pVidChM baoToi m Wm champion auto stores E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment 8 Parts $37.26 0301302 VenlVisor CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 0^/11/051:15 PM Pages Total CHAMPION AUTO STORES FEBRUARY 2005 CheckArnt lnv< $37.26 Comment Paw Chk# 060182 2/14/2005 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION £234^5660^12 BuiWing Rentals $1,200.00 213L277255G Lurten tease 2/2005 Total COMMttSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION $1,200.00 PaW Chk# 080183 2/14/2005 COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES E 101-42260^7 JanNortel Services $166.38 92295 Janitorial Service 1/2005 E 101-41000-404 Repairs/Mainl-BWgs/Grounds $1,574.40 93220 JanHoriat -1/2005 E 101-42110-404 Repairs/Mainl-BWgs/Grounds $1.070 00 93220 Janitorial -1/2005 Total COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES $2,030.70 PaW Chk# 080164 2/14/2005 DAHLGREN SHARDLOW A UBAN 0101-20200 Accounts Payabte $35833 25467 Rural Oasis G 101-20200 Accounts Payabte $1,727.50 25544 Rural Oasis Total DAHLGREN SHARDLOW a UBAN $2,085.03 PaW 6}ik# 080185 2/14/2005 DAHLKE TREE SERVICE £ 101-43000-240 Small Tools and Minor Equip $400.00 2/4 Banners Total DAHLKE TREE SERVICE $400.00 PaW Chk# 060186 2/14/2005 DAY. SUSAN E 101-42110-331 Travel Expenses $17.00 1/13/05 Parking Total DAY. SUSAN $17.00 PaW Chk# 080107 2/14/2005 DCA - WIRE ONLY G 101-21719 DCA/Spending Accounts $13100 2/2/05 Flex 2/2/2005 G 101-21719 DCA/Spending Accounts $495.94 2/2/05 Flex 2004 Total DCA-WIRE ONLY $626.94 PaW Chk# 080188 2/14/2005 DEPT OF ADM - INTERTECH GROUP G 101-20200 Accounts Payabte $37.00 DV04120294 PVC Circuit G 601-20200 Accounts Payabte $12 42 W04120592 Phone Service 12/2004 G 101-20200 Accounts Payabte $53 26 W04120592 Phone Service 12/2004 G 101-20200 Accounts Payable $74 60 W04120592 Phone Service 12/2004 G 602-20200 Accounts Payabte $37 26 W04120r?2 Phone Service 12/2004 Total DEPT OF ADM • INTERTECH GROUP $214.54 PaW^hk# 080109 2/14/2005 DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY E 101-42110-409 Other Miscellaneous Charges $120J)0_ 1/5A)5 FBI Record Checks Total DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY $120 00 PaW Chk# 000190 2/14/2005 DEPUTY REGISTRAR E 231-45650-441 Licensos 8 Taxes $13.50 1/20/05 Nelson Forfeiture • 99 Ford E 101-42110-550 Automotive Equipment $1,235 10 2/11/05 License/Tax Sqd 203 E 101-42110-550 Automotive Equipment $1,235.10 2/11/05 License/Tax Sqd 203 Total DEPUTY REGISTRAR $2,40370 7ST5hk# 000191 2/14/2005 DNR WATERS G 601-20200 Accounts Payable _ $3M. 75 701351 2004 ONR Fee Total DNR WATERS $358 75 PaW Chk# 000192 2/14/2005 DODGE, RACHEL E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $43.00 1/20/05 Notary Ronevral E 101-41300-433 Memberships & SiWscrlplions $25.00 2/4/05 Clerk Ceilficatlon Fm Total DODGE, RACHEL $68.00 CITY OF ORONO 'Check Detail Register® 02/11/05 1;15PM Page 4 FEBRUARY 2008 Check Amt Invoice Comment :hk# 000193 2/14/2005 E-Z RECYCLING E 101*43270*316 Contract Recycling Pickup Total E-Z RECYCLING 16.784.96 7663 $6,784.96 Recycling • 2/2005 PaldChki 080194 2/14/2005 EGAN E 101*43000*408 Contracted Street Maint. _ $233.12 JC10000602 Repair Signal 12/6 Total EGAN $233.12 Paid Chk« 080195 2/14/2005 ELECTRIC RESOURCE CONTRACTORS E 602*49450*406 Repairs/Maint-Swr Unes/IWs $176.36 43768 Repairs LS«23 Total ELECTRIC RESOURCE CONTRACTORS $176 36 Paid Chk# 080196 2/14/2005 ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS E 602*49450*443 Repairs/t.4alnt*l&l Reduction $19 87 84379 E 602*49450*227 Utility System Maint. Supplies Total ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS $203 27 84379 $223.14 Copy Sower Plans Copy Sewer Plans Paid Chk# 080197 2/14/2005 EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO. INC. 0 602*20200 Accounts Payable $413.01 56124 Total EULUS MANUFACTURING CO. INC. Riser Kings $413.01 Pakf Chk# 080198 2/14/2005 EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT £ 101*42260*318 Fire Services J35.781.13_ 1/19/05 Total EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT $35,781.13 Fire Service* 1st Qtr2005 Paid Chk# 080199 2/14/2005 FARNIOK. CORREY E 101*42110*226 Clothing & personal equipment Total FARNIOK. CORREY $165.64 1/17/05 Investigator Clothing $16584 Paid Chk# 080200 2/14/2005 FORTIS BENEFITS 6 101*21713 LTD Insurance Total FORTIS BENEFITS $866.24 4019625*1 LTD 2/2005 $86624 Paid Chk# 080201 2/14/2005 G S K SERVICES E 101*41900*404 E 613*49830*226 E 101*43000*226 E 601*49400*226 E 602*49450*226 E 101*42110*404 E 101*41900 404 E 101*41900*404 E 601*49400*226 E 602*49450 226 £613^9630*226 E 101-43000*226 E 101-43000*221 Repairs/Maint*6ldgs/Grounds Clolhing 8 personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Clothing & personal equipment Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Repalra/Mainl*Bldgs/Grounds Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Clothing & personai equipmont Clothing & personal equipment Clothing A personal equipmont Clothing & | irsonal equipment Equipment Paris & Accessories Total GSK SERVICES $99.24 $602 $80.26 $1340 $4020 $154.40 $57.65 $6518 $13 03 $39.09 $6.02 $7819 $60 60 $71328 1006355661 1006355661 1006355661 1006355661 1006355661 1006355663 1006355664 1006355666 1006362100 1006362100 1006362100 1006362100 1006362100 Mat Senrice Uniforms Uniforms Uniforms Uniforms Mat Service * Mat Service Mat Service Uniforms Uniforms Uniforms Uniforms Shop Towels Paid Chk# 080202 2/14/2005 G&PCABINETS £101*42110*404 Kepalrs/Maint-iiidgs/Grounds Total GAPCABINETS $2250 14271 $22.M Drawer Repair Paid Chk# 080203 2/14/2005 GALL’S INC. E 101*42110*221 Equipment Parti 4 Accessorfes Total GALL’S iNC. $95 83 575304080 $95 83 Camera CITY OF ORONO 02/11/05 1.15 PM Pag«5 Check Detail Register® FEBRUARY 2008 Check Amt Invoice Comment PaM ChkA 060204 2/14/2005 GENUINE PARTS CO. E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment A Paris 122.58 616778 Parts - 431 E 10^ 43000-222 Vehicle Equipment A Parts $39.81 816849 Bea.tng-426 E 10. 13000-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $7.70 619323 Switch • Backhoe E 101-45200-223 Bidg/Grounds Maint. Supplies $28.21 819716 Cable Ties E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment A Parts $5.85 819037 Hose End E 101-43000-222 Vehicte Equipment A Parts $28.38 820016 Hose End E 101-43000-222 Vehicie Equipment A Parts $11.70 620192 Oil Filter E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $14.14 820520 Gauges E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment A Parts $33.59 620676 Hose Ends. Hose E 101-43000-222 Vehicle hquipmonl A Parts $15.31 820793 Wiper Blades E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment A Parts $38.64 820801 Oil Fitters E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment A Parts $3.72 821342 Broom E 101-43000-224 Street Maint. Matertals/Supply $26.40 621385 Bulbs E 101-43000-224 Street Maint. Matertals/Supply $34.03 821747 Batter>*. Gojo E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment A Parts $71 25 821995 Hoso. hose Ends E 651-49010-227 Utmty System Maint. Supplies $2129 822013 Battery Total GENUINE PARTS CO.$402 60 Paid ChkA 080205 2/14/2005 GLOCK E 101-42110-437 Training A Development $100.00 009569 Armorer's Course Total GLOCK $100.00 2/14/2005 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE E lOMISOO^S? Training & Development E 101-41500-437 Training & Dovelopmont Total GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE $150 00 Dodge $150.00 Pottit Clerks Cent • R Dodge MCFOAConf-PoUH $300 00 PaidChkA 080207 2/14/2005 GRAINGER E 002*49450-406 Repairs/Maint-Swr lines/lifis E 602-49450-406 Repairs/Maint-Swr Unes/Ufts Tctat GRAINGER $265 03 666625-5 $75 70 702128-8 $340 73 Starter Motor-LS10 Relay PaidChki 080208 2/14/2005 GREGORY. JAMES E 602-49450-437 Training A Development Total GREGORY, JAMES $45 36 1/31/05 Mileage Sower School $45.36 >akfChk« 060209 2/14/2005 HANSEN. STEVEN C. E 602-49450-437 Training A Development Total HANSEN. STEVEN C. $68.04 1/31/2005 Miioago • Sewor School $68.04 PaidChkA 060210 2/14/2005 HAWKINS CHEMICAL E 601-49400-216 Chemicais and Chem Products Total HAWKINS CHEMICAL $2,056.10 680605 $2,056.10 Chemicals TSid ChkA 080211 2/14/2005 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE E 101-43000-224 Street Main! Matehals/Supply $57.45 90419 Total HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE $57 45 Power Thaw >ald ChkA 080212 2/14/2005 HENNEPIN COUNTY GIS USER GRP E 101-42400-433 Memberships A Subscriptions __$10.00 Curtis Total HENNEPIN COUNTY GIS USER GRP $10 00 2005 Membership - Curtis pj^d'etTkA 080213 2/14/2005 HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT E 101-41900-329 Other Communlcallons $74.34 25017172 E 101-42110-414 EDP/Communicaiions Equip Rent $1,645 49 25018029 Database Access Radio Lease r CITY OF ORONO 'Check Detail Register® 02/11/05 1:15 PM Pages FEBRUARY 2005 Check Ain't Invoice Comment E 602-40450403 Repairt/Maint MIsc. Equip E 601-40400^3 Repairs/Maint-Mwc. Equip Total HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH OPT $26.74 25018066 $26.75 25018066 PW Radios PW Radios $1,773.32 Paw Chk« 080214 2/14/2005 HENNEPIN COUNTY TR-TAX PYR 8RV 0101-20200 Accounts Payable $348 00 1/12A)5 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY TR-TAX PYR 8RV $348.00 Postal Verifications Paw Chk« 080215 2/14/2005 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREA8URER-JAIL 0101-20200 Accounts Payable ____$229.50 827 Room A Board - 12/2004 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY TREA8URER-JAIL $229.50 PaW Chk» 060216 2/14/2005 HEWLETT PACKARD £ 227-45500-240 Small Tools and Minor Equip $U76 64 Totol HEWLETT PACKARD $1.976 64 17846760 Laserlel4250 PaWXhk# 060217 2/14/2005 HORNADY E 101-42110-228 Training Supplies Total HORNADY _^31.00 338055 $431 66 Duty Ammo PaWChki 080218 2/14/2005 HYDRO METERING TECHNOLOGY E 601 49400-403 Repalrs/Maint-Misc Equip $799.32 28800 Orono Schools Meter Total HYDRO METERING TECHNOLOGY $799 32 PaW Chk« 080219 2/14/2005 ICMA MEMBER8HIP RENEWAL8 £ 101-41300-433 Memberships A Subscriptions $/64.50 Moorso Total ICMA MEMBERSHIP RENEWALS $764 50 2005 ICMA Membership-Moorso PaWChk# 080220 2/14/2005 INTOXIMETEK8 E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories Total INTOXMETER8 $1.038 38 161062 $1.038 38 Alco Sensors PaW Chki 080221 2/14/2005 JOHNSON. RICK E 101-42110-317 Animat Care ToUl JOHNSON. RICK $82.50 $82 50 1/2005 Deer Removal PaWChk# 060222 2/14/2005 KEEPERS E 101-42110-226 Clothing A personal equipment Total KEEPERS $7862 $7862 32875 Shirts - Tomcheck PaWChki 080223 2/14/2005 KELLY INN E 101-41300-437 Training A Development Total KELLY INN J^176 96 Dodge $17696 Lodging • Clerks Conf-Dodge PaW Chki 080224 2/14/2005 KENNEDY A GRAVEN. CHARTERED G 101-20200 Accounts i’ayable ____$324.00 64628 Borgen Matter Total KENNEDY A GRAVEN. CHARTERED $32400 PaW Chki 080225 2/14/2005 KENNETH N. POnS. PA 1:231 45650 307 Legal-ConsuHirtg $203 00 1/20AI5 G 231-20200 Accounts Payable $227 50 1/20/05 E 101-41600-306 Legai-Prosocution $2,500.00 2/1/2005 Total KENNETH N. POTTS. PA ' $2,930 50 Schultz Forfeiture Schultz Forfeiture Prosecutions - 1/2005 PaWChki 080226 2/14/2005 LABOR RELATIONS ASSOC 0 101-20200 Accounts Payable $4^641.00 1/1/05 Total LABOR RELATIONS ASSOC $4,64100 LELS Arbitration ----------- .li. . CITY OF ORONO 02/11/05 1:15 PM Page? *Check Detail Register® FEBRUARY 2005 Cbeclt Amt Invoice Comment 17 2/14/2005 UNO EQUIPMENT E 101-43000-221 Equipment Parts 5 Aocestortet Total UNO EQUIPMENT $16.40 123058 Spring $16.48 PaMChki 060228 2/14/2005 U80N E 101-41000-310 Other Professional Services Total USON $2,395.15 104429 Microfilm > Street Files $2,395.15 Paid Chk# 080229 2/14/2005 LESK1NEN» DENISE M. E 101-41900-201 Office supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies Totol LE8KINEN. DENISE M. $43.00 1/13/05 $43.00 1/13A>5 Notary Comirtssions Notary Commissions $86.00 Paid Chk# 080230 2/14/2005 LOGI8 O 101-20200 Accounts Payable 0101-20200 Accounts Payable O 101-20200 Accounts Payable 0101-20200 AccounU Payable 0 802-20200 Accounts Payable 0101-20200 Accounts Payable O 101-20200 Accounts Payable 0801-20200 Accounts Payable E 408-48720-310 LOGIS-Appiicalions Total Loots 1196.50 $196.50 $30 00 $1,876.00 $127.60 $185.63 $185.63 $127.60 $48,500.00 24774 24774 24774 24774 24803 24803 24803 24803 24856 Inlemol -12/2004 Internet • 12/2004 Menn Cty Connect -12/2004 Police Records - 12/2004 Smartnel Pest Patrol Pest Patrol Smartnet Police Assessment - Pmt 2F $51,425.46 ?3T<5KKr080231 ^14/2005 LONG LAKE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE E 101-42110-433 Memberships & Subscriptions $55.00 1/5/05 E 1C1-41300-433 Memberships & Subscriptions ____$55.00_ 1/5/05 Total LONG UKE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 2005 Membership Dues 2005 Membership Dues $110.00 Paid Chk# 060232 2/14/2005 LONG UKE. CITY OF R 101-35620 Administrative 30% Share O 101-20200 Accounts Payable E 601-49400-361 Gas S Electric E 101-42260-318 Fire Services O 101-20200 Accounts Payable Total LONG LAKE. CITY OF $300 00 mom $41.00 20050001 $40.63 20050002 $43.768 25 20050007 $2,174.56 20050009 Blackburn Forfeiture Fuel - Nav Fire Electricity - interconnect Pum Fire Senrices-lsl Qtr 2005 Reimbuse Nav Fire Payroll $46,324.44 Paid Chk# 060233 2/14/2005 M.G. INCENTIVES. INC E 101-42110-340 General Advertising E 101-42110-340 Ger>eral Advertising Tout M.G. INCENTIVES. INC $463 50 17316 $49050 17339 Orono Police Buttons Magnets $974.00 Paid Chk# 060234 2/14/2005 MCLEOD USA - PHONE BILLS E 601-49400-321 Telephone $42 95 8605097 E 602-49450-321 Telephone $55.11 8605097 E 602-49450-321 Telephone $39 45 8605097 E 601-49400-321 Telephone $23.62 8605097 E 101-42110-321 Telephone $212.56 8605097 E 10^-41900-321 Telephone $495.98 8605097 Phone Senrtce Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Phone Service Total MCLEOD USA - PHONE BILLS $869 67 Paid Chk# 080235 2/14/2005 MEYER. MARY A. G 101-20200 Accounts Payable Total MEYER, MARY A. $100.00 2004 Training $100.00 CITY OF ORONO 'Check Detail Register® 02/11/05 1:15 PM Pages FEBRUARY 200S Check Amt Invoice Comment!RPaid Chk# 080236 2/14/2005 MIDWEST FUELS E 101'43000*212 Motor Fueto & Lubricants O 10M4101 Gasoline Inventory Total MIDWEST FUELS $1,238.91 24096 $4,511.09 24096 740 Gals Diesel 23R0.9 Gals Unleaded $5,750.00 Paid Chk» 080237 2/14/2005 MINNEAPOUS FINANCE DEPARTMENT E 101-42110-311 Data Processing Communication $432.00 40650002171 APS 2005 Total MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT $432.00 Paid Chk» 080238 2/14/2005 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY E 101*42110*221 Equipment Parts A Accessories E 101*43000*224 Street Mainl. Materials/Supply E 101-43000*224 Street Maint. Materials/Supply E 101-42110*221 Equipment Parts & Accessories Total MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY $56.12 805735 $148 83 806372 $33.68 RI01050839 $22.45 RI01050A40 Medical Oxygen Oxygen/ Acetylene Cylinder Invoice Cylinder Invoice $261.08 Paid Chk# 080239 2/14/2005 MINNETONKA BEACH. CITY OF R 101*35620 Administrative 30% Share $1^00.^1/13/05 Total MINNETONKA BEACH. CITY OF $1,200 00 RHchio Forfeiture Paid Chk# 080240 2/14/2005 MN COUNTIES INSURANCE TRUST E 101-41900-489 Olher Miscellaneous Charges ____$125.00 3282 2005 Drug & Alcohol Testing Total MN COUNTIES INSURANCE TRUST $125.00 Paid Chk# 080241 2/14/2005 MN COUNTY ATTORNEYS ASSOC. E 101-42110*201 Office supplies $35.68 13888 DUI forfeiture Forms Total MN COUNTY ATTORNEYS ASSOC.$3568 Pal^hk# 080242 2/14/2005 MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY E 101-42110*437 Training 4 Development $100.00 Boris Homeland Sec Conference Total MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY $100.00 Paid Chk# 080243 2/14/2005 MN RURAL WATER ASSOCIATION E 601*49400-433 Momborships & Subscriptions E 601-49400*437 Training & Development E 601*49400*437 Training A Development E 601*49400*437 Training A Development E 601*49400*437 Training A Development Total MN RURAL WATER ASSOCIATION $205 00 2005 $100.00 DoBaere $100.00 Obrien $100 00 Palmer _$1^qo.W Skreen $605 00 2005 MN Rural Water Mbrshp MRWA Conference MRWA Conference MRWA Conference MRWA Conference Paid Chk# 080244 2/14/2005 MN STATE BAR ASSOCIATION E 101-42110-437 Training A Development J?35.00_ 155890502 Total MN STATE BAR ASSOCIATION $235 00 ~ DWITraining * Day Paid Chk# 080245 2/14/2005 MN WEIGHTS A MEASURES E 101 42110*319 Other Professional Services $250.00 75413-12698 Calibr.ito Scales Total MN WEIGHTS A MEASURES $250 00 Paid Chk# 080246 2/14/2005 NATIONAL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Mainl*Bldgs/Grounds $621.90 14231 Repair Valve * PW Total NATIONAL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER $621 90 Paid Chk# 080247 2/14/2005 NAVARRE HARDWARE E 601-49400*405 Repairs/Maint-Watormains/piant E 101-43000*221 Equipment Parts A Accostoriea E 613-49030-223 Bidg/Grounds Mainl. Supplies E 101*42110*221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $8 50 146904 $2129 147095 $31.07 147319 $19 15 147828 Galv Cap. Nipple Plug Paint, Brush Light Bulbs CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 02/11/05 1:15 PM Page 9 FEBRUARY 200S . CtMckAmt Invoice Comment . ... E 101-4300D-221 Equipment Parts & Accessories 121.20 147916 Doorbell Total NAVARRE HARDWARE $101.30 Paid Chki 060246 2/14/2005 NCPER8 GROUP LIFE INS G101'21710 Life Insurance $304.00 6732205 PERA Life • 2/2005 Total NCPER8 GROUP UFE INS $304.00 Paid Chk# 060246 2/14/2005 NEXTEL COMMUNiCATIONS G 101-20200 Accounts Payable $305.34 326160427-01Cell Phones G 613-20200 Accounts Payable $46.90 326180427-01Cell Phones G 602-20200 Accounts Psyabfe $97.80 326180427-01Cell Phones G 601-20200 Accounts Payable $32 60 326180427-01Cell Phonos E 101-42110-321 Telephone $696.67 506573311-03Police Cell Phones Total NEXTEL COMHUNICATIONS $1,181.31 PaiddhkI 060250 2/14^2005 NORTH AMERICAN S/U.T E 101-43000-224 Street Maint. Materials/Supply $1,954.25 1180772 Road Salt E 101-43000-224 Street Maint. Materials/Suppiy $1,042.75 1183997 Road Salt E 101-43000-224 Street Maint. Materials/Supply $034.65 1185484 Road San Total NORTH AMERICAN SALT $3,931.65 Paid dhk# 060251 2/14/2005 OBERAIONER, SCOTT E 602-49450-437 Training & Development $22.68 1/31/05 Mileage Sewer School Total ODERAIGNEI^. SCOTT $22.68 Paid Chk# 060252 2/14/2005 OFFICE DEPOT E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $212.29 271165809 Office Supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $212 30 271165609 Office Supplies E 101-41900-201 Office supplies $120.98 27147772 Office Supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $120.99 27147772 Office Supplies E 101-41900-201 Office supplies ($9.54) 271613314 Credn E 101-42110-201 Office supplies $293.12 273265084 Ink Hp3000 Total OFFICE DEPOT $950.14 '|>ald dhil# 060253 2/14/2001^ ORONO ROTARY E 101-42110-433 Memberships A Subscriptions $139.00 63 1st Qtr 2005 Rotary G 101-20200 Accounts Payable $104.00 63 4th Qtr 2004 Rotary Total ORONO ROTARY $243.00 Paid Chk# 080254 2/14/2005 ORONO SR HOUSING • WIRE ONLY E 415-48930-489 Other Miscellaneous Charges $23.887 27 2/1/05 Tax Increment 2004-2 Total ORONO SR HOUSING - WIRE ONLY $23.88727 Paid Chk# 060255 2/14/2005 PAL AUTOMOTIVE INC G 101-20200 Accounts Payable $514.00 150329 Spray on Bedliner Total P A L AUTOMOTIVE INC $514.00 Paid ChkI 060256 2/14/2005 PETTIT. SANDRA K. E 101-41500-331 Travel Expenses $5 67 2/9A)4 Mileage 0 101-20200 Accounts Payable $8 55 2./9/04 Kitchen Supplies G 101-20200 Accounts Payable $29 02 2/9/04 Holiday Luncheon £ 101-41900-201 Office supplies $143.00 2/9/04 Notary Total PETTIT, SANDRA K.$186.24 Paid Chk# 060257 2/14/2005 PHOENIX TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS. £ 101-42260-401 Repalrs/Maint-Office Equip $150.00 2135 Support 1/2005 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 02/11/051:15 PM Page 10 FEBRUARY 2005 Check Amt Invoice Comment Total PHOENIX TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS,$150.00 Paid Chki 050258 2/14/2005 PIONEER E 101-42400-340 General Adveftfsino E 651-49910-3S2 RrMIng S PubNihing Total PIONEER $?62.68 010605 $63.66 010905 AppHcationt Notice - SWPPP $326.36 Paid Chki 060259 2/14/2005 PRESS S NEWS PUBLICATIONS E 602-49450-352 Printing A Publishing $147.70 2106175 E 601-49400-352 Printing A Publishing $147.70 2106175 Total PRESS A NEWS PUBLICATIONS $295.40 Adv for Emp - PW Adv for Emp - PW Paid Chk« 300260 2/14/2005 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE G101-21710 Life Insurance G101-21710 LHe insurance G101-21710 Life Insurance G 101-21710 Lite Insurance $710.45 96234 $710.45 96234 $63.52 96234 $61.76 96234 Life Insurance 1/2005 Life Insurance 2/2005 Life Insurance 2/2005 Ufe Insurance 1/2005 G 101-15996 Non-Employee Health Ins G101-15996 Non-Employee Health Ins Total PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE $1.65 96234 $1.65 96234 $1,569.50 Life Insurance 2/2005 Life Insurance 1/2005 Paid Chk« 060261 2/14/2005 QWEST E 613-49630-321 Telephone $61 28 9524739904 Phone Service - GC Total QWEST $61.26 Paid Chki 060262 2/14/2005 RATHBUN, BARRY E 602-49450-437 Training A Development Total RATHBUN. BARRY $90.54 1/31/05 $90 54 Mileage/Parking Swr School Paid dhirii' 0M263 2/14/2005 RICKS SUPERVALUE E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Txbl E 613-499004)93 Concessions For Resaie-Txbl Total RICKS SUPERVALUE $67.32 1/21/05 $34.43 1/26A>5 $101.75 Concessions For Resale Concessions For Resate Paid Chki 060264 2/14/2005 SA-AGINC. E 101-43000-224 Street Maint. Materials/Supply E 101-43000-224 Street Malnl. Materials/Supply Total SA-AGINC. $3,318.73 41215 $1,766.70 41244 $5,065.43 Sand Sand Paid Chki 080265 2/14/2005 SBC PAGING E 101-42110-321 Telephone Total SBC PAGING $79.64 9202610 $79.64 Police Pagers - 2/2005 Paid Chki 060266 2/14/2005 SCHOENHOFF. JOHN E 101-42110-433 Memberships A Subscriptions Total SCHOENHOFF. JOHN $30.00 1/17/05 $30.00 High Tech Crimes - Dues Paid Chki 060267 2/14/2005 SECURINT • ACCOUNT 5742 E 101-42110-319 Other Professional Services $8.00 20050131 Total SECURINT-ACCOUNT 6742 $8 00 Credit Roprts - 2/005 Paid Chki 080266 2/14/2005 SIRCHIE FINGER PRINT LABS E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts A Accessories $368 93 366695 Fingerprinl/Evidence Supplies Total SIRCHIE FINGER PRINT LABS $366.93 Paid Chk# 060269 2/14/2005 SOUTH METRO SAFETY TRAINING E 101-42110-437 Training A Development $650.00 1/27/05 Supervision - Tomcheck CITY OF ORONO 'Check Detail Register© FEBRUARY 2008 Check Ami Invoice Comment 02/11/05 1:15 PM Page 11 Total SOUTH METRO SAFETY TRAINING 1850.00 ^aM Chk# 080270 2/14/2005 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA UC E 101-43000-212 Motor Fuels A Lubricants 166.00 0930943030 Total SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA L LC $66.00 Diesel Fuel #424 Paid Chk# 080271 2/14/2005 ST. PAUL, CITY OF E 101-42110-437 Training & Development Total ST. PAUL, CITY OF $125.00 McNichols $125.00 Background Investigations ^•td<!M(l 080272 2/f4/2655 STAR TRIBUNE E 601-49400-352 PrMIng 8 Publishing E 602-49450-352 Printing & Publishing Total STAR TRIBUNE $305.67 12757006 $305.87 12757006 $611.74 AdvForEmp-PW Adv For Emp - PW Paid Chki 0^273 2/14/2005 STAR TRIBUNE - SERVICE E 101-42110-433 Memberships & Subscriptions E 601-49400-433 Memberships & Subscriptions E 602-49450-433 Memberships & Subscriptions Total STAR TRIBUNE • SERVICE $111.60 1069427 $55 90 3009532 $55.90 3009532 $223.60 Subscription Newspaper Subscription Newspaper Subscription Paid 080274 2/14/2005 STAR WEST E 101-43000-222 Vehicle Equipment & Parts $79.62 119342 Switch Total STAR WEST $79.62 Paid Chk# 080275 2/14/2005 STEFFENHAOEN. RON E 613-49830-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 613-49830-223 BkJg/Grounds Maint. Supplies Total STEFFENHAOEN. RON $79.00 1/13/05 $36.19 2/7/OS $115.19 Safety Boots Mats >ey (Sbkill 080276 2/14)2005 STREICHERS 0 425-20200 Accounts Payabie Total STREICHERS $976.90 1233571 $976.90 Build Up F350 • Navarre Paid Chk# 080277 2/14/2005 SUN NEWSPAPERS E 601-49400-340 General Advertising E 602-49450-340 General Advertising Total SUN NEWSPAPERS $272 00 751404 $272.00 751404 $544.00 Adv for Emp - PW Adv for Emp - PW Paid Chk# 0l0276 2/14/2005 TALLEN MiD BAER1SCHI E 101-41600-306 Legal-Prosecution $233.27 1/2005 Prosecutions 1/2005 Total TALLEN AND BAERTSCHi $23327 Paid Chk# 080279 2/14/2005 TASER INTERNATIONAL E 101-42110-437 Training & Development ToUl TASER INTERNATIONAL $225 00 41005376 $225 00 Training - Comtek '^ak) Chk# 0M280 2/14/2005 TKDA 0 601-20200 Accounts Payable $223.73 200500398 Leak Location - 3020 Casco Total TKDA $223 73 ?ald 6hk# 060281 2/14/2005 TWIN CITY OARAGE DOOR CO. E 101-42110-404 Rep^rs/Maint-Bidgs/Grounds 192.66 231831 Total TWIN CITY OARAGE DOOR CO. $92.66 Garage Door Openers G 101-20200 Accounts Payable 11.500.00 3057 Striping • Watertown Road CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 02/11/05 1:15 PM Page 12 FEBRUARY 2005 Check AmC Invoice Comment Total TWIN CITY STRIPING 11.500.00 Paid Chk# 060203 2/14/2005 US BANK NA - WIRE ONLY £311*47000*611Bond Interest $29,715.6315035 •*i0 Debt Due 2/1/05 E 311*47000*601Debt Srv Bond Principal $110,000 00 15035450 Debt Due 2/1/05 E 312*47000*601Debt Srv Bond Principal $340,000.0025167401 HRA Debt Due 2/1/05 G 312*10102 Casfvw/truslee ($1,815.20) 25167401 HRA Trust Acet Cash E 312-47000-611BotkI Interest $1,8152025167401 HRA Debt Duo 2/1/05 £312*47000*611Bond Interest $30,609.6025167401 HRA Debt Due 2/1/05 E 313-47000-611Bond Intorost $23.006 25 25525000 Debt Due 2/1/05 E 313-47000-601Debt Srv Bond Principal $70,000 00 25525000 Debt Due 2/1/05 £314*47000*611Bond Interest $19,543.75 33365060 Dob! Due 2/1/05 E 314*47000*601Debt Srv Bond Principal $50,000 00 33365060 Debt Due 2/1/05 0 315*10102 Cash-w/truslee ($529.65) 33529400 HRA Trust Acet Cash E 315^47000*611Bond Intorest $529.65 33529400 HRA Debt Due 2/1/05 E 315-47000-611Bond Interest $34,347.85 33529400 HRA Debt Due 2/1/05 E 316-47000*601Debt Srv Bond Principal $160,000.0033539400 Debt Duo 2/1/05 E 316-47000*611Bond Interest $5,522.50 33539400 Debt Due 2/1/05 Total US BANK NA* WIRE ONLY $892,745.78 Paiddlik# 080284 2/14/20<^ VEE/LIN E 101*41410*331Travel Expenses $20.10 2/8/05 Mileage E 101*41500*331Travel Expenses $25.52 2/8/05 Mileage E 101-41900 201 Office supplies _ $43.00 2/8/05 Rotary Renewal Total VEE.LIN ' $88.62 PaidChkO 060285 2/14/2005 VERIZON DIRECTORIES E 613^9630*340 General Advorttoing Total VERIZON DIRECTORIES 118.20 390009645313 Dirodofy $18 20 ' PakJ ChKi 060266 Z'14/2005 VERIZON WIRELESS E 101*41900-321 Telephone Total VERIZON WIRELESS $92 62 3566317423 Coll Phonei $92.82 Paid Chki 080287 2/14/2005 VOGT HEATING S AIR E 101*41900*404 Repaifs/Mainl-Bldga/Grounda Total VOGT HEATING a AIR $412.00 25425 $412.00 Ropairs * Furnace #6 Paid Chk# 060268 2/14/2005 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT U 101-43000*221 EquIpmont Paris 8 Accossorios Total WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT $1345 27381 $13.45 Nozzle PaidChka 060289 2/14/2005 WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0 101*20200 Accounts Payablo $1,125 00 411285 Total WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES $1.125 00 Dcmuth * Reforestation Plan Paid Chk# 060290 2/14/2005 WILLIAMS TOWING 0 231*20200 Accounts Payablo Total WILLIAMS TOWING $14165 73780 $141.65 Tow - 2002 D Ram l^id dfiki 060291 2/14/2005 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC E 101*43000*381 Gas & Electric E 602^9450*361 Gas & Electric Total WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC $30 96 3113009200 Electrical Service $37.^ 3113009200 Electrical Service $68 39 Paid Chk# 080292 2/14/2005 XCEL ENERGY E 602 49450 381 Gas & Electric $1,516.28 118059677701 Electrical Servlco CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 02/11/05 1:15 PM Page 13 FEBRUARY 200S Cheek Amt Invoica Comment E 601-49400-3ai £613^0630-381 E 101-42110-381 E 101-41000-381 E 101-43000-381 E 101-45200-381 E 101-42110-381 E 101-43000-380 E 101-42260-381 GasAEioctrlc Oat AEiectric Gat & Electric Gat & Electric Oat & Eiectric Oat & Electric Gat & Electric Street LighUng Oat A Electric Total XCEL ENERGY 13.203.02 1182.28 1543.85 $1,380.17 $320.65 $22.84 $9.42 $1,330.80 $411.30 118050677701 Eiectricai Service 11805067n01 Electrical Service 118050677701 Eiectricai Service 118050677701 Electrical Service 118050677701 Electrical Service 118050677701 Electrical Service 118050677701 Electrical Service 118050677701 Eledrical Service 116154014702 Electricity $8,023.51 PaW Chk# 080203 2/14/2005 YELLOW BOOK USA 0613-20200 Accounts Payable Total YELLOW BOOK USA $85.17 303866 Dkectoiy Adveititing $85.17 PaWChki 060204 2/14/2005 ^UNO.JACKr G 101-20200 Accounts Payablo E 101-42400-310 Other Professional Services E 101-41300-310 Other Professional Services Total YOUNG. JACKIE Paid Chk« 080295 $205.00 1/25AM $350.00 1<2SA)5 $170.00 1/25A>5 CC Minutes-12/13AM PC Mburtet 1/18 CC Minutes 1/10 $725 00 2/14/2005 ZEP MANUFACTURING CO. E 101-43000-224 Street Mainl. Materiats/Supply ___$116.98 67116448 Hand Cleaners Total ZEP MANUFACTURING CO.$116.98 10100 Primary Cash $1,162,769.75 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 227 IMPR/EQUIP CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND 231 DRUO/FELONY FORFEITURE FUND 234 LURTON PARK 311 1997 IMPROVEMENT BOND 312 1998 HRA REFUNDING BONO FUND 313 1099 IMPROVEMENT BOND 314 2000 IMPROVEMENT BONO 315 2003 PUB FAC REV BONO 316 2003 Sewer Refund Bond 406 PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT REVOLVE 415 2001 SENIOR HSG TIF CONST FUND 425 NAVARRE FIRE STATION PROJ FUND 601 WATER OPERATING FUND 602 SEWER OPERATING FUND 613 GOLF COURSE 651 STORMWATER UTILITY OP FUND 10100 Primary Cash $172,510.77 $1,976.64 1585.65 $1,200.00 $139,715.63 $370,609.80 $93.006 25 $60,543.75 $34,347.85 $185,522.50 $48,500.00 123.667.27 $976.90 $11.586 68 $7,472.59 $1,253.50 $64.97 $1,162,789.75 OOf FED 1 4 2005 ' (^"yOFOHOfiO • .INFOKMATION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING OOMK*^** fc«CCT|fSjG f::3 1 4 2005 OF CITY OF ORONO % % BL ¥ ' OFFICERS Liz Jciisca Fnrsident A amcmw Putar. Falnicw Chunii Da^cGamkit Viic President PmkhMr. CliriM Luthmii CiNNcti I^fanin Johnson Treasurer %U}m liMirpffMkfict SucWUllams Secretary CaNHmiaii) iyiunUtr BOARl> OF DIRECTORS Craig Anderson Slirntlrttla IVIU* diirf Vem Brandenburg CoMMltUllilJr VttlMHlnr Sue Clemenls CoiUiHUMily Volwnlttr Sharon Cook C«niHiunity Valunlm Maiy DcVInney siiHf RoUie llerbst CMiMwiiMlir VuiuNim Mary Hughes nmiw Woiowka C«MiuiMil}i BdiiraUMi Davm Johnson CMtnwMtU VUniHwr hlarkLec CWHIMMiiy \W«M«««r Ray McCoy DUntw Pufclif Safrty Dorothy McQueen CwoiwHMlT ValuiMwr Charles Pugh Dasid L. Sutton liiMMcdlalt Pm*t PriSidcat AUrk Mlnler PmMxM/ceO Crwa W*ef Sank WeCAN STAFF Ginny Lozano EMC«il*e Uiicctar UxUHUk JcSCaMMalar/ CaartllMter Jessie BtUet r««*lrAd»acaia Audrey Ogland MMtt Ml «rkaala CawdiMttr Western Communities Action Network "«ri 7m Family Support Ser\'iccs • Meals on Wheels • Employment Counseling • Human Serv ices ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^ lT:QH4a>NO 2434 Commerce Blvd Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-0742 Phone (952) 472-55H9 Fax »' m “’■'"OfORONo January 2005 Mayor Barbara Pelcrson and City Council Members City of Orono PO Box 66 Cry stal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mayor Pelcrson and Council Members, On behalf of the Western Communities Action Network (WeCAN). I am requesting the City of Orono to support our application for Community Development lilock Grant (CDBG) Pool funds. WeCAN is the community-based human service organization dedicated to helping families achieve greater self-sufficiency and stability. We have been providing a variety of services to low-income residents in twelve communities in we.stem Hennepin County for over 15 years. WeCAN is the sole designated provider of emergency human services in your community. Our mission is to provide a safety net to the.se families during a time of crisis. Our programs include Meals on Wheels, emergency housing and utility assistance, employment counseling, family support services, healtli care referral, and public assistance intake serx ices. In 2004, we .ser\x*d over 1,800 households in our serx iccs area. This reflects a 6% increase in the number of households served from the previous year. During these tough economic times and a climate of job lay-offs, we have .seen an increase in the m»mbc» of clients seeking assistance for the first time. The majority of our clients have household incomes considered to be low or very low. A financial crisis can be devastating for most families. WeCAN was able to provide the guidance and assistance needed to maintain family stability. Enclosed for your review is 2004 demographic information about the services provided in your community and surrounding area. WeCAN ierv» the fottowuig oommunities: Greenfield. Independence, Loretto, Maple Plain. Minnetonka Beach, Minnetristi. Mound, Rockford. St Bonificiut, Spring Park, Tonka Bay h Western Orono This year WeCAN is requesting $15,000 from the Consolidated CDBG funds to support our mission of helping families in your community. We ask for your city’s support of our application and would appreciate a letter of support or resolution by February 25“" so that it can be included in the materials for Hennepin County. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please feel free to contact me. Thank you for your continued support. Respectfully, J Ginny Lozano Executive Director Enclosures I WrCAN Scrvicrx lo Hfmxrtiolds by Ciiy 2004 | BiiierKencTy ljii|iloyiiieiil Meals <111 Fa Hilly Referrals/C^ly city Service Program wheel*.Sii|i|iorl C'oiitract Totals (•rccnrield 0 0 0 0 9 9 Independence 1 1 0 2 10 14 l4>retto 6 2 0 f)22 35 Maple Plain 11 7 20 go 141 Mound r,6 <)H 50 120 S7r>f.cjy Mtka Ileacli 0 1 0 0 10 11 MiliiictriMa 2 2 1 2 60 07 Oroiio 0 0 0 0 40 40 Rockford 7 0 27 97 H4 St. Konifaciti.s 15 9 4 21 9.S 144 4 11 9 11 80 tir> Tonkii Bay n 3 0 S «r. lloiiiele.s.s 1 0 0 If)19 Ollier C!ilie.s 0 20 1 8 :U)r.3'M Pro)*raiii Totals 105 l.'»7 7H 222 I2K;i 184*; OlluT Cities liiducle: Wa>7Uita, U)i4; Annaiulale. BirK)klyn Park, Chanhassen, New (jerinaii). St. Paul, Waeoiiia, WatiTtowii, KxceLsior, Delano, SI. Ixuiis Park. MiniuM|H)lis Metro Area I ,% t I WeCAN Program Summary 2004 Households Served Program Total Number of Households Served Emergency Assistance 109 Employment Program 157 Meals on Wheels 73 Family Support 222 Information/Referral 1283 Total Households Served 1844 Individuals Served Program Total number of Individuals Served Emergency Assistance 292 Employment Program 286 Meals on Wheels 77 Family Support 736 Total Individuals Served 1391 Units of Service Program UOS per Program Emergency Assistance 169 Employment Program 316 Meals on Wheels 8.823 Family Support 739 Information/Referral 1283 Total UOS Served 11161 UOS = Units of Service WeCAN Services Household Characteristics 2004 Household Income Levels - Percentage of Totals Program <80% of SMSA <50-30% of SMSA <30% of SMSA Federal Pov(;riy Level Emergency Services 2%3%30%65% Employment Program 9%15%19%58% Meals on Wheels -8%48%44% Family Support Program 2%5%34%59% * Based on 2003 HUD Household Income Guidelines FY 2003 Median Household Income (Mpis/St. Paul) $ 75,300 Household Types Program Children Adults Seniors Male Female Total Individuals Emergency Services 138 154 1 130 162 292 Employment Program 85 195 3 115 171 286 Meals on Wheels 0 13 64 14 63 77 Family Support Program 416 316 34 327 409 736 Total 639 678 102 586 805 1391 Female-Head of Households Program Female HH % of Households Emergency Services 67%61.00% Employment Program 73 46.00% Meals on Wheels 49%67% Family Support Program 131%59% Definitions: Children 0-18 Adults 19-64 Seniors 64-f SMSA Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area HH Head of Household Western Communities Action Network (WeCAN) 2434 Commerce Blvd. Suite H Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-0742 www.wecan-help.org 2004 Program and Services Statistics Information and Referral With integrated client management our staff \iews the whole family and assesses their need for service. Referrals, information and navigation assistance is offered. R eferral Services ; Community Food Shelf Referrals are given to the appropriate Community Food Shelf to clients in need. Food Shelves can provide fresh milk and bread, canned and packaged foods for individuals and families. f jnw Co.«iT Clothing Providers The Pennywise Shop in Mound offers quality second-hand clothing, toys, and house wares to area residents. Through WeCAN, vouchers are available for free clothing. Economic A ssistance ; Hennepin Count Economic Assistance intake workers take applications for Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP), General Assistance, and other programs in the WeCAN offices one day each week. Family AND Individual Counseling Appointments are available in the WeCAN offices one day per week for professional individual and family counseling provided by Pyramid Mental Health Center. Please let Friends and Family in Need of These Services Know About WeCAN! Our telephone number is: 952.472.0742 If you would like to volunteer — be sure to let us know, there are many great ways you can get involved! Neighbors helping neighbors really works! Western Communities Action Network 2434 Commerce Blvd Mound, MN 55364 952-472-0742 Phone 952-472-5589 Fax wwvv.wecan-help.org r C Western Communities Action Network WeCAN is a non-profit 501(0)3 organization whose mission is to help provide basic human services in a respectful manner to individuals and families in our service area, and to work with them to enhance family stability and self-sufficiency. We serve the following communities: Mound, Greenfield, Loretto, Independence, Maple Plain, Minnetrista, Minnetonka Beach, Rockford, Spring Park, St. Bonifacius, Tonka Bay and Western Orono. Here are some of our services: Meals -on -Wheels The Meals on Wheels provides hot noon meals to seniors and homebound residents throughout the service area. Community volunteers deliver all meals. Employment Counseling Program WeCAN offers assistance in updating resumes, one-on-one counseling, computer access for searching and applying on-line. WeCAN also provides information and referrals for potential community' employment opportunities. Family Support Services Birthday Shelf: Donated birthday presents and supplies are available for low and moderate-income families having a party' or attending one. Ready-to-Leam: Donated school supplies are distributed to school aged children year round. Holiday Gift Program: Christmas gifts are pro\ided to families in need from donations by area residents and businesses. Stay-Warm: Quilts made and donated by local quilting groups are distributed to households in the service area. Emergency Assistance Eligible recipients can receive emergency assistance for rent or mortgage payments, transportation and utilities through vouchers or interest-free loans, appointments are available at either of these locations; • WeCAN Main Office 2434 Commerce Blvd Mound, MN 55364 • Orono Discovery Center 5050 Independence St Maple Plain, MN 55359 All appoinhnenis need to be scheduled by calling 952 ‘472‘0742. H ealth Advocacy WeCAN’s Health Advocate provides assistance with Minnesota Care, medical assistance and Food Support applications and referrals for other health care resources.