Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-23-2004 Council Packet^ * AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23,2004,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - !ocaie.d on the counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend COIlWr.II MFFTING m 2 5 2004 CITY OF ORC.NO RECOGNITION 2. Linda Koblick, County Commissioner - Presentation 3. Excelsior Fire Chief; Mark DuCharmc & Long Lake Fire Administrative Officer; Tony Roe - Introduction of the New Volunteer Firefighters for the Navarre Fire Station. 4. John Herman, Community Service Officer - Resolution APPROVAL OF MINUTES • 5. Regular Council Meeting of January 26. 2004 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Pauline Bouchard. Representative PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - David Rahn, Representative LMCD REPORT - Debora Halvorson PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 6. #04-2976 James and Judith Pierpont, 1801 West Farm Road - CUP - Resolution #04-2983 James and Jean Echtencamp, 2800 Pheasant Road - CUP - Resolution #04-2985 Tom Cullum. 785 Femdale Road N. - Variance - Resolution #04-2981 Jeff Martineau, 2565 North Shore Drive - Variance - Resolution #03-2923 Stevan Wagner, 3609 Shoreline Dnve - Commercial Site Plan 7 8. 9. 10. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT 11. Scheduled Assessment Hearing - West Farm Sewer Project - Resolution AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23,2004,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 12. Change Order #7 - Long Lake Fire Station 13. Funding of Assessment for Logis Police Records System. 14. Support of CDBU Urant Application by the West Hennepin Affordable Housing l^nd Trust (WHAHLl) 15. Support of CDBG Funding Request by WeCan. 16. Declaration of Reimbursement Intent for Police Vehicle Costs and Public Works Capital Equipment Costs - Resolution CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 17. LICENSES Temporary On Sale Liquor License Special Event Permit ♦ 18. BILLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2004 i 03/01 - Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. 03/03 - Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. 03/04 - Council Work Session, Thursday, 5:30 p.m. 03/08 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 03/15 - Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p m. 03/22 - Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. 04/05 04/07 04/08 04/12 04/19 04/21 04/26 Park Commission Meeting, 7:15 p.m. Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. Council Work Session, Thursday, 5:30 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.m. Local Board of Appeal and Equalization, 7:00 p.m. Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m. Public A ttendance Meeting Date 2 25 -o <-1 51 Council □ Planning Commission □ Park Commission □ Other Please filloijtthe information requested BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 2. 7 4.1.C I A, 3. 4. 5.. 6.. 7.. 8.. 9. 10. 11-. 12.. 13. 14. 15. ^iVAJnilRietmBse Iappae riPanRapHfclts AHamlaMo.tspd A1 7^ . •-» COI tWCII. MFFTING FEB 2 3 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORO n U DATE: 2/23/04 ITEM NO:H Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name: StephanyG Title: Chief of PPlicece^ Item Description: Accept Resolution to Recognize John Herman, CSO Exhibits; Resolution Attached DISCUSSION: John Herman has served as the full time community service officer to the City of Orono for the past 18 months. He has accepted a job as a police officer for the City of St. Louis Park effective March 8.2004. John has helped the police department meet its mission of fairness, service, pride and quality through his assistance in ensuring quality community oriented policing and he will be missed. The police department and city staff recommend that he be recognized by attached resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to recognize John Herman for his service to the City of Orono and contract jurisdictions by council resolution. & r '' ■ • ' ■■■■- L- A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER JOHN HERMAN RESOLUTION NO. 5115 WHEREAS, the CITY OF ORONO AND ORONO POUCE DEPARTMENT seek staff who are responsive to the needs of the citizens and offer the employment opportunity of Community Service Officer (CSO), which can be a gateway position for persons interested in law enforcement; and WHEREAS, John Herman decided to make a midlife career change at age 36 and take the position of Orono CSO in order to become a police officer; and WHEREAS, John Herman served the City of Orono as a CSO and animal control officer for eighteen months, and has taken a position of Police Officer for the City of St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS. John has represented the City and the Police Department professionally and kindly, and WHEREAS, John will be missed by his friends, human and canine. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, by the City of Orono, that John Ralph Herman be recognized for his outstanding contribution as a CSO, including providing an endless supply of dog biscuits, and that he go in safety with our best wishes. Adopted by the City Council of Orono. Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 23rd day of February, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vec, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 CnilMr.ll MFFTING m 2 5 g004 ROLL CITY OF ORONO The Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present; Mayor Barbara Peterson. Council Members Bob Sansevere, Jim Murphy. Jim White, and Lili McMillan. Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse. Planner Melanie Curtis. Planner Janice Gundlach. City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Alissa Wintcmheimcr. Planning Director Mike Gaffron was absent. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend Items 11, 12, 14, and 15 were added to the Consent Agenda. Item 10 was removed from the Consent Agenda. Murphy moved, and White seconded, to approve the consent agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PRESENTATION 2. Safe and Sober Program Grant Chief Stephanie Good introduced Bob O’Brien, the Safe and Sober Liaison for the State Department of Public Safety. Mr. O’Brien put together a fact sheet, which he passed out to Council that showed car accidents in Orono in 2002 cost rlmost $4 million. Car accidents are the number one reason cause of teenage deaths. He stated that Orono has an excellent police department and their efforts in the community have made an impact on Orono’s safety statistics. Safe and Sober believes in engineering, education and enforcement. He repeated that Orono’s police department does an excellent job of education and enforcement in the community. He presented Officer Famiok with a portable breath tester, a $400 item. Chief Good thanked Mr. O’Brien for his work with the police force and for helping them with grant applications. She asked Officer Famiok to name the other officers involved in the program. Officer Famiok named Chris Fisher, Jeff Johnson, Bruce Anderson. David McNichol Mayor Peterson thanked Chief Good for the work the police force does for the community. She stated Council is proud of the department. d) ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 APPROVAL OF MINUTES *3. Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of January 26,2004 Murphy moved, and White seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of January 26,2004. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS—RICK RICE, REPRESENTATIVE See comments followinp Item 4. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS—JEANNE MABUSTH, REPRESENTATIVE None. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 4. #03*2958 Judson Dayton, 2885 Little Orchard Way—Variances—Resolution No. 5110. Gundlach stated that the original request was for renewal of a variance that allowed a bam to remain on the property absent a principal structure. With the original variance the bam was to be re-located to the rear of the lot. However, the bam was never moved, and the applicant applied for a renewal variance to again re-locate it. which was denied by the Planning Commission. They felt the circumstances under which the original variance was approved were no longer valid. Originally, the variance was approved under the condition that a principal structure would be built. The applicant indicated he would not be building on the lot. Instead, the Planning Commission approved two new variances to allow the bam to remain, contingent upon the applicant combining his two lots at 2885 Little Orchard Way and 825 Old Crystal Bay Road S. by July 31,2004, That way the bam would have a principal structure to be accessory to. ' I i ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 The variances allow for one oversized accessory building (any structure over 1,0(X) s.f.) beyond what the ordinance allows and for the total square footages of all accessory structures to exceed what the ordinance allows. This was allowed because the ordinance doesn’t specifically address totals for acce.ssory structures on properties of over 9-acres. Mr. Dayton’s main parcel is over 21-acres. If the table were extended out, accessory total limits would allow the bam. The resolution grants approval of two variances stipulating that the properties be combined and the bam moved to the location shown on the plans, and that this work is completed by July 31, 2(M)4. Should the applicant choose to not relocate the bam, or combine the lots the bam would need to be removed in its entirety by July 31,2004. Mr. Dayton stated that the process has been more complicated than they had thought it would be. They are comfortable with the request to combine the lots, and intend to move and renovate the bam. Steve Hoyt of 2865 Little Orchard Way stated that the original variance was granted to the developer of 7 lots. He sold the lot to someone else, who then sold it to the Daytons. The bam has sat there for 100 years without anything being done to it. The variance has expired. The only hardship is the neighbors who have to look at it. None of the neighbors support the maintenance of this nonconforming bam. The covenants that govern the properties do not support it either. The development covenants stated that no lot shall be used except for residential purposes, and no storage is allowed which is untidy or obnoxious to the eye. Also the covenants stated that no bam shall be used as a residence. Mr. Hoyt stated that if the covenants and ordinance are to be respected, the bam should be removed. Sansevere stated that the City did address Mr. Hoyt’s concerns in the resolution particularly regarding the exterior appearance of the bam. He stated that the bam was present when the neighbors built their homes. Mr. Hoyt stated that the properties were marketed with the understanding that the bam would be converted into part of a large home. Murphy stated that if the lots are combined, then the bam will conform with the ordinance. Sansevere asked what Dayton’s plans are for the bam. Mr. Dayton replied that he intends to move it away from the lot line and repair it. It could be used for storage of vehicles, or as an office space. In the subdivision of the neighborhood, the Ancorp people placed a lot line so close to the bam that they had to tear off parts of the bam, creating some of the disrepair Mr. Hoyt complained about. a fi n ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Sansevere asked if he had made a decision about combining the lots. Mr. Dayton stated they had been waiting to hear from the City, and realizes that if they decide not to move the bam or combine the parcels, they will have to remove it. Sansevere stated that he appreciates the bam as a piece of Orono’s past, and feels it does not detract from the neighborhood. Mr. Hoyt stated that the bam is a fire and safety hazard. Murphy asked if he objected more to the location or condition of the bam. Mr. Hoyt stated he objects to both. Mr. Dayton stated that he has never had complaints about the bam before. Their proposal would take care of these complaints, moving and renovating the bam. Mr. Hoyt stated he had lived in his home for 3 years and was one of the first to move into the neighborhood. They were told the bam would be incorporated into an 8,000 s.f. home at the time they purchased their lot. Sansevere asked about requirements the City could place on the barn's renovation. Barrett stated that Council could require as a part of the variance that after it is moved, it be brought into a suitable, or reasonable, condition. Moorse stated it was up to Council how to define a reasonable condition. Mr. Dayton stated that he would move the bam away from the neighboring properties, turn it and landscape around it. Mabusth stated that Mr. Dayton would be required to get a building permit to re-locate the bam. That process would allow some involvement of the City. He stated the Dayton’s accessory structures are well kept. She noted that the Planning Commission had wanted a deadline of July 31, not July 21 “ as it appears in the Resolution. Mr. Hoyt stated that if Council allows the bam to remain, he would like a time limit placed upon it. Barrett stated that the structure would never be allowed to be used as a residence. He stated that when the building is moved, it will need to be made stmcturally sound at that time. Mabusth stated that the Planning Commission wants the lots combined and the bam moved by July 31,2004, or the bam will have to be destroyed by that date. Once the building permit is issued, it is valid for one year. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Murphy asked Dayton if he moves the bam. would he immediately work to make it presentable. Barrett suggested changing the language in item 3 on page 3 of S to include, ‘‘applicant shall move and renovate the bam pursuant to building code.” In item S. he suggested that “if the conditions of the resolution are not complied with...the applicant will remove the bam in its entirety by July 31,2004.” Moorse stated that the building code does not deal with aesthetics. He suggested including something in the motion that deals with the exterior appearance. Barrett suggested adding to item 3 that the exterior “shall be brought up to a reasonable standard of appearance.” Mr. Dayton asked for clarification on the deadline. Mayor Peterson stated that he would need to combine the lots and move the bam by July 31. 2004. Once the building permit is issued he would have 1 year to complete the renovations —until July 31. 200S. Sansevere moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5110 granting variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78>1434(1) & (2) to allow the existing barn, currently located at 2885 Little Orchard Way, to remain in its current sixe of 1,252 s.f. subject to it being moved and renovated as described in the resolution with the language changes to Items 3 & 5 of the conclusions. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION--R1CK RICE, REPRESENTATIVE Sansevere stated that it was nice that Mr. Pasek pointed out that Orono has one of the lowest tax rates in the county of 1.057%. He noted that the memo suggested they raise Orono taxes in order to fund park services. He polled the residents at the meeting by asking who would like their taxes raised, then noted that nobody raised their hand in favor of a tax increase. Rice stated that the Park Commission had discussed the status of the Lurton property. Moorse stated they had now settled with Mn/DOT. Murphy asked if the Commission discussed the memo Council received that proposed they “petition the State of Minnesota to allow Orono to increase its real estate tax rate and levy ceiling.” Rice replied they did not know if that would even be possible, and that the proposal was not unanimously agreed upon. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Sansevere stated that the Park Commission should petition Council with such ideas before proceeding with them. McMillan asked about the Saga Hill land transfer. Moorse replied that the DNR is totally on board. They need to write a revised agreement that describes how the exchange will occur. The closing should be scheduled within a few weeks. The price differential had been worked out. Murphy asked if the memo about taxes was representing the opinion of all members of the Park Commission, or one person. Rice replied it was not the position of all of the Conunission members. Rice stated that he regretted missing the November joint work session. White stated that Rice brought a good perspective to the Commission and the last meeting he’d attended had been the most productive he'd seen in a long time. White stated that only 2% cf Orono's property is industrial/commercial, so any tax increases hurt the homeowners. A lot of people can ’t afford the increases. Raising taxes is not a creative solution. Sansevere stated that even if the taxes were raised, the priority level of parks would not change. Safety issues related to the parks are a high priority, but other improvements come after general safety issues. Rice asked if there could be a line item donation to fund parks on the taxes. Barrett stated this could not be done. Mayor Peterson stated that the Commission has tried some fund-raisers in the past that have not proved very fruitful. She felt the Commission should focus on the trail from the Dakota line to NavaiTC Park. Sansevere stated that Council made it clear months ago that they will not have an ice rink near the fire department, and the Commission needs to move on. Rice asked if they were wrong to advocate for funds as they did in the memo. Sansevere and Mayor Peterson stated it was not their role to pursue funding through taxes. White stated that there is a grant that expires in October for $200,000 that nobody is applying for. If they have a clean-up project, they should ^ply for the funds. iiiiliite I ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT—CONTINUED 5. #03*2962 Robert & Joanne Switz, 1740 Shady wood Road—Variances— Gundinch stated that the applicant redesigned the home in an effort to meet zoning ordinance requirements. The new plans met the 15% footprint requirement, and are at the maximum of 15%. The applicant requested a variance for lot area to rebuild on a lot of 0.47 acres in a 0.50 acre zone, and a variance for hardcover to allow 38.6% in the 75*250 ’ zone when 38.8% currently exists and 25% is normally allowed. The applicants would be removing 2,050 s.f. hardcover from the 0-75’ zone. Hardships regarding the hardcover variance consist of the shallowness of the lot and the need for a backup apron. Gundlach stated that the hardships are legitimate, but the 38.6% hardcover was an inflated number because the applicant maxed out their structural coverage at 15%. Staff recommended approval of the lot size variance and a hardcover variance, but encouraged Council to consider if hardcover of 38.6% was extreme. Mr. Switz stated that they aggressively worked on the plans for their house to bring them into conformance. He felt everyone’s best interest would be served by approving the application. Sansevere stated that in his memo, Gaffron recommended not allowing over 33.6% hardcover in the 75-250’ zone. Gundlach stated that the real issue was if the applicant should be allowed to max out structural coverage at 15% thus creating the need for a greater hardcover variance. Mabusth stated that this is the hardest type of application you get because the lot is currently completely covered in structure. They’re at 22% in the 0-75’ zone, and the applicant would get rid of all that. Because of the lot shape, the applicant doesn ’t get the full benefit they might on a normal lot—the hardships should bring them to about 33-34% hardcover. Mr. Switz stated the lot is over 60% hardcover now, and they’d make significant improvements. McMillan stated she was tom because the existing house covers the entire lot and is so far out of conformity. ORONO CITY COUNOL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Moorse stated in the mid-90*s they were happy to grant applications that brought an improvement. The current philosophy is to only give variances on valid hardships. Staff couldn ’t find a hardship for coverage over 34% based on the irregular lot. Unless the property is unique, they would set a precedent by allowing the 38.6% hardcover. Gundlach stated that the difference between the 33.6% and 38.6% is 800 s.f. Mr. Switz stated that if their application is denied, they risk the lot staying exactly as it is for any number of years. White asked if they could install porous paving material in the driveway. Mr. Switz stated he was willing. Sansevere stated the material is too new to be tested for longevity, and allowing that as a hardcover reduction would set a precedent. Murphy moved, and While lecondcd, to approve the application. Moorse stated that if Council approved the application, they should make the situation as unique as possible to avoid precedent setting, and note the amount of hardcover removed from the lot. Mayor Peterson stated she would vote against the application because she felt they had to require valid hardships for variances. She stated she did appreciate the improvements proposed. McMillan stated that she agreed with the Mayor and would vote against the application. Sansevere stated that if Council voted, Mr. Switz may not get approval. He asked if there were any more hardcover reductions they could make. Mr. Switz replied there were not. and they would choose to not buy the property. Moorse stated that the Planning Commission really wanted to make the application work, but there is no other hardship in the application. If there were, the Planning Commission would have found it. Sansevere asked Mr. Switz if he would like the application tabled. He stated he would only allow him to discuss it with his wife. Barrett recommended Council deny the resolution unless the applicant signs an extension by February 18*^. w 8 4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Murphy withdrew his motion. White moved, and Murphy seconded to deny the request for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78«3S0(B), 78*282, and 78*1288 to allow construction of a new residence, unless the applicant signs an extension of the deadline to table the application before February 18,2004. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Mr. Switz stated that he wished staff had been more forthright at the Planning Commission so that the application had not needed to go that far. *6. #03*2965 Scott Sennes of Sennes Design Build on behalf of Franz & Kersten Jevne, 819 Brown Road North—Variances—Resolution No. 5111 Murphy moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5111 granting variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-420 Subdivision B to allow a new residence to be constructed on a lot with substandard area and width, and a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78*420 Subdivision B to allow a side yard setback of 24* where 30’ is required. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 7. #04*2967 Sharon Rae Guimond, 2900 Watertown Road—Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 5112 Curtis stated that the applicant was requesting a CUP to constmet a 1,500 s.f. accessory structure on a through lot. The applicant also requested a variance to exceed the maximum size allowed for a single accessory structure by 300 s.f. for the proposed pole bam. A previously existing bam of approximately 2,600 s.f. and 25’ high was destroyed by arson. The applicant would use much of the existing foundation of the previous bam, but would adjust the bam location to meet a 50’ rear yard setback. Staff found a hardship as the destruction of the existing bam was neither the applicant ’s intent nor an act of God. Mayor Peterson stated that she kept the application off the Consent Agenda because, while the destruction of the old bam provided unusual circumstances, she felt strongly about rebuilding to meet City requirements. Murphy asked if they could rebuild exactly as the bam was before. Curtis stated that she could not because over 75% of the bam h-xd been destroyed. J v‘ . ■ •iSc VI ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Ms. Guimond stated that they wanted to recreate the old bam with the cement foundation that was there. She had people come out to look at the bam area and all said that she would have to go to a certain size to have the bam be gabled and to recreate the look of the lost bam. She stated that they know who set the fire, but are having difficulty proving It. White moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5112 granting a Variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code SMtion 78«1434 Subdivision 2 and a conditional use permit for the construction of a 1,500 s.f. detached accessory structure/bam on a through lot Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1 (Mayor Peterson). *8. 04*2968 Custom Structures Ltd., 440 Stubbs Bay Road North—Preliminary Plat—Resolution No. 5113 Murphy moved, and White seconded, to adopt Rnolution No. 5113 granting preliminary approval of a Class II Subdivision for property located at 440 Stubbs Bay Road North. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *9. #04-2972 Bob Knuth & Mary Thompson, 2700 White Oak Circle-Variances^ Resolution No. 5114. Murphy moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5114 granting variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-420 Subdivision B to allow construction of a covered porch 45* from the front property line and 35* from the side street property line where 50* setbacks are required. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 10. #04-2976 James & Judith Pierpont, 1801 West Farm Road—Conditional Use Permit Mr. Pierpont stated that he requested the item be removed from Consent because of the condition that the kitchen be removed. He passed around pictures to show the kitchen in their guest house. It consisted of a mini-fridge, cooktop, and small washbasin-style sink. He stated there is no disposal, microwave, or other appliances typically found in a kitchen. He stated the kitchen was solely for the convenience of their guests, should they want to boil water or keep milk handy for babies. Sansevere asked why the kitchen should be removed when the fixtures in question were smaller than standard size. n I rirti ' I ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Gundlach stated that the technicality was over conformity because the code does not allow for kitchens in accessory buildings. Mabusth stated that she felt the kitchen should not be removed based on its small scale, however, if the applicant combined the lots, they would be in compliance and the kitchen would not be an issue. Mr. Pierpont stated that they moved the lot line because of a septic issue. They wanted to have two separate salable lots, one of 2 acres and one of 4 acres. He stated the problem arises with the wetland debate. He maintained that there is no more than ^-acre of wetland on the lot. As a result, they have approximately 3.5 acres of dry buildable, instead of 4, which results in the requirement that they remove the kitchen. He stated the sink is the furthest point in their plumbing and if they shut off the sink, they would have problems with pipes freezing. He asked Council to approve the application without requiring the kitchen be removed. Murphy clarifled that the matter arose because of a lot line rearrangement issue. He stated he felt it ludicrous to have to remove the kitchen. McMillan stated that the guest house was nonconforming, and removing the appliances was a technicality based on City code, which therefore should be followed. Mr. Pierpont stated that the rule about dry buildable and the confusion about the amount of wetland made his guest house nonconforming. Mayor Peterson asked about the original application. Gundlach replied that the 1990 permit for the guest house required the lots be combined. If that had happened, there would not be any issue. Mr. Pierpont stated he would covenant that the guest house never be used inappropriately. White asked if they could have a wet bar in an accessory structure. Gundlach stated he could not. The intent of the code was to allow a bathroom only. The issue is with the sink and the plumbing associated with it. McMillan stated that the ordinance was designed to prevent renting out accessory structures. They had issues to address and the ordinance was the only way to handle them. While the Pierponts might not cause problems, the codes apply to the properties, not the owners. Moorse stated the City could regulate plumbing matters, but could not control appliance use. White stated he would vote to enforce the ordinance. V.. jHiiyfiiiiiwaiaidiii ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Sansevere moved to allow the kitchen to remain provided it never be expanded in any way. The motion failed as no one seconded it Murphy asked if there was any restriction on the City pursuing the kitchen issue because of the way it came up: accidentally during a lot line rearrangement application. Barrett replied that there was nothing to prevent the City from addressing the fact that the expected lot combination never happened. McMillan moved, and White seconded, to approve the CUP subject to the removal of the sink, cooktop, and fridge, and that a covenant be placed to Insure the guest house never be used as a residence. Vote: Ayes 1, Nays 4 (Mayor Peterson, White, Murphy, Sansevere). Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the CUP, allowing the kitchen to remain, with the guest house being regulated by a standard use limitation covenant. Barren stated that the applicant has a guest house, not an accessory building with plumbing, therefore the Pierponts should pursue a CUP for a guest house. He suggested they convert the application to one concerning the guest house, and then Council move to grant a variance to the lot area requirements for the guest house from the 4 acres required to the 3.S that the Pierponts have available. Moorse stated they were moving quickly and suggested they table the item so that staff could pursue the appropriate resolution. Mayor Peterson added they could not go further in that direction without getting the language down. Barrett stated that they would need a covenant and to find a hardship to allow the 3.S acres to support a guest house. Changing the application could raise other issues. At any point, the applicants could opt to remove the kitchen according to the current application. Mr. Pierpont stated they would do whatever is necessary. He stated that the lot was considered 4 full acres before the rule changed concerning wetlands. The guest house existed and was allowed before that time. Murphy asked if they could be grandfathered in. Barrett replied the guest house never would have been allowed if they had not agreed to combine the lots in 1990. Mayor Peterson stated they would need an extension from the applicant to table it. Gundlach stated the City could authorize the first extension, and said she would send the Pierponts a letter to that effect. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Murphy withdrew his motion. Mayor Peterson moved, and White seconded, to table the application with an extension of the sixty days. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Sansevere stated that he has serious concerns about the direction of the Parks Commission. He felt Council should address the matter soon. Sansevere congratulated Janice Gundlach and Melanie Curtis on their marriages. Murphy stated that the memo concerning tax increases for the parks saddened him. He felt that Council and Park Commission relations are failing. McMillan stated that as the liaison to the Park Commission she hears both sides of it. She noted that no one signed the memo, and she would speak to Drew McDermott this week. She suggested a joint meeting in April to encourage them to focus on goals that they can control. White stated that the chair should be in sync with the Council, and realize the position of carrying out Council’s goals. He felt they laid out a great plan, and then ignored it. He stat^ it appears Orono has an ineffective, disgruntled Park Commission. Sansevere suggested Council all attend a Park Commission meeting. Mayor Peterson stated that the Council and Commission goals are separate and need to be brought together. She stated they are a voluntary group and are there to serve the needs of the Council. White stated that he drove past four people on his way to the meeting walking on the road, and none of them wore reflective clothing. He noted the danger to pedestrians and suggested some sort of warning to remind people to be safe. White stated that creosote on bridges pollute the water. Gappa stated that both of Orono* s bridges arc being replaced. k ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT *11. Adopt Assessment Roll—North Long Lake East Sewer Extension—Resolution No. 5115. Murphy moved, and White seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5115 adopting the North Long Lake East Sewer Extension Assessment Roll. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *12. Pny Request—Navarre Fire Station Murphy moved, and White seconded, to approve the request for payment in the amount of $2,500.00 to Constructive Ideas, to be funded from the Navarre Fire Station Construction Fund. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 13. Settlement with Mn/DOT Regarding the Acquisition of the Lurton Property Moorse staled that he kept it off Consent in order to remove language from the second condition; 'Yrom the planned new Highway 12 frontage road." Murphy moved, and Mayor Peterson seconded, to approve the settlement regarding Mn/DOT's acquisition of a portion of the property at 3850 Wayzata Boulevard West for the agreed upon price of $1,077,000. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *14. Lease with Mn/Dot Related to the Lurton Property Murphy moved, and White seconded, to approve the lease with Mn/DOT for the Lurton property, with a monthly lease rate of $1,200.00, and an expiration date of March 31,2005, and to approve a budget adjustment reflecting the lease payments being made by the City using the funds received from Mn/DOT for the acquisition of the property. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *15. City Administrator Compensation Adjustments Murphy moved, and White seconded, to approve the City Administrator Compensation Adjustments. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PI.. ORONO CITY COUNaL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT None. *16. LICENSES Special Event 1.Applicant: Event: Location: Date: Time: Brenshell Homes 2004 Parade of Homes —Spring Preview 925 Willow View Drive February 14-March 21,2004, Thursdays - Sundays 12:00 noon - 6:00 p.m. 2.Applicant: Event: Location: Date: Time: LeGran Homes 2004 Parade of Homes —Spring Preview 970 Willow View Drive February 14-March 21,2004, Thursdays - Sundays 12:00 noon - 6:00 p.m. 3.Applicant: Event: Location: Date: Time: Wells Fargo Bank, Wayzata 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 Northview Road to Lake Road to County Road 15 to Old Beach Road to County Road 19 to Beehrle Avenue to Southwest LRT Trail to Water Street. Finish: Wells Fargo Bank Excelsior. Sunday, May 2,2004 12:00 noon - 6:00 p.m. TOBACCO 4.Navarre Liquor Inc. Steven Corl 3421 Shoreline Drive 5.Orono Liquor (Narrows Saloon) James Anderst 3380 Shoreline Drive k ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Murphy moved, and White seconded, to approve the above listed licenses. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *17. BILLS Murphy moved, and White seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. : ! ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson. Mayor i AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23,2004,7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 27S0 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (•) Asttfilk itetni tit coiuidticd to be routine itemi to be enicted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Content Item* on the a^iendt. Memot refirding etch of the Agcndi items tie iviiliblc in the Public Packet • loctted on the counter near the iign in sheet ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve/Amend COUMHI FED 2 3 2004 CITY OF OROtMORECOGNITION 2. UntUKobUck. County CotnmU$ion«-P«MentMion ^ - o 3. ExceUior Fite Chief. M*k DuChimte * Long Uke Fite Admimstnttve Officer, Tony Roe Iniioduction of the New Volunteer Firefi|hten for the Navene Fite Station. 4. John Hentian. Community Service Officer - Resolution ATPROVAL or MINUTES • 5. Regular Council Meeting of January 26,2004 PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Pauline Bouehitd. Representati vo PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - David Rahn. RepieaentaUve LMCD REPORT - Debora Halvorion PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit S Minutm P*r Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOK'S REPORT 6. #04*2976 Jamei and Judith Piexpont, 1801 Weat Farm Road - CUP - Raolution 7. #04-2983 James and Jean Echtencamp, 2800 Pheaunt Road - CUP - Reiolution 8. #04-2985 Tom Cullum, 785 Femdale Road N. - Variance - Resolution* 9. #04-2981 Jeff Marti neau, 2565 North Shore Drive-Variance - Resolution 10. #03-2923 Stevan Wagner, 3609 Shoreline Dnve - Commercial Site Plan MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR S REPORT 11. Scheduled Asseument Hearing - Weat Farm Sewer Project • Resoluuon AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23,2004,7:00 P^M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY. ORONO, MINNESOTA UTY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 11 ChaiifsOrder #7-LongLake Fire Sudon 13. Fiiading of Aaseumem for Logii Police Recoeds System. 14. Support of CDBG Grant Application by the Weat Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust (WHAHLT) 15. Support of CDBG Binding Request by WeCan. 16. Declaration of Reimbunement Intent for Police Vehicle Costs and PubUc Works Capital Equipment Costs - Resolution CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 17.UCENSES Tmipociry On Sale Liquor license Special Event Permit • 18.BILL8 UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 0M)1 - Park Comnussion Meeting. 7.15 pm. 03/03 - Plvining Commisiion Work Seaiion. WidMsday. 5:30 pm. 03/04 - Coiadl Work Scuioo, Thunday. 5;30 p m. Date Application Received: 12/21/03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 12/21/03 Initial 60-Day Review Period Expires: 2/19/04 60 Day Extension Notice 2/19/04 to: 4/18/04 rniiMrii mpetinG rEB 2 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Di e; February 20. 2004 Item No.: ^ Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-2976 James & Judith Pietpont, 1801 West Farm Road - CUP for Plumbing in an Accessory Structure - Resolution Zoning District: LR-1A Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre min. (87,120 s.f.) Lot Area:(Per approved lot line rearrangement) 4.01 ac. (3 ac. dry, 1 ac. wetland) List of Exhibits A - April 23,1997 MPG Memo re: Accessory Structures B - July 21,2003 MPG Memo re: Refresher Course on Guest Houses, Guest Apartments and Plumbing in Accessory Buildings C - Resolution (no change from February 9 version) D - Notice of 60-Day Extension 2-19-04 E - Notice of Council Action 2-11-04 F - Draft Council Minutes 2-9-04 G - Memo and select exhibits of 1-29-04 AppUcaiion Status: Council tabled this item on February 9 and directed staff to explore ways to allow the kitchen to remain. Analysis of Zoning Ordinance Please review the attached staff memos of April 23,1997 and July 21,2003 addressing the issue of guest houses and the like. .. • d *04.2976 February 20,2004 Page 2 Wetland Issue. First, I would like to state that, as strongly as the applicant believes that the only reason he was required to combine in 1990 was the septic system over the line, I am equally convinced that the primary reason for combination was that without it, the property did not meet the 4-dry-buildable-acres for a guest house in the 2-acre zone. The definition of what portion of his property was wetland has not changedsince 1990. Theboundarybetween the wetlandanduplandonour 1974 mapsisvirtuallyidentical to that depicted by the current topographic survey. It's an abrupt change from upland to wetland, and not much room for interpretation. Guest House Standards Reflect Density Concern. Staff believes the City's need to regulate guest houses is directly related to the intended density and intensity of dwelling uses. A second dwelling on a given standard sized property potentially brings in double the traffic, double the human activity, and half as much open space as the same lot with just a principal dwelling. That is why the Code since 1967 or earlier has required that “all regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house". This guarantees a measure of separation commensurate with the intended zoning. The Code has never differentiated between the relatively benign impacts of an occasional house guest staying for a few days, and the much greater potential impacts of the family or extended family memberf*') or long-term caretaker and family who occupy a guest house as their primary residence. Indeed, it w'/ald be difficult for the City to monitor such uses, nor to monitor whether rent is exchanged for such u.«:e, and that is likely why the broad-brush guest house CUP was established. The City has in fact had to contend with illegal rental occupancy of accessory buildings that were provided with plumbing. We have had multiple situations in the Navarre area where detarSied garages with plumbing were rented as dwelling space. It may be affordable housing, but the neighbc.hood suffers. Staff believes that the proliferation of detached garages with studio or other non-storage sp ice that have been approved for a 'plumbing in accessory structure' CUP set up a situation for separate dwi lling rental uses, regardless whether they have kitchens, and regardless whether they have executed a ct vcnant agreeing to no such uses. Defining “Guest House". What is a guest house? The zoning code defines it as follows; "Guest House - An accessory separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants, including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests, of the primary dwelling. All regular lot requirements simll be met by the guest house. ’’ A guest house is an accessory separate dwellineon a property that already has a principal dwelling. The definition of dwelling is key to the issue. The zoning code definition of 'dwelling' is: "Dwelling - A building or one or more portions thereof designed or intended to be occupied exclusively for residence purposes, but not including rooms in motels, hotels, nursing homes, boardinghouses, nor trailers, tents, cabins, or trailer coaches. A dwelling shall not be interpreted to include lodging rooms." I W4-2976 February 20,2004 Pages If the intended use of a guest house is for residence purposes, that seems to infer a long-term use as a permanent place to live, which suggests the need for complete living facilities. The Building Code indicates that a dwelling is characterized by containing facilities for "sleeping , eating , cooking and sanitation." The building code also indicates a number of other features of a habitable dwelling: a separate closet, a kitchen sink, refrigeration, a cooking appliance, and plumbing to include as a minimum a toilet, a tub or shower, and a lavatory. One could also argue that in Minnesota, a source of heat is also necessary during a portion of the year. I believe Council will agree with staff that other than the bathroom fixtures, heating equipment and kitchen sink, virtually all other elements that make up the four characteristics of a dwelling are 'plug-in* items that can be purchased and installed without City permits. Need for 'Full F>*^ilities. Limited Use* Option? The Zoning Code distinguishes between an accessory building that doesn*t have the complete facilities rrecessary for permanent dwelling status, and one that does have such facilities, via the 'accessory building with plumbing CUP and the 'guest house CUP' regulations. Perhaps there should be an additional CUP option, based on the intended length or intensity of use as a dwelling vs. the occasional guest. For example, a covenant could be required that allows only infrequent, short-time residence use, say up to 2 weeks, only 4 times per year, or similar. This type of limitation is, unfortunately, difficult to monitor. We would ultimately rely on the neighborhood to let us know when a problem occurs. Ultimately, the question comes down to enforceability. If a current owner uses a full-facility accessory building for occasional guests, it is not a problem for the neighborhood. If the next owner buys it with the idea of renting it out as a source of income, or merely has his caretaker live there, it can have an impact on the neighborhood. Conditional Use Permits go with the property, not with the applicant. Despite the existence of a covenant in the chain of title, a new property owner might change the use horn a benign one to one that has greater impacts. The covenant gives the City an enforcement tool, but it requires City action, whereas not allowing the creation of a full-facility accessory building would potentially avoid the need for enforcement. Options for Pierpont Situation The primary issue we ate dealing with in the Pierpont application is vt^iether retention of the kitchen, or even just the sink, will be allowed. It has been staff s contention that, absent any clear direction in the Zoning Code, the existence of the kitchen is what functionally differentiates a 'guest house’ from an 'accessory building with plumbing ’, and is what gives the guest house the ability to function as a dwelling. While it may be attractive to merely require that the owner execute a covenant stating the accessory building with full plumbing, heating equipment and a kitchen sink won’t be used as aguest house, Mr. Pierpont has described its past use and projected use as a place for guests to stay overnight. That is in fact a guest house use under the current interpretation of the code. If you wish to conclude that the intended use should be the defining factor, then staff believes a code amendment would be prudent. «04-297( February 20,2004 Pagc4 Staff would strongly recommend against granting a variance to the dry-buildable-area requirement to allow this guest house use. That has not been varied in past guest house approvals, and would set a negative precedent in terms of the density issue discussed above. When the terms of an allowed use are abused by a property owner, the City typically relies on a neighborhood to inform us of the problem situation. The code was designed to plan for the worst possible scenario situations, and when a consistent pattern of approvals and enforcement has been followed, enforcement is relatively easy. However, if the Council waivers from the consistent pattern of rqrprova’s to accommodate a special situation, future enforcement can become more difficult. Finally, recall that the 'plumbing in accessory building CUP’ standard covenant includes the following elements: 1. No use for home occupation purposes 2. No use as a dwelling without a guest house CUP 3. No rental or leasing for use as a dwelling Options for Consideration: 1. Approve the plumbing in accessory building CUP and require removal of kitchen sink uid any other kitchen facilities, require standard covenant execution. 2. Approve the plumbing in accessory building CUP and require removal of all kitchen facilities, and allow the kitchen sink to remain merely as a basin, not as a source of water, by removing its supportive plumbing, requite standard covenant execution. 3. Table the application, direct Planning Commission to make a recommendation regarding apolerkial code amendment and clarifications that would clearly establish CUP standards for various levels of use, based on the applicants’ intended levels of use rather than on the extent of facilities provided. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Determine how you wish to proceed on this matter. A To:Ron Moorse, City Administrator From:Michael P. Gaffron Date:April 23,1997 Subject: Accessory Structure Policies P,jlated to Dwelling Status Accessory Structure Not To Be Used As Dwelling Except By CUP Zoning Code Section 10.03 Subd. 11 states; "Dwelling Use Prohibited. No cellar, basement, tent, trailer or accessory building shall at any time be used as an occupied dwelling". An accessory building with the potential to be used as separate dwelling unit creates a potential violation situation. However, Code Section 10.20 Subd. 3 (G)(1) provides for one special circumstance under which an accessory building mav be used for dwelling purposes via a Conditional Use Pemit in residential zoning districts: "Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings, including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house." Guest House Performance Standards The above language in italics has been part of the zoning code since 1975 (perhaps earlier). The City has long interpreted the phrase "all regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house ” to mean that the property on which a guest house conditional use is proposed must contain double the required lot area of the zoning district in which it is located. The intent of this requirement is two fold: 1. Allow the ability for future subdivision to place the guest house on its own conforming lot (hence setbacks from lot lines and the principal residence structure are taken into account when a guest house CUP is reviewed). 2. Preserve the intended degree of residential density in Orono's neighborhoods, even if the guest house is never subdivided off. Limiting guest house use to that of the occupants of the principal residence and their domestic employees and non-oaving guests, is intended to allow for a caretaker, maid, etc. to live on the site as well as to provide for the occasional relative or guest (length of stay not specified). This eliminates the use as an income-producing separate dwelling unit which would function totally independently from the principal residence and which would therefore lose its "accessory" character. Of course, it is often difficult or impossible for the City to monitor whether a guest house is being rented out, and the City generally relies on neighbor complaints to identify violations. J Accessory Structures April 23,1997 Page 2 What Constitutes a 'Dwelling'? The primary issue for building & zoning staff is to determine whether a guest house CUP is required for a given project . This determination relies on a definition of what makes an accessory structure a dwelling. The zoning code definition of 'dwelling* is: “Dwelling - A building or one or more portions thereof designed or intended to be occupied exclusivelyfor residence purposes, but not including rooms in motels, hotels, nursing homes, boardinghouses, nor trailers, tents, cabins, or trailer coaches. A dwelling shall not be interpreted to include lodging rooms." The terms 'building', 'boardinghouse', 'motel' and 'hotel' are further defined in the zoning code. It is unfortunate, however, that the physical features that differentiate a building that is a dwelling from one that is not, are not defined. We then must turn to the Building Code, which indicates that a dwelling is characterized by containing facilities for "sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation." The building code also indicates a number of other features of a habitable dwelling: a separate closet, a kitchen sink, refrigeration, a cooking tqipliance, and plumbing to include as a minimum a toilet, a tub or shower, and a lavatory. One could also argue that in Minnesota, a source of heat is also necessary during a portion of the year. Permanent Fixtures vs. Personal Property The next difficulty is that many of the physical objects which would reasonably and normally be used for the activities of 'sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation' are not fixtures but can be relatively mobile items of personal property rather than real property, i .e. a bed, perhaps a space heater, a table/chairs/eating utensils, a microwave oven or even an electric or gas stove and a refrigerator. These 'portable' items can be brought into and removed from a building at will and, significantly, without the requirement of a building permit, hence using them to define whether a building is or isn't potentially functional as a dwelling, is not practical. However, the function of sanitation generally requires permanent fixtures which are readily distinguishable frou: r crsonal property, and which technically require that a building permit be issued. Toilets, showers, tubs and lavatories fall into this category. And, most heating equipment falls into this category. Presence or Absence of a 'Kitchen' For some time staff has considered that the presence or absence of a Idtchen' is a key determinant of dwelling status. Also, staff has generally considered that a secondary kitchen ivithtn a dwelling is one of the key factors that can create an apartment unit, and has usually noted to the builder/owner via the plan review that use of the second kitchen for a separate dwelling unit requires City iqrproval (guest apartment CUP). Accessory Structures April 23.1997 Page 3 The problem here is that the only permanent fixture in a kitchen may be a kitchen sink, and a lavatory in a bathroom might serve the same function. Typical Accesssory Building Utility Amenities It is not uncommon for accessory buildings to be provided with electricity, not only for lighting but for many other purposes (lawn maintenance, workshop, etc.). A telephone jack might also be placed in an accessory building for convenience. Less common would be natural gas, except for heating purposes. Water piping might be common in an accessory building for someone who is a gardener, with a washtub or sink area. A home workshop in an accessory building might include a toilet and lavatory for convenience. Much less common in an accessory building is a shower or bathtub. Such a fixture technically would require a permit from the City, and is perhaps the single 'built-in' feature most likely to make a building suitably functional as astand-alone dwelling. In our society, where the majority of individuals tend to bathe on a regular basis, the absence of a shower or tub suggests a space that, even if provided with most other amenities, is not intended for anything more than short term use accessory to a building that has such a facility. Without a tub or shower, it is not livable. Bythesametoken, withoutatoilet.itisnotlivable. Yet the presence of a shower stall in an unheated garage for seasonal or occasional use by the homeowner to remove the grime from a hard day 'in the coal mines', hardly would constitute a separate dwelling unit in itself. This suggests that perhaps a shower or tub in combination with a toilet is necessary to comprise a functional, if not necessarily legal, dwelling unit... It may therefore be reasonable to define whether a structure or space is a (potential) dwelling unit by the presence or absence of a bathtub or shower in combination with a toilet. Restrictive Covenant: Alternative to CUP? We need a useful policy statement on what fixtures can be allowed in an accessory building without requiring a Guest House CUP. The policy becomes more difficult to define now that the Council has in at least one case allowed an accessory building to contain a shower and a toilet, with a covenant filed in the title stating that the building may not be used as "an alternative living space, guest house, secondary residential unit, mother-in-law apartment, rental structure, or the like." Council apparently has taken the position that even though an accessory structure has the amenities to be used as a second dwelling unit (i.e. it looks and smells and feels and tastes like a guest house), the determinant of whether it needs a CUP is the owner's intended use of the structure. And, if the owner does not intend to use it as a guest house even though it can easily function as one. a covenant filed in the title stating the owner agrees to not use it as a dwelling presumably at least gives the City the right to sue for breach of covenant if it is in fact used as a dwelling unit. The covenant also notifies future owners of the property that dwelling use is not allowed. Accessory Structures April 23.1997 Page 4 But such a covenant does not result in physical traits of the structure being created in a manner non- conducive to dwelling use. It effectively allows all the necessary physical features for adwelling to be put into place, then assumes the homeowner and all future homeowners will abide by the restrictions (similar to allowing the manufacture of cars that can go 120 miles an hour when the speed limit is SS). Determining Policy Given the Council's recent action to allow viaametecovenantall the physical improvements which make an accessory structure functional as a dwelling, it appears the Council expects staff to take into consideration the intent of the owner, not just the physical improvements in the building. It is not clear whether Council wants to review each individual case, or whether Council expects staff to determine whether a CUP or covenant is most appropri ate for a gi ven application and let staff deal with the covenant situations. And, Council has not given clear direction as to what fixtures or facilities are necessary to consider a structure to be a potential guest house. 'Sewer Connection Charge* Policy Has Been Inconsistent Council has given inconsistent direction through the years as to the sewer connection charge for properties with guest houses. In the past, where sewer was available, approval of a guest house CUP was accompanied by a requirement that a full sewer unit connection charge be paid, regardless whether the property was conforming in lot area requirements. However, in the recent (1994) Stoddard request for a Guest House CUP on sewered property in which the lot did not meet the 'double area* standard. Council chose to not require aconnection charge, apparently on the theory that charging one would provide a future basis for the property owner to demand lot area and width variances for a future subdivision. Draft Policy Statement The Orono Zoning Code prohibits the use of an accessory structure on a property as a separate dwelling unit, except via a Guest House Conditional Use Permit (CUP). A CUP may be issued by the City Council upon finding that all Code requirements ate met. AUTHOR ADDENDUM 2<2IMM: This memo was a precursor to Ordinance No. 179, Second Series, adopted 10-12-98, which established the “Plumbing In Accessory Building” CUP. To:Building & Zoning Staff From: Date: Subject: Mike Gaffron July 21,2003 Refresher Course on Guest Apartments, Guest Houses, and Plumbing in Accessory Buildings 1. Guest Apartments are attached to the principal residence structure, and standards are established in 10.20, Subd. 3(G)(2). 10.20, Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following except by conditional use permit: G. Guest Houses & Non-rental Guest Apartments. 2) Non-rental Guest Apartments. An apartment within the principal residence structure on a lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal residence, including their domestic employees or non-paying guests. There shall be at least one access door to the apartment from within the principal structure, and such door shall be the primary access to the apartment. Application for such a guest apartment shall address the concerns of parking, sewage treatment, entryway and interior access method. Such apartments shall not have utilities metered separately from the principal residence utilities and shall not have a separate street address. Source: Ordinance 29,2nd Scries Adopted: 2-23-87 2. Guest Houses are free-standing accessory structures, and standards are established in 10.20, Subd 3(G)(1): 10.20, Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: G. Guest Houses & Non-rental Guest Apartments. 1) Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings, including their domestic employees or their non-paying guests. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house.* Source: Ordinance 29,2nd Series Adopted: 2-23-87 1 1 \ *Ed. Note: ’’All regular lot requirements” means that 1. Property must have double the dry buildable acreage required for a principle structure; and 2. Guest house must be located so that it could be subdivided off from main house and both main house and guest house would have conforming setbacks from lot lines, etc. 3. Accessory Building with Plumbing are those accessory structures which are neither intended nor used for overnight occupancy. Overnight use would presumably make them dwelling units, which triggers the Guest House status and need for a CUP. Accessory Buildings with Plumbing are divided into two categories: a)Those that do not contain any of these fixtures: bathtub, toilet, or shower. These are subject to an administrative permit and covenant filing: and Those that ds contain one or more of any of these fixtures: bathtub, a toilet, or a shower (or a combination of these fixtures). These require a Plumbing in Accessory Building CUP. Accessory Buildings with Plumbing are governed by Section 10.03, Subd. 9(F): 10.03, Subd. 9. Accessory Buildings. F. Plumbing. Because the provision of plumbing fixtures and wastewater plumbing in accessory buildings has the potential to allow such buildings to be used as dwelling units, and because it is the policy of the City to limit residential development density to the allowed densities within the respective zoning districts, plumbing in accessory buildings shall be regulated as follows: 1.The provision of outside sillcocks and indoor water supply shall be allowed in any accessory building that is conforming in location, size and height. 2. Installation of any combination of fixtures requiring wastewater plumbing that does ivqI include a toilet, shower or bathtub shall be allowed in any accessory building that is conforming in location, size and height, subject to provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from such fixtures, and subject to the property owner executing a covenant providing that: a. b. c. Accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code. Accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained. Accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. 3. Installation of any combination of fixtures requiring wastewater plumbing that includes a toilet, shower or bathtub shall be allowed only in an accessory building that is conforming in location, size and height, which meets one of the following criteria; a.The accessory building has been approved for a 'Guest House' conditional use permit; or b.The accessory building has been approved for a 'Plumbing in Accessory Building' conditional use permit. Source: Ordiiuncc No. 179,2nd Seria Adopted: 10*12>98 Accessory Buildings with Plumbing that includes a toilet, tub, or shower or a combination of these fixtures, but not intended to be used as a Guest House, are governed by the “Plumbing In Accessory Building” CUP standards of Section 10.03, Subd. 3(Q): 10.20, Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-1 A" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: Q. Plumbing in Accessory Building. The provision of a toilet, bathtub or shower in an accessory building. Approval shall be conditioned on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anticipated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: 1.The Council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. 2.The Council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. 3. 4. The property is 2.0 acres in area or larger. The accessory building is conforming in location, size and height. 5. b. The property owner agrees to the fi ling of a covenant in the title of the property providing that: a. the accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code. the accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained, the accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. S«urct: Ordinaace No. 179,2od Serifs Adopted: 10-12.91 c. 9 I • I. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PLUMBING IN AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-303, SUBDIVISION (17) FILE M4-2976 WHEREAS, James W. Pierpont and Judith A. Pierpont, husband and wife, (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the pr operty located at 1801 West Farm Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as: Attached “Exhibit A" (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-303, Subdivision (17) to allow plumbing includinga toilet, bathroom sink and shower to remain in an existing accessory structure formerly used as a guest house; and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on January20,2004, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-2976. 2. The property is located in the LR-1A Zoning District, where 2 acres is the minimum lot area. The property is approximately 4 acres in gross area including wetlands. Page i of 6 I i 3. 4. 5. The Planning Commission reviewed this replication on January 20,2004 and on a vote of 4-1 recommended approval of a CUP for plumbing in the accessory structure, based on the following findings: a.The proposed use of the accessory structure with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. b.The plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory structure. c.The property size and accessory building location are sufficient to allow the conditional use permit to be granted. The nonconformity of the building location is mitigated by the existing screening and adequate separation distances to neighboring homes. d.The CUP should be subject to the standard “Plumbing in Accessory Structure" conditions. e.The retention of the existing kitchen fixtures in the structure would not be appropriate as that would make the building easily functional as a guest house for which the property does not qualify. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Conunission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed conditional use permit on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow plumbing in the accessory structure will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its use d^neciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 6 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants aconditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-303, Subdivision (17) to allow plumbing including a toilet, bathroom sink and shower to be retained in the existing accessory stnicture, per the site plan and building floor plans attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B and as annotated by City staff, subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. The applicants shall, prior to this resolution taking full effect and within 90 days of the date of this resolution, remove the following existing kitchen fixtures from the structuraqisstion: - cooktop (no oven exists) - refrigerator - kitchen sink and its associated plumbing The applicants by executing this resolution agree and covenant that the property will be bound by the following conditions: Kitchen fixtures including kitchen sink and its associated plumbing, refrigerator, stove/range and cooktop, shall not be reinstalled or installed in the accessory structure unless specific approval to do so is granted by the City Council, and installation of such fixtures in the future without City Council approval shall be considered a violation of the conditions of this resolution; The accessory building will not be used for a home occupation unless specifically approved by City or if allowed by City code; The accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP is obtained (site is not large enough to qualify); and The accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances. Page 3 of 6 3.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by completing the kitchen removals within the time frame established above and by obtaining a final inspection for same within one year of the date of Council approval, or this approval will expire on that date (February 23,2005). Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall consdtutea violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their 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 this 23rd day of February, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 6 ...; ^----: STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 23rd day of February, 2004 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..• *mi LindaS. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, aMinnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 5 of 6 i STATE OF MINNESOi'A COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instniment was acknowledged before me this James W. Pieipont, husband of Judith A. Ferpont. day of..,2004 by > M ' ; tf \;-' Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this Judith A. Pierpont, wife of James W. Pierpont. day of.2004 by Notary Public PlSB6of6 lAtfdiaiMsdMJlAikAii D CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 2494600 ZONING FILE #04-2976 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: February 19. 2004 TRANSMITTED BY FACSIMILE M9-04 95^475•1678 mm mm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm••••< TO:James & Judith Pierpont 1801 West Farm Road Long Lake, MN SS3S6 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION; Conditions! Use Permit - Plumbing in Accessory Structure State law provides that Cities shall make decisions on zoning reouests within 60 days from the date of applicationt and that this review period may be extended by notification to the applicont. Your applieadon was received on December 21, 2003 and the 60-day review period would end on January 19, 2004. However, because your application weu tabled by the City Council to the February 23 meeting, the earliest potential date affinal Council action falls etfier the 60-day period ends. Therefore, the 60-day review period is hereby extended an additional 60 days to April 18, 2004. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, February 23, 2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. If you have any questions, please contact Mike Gaffron at 952-249-4600. I i i CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #04-2976 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; February 11. 2004 TO;James A Judith Pieipont 1801 West Farm Road Long Uke. MN SS3S6 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Conditional Use Permit - Plumbing in Accessory Structure DATE OF MEETING: February 9. 2004 VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST Motion: Table • directing staff to explore options for allowing the kitchen to remain. Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, February 23, 2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. If you have any questions, please contact Mike Gaffron at 952-249-4600. " . /. ORONO aXY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 F I Resolution No. % Murphy moved, and White seconded, to<adopt Resolution No. granting variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78*420 Subdivision B to allow construction of a covered porch 4S ’ from the front property iine and 35* from the side street property line where SO* setbacks are required. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 10. #04*2976 James & Judith Plerpont, 1801 West Farm Road—Conditional Use Permit Mr. Pietpont stated that he requested the item be removed from Consent because of the condition that the kitchen be removed. He passed around pictures to show the kitchen in their guest house. It consisted of a mini-fridge, cooktop, and small washbasin-style sink. He stated there is no disposal, microwave, or other appliances typically found in a kitchen. He stated the kitchen was solely for the convenience of their guests, should they want to boil water or keep milk handy for babies. Sansevere asked why the kitchen should be removed when the fixtures in question were smaller than standard size. Gundlach stated that the technicality was over conformity because the code does not allow ORONO CITY COCNCa MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 for kitchens in accessory buildings. 4^ Mabusth stated that she felt the kitchen should not be removed based on its small scale, however, if the applicant combined the lots, they would be in compliance and the kitchen would not be an issue. Mr. Pierpont stated that they moved the lot line because of a septic issue. They wanted to have two separate salable lots, one of 2 acres and one of 4 acres. He stated the problem arises with the wetland debate. He maintained that there is no more than V^*acre of wetland on the lot. As a result, they have approximately 3.S acres of dry buildable. instead of 4, which results in the requirement that they remove the kitchen. He stated the sink is the furthest point in their plumbing and if they shut off the sink, they would have problems with pipes freezing. He asked Council to approve the application without requiring the kitchen be removed. Murphy clarified that the matter arose because of a lot line rearrangement issue. He stated he felt it ludicrous to have to remove the kitchen. McMillan stated that the guest house was nonconforming, and removing the appliances was a technicality based on City code, which therefore should be followed. Mr. Pierpont stated that the mle about dry buildable and the confusion about the amount ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 of wetland made his guest house nonconforming. Mayor Peterson asked about the original application. Gundlach replied that the 1990 permit for the guest house required the lots be combined. If that had happened, there would not be any issue. Mr. Pierpont stated he would covenant that the guest house never be used inappropriately. White asked if they could have a wet bar in an accessory structure. Oundlach stated he could not The intent of the code was to allow a bathroom only. The issue is with the sink and the plumbing associated with it. McMillan stated that die ordinance was designed to prevent renting out accessory structures. They had issues to address and the ordinance was the only way to handle them. While the Pierponts might not cause problems, the codes apply to the properties, not the owners. Moorse stated the City could regulate plumbing matters, but could not control appliance use. White stated he would vote to enforce the ordinance. ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Sansevere moved to allow the *v:*chen to remain provided it never be expraded in % any way. The motion failed as no one seconded it Muiphy asked if there was any restriction on the City pursuing the kitchen issue because of the way it came up: accidentally during a lot line rearrangement application. Barrett replied that there was nothing to prevent the City from addressing the fact that the expected lot combination never happened. McMiUan moved, and Wliitc seconded, to approve the CUP subject to the removal of the sink, cooktop, and fridge, and that a covenant be placed to insure the guest house never be used as a residence. Vote: Ayes 1, Nays 4 (Mayor Peterson, White, Murphy, Sansevere). Murphy moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the CUP; allowing the kitchen to remain, with the guest house being regulated by a standard use limitation covenant Barrett stated that the applicant has a guest house, not an accessory building with plumbing, therefore the Pierponts should pursue a CUP for a guest house. He suggested they convert the spplication to one concerning the guest house, and then Council move to grant a variance to the lot area requirements for the guest house from the 4 acres required to the 3.5 that the Pierponts have available. JSbi. A ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Moorse stated they were moving quickly and suggested they table the item so that staff could pursue the appropriate resolution. Mayor Peterson added they could not go further in that direction without getting the language down. Barrett stated that they would need a covenant and to find a hardship to allow the 3.5 acres to support a guest house. Changing the application could raise other issues. At any point, the applicants could opt to remove the kitchen according to the current application. Mr. Fierpont stated they would do whatever is necessary. He stated that the lot was considered 4 full acres before the rule changed concerning wetlands. The guest house existed and was allowed before that time. Murphy asked if they could be grandfathered in. Barrett replied the guest house never would have been allowed if they had not agreed to combine the lots in 1990. Mayor Peterson stated they would need an extension from the applicant to table it. Gundlach stated the City could authorize the first extension, and said she would sent the Pierponts a letter to that effect. Murphy withdrew his motion. 1 ■ ■ill mKTiAfaiiii niTiiniTiiriiT L ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9,2004 Mayor Peterson moved, and White seconded, to table the application vrith an extension of the sixty days. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Sansevere stated d\at he has serious concerns about the direction of the Parks Commission. He felt Council should address the matter soon. Sansevere congratulated Janice Gundlach and Melanie Curtis on their marriages. Murphy stated that the memo concerning tax increases for the parks saddened him. He felt that Council and Park Commission relations are failing. McMillan stated that as the liaison to the Park Commission she hean both sides of it. She noted that no one signed the memo, and she would speak to Drew McDermott this week. She suggested a joint meeting in April to encourage them to focus on goals that they can control. White stated that the chair should be in sync with the Council, and realize the position of carrying out Council's goals. He felt they laid out a great plan, and then ignored it. He Drte Application Received: 12/21/03 Date Application Considered at Compiete: 12/21/03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 2/19/04 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: January 29,2004 Item No.: Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Title: Planning Director Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-2976 James & Judith Pieipont, 1801 West Farm Road - CUP for Plumbing in an Accessory Stmcture Zoning District: LR-1A Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre min. (87,120 s.f.) Lot Area:(Per approved lot line rearrangement) 4.01 ac. (3 ac. dry, 1 ac. wetland) List of Exhibits A • Resolution B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 1-23-04 C - Draft PC Minutes 1-20-04 D - Memo and Exhibits of 1-13-04 Application Summary: The property at 1801 West Farm Road contains a principal residence and a guest house originally approved via CUP Resolution No .2854 in 1990. During the recent lot line rearrangement review, it was confirmed that the legal combination condition of Resolution No. 2854 had never been fulfilled. It was also confmned that the applicants at this time do not want to combine the properties (1801-1849) and the Planning Commission and Council confirmed that the 3 ac. dry/1 ac. wetland area of 1801 West Farm was not sufficient to meet the intent of the Guest House ordinance regarding lot area. Based on the recommendations of the Planning Commission, Council conditioned lot line rearrangement approval on successfully obtaining a CUP for Plumbing in an Accessory Building, with the understanding that the kitchen in the guest house would have to be removed. Planning Commission Recommendation: On a vote of 4-1, Planning Commission recommended approval of a (TUP for plumbing in the accessory building, subject to: 1. Removal of kitchen facilities, including: - Removal of cooktop (no oven exists) - Removal of refrigerator - Removal of the kitchen sink 2. Applicant to execute standard ‘use limitation’ covenant. M4'2976 1801 West Farm Road January 29,2004 Page 2 A majority of the Planning Commission concluded that the proposed use of the accessory structure with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood and that the plumbing fixtures that will remain are in keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. ♦i staff Recommendation Staff concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation. A resolution for approval and containing the required covenant language is attached for Council review and adoption. m : COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt the attached resolution for a Plumbing in Accessory Structure CUP. i f J 5 *4 >J i ytJbki Date AppUcation Received: 12/21/03 Date AppUcation Considered u Complete: 12/21/03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 2/19/04 ■' ’ f'/'f • •/' '■ To: From: Date: Subject: Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners ^ ^ . .., . Ron Moorse, City Administrator c. t ^kr f J g Director January 13,2004 #04-2976 James & Judith Pietpont, 1801 West Farm Road \/0'f^ / - CUP for Plumbing in an Accessory Structure f - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-1A Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acre min. (87,120 s.f.) Lot Area: (Per approved lot line rearrangement) 4.01 ac. (3 ac. dry, 1 ac. wetland) Guest House ordinance regarding lot area. Based on the recommendations of the Planning Commission, Council conditioned lot line rearrangement approval on successfuUy obtaining a CUP for Plumbmg m an Accessor Building, with the understanding that the kitchen in the guest aouse would have to be removed._______ Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to removal of kitchen fiicilities and execution of standard covenants limiting foture use. ____________________________________ List of Exhibits B - Sm^ey - Showing Location of Accessory Building, Proposed Lot Lines C - Floor Plan Sketches by Staff (Approx, per 1990 Bldg. Permit), Elev. Views D - Photos E - Property Owners List F - Plat map G - Memo of 10/20/03 H - Council Minutes 11/24/03 :.‘j| n r i! M4.2976 January 13i 2004 Page 2 Pertioeiit Code Sectioos: 1. Section 78-303(17): LR-IA Conditional Uses: 2. "The provision of a toilet, bathtub or shower In ao accessory building. Approval shall be conditiooed on provision of municipal sanitary sewer or a conforming sewage treatment system designed to handle the anddpated flows from the building plumbing. Approval shall be granted only when the following criteria are met: 1. The Council finds that the proposed use of the accessory structure with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. Tb c Council finds that the plumbing fixtures proposed are In keeping with the intended use of the accessory building. The property is 2J> acres in area or larger. The accessory bnfldlng Is conforming in location, sIm and height. The property owBer agrees to the filing of a covenant In the title of the property pro>1ding that: a. the accessory building will not be used for a heme occupation unless specifleaDr approved by City or if allowed by City code, the accessory building will not be used as a dwelling unless a guest house CUP Is obtained. the accessory building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling under any circumstances." 3. 4. 5. b. 2.Section 78-1437(3): Supplementaiy Requirements and Restrictions - Accessory Buildings- Plumbing. "Because the provision of plumbing fixtures and wutewater plumbing in accessory buildings has the potential tb allow sneh buUdIngs to be used at dwelling units, and because it it the policy of the Cit>' to limit residential development density to the allowed densities within the respective zoning districts, plumbing in accessory buUdings shall be regulated at follows: 1. The provision of _ctc... Installation of ...etc— Installation of any combination of fixtures requiring wastewater plumbing that includes a toilet, shower or bathtub shall be allowed only In an accessory building that Is conforming in locadon, size and height, which meets one of the following criteria: a. The accessory building has been approved for a 'Guest House* conditional use permit; or b. The accessory building has been approved for a 'Plumbing in Accessory Building* conditional use permit." 2. 3. 3. Section 78-1434: Oversize Accessory Structure Standards Background Because the City will not accept continuation of the Guest House use without 4.0 acres of dry at the Council level established that removal of the kitchen facilitiea from the exi atmeture would be required, but the plumbing would be allowed to remain subject to applicant successfully obtaining a CUP. The lot line rearrangement approval does not take effect until the Plumbing in Accessory Building CUP is obtained. wrTH a/vMBnaa f jThw ^ M4.2976 January 13,2004 Pata3 It should be noted that the existing guest house is located very near the north boundary of the property; this was reviewed and found acceptable during review of the CUP granted in 1990. NeighboAood conditions have not changed substantially since that time. Septic System Capability; Sewer Pending 1801 West Farm Road has been confirmed to have a site for construction of a 5-bedroom mound system should the need arise to replace the existing system serving the house and accessory building. However, the City Council has received and acted on a petition by this neighborhood for municipal sewer, and it is anticipated that the property will be served by municipal sewer in the relatively near future. CUP Standards per 78-303(17) Lot Area The property contains the required 2.0 acres of land, meeting Condition 3 of Section 78-303(17). Ruildinp Conformity The property does not s|)pear to abut Long Lake and is not considered a lakeshore lot. While the accessory building is conforming as to height, it is nonconforming as to size and location. The structure consists of two buildings - an old stable and a newer garage, connected by a circular room. The total square footage is approximately 1075 s.f., which would place this building into the category of an 'oversize accessory structure* subject to principal structure setbacks (50* front, 30* side) and not nearer the street than the principal residence structure. However, this building is located approximately 49' from the cul-de-sac where a 50' setback would be required, and it sits between the house and the street. Further, its location ranges from 1.5' to 6' firom the north side lot line. This building was allowed to be established in 1990 via Resolution No. 2854 which made die following finding regarding its location: "b. The property owner to the immediate north that receives the most visual impact from the intensification of the structure has submitted written approval of the project That property owner ’s house is located 150' cast of the project." The building today is screened from the north by vegetation existing on the adjacent property. Staff believes the neighborhood visual impact today is as minimal as it was in 1990. Covenant Requirement It is asstuned that the property owner will agree to the covenant requirements, including: - the building will not be used for a home occupation; - the building w ill not be used as a dwelling; and • building will not be rented, leased or otherwise provided for use as a dwelling. r #04-2976 January 13,2004 Page 4 Required Findings In order to approve the CUP, Council must make the following two findings: - the proposed use of the accessory structure with plumbing will not be detrimental to the residential character of the neighborhood. - the plumbing fixtures proposed are in keeping with die intended use of the accessory building. Planning Conunission should ask the applicant to confirm the intended uses of this building once the kitchen is removed, to ensure that the above findings are satisfied. Kitchen removal should include the following, in the opinion of staff: 1 . Remove stove and microwave oven, if any. 2. Remove refiigerator. 3. Remove kitchen sink and associated plumbing. Planning Commission should confirm that these are &e appropriate fixtures to be removed to result in the conversion fiom a ‘guest house* use to an ‘accessory stmcture with plumbing* use. The fixtures to be removed will be documented as 'not allowed to be reinstalled’ in the CUP resolution. Issues for Cottsideration 1 . Are the neighborhood impacts of the nonconforming aspects of the stmcture so minimal as to be a non-issue regarding this CUP request? 2. With removals of existing kitchen facilities, the structure will still have a bathroom. Is this consistent with the ^plicant’ s proposed use for the structure? Are die fixtures suggested for removal by staff the appropriate fixtures to be re**ioved? 3. Does Pluming Commission have any concerns regarding this proposed CUP? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends ^proval of the CUP for plumbing in the accessory structure, subject to the following: 1 . Applicants to execute standard 'use limitation* covenants as required by City Ordinance. 2. Conversion from 'guest house* status '*'.ccessory building with plumbing* status will require removal of existing kitchen facilities including stove and microwave oven, if any; re^gerator; and kitchen sink and associated plumbing. i W 74j:4a c j ; ----------------- £y^' «••••« T» 4J?*-©*** 5 ^ecawb. F/LMfc.(aWmx^ puur Date Application Received: l*21-04 Dale Application Considered as Coroplct?: 1-21*04 dO'Day Review Period Expires: 3*21*04 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COl iwnif MFFTINn FEB 2 3 2004 Date: Item No.• 7 Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Michael P. Qaffron Title: Plsnnina Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-2983 James and Jean Echtencamp, 2800 Pheasant Road - CUPA^ariance for Land Alteration in 0-75' Zone - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution B - No.’ice of Planning Commission Action 2-19-04 C - Memo and Exhibits of 1-30-04 Application Summary: Applicant requests CUP approval for filling within 75' of the lake to avoid construction of a retaining wall at the 75' setback line adjacent to the driveway. Planning Recommendation: Planning Commission recommended approval on a vote of 5-0, subject to the staff recommendation. Stqff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to: 1. Final grade of slope to be established at 3:1; and 2. Establishment of a 5-10' wide unmowed vegetated buffer (raingarden) for infiltration at the base of the slope. Please review the memo and exhibits of January 30. Applicant has requested approval for filling and grading of approximately 200 cubic yards of fill within 55'-75' of the shoreline, to avoid construction of a previously approved retaining wall, for safety and aesthetic purposes. Staff and Planning Commission concur that the proposed work is appropriate, subject to maintaining a slope no steeper than 3:1 and establishing a vegetative buffer at the base of the slope. A resolution reflecting the staff and Planning Commission recommeiidation is attached for your review. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt or amend the attached resolution. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by__, seconded by__, to adopt resolution No.___granting a variance and conditional use permit for land alterations within 75'of the shoreline for James and Jeanne Echtencamp at 2800 Pheasant Road. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARUNCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-282; 78-1112; AND 78-1286(b) HLE NO. 04-2983 WHEREAS, James D. Echtencamp and Jean M. Echtenkamp. husband and wife (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at2800 Pheasant Road within the City of Orono (herein^ter "the City") and legally described as follows: Attached “Exhibit A“ (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREiVS, the applicants submitted an application requesting variances to Municipal Zoriing Code Sections 78-282,78-1112 and 78- 1286(b) to permit filling and grading within 75' of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka where no such activity is normally allowed; and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 17,2004, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this applicauon were given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Ccxincil of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. 3. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-2983. The property is located in the LR-IB Lakeshore Residential 2^ning District. The Planning Commission reviewed the application for variances at a public hearing held on February 17, 2004 and recommended approval by a vote of 5-0 based on the following findings and hardships: a)This property was granted hardcover variances in 2002 for a rebuild. The basis to allow the hardcover excesses was primahly related to the peninsula shl^)e of the lot, leaving about 1.5 acres of the 2-acre lot in the 0-75' zone; ana the placement Page I of S tmurni ff of house and driveway which allows for an unusually substantial area of lawn in the runoff flow path for infiltration. In order to avoid filling in the 0-75' zone to accommodate the driveway, the applicant was approved fcr a retaining wall adjacent to the driveway. Now that the house is completed and final grades established, applicant has concerns about the necessary height of the retaining wall. Safety is the primaiy factor which supports eliminating the wall.The wall as approved was at the edge ofthe driveway, with an inunediate drop of 2.5*. then a 1:1 downslope for another 3-4'. with gradual slope after that. The driveway functionally is about 6' above original grade at this point, and filling/grading would have stopped at the 75* setback line. This immediate grade change in an area that will have pedestrian traffic, children playing, etc. is less than ideal. The visual impacts of the wall would be primarily as it is viewed from the lagoon. Grading the slope and vegetating it will provide a softer and more natural view from the lagoon than a 64' long, 2'-6" high wail. The driveway itself will be only minimally visible from the lagoon regardless of whether the wall is built Creating a 3:1 ’.ope from the driveway (elev. 942') to the enl-ting grade (934') will eliminate 64'of retaining wall. onq)proximately 50-60s.f. of hardcover, which will allow for a better situation in terms of runoff The trade-off is that rainfall that would have fallen on a relatively flat lawn surface at the base of the wall, will now fall on a slope and be somewhat more prone to run off than soak in during certain storm events. To mitigate any negative runoff impacts that might be created by the increased slope in the 0-75' zone, a 5-10' wide vegetated bo^der^uffer should be establ' shed at the base of the slope. This area should be maintained in high grasses or other vegetation which will allow fcr greater infiltration in this area. e) Because City code requires finish grades to be 3:1 or flatter, the 8' total drop translates to a 24' wide slope about 80' in length. Total fill needed for the project is approximately 250 cubic yards. Page 2 ofS 4.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the conununity. 5.The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; 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 Sections 78-282,78-1112 and 78-1286(b) to permit filling and grading within 75' of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka where no such activity is normally allowed subject to the following conditions; 1.Council approval is based on the site grading plan submitted by the applicants and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhilnt B. Any amendments to the site grading plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2.The final grade of slope shall be established at 3:1 and shall be revegetated as soon as possible. Proper erosion control measures shall be established and maintained until the revegetation is complete. 3.A S-10' wide unmowed vegetated buffer (raingaiden) for infiltration shall be established atthe base of the slope, final design to be approved by City staff. 4.Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a land alteration permit for the revised grading plan within one ytu of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (February 23,2005). Page 3 of S I i i i 4.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. 5.The undersigned applicants have read, understood 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 Otono City Council on this 23rd day of February, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Ownerfs) STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on ‘this__day oi .2004by Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and sdd instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of S 11 i ■ I g CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #04-2983 4 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; February 19. 2004 TO:James & Jeanne Echtencamp 1060 Tonkawa Road Long Lake. MN SS356 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION; Variance/CUP DATE OF MEETING: February 17. 2004 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval, subject to: 1. Final grade of slope to be established at 3:1; and 2. Establishment of a S-10' wide unmowed vegetated buffer (raingarden) for inHltration at the base of the slope. VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council • Monday, February 23, 2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. 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 Planning Director Mike Gaffron at 952-249-4600. Date Application Received: 1-21>04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 1>21*04 60'Day Review Period Expires: 3*21-04 To;Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director January 30.2004 #04-2983 James and Jean Echtencamp, 2800 Pheasant Road • CUPA^ariance for Land Alteration in 0-75’ Zone - Public Hearing Zoning District: Lot Area: LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 1-acre min. 88.543 s.f. (2.03 acres) AppUeation Summary: Applicant requests CUP approval for filling within 75' of the lake to avoid construction of a retaining wall at the 75' setback line adjacent to the driveway. Stqff Recommendation: Staff recommends conditional approval of the proposed grading. Pertinent Code Sections: 1.Section 78-282: Lakeshore Hardcover and Land Alteration Regulations. Within 75 feet of shoreline there shall be no excavating, filling, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures... 2.Section 78-1112: Development Restricted; Prohibition. Except as hereinafter specifically permitted, no filling, grading, dnxlging, excavation, hardcover, temporary or permanent stmetures, obstructions, septic systems, well or other construction shall be allowed within the Rood Plain and Wetlands Conservation Area; nor on any lands within 26 feet thereof; nor on any land within 75 feet of the ordinary highwater elevation of any lake shoreline... 3.Section 78-1286(b): Grading, filling or excavating of mote than 10 cubic yards is prohibited within 75' of the Ordinary High Water Level of the public waters enumerated in Section 78-1217... 4. Section 78-1286(e): (Shoreland standards for CUPs and variances for land alteration) List of Exhibits A - Application and Hardship Statement B - Letter of Request C - Survey/Site Plan - Existing D - Survey/Site Grading Plans - Proposed E - Photographs F - Property Owners List G - Plat Map H - Resolution No. 4847 (2002 Var. approval) I - Code Excerpts - Land Alteration Standards V m 404-2983 Janiuuy 30,2004 Page 2 Background Please review the applicant’s letter of request. Briefly, this property was granted hardcover variances in 2002 for a rebuild. The basis to allow the hardcover excesses was primarily related to the peninsula shape of the lot, leaving about 1.5 acres of the 2-acre lot in the 0-75' zone; and the placement of house and driveway which allows for an unusually substantial area of lawn in the runoff flow path for infiltration In order to avoid filling in the 0-75* zone to accommodate the driveway, the applicant was approved for a retaining wall adjacent to the driveway. Now that the house is completed and final grades established, applicant has concerns about the necessary height of the retaining wall. From staffs perspective, safety is the primary factor which suggests that eliminating the wall may be appropriate. The wall as approved was right 2.1 the edge of the driveway, with an immediate drop of 2.5', then a 1:1 downslope for another 3-4', with gradual slope after that. The driveway functionally is about 6'above original grade at this point, and fiUing/grading would have stopped at the 75' setback line. This immediate grade change in an area that will have pedestrian traffic, children playing, etc. is less than ideal. The visual impacts of the wall would be primarily as it is viewed from the lagoon. Grading the slope and vegetating it would provide a softer and more natural view from the lagoon than a 64' long, 2'-6" high wall. The driveway itself will not be very visible from the lagoon regardless of whether the wall is built. Applicant has suggested that creating a slope from the driveway (elev. 942') to the existing grade (934') would eliminate 64' of retaining wall, or approximately 50-60 s.f. of hardcover, which would allow fora better situation in terms of ninoff. The trade-off is that rainfall that would have fallen on a relati vely flat lawn surface at the base of the wall, will now fall on a slope and be somewhat more prone to run off than soak in during certain storm events. It’s probably an even trade. City code requires finish grades to be 3; 1 or flatter in a situation such as this. Therefore, the 8' total drop translates to a 24' wide slope. The driveway is about 79' from the shoreline, so the toe of the fi 11 area will be approximately 55' horn the shoreline, and the filled area will be about 80' in length. Total fill needed to do this is estimated by staff at approximately 250 cubic yards of material [80 ft x (avg.7x24/2) / 27 ft per cy = 248 c.y.]. The fill will cover approximately 1900 s.f.; about 2/3 of this in the 0-75' zone. Hardcover . Hardcover in the 75-250' zone was approved at 8,810 s.f. or 39.2% of the 75-250' zone. This was equivalent to 9.9% of the total lot area. Hardcover associated with the retaining wall is approximately 50-60 s.f., so without it the 75-250' hardcover will reduce to about 8,750 s.f. or 38.9%. Hardcover Zone Area (n Zone Allowed Hardcover Rcsol. No. 4847 Proposed Hardcover 0 75'66,046 s.f.Os.f. (0%)Os.f. 75-250'22,497 s.f.8,810 s.f (39.2%)8,750 s.f. (38.9%) MUM #04-2983 January 30,2004 Pafc3 Hardship Statement Applicant has provided a letter of request and completed the hardship documentation form included in Exhibit A-2, and should be asked for his additional testimony regarding the application. Issues for Consideration 1.is the reduction of negative impacts associated with a 2-3' high retaining wall sufficient to offset any potential negative impacts of the proposed fill to within 5S' of the shoreline? 2.To mitigate any negative runoff impacts that might be created by the increased slope in the 0-75* zone, the City could require a S-10' wide vegetated border/buffer be established at the base of the slope. This area could be maintained in high grasses or other vegetation which would allow for greater infiltration in this area. It could be a visual amenity as well as having runoff treatment value. 3. Does Planning Commission have any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of a variance and CUP to allow the fill as proposed in the 0-7S' zone, to allow for elimination of the previously approved retaining wall, based on the plan increasing safety of the site, reducing the negative visual impacts of a wall at the 75' setback, and resulting in maintenance of an equivalent level of stoiriiwater treatment, subject to: 1. Final grade of slope to be established at 3:1; and 2.Establishment of a S-10' wide unmowed vegetated buffer (raingarden) for infiltration at the base of the slope. ^ ‘ • V . -4., • • v: ► •m t i M . I ! A. ■■ Am City of Orono Variance Application 1^^ !^ieS'u Street Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 • Main: 952-249-4600 ■ fax 952-249-4616 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 5532343066 Application # Date ReceiveC' Amount Paid: Staff: ____^ Fee:S600 Renewal: $300 After-the-fact $1,200 Double Fee This application form must be completed in full. Applcant 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: SL*^oc> “^oouc) P.-’operty Identification Number (PIN): X\ \v~l S2, OOOM (Attach legal description to application if not included on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): ft.gc'v.\ crz. □ Yes, I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of property: ® Residential □ Other ___________________________________ Zoning District: ______ APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal narr.es and marital status required for each interested party) Name: -^eoors, ________________k ^ojck - Phone (home): <4ol Phone (work): Address: votoO -\-e>y>.Vcxx.»aap> _____________ Email: Ga\.A>rrvcur^c-- cc .qnv -v_________Fax: Mo v. ^ U OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legal names ard mantal status required for each interested party) Name: ______^e-e. e-_______________________________________________ Phone (home): _________________________ Address: _______________________________ Email: Phone (work): Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost: $ SQOo/ Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): "To cxSXou:^ O Q c>ca(\ o$oo\.<^ ^ . _ “v _ 7AVbg- ~~VS 0’e><3'\ ^ V^.v^.g- cvjc ^s^ cr.’cegAcg. c>^ xso>jtv.awxaA. Wcyg, cX-C^ycooex^ ^o>\r -VVe, (oM uy -i-p-^V •W\g- Vsca^ce. \h(\\xvfv.<a.\o«>^'qoolVvA m. ^Vejcxs.e. Se.e_ Y:aag^C■>roca^^c) U \ /- r :•• ••••f : \ ' k . .C a . r REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: All of the following information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your application to be processed. S' Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a City Planner. O' Completed Application Form O' Completed Hardship Documentation Forrrt □ 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 Department of Finance Government Center, A-603 300 South e"' Street. Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 0^ Original Certificate of Sun/ey (signed by a licensed sunreyor). meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one coov 8 5" x 1 r or 11" X17" for reproduction. v.\e ^ ' 0 “ Completed hardcover calculation worksheets (as provided within the variance packet).Ov9*v\cL B- Topographic sunrey - including existing and proposed elevations. Provide one copy 8 S" x 11’ or 1 r X 17" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views (provide one copy 8.5" x11"or11"x 17") □ Additioi lal 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 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 infer..lation 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 tp-reject it until it is complete or to recommend the request for denial of the request regar^^ itsj^^entiaLmecit^ Applicant's Signature: Applicant's Signature:z v» \«=\ -qm V . VH- OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this applicatio.n and further authorizes reasonable enby onto the property by. City ^ff.\consultants. agents. Commission & Council Members for purposes of investigation an^ vfjificatlon Htois request. Owner's Signature: Owner ’s Signature:V- »r>4 \ • va »q<4 ^plicant must have all Xubmittals 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 Citv Planner assigned to your project. ' i,, ' ■ Uli t r * . *•* '•{ ^ V._______^ Ik i . A-Q- Page 1 ofr HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM Thit 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 requires that a hardship oe 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 staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the vanance will affect the surrounding community. To prove a ha.'dship, 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.” "W>a. Vae. qvA os.e- vjos.\V>~^V>e. vQ ooLS\.c»j>c«e. ____________ €»oW^;vo<^. •Vo VOXN.-OQQ sjoooVd 'oe. "The plight of the iandowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner.* Airuao <>cxe \ca\ ^o^y'^exei^ ots . ~~IS Qoo'*t V ^j^V.rex»efAs cjceg».ke- o»_ vrsQjrvQi.o ~y r,y\«=» ^ fon.' (XQCCLSS OOCNd X\a.VviVoL\7 'The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." '3IQ ’ . •Wse. V.<sc.o\ c.Vsourc»c\eip* vjovVVy Voe, \e\Li <CTN.o.Ly^VQA.’«>. Imn .< cx ^ V^\cx \.lix -qA. oe.QeV:q.K.vv^e. . "Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." 'CMS V fT'''. O O X 4 " V* " *f AM/-"* IMi J r I 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Page 2 of3 "Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth shei;ered construction 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.” agaa •The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ •The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question arc peculiar to such property or immediately adjoinir:g property." "We. reja.o\.\ -Vo 'X'%00 VV>cc A ql3(n A / ol ^e'CvL'CN.^AaVojc V.o\ Woc^eeo^ Qts-V:tjoe> ^V.tbes. \.~1 OO oV \aioe^VNO'C ‘«- •The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures In the district in which said land is located." >\\rp-^s__CXXfc. Vse-> •The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant” ______________<s\ <3L.C^\.V^_______________________________________________________________ "The granting of the proposed variance will not in an/ way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code." ooo\\ ~Ty\Q. uvr xsvaoc\c,e ocbyW Vv-^ >SeScM ls.^<ae.^ e.Vs.^V'wx.^vj^V.Cvc ‘ ^eA\. -vVv e. / Qo\V cL c r n «• -r*;. • • • • , J- > ■ '■ I.' ^ ■l■^r If I J Pages of 3 12."The granting of such variance wiil not mereiy serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." r\.Q\ - — Hardship Statement 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): -v i v i fi ^ " 4 rJ : nr,* ^ , > 4 • *1. • #•> •s %»1 MtMaMittdiaiaMMieaiiaiBeidtfbflh i ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM J (we) _______of 4 [print name(s)] [print address] have reviev^ the RlaQ^for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at r^^Afa»\f Add also referred to as Land Use Application No,_______. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) Gware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Pro^ftyOwner ^ DateDate Property Owner Date I (we) M»'i- /tUM.'/iy ____ [print name(s)] ^ [^t address] have revie at?^^ ))Md the plMsJtor^e proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located / AtKJaoof i<v also referred to as Land Use Application No._______. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware nf the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Ovwier Date If you have any Information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days pnor to the scheduled meeting date. OQO BACKGROUND AND EXPLAINATION OF REQUEST Applicant purchased the property in April 2002. The property is a unique, peninsular property, surrounded by water on three sides with approximately 1,700 feet of lakeshore on the two-acre site. Ihe significant amount of lakeshore along the 0-75 foot zone resulted in a relatively small and narrow buildable zone for such a large parcel. Working with staff, applicant requested a hardcover variance for tir:; site. Applicant proposed to remove existing dwelling hardcover from the 0-7S foot zone and to construct a property that did not exceed the current existing hardcover. Both the planning comnoission and the council, with the findings that the unique nature of the peninsular lot resulted in a hardship to the applicants, approved the application unanimously. The application and findings are in applicants file at the city offices. In subsequent meetings with city staff, applicants voluntarily eliminated a lower garage entrance and two retaining walls within the buildable zone, resulting in further reduction of retaining wall hardcover. The remaining retaining wall is approximately 64 lineal feet and rests on the 7S-foot lakeside setback line. In designing the wall, the landscape architect noted that the wall could be eliminated if a gentle slope could be graded approximately into the 0-75 foot setback. The actual area of grading in the 0-75 foot zone is relatively small and can be accomplished along with the sod restoration that will follow construction. The proposed slope is illustrated on the topographical map included with the application. The advantages of such a slope are: 1 . Elimination of 64 lineal feet of hardcover on the 7S-foot setback line. 2. Increased vegetative surface and a more positive environment for run-off. 3. A safer sur&ce area, as opposed to c two and one-half foot tall retaining wall. 4. Such elimination of hardcover and better management of nutrient run-off is more in keeping with the Orono City Philosophy for protecting the Lake and promoting better water quality. Current discussions with staff indicate this plan will be a more desirable alternative to a retained surface. The grading can be easily accomplished as a part of the required landscaping and sodding following constructioa It will result in minimal disruption in the setback area. Applicant has included before and after topographical surveys showing the area of recommended grading to avoid retaining wall haricover. In addition, we have included photographs of the area to be sloped and the adjacent property's driveway and slope. You will see that die adjacent property graded a substantially similar slope in 2003 to accommodate its driveway. Such similar slope is illustrative of the grade that applicants are proposing. In summary, applicants respectfully request the approval of grading in the 60-75 foot portion of the 0-75 foot setback pursuant to the attached grading plan in order to eliminate approximately 64 lineal feet of retaining wall hardcover. # o a Q 4/ /.. •1 -.4V "4 s ^ .VK.- r>.«’~V^JTVP»T*^;X , «» * / / vj ccRTiriCATC or survcv roR JAMES ECHTENKAMP •PHEASANT ROAD IN LOTS 13 I H. PHCASANT LAWN HCNNCPIN COUNTY. HINNCSOTA LAKE MINNETONKA V II rjL-scc -aiB« *»p mm «pwM « MP M •• •• ^ «# aVUA Ok mmmt mmtmm •••«•• •* * (•• \r ri mm «««!•• i «R fli ^ M ^im M *..««• •• «N> «>«• IMI >1 1^ •1 M ■r Ma« M M «■ •• at m Hm% • - N --mrnmmmtf mmmm mmt mrnm I» M* ^mrn m mm «# ' «wv«ia w mmtm tmWrnmmtrnm^ // ■/>. '* If •’ •■•♦ i * j, .•« / t * *•»t :%Y o / I*. h; •<?»... •■•' N, V . Mm.J ¥/ 1 f(/It LjSi •<:i t/Tls: oAl ‘ aory25 riii-1 IXa s 1. !' 01 Vj-J-' / H Z>'2 P II II MjPA r^i;-..,-iJ , ...iw*. h>»?: JlMKJIKlW 4«*33W _i£iJJifl;___ V ^ '-ijM Sfi?’ * >• - Mi?»_ .\.i} V 1 *, . ♦ . -,'-7< C'^ ^^'.;s--"“'^'-:,,... ■- rvi*;- ». -vr-1 .> *" . v-‘... -4J ^ V r* k# • ^ V ^ ^ <f y!..r m iiS . ■. ♦rf •' j ,>r-Tirv V^ W -v^‘.'ir ^ Lt<*> $rC ,r''J!i '4 >• *.# '/ B w» 4i IVi. '‘'’-»4v V>' ‘ 'lit • • ' |gr* .*', ;,V . ^ , *-.- V'fi^ ■ ^'1* - i'F '‘‘4^ ''fe^' r.>cw. '->'. .j ^ ^ j ^ -» r*^ flTTTr; V »T-• v>> , Si - N! f ^ • 1 . .. -» A ^ « . • ?.4>« 'r 1 IL. !>. '•:< • ; / :•.*•' >-i 1 V r * %v \* ..• . 4 « * to* , . ’•• * . ‘ h. •',.« •'».•> 7. • '*•' •• *.4f • . 5 ’ ijfti v-'* -‘*1 '*y% '•' ' ’ • ■•* V « « I •‘vv jy-,^;;' i * ■** ■ 0t, •an3|^ ▼?»•<. •; ir to "* • •■;i« -*• f?' »■ 4i:. :& % « V i si / Mi^ 3..V .4 *“ s ‘4 i.-* ^ ^ 1. % #•<'%___v> ». 2&-»*k«-.'sCL2^'’ 9 M I i i >> ik-^- .- ‘-■^ _v~ / -'y ' A _ io . \ A- -*Vl ir y- L RUN DATE :2/«2004 3« 2III7M2.100I4 PROP ADUR 38 AODRE.SS UNASSIGNliO OWNER NAME PHEASANT l>WN HOMEOWNERS TAXPAYER PHEASANT LAWN HOMEOWNERS NAME/AOOR 2700 PLEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 553JI 38 2111723240004 PROPADDR 2725 SHAOVWOODRn OWNER NAME M OR R A MEEK T AXPAYER MKTIAIil. O A ROIIERTA A MEEK NAMIMOUR 2725 SHADYWOOD RO EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21 11723320003 PROPADDR 2799 PHEASANT RD OWNER NAME ELMER J MARTINSON TAXPAYER ELMER J MARTINSON NAMC/ADDR 2799PHEASANTRD l•X^I•;LSIOR MN 55331 HENNEPIN • ioa s t a i rivi 38 2111723210015 PROP ADDR 2760 PHEASANT RO OWNER NAME T J MAHONEY AKA MAHONEY TAXPAYER TIMOTHY J MAHONEY NAME/ADOR 2760 PHEASANT RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 2111723240003 PROPADDR 2705 SHADYWOOD RD OWNER NAME GORJMPOX TAXPAYER OAYtX>RDOA JONMARIEFOX NAME/ADDR 2705 SHADYWOOD RD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 2111723310003 PROPADDR 2745 SHADYWOOD RD OWNER NAME JAMES E2IMMERMAN TAXPAYER JAMES E 7.IMMI-.RMAN NAME/ADOR 2745 SHADYWOOD RD EXCEISIORMN 55331 38 21 11723320002 PROPADDR 2795 PHEASANT RD OWNER NAME RICHARD A MARZAN T AXPAYI;R RKTIARD A MAR/AN NAME/ADDR 2795 PHEASANT RD ORONOMN 55331 38 2111723320004 PROPADDR 2800 PHEASANT RO OWNER NAME JAMES D ECHTENKAMP CT AL TAXPAYER JAMES A JEAN ECMT ENKAMP NAME/ADDR 120 BIRCH BLUFF RD TONKA BAY MN 55331 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESEFTTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESEKPATIONOF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OFTHE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TO IWE BEST, , OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEUEF. , ^ DATE £zll£/ BY / ■■ • V = O = i; V •• . Vi.-. «*.v :y Jfffr -VvJvVTf = ••=. • : = r>. ' ri* K5 if f'' 1 V V../ •r.r-v . •‘r* Vv • ^ ti- -1^ wnniiAf iiiMtii[[■iilinAin i Hennepin Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Department ^ Q Q i •I ID 2111723321 Houm Number 2800 Street Name PHEASANT RO I This i$not» rtcord^ti mwfi. RmtnfMt • eomfittftion o^Wbrmeeon §ndOat» from Oty. County, and State rood suthonlit tnd othor tourem. efttiAiftiii J. ORONO cm* CODK > not n*qiiire tho issuance of a separate grading nnd filling permit. However, nil grading and filling activity approved permits for construction ofstruc* tiire.**. sewage treatment systems, and driveways shall adhere to the grading and filling standards of tins article. (b) Cirading. filling or excavating of mure than ten cid)ic yards is prohibited within 75 feet of the orilinary high water level of the public waters enumerated in section 78 1217. Grading, filling or excavating of ten cubic yards or less shall require city staff review and permit and be subject to othoi pertinent sections of this chapter. (c) Public and private roads, driveways, park­ ing areas, and public or private watercraft access ramps shall not be constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of the public waters enumerated in M'ction 78-1217. If no alternatives exist, such impruvement.s shall lie subject to the standard zoning variance review procedure, nnd such review shall take into account the following con.«<idoratiuns: (1) Such imjirovements shall bo designed to take advantage of natural vegetation and topography to achieve maximum screen­ ing from view from public waters. (2) All roads and parking areas shall be de­ signed and constructed to minimize and control erosion to public waters consistent with the requirements of all agencies with jurisdiction. (d) Kxcept for those projects rcHpiiring permits for construction of structures, sewage treatment systems and driveways, a land alteration pr*rmit will be required os follows: U» For movement of one through 500 cubic yards of material anywhere within the Shoreland Overlay District, a staff-issued land alteration permit shall be required. (21 For movement of more than 500 cubic yards of material within the Shoreland Overlay District, conditional use permit approval by the city council is required in addition to the required land alteration permit. (e) The following con.«iidcrnlions and condi­ tions must be adhered to during the issuance of construction permits, grading nnd filling permits, conditioitnl use permits, variances and subdivi­ sion approvals: n> I. ^ 1.5) Ii r.r.nfling nr filling in any typo ‘2. 3. 1.5. (>. 7 nr H wetlaml mu.st bo evaluated to determine how extensively the proposed activity would affect the following func­ tional C|iKiIities of the wetland: a Sediment nnd pollutant trapping and retention; h. Stomge of .surface runoff to prevent or reduce flofxl damage; c. Fish and wildlife habitat; d. Recreational use; e. Shoreline or bank stabilization; and f. Noleworthiness, including special qualities, such ns historic signifi­ cance, critical habitat for endan­ gered plants and animals, or others. This evaluation must also include a deter­ mination of whether the wetland alter­ ation being proposed requires permits, reviews or approvals by other local state or federal agencies including but not lim­ ited to watershed districts, state depart­ ment of natural resources, or the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Alterations must be designed and con­ ducted in a manner that ensures only the smallest amount of bare ground is ex ­ posed for the shortest time possible. Mulches or similar materials must be used, where necessary, for temporary bare soil coverage, and a permanent vegetation cover must be established as soon as pos­ sible. Methods to minimize soil erosion and to trap sediments before they reach any sur­ face water feature must used. Altered areas must be stabilized to accept­ able erosion control standards consistent with the field office technical guides of the \ ''••I'P N«f. I CD78:192 ZONING RKGUl^TIONS f 7S-I»8 local soil and water conservation districts and the United States Soil Conservation Service. Fill or excavated material must not be placed in a manner that creates on unsta­ ble slope. Plans to place fill or excavated material on steep slopes must be reviewed by the city engineer for continued slope stability and must not create finished slopes of 30 percent or greater. Fill or excavated material must not be placed in bluff impact zones. Any alterations tielow the ordinary hip.li water level of public waters must first be authorized by the commissioner of the department of natural resources under Minn. Stnt. 5 103G.245. (10) Alterations of topography must only l>o allowed if they are accessory to permitted or conditional uacs and do not adversely alTecl adjacent or nearby properly. (P ) Placement of natural rock riprap, includ­ ing associated grading of the shoreline and placement of a filter blanket, is per­ mitted if the finished slope does not ex­ ceed three feel horizontal to one foot ver­ tical, the landvv.ird extent of the riprap is within ten feel of the ordinary high water level, ami the height of the riprap above the ordinary high water level does not exceed throe feet. A riprap permit shall be obtained fH*r the requirements of section 78-969. (0 Kxcavations where the intended purpose is connection to a public water, such as boat slips, canals, lagoons and harlwrs. are prohibited above the ordinary high water level Such excavations 1k ?I ow the elevation or the ordinary high water level are subject to approval of the department of natural resources and other agencies with concur­ rent juri.sdiclion. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series. § 1(10.56(16XJ)). 2-24- 1992; Ord. No. 127 2nd series. 9 8.7-11-1994; Ord. No. 163 2nd series, 5 3, 12-8-1997; Ord. No. 171 2nd series, § 2, 4-4-1998) Sec. 78-1287. Stormwater management. The following general and specific standards shall apply in addition to those standards found in article VIII of this chapter and section 82-222: (1) When possible, existing natural drainageways. wetlands and vegetated toil surfaces must be used to convey, store, filter and retain stormwater runoff before discharge to public waters (2) A develupmeni must be planned and con­ ducted in a manner that will minimize the extent ofdisturbed areas, runoff velocities and erosiiui potential, and reduce and dehay runoff volumes. Disturbed ar<»a.s must lx» stabilized and protected as soon a.< po-isible and facilities or methods used to retain sediment on the site. (3) Wlien development density, topographic features, and soil and vegetation condi­ tions are not suflicient to adequately han­ dle stormwater runoff using natural fea­ tures .niul vegetation, various types of con-tructed facilities, such as diversions, settling basins, skinuning devices, dikes, waterways and ponds may be used. Prtf- ereiici* must be given to designs using surface drainage, vegeiation. and infiltra­ tion rather than buried pi|>es and manmade materials and facilities. 14) When constructed facilities are used to perform water manajjeiixMU, docuinenta* lion must be providi'il li> a registon^l professional civil engineer that they nre desigiifd and installed consistent witli the field ofllce technical guide of the local soil and water conservation district. (5) New constructed stormwater outfalls to public waters must provide for filtering or settling of suspended solid.s and skim­ ming of surface debris before discharge. (Ord No. 101 2nd scries, ft l( 10 .'»«• KiMK)). 2-24- 1992) See. 78-1288. Hard cover lirailulions. (a) No hard cover or impervious .surf-ire shall be placed, located or constructed within T j fietof the ordinary high water level of any l«*V» or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. Siipp No 1 CD78:193 Date Application Received: 1-21*04 Date Application Coneidered as Complete: 2-2-04 60>Day kview Period Expires: 4>2>04 COllMril MFFTING FEB 2 3 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION _ CITY OF OROnO Date: Febniai^ 19,2004 Item No.: P Department Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffro Title: Planning Director Iministrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-2985 Tom Cullum, 785 North Femdale Road - CUP and Variance for Wetland Alteration - Resolution List of Exhibits A - Resolution B • Notice of Planning Commission Action 2-19-04 C • Memo and Exhibits of 2-2-04 Application Summary: Applicant requests a variance and conditional use permit for filling and excavation within and within 26' of a City-protected wetland. A small portion of the wetland extends into the neighboring property. The fill is intended to allow for the establishment of woody vegetation along the applicant ’s western property boundary. The 2,135 s.f. fill area will convert approximately 10% of the existing wetland from a shallow open water wetland to a wetland with saturated soils. Because the project will also involve excavation of adjacent upland to create new wetland (requiring a CUP), the project is being treated by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as a No Loss situation, and as a wetland restoration based on reducing the impacts of wetland excavation that occurred in the 1950 ’s. nuuting Recommendation: Planning Commission recommended approval on a vote of 5-0, subject to the staff recommendation. 5lqjQT Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to: 1) that the City receive a copy of the executed buffer preservation declaration required by the MCWD, and 2) that the City be provided with the required ongoing monitoring reports. 3) that the applicant be required to execute the standard Flowage and Conservation Easement over the wetland and its MCWD-required buffers. Please carefully review the memo and exhibits of Febniarv 2. A resolution reflecting the staff and Planning Commission recommendation is attached for your review. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to adopt or amend the attached resolution. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by __, seconded by ___ to adopt resolution No.___granting a variance and conditional use permit for land alterations within and within 26' of aCity-protected wetland for Tom and Michelle Cullum at 785 North Femdale Road. iiofihlb JJ A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1112, AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTIONS 78-U13/14(2b) FILE NO. 04-2983 WHEREAS, Michelle A. CuIIum and Thomas C. Cullum, Jr., husband and wife (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 7 8S Femdale Road North within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Tract B. Registered Land Survey No. 1031, Hennepin County, Minnesota, according to the files of the Registrar of Titles. (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have submitted an application requesting a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1112 and a conditional use permit per Sections 78-1113/14(2b) to permit filling and grading within and within 26* of a City-protected wetland where no such activity is normally allowed; and WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 17,2004, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS I. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-2985. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB Rural Residential Zoning EHstrict. Page 1 of 7 1 3.The Planning Commission reviewed the application for a variance and a conditional use permit at a public hearing held on February 17,2004 and recommended approval by a vote of 5 -0 based on the following findings and hardships: Applicant requests variance approval for filling of a small portion of a City-protected wetland located mostly within applicant ’s property but partially within the neighboring property. The fill is intended to allow for the establishment of woody vegetation along the western property boundary. The 2,135 s.f. fill area will convert qiproximately 10% of the existing wetland from a shallow open water wetland to a wetland widi saturated soils. The project also involves excavation of adjacent upland to create new wetland, requiring a conditional use permit. The property contains a small wetland which was modified in the 19S0's (based on airphoto evidence) by dredging to make it deeper. The wetland since that time has generally had the characteristics of an open water pond. As a result of legal vegetation removals by the neighboring property owner to the west, the applicant ’s view over the pond area has changed, and now he views the neighboring residence rather than a wooded area. Because the far shore of the pond is on the neighboring property, qiplicant is proposing fill in a portion of the pond just inside his property boundary to create a “berm”, which will allow the establishment of wooded vegetation to regain some of the wooded character of the lot and provide a buffer to the nei^boring property. The applicant has engaged a variety of professionals to design a project that would meet the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) guidelines for a wetland restoration, No-Loss status. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as the designated LGU for Orono has approved the fill and excavation project as a 'No-Loss’ wetland restoration based on reducing the impacts of wetland excavation that occurred in the 1950's, subject to certain conditions including submittal of a declaration forpresetvation of the wetland buffer which must be executed and recorded, and subject to ongoing monitoring and reporting of the wetland mitigation project for a five-year period. John Smyth, Water Resource Specialist with Bonestroo & Associates, the City’s engineering and environmental consultants, has recommended approval of the project, noting that the project will result in an overall improvement to the wetland. Smyth noted Page 2 of 7 4. 5. that the additional wetland to be created will meet the WCA replacement guidelines, and that this project can be considered as a restoration. Smyth recommended approval conditioned on 1) that the City receive a copy of the executed buffer preservation declaration required by the MC WD, and 2) that the City be provided with the required ongoing monitoring reports. The project has been highly refined to meet the WCA guidelines, and has been the subject of much scmtiny by the MCWD staff and consultants as well as a Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) consisting of representatives from the MCWD, the Board of Soil and Water Resources (BWSR), and Hennepin County Environmental Services. G) The hardship supporting the variance is that this wetland was altered in the past, and the the project will restore it to a condition more closely resembling its natural state. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance and conditional use permit on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance and conditional use permit would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; 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 Sections 78-1112 and a conditional use permit per Sections 78*1113/14(2b) to permit tilling and grading within and within 26' of a City-protected wetland where no such activity is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: Page 3 of 7 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Council approval is based on the site grading and wetland restoration plan submitted by the applicants tutd annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the plan which are not in conformity with the approved plan will at the discretion of City staff require further Planning Commission and City Council review. The applicant shall provide the City with a copy of the executed buffer preservation declaration required by the MCWD. The applicant shall provide to the City copies of the required ongoing wetland restoration monitoring reports as required by the MCWD. The applicant shall execute the standard Flowage and Conservation Easement over the wetland and its MCWD-required buffers. The applicant and his agents shall comply with all permit requirements of the various agencies having jurisdiction over this wetland. The applicant shall apply for and obuun a land alteration peimit from the City prior to commencing the project. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a land alteration permit for the project within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variance will expire on that date (February 23, 2005). 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. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicants and the applicants’ heirs, successors and assi^, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in ihe chain of title of the property. Page 4 of 7 • .1 • I .? ! Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 23rd day of February, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vcc, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Par 5 of 7 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this _ Thomas C. Cullum, Jr., husband of Michelle A. Cullum. day of..,2004 by Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this_____day of. Michelle A. Cullum, wife of Thomas C. Cullum, Jr.. 2004by Notary Public Psge7of7 < II »<t A CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING nLE #04-2985 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: February 19, 2004 TO: Tom Cullum COPIES: Mike deRuyter 785 Femdale Road North Kjolhaug Environmental Wayzata, MN 55391 26105 Wild Rose Lane Shorewood, MN 55331 Rachel Igel Igel & Johnson, LLC 501 Big Woods Boulevard, Suite 1000 Chanhassen, MN 55317 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance/CLT DATE OF MEETING: February 17. 2004 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval as proposed, subject to the following conditions: 1) The City shall be provided with a copy of the executed buffer preservation declaration required by the MCWD; The City shall be provided with the required ongoing monitoring reports. The applicant shall execute the standard Flowage and Conservation Easement over the wetland and its MCWD-required buffers. 2) 3) VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council • Monday, February 23, 2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.ro. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they ate avail^le from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please call Plan.:ing Director Mike Gaffron at 9S2-249-4600. Date Application Received: 1-21>04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 2<2-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 4-2-04 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director February 2,2004 #04-2985 Tom Cullum, 785 North Femdale Road - CUP and Variance for Wetland Alteration - Public Hearing Zoning District:RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential, 2-acre min. (The property is also within 1(XX)' of Lydiard Lake and therefore is within the Shoteland Overlay District) Lot Area:Gross: 147,500 s.f. ± (3.4 acres) Net (Excl. Wetlands): 3.0 acres Application Summary: Applicant n^uests variance approval for filling of a small portion of a City- protected wetland located mostly within applicant ’s property but partially within the neighboring property. The fill is intended to allow for the establishment of woc^y vegetation along the western property boundary. The 2,135 s.f. fill area will convert approximately 10% of the existing wetland from a shallow open water wetland to a wetland with saturated soils. Because the project will also involve excavation of adjacent upland to create new wetland (requiring a CUP), the project is being treated by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as a No Loss situation, and as a wetland restoration based on reducing the impacts of wetland excavation that occurred in the 1950's. Stqff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the proposed wetland alterations per the conditions recommended by the City’s wetland consultant, John Smyth of Bonestroo and Associates. Pertinent Code Sections: 1.Scction78-1112: Development Restricted; Prohibition. Except as hereinafter specifically permitted, no filling, grading, died^ng, excavation, hardcover, temporary or permanent structures, obstructions, septic systems, well or other construction shall be allowed within the Flood Plain and Wetlands Conservation Area; nor on any lands within 26 feet thereof; nor on any land within 75 feet of the ordinary highwater elevation of any lake shoreline. 2.Sections 78-1113/14(2b): “All dredging or excavation of material from any lake bed, pondt^ wetland or ^m adjacent land thereto” is a conditional use within the Floodway and Flood Fringe Districts. Thi s wetland (as all wetlands) includes areas within those two Districts as defined in Section 78-1108. 3. Section 78-1117: (Standards for floodway and flood fringe conditional uses) 4. Section 78-1286: (Shoieland standards for topographic alterations, grading and filling) 1 tiJL «M-298S February 12,2004 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Variance application form and: 1-21-04 Letter of transmittal from Rachel Igel 1-21-04 Memo of request from Rachel Igel. B - SWMP Map Excerpt Identifying Wetland LL-612 C - City 1974 Wetland Inventory Map D - Airphoto of Site E - Survey/Site Plan/Grading Plan F - John Smyth Comments Memo 2/3/04 G - Kjolhaug Wetland Delineation report excerpts (11-1-02) H - Kjolhaug Memo to MCWD 11-6-02 re: No-Loss Determination and Wetland Restoration I -11-25-03 Rachel Igel letter to MCWD re: project J - MCWD 12-19-03 Permit Approval Letter to Applicant K - MCWD Notice of WCA Decision Packet L - Property Owners List M • Plat Map N • Code Excerpts Pertinent to Wetland Alterations O - Orono SWMP Excerpts: Sectior. 3, Wetlands Management P - Standard Flowage and Conservation Easement Background The property contains a small wetland which was modified in the 1950's (based on airphoto evidence) by dredging to make it deeper. The wetland since that time has generally had the characteristics of an open water pond. A residence has existed on the property since 1963, undergoing numerous remodels and additions since its original construction. As a result of legal vegetation removals by the neighboring propeity owner to the west, the applicant ’s view over the pond area has changed, and now he views the neighboring residence rather than a wooded area. Because the far shore of the pond is on the neighboring propeity. applicant is proposing fill in a portion of the pond just inside his property boundary to create a “berm", which will allow the establishment of wooded vegetation to regain some of the wooded character of the lot and provide a buffer to the neighboring propeity. It may be somewhat ironic that the neighbor may have removed the vegetation to gain a view of the pond, and the current proposal would tend to negate the impacts of that activity. Prior to the Wetland Conservation Act(WCA)in the early 199C's,generallytheonlyfillingof wetlands approved by Orono had been for the purpose of providing access to property. Orono's first wetland protection ordinance was enacted in 1964, and prohibited filling without a permit approval from the Council. The protection ordinance was strengthened considerably in 1970 by acknowledging the public benefits of wetlands. 404-298S Fcbiiuiry 12,2004 Past 3 With passage of the WCA, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was designated by the Ci ty as the tesponsibie Local Government Unit (LGU) for administering the WCA regulations. These regulations provide degrees of flexibility for certain types of wetland alteration activities which are seen as positive rather than detrimental, and they provide for mitigation of negative impacts when they are unavoidable. The WCA regulations also provide standards and opportunities for wetland restoration, where prior human activity has changed or degraded a wetland and it is possible to bring it back to nearer its original conditions. Orono’s ordinances have never been specifically revised to accommodate the WCA regulations; the Zoning Code still simply prohibits filling within a wetland (requiring a variance and showingof a hardship) and requires a conditional use permit for land alterations in, or within 26* of, a wetland. The Zoning Code provides virtually no specific standards for when a wetland alteration should be allowed, and in the Shoieland section merely suggests a list of factors to be considered [see Exhibit N, Section 78-1 286(e 1)]; however, the City's Surface Water Management Plan (S WMP) in Section S “Wetlands Management''does establish a detailed management approach to maintaining or improving the City’s wetland resources. That section is included as Exhibit O. MCWD Approval The applicant initially contacted staff regarding this project perhaps a year ago, and he has engaged a variety of professionals to design a project that would meet the WCA guidelines for a wetland restoration, No-Loss status. The MCWD as the designated LGU for Orono has approved the project with certain conditions (see Exhibits J and K). City Consultant Review This application was directed by staff to John Smyth, Water Resource Specialist with Bonestroo & Associates, the City’s engineering and environmental consultants. His favorable comments are attached as Exhibit F, and reflect that the project will result in an overall improvement to the wetland. He notes that the additional wetland to be created will meet the WCA replacement guidelines. He also notes that this project could in fact be considered as a restoration, and he recommends approval conditioned on 1) that the City receive a copy of the executed buffer preservation declaration required by the MCWD, and 2) that the City be provided with the required ongoing monitoring reports. Project Details Rather than attempting to summarize the details of the project, I will refer you to Exhibit H, the Kjolhaug memo which provides a detailed review of the project. Hardship Statement Because the proposed wetland alterations are not idlowed by Orono Code except by van anoe, the activity is required to be justified via the demonstration of a hardship. Given the variety of agency approvals H04-298S February 12,2004 Pafc4 required, and the State regulations applicable to wetlands, thi s hardship requirement would tend to make it difficult to approve many wetland alteration projects which may in fact have positive impacts but are not specifically supported by hardship. While Orono’s past history of ‘just saying no’ to most wetland filling requests has served the City fairly well, the current regulatory climate suggests that we may need to consider code revisions that allow for positive wetland alterations, without the finding of hardship. That being said, the question to be asked is whether the current application is in fact apositive wetland alteration. Staffs initial reaction to the early queries about filling the wetland to create a berm to plant trees to screen the applicant from his neighbor's home, was that thi s didn* t seem to be a reasonable request, and wouldn't be reconunended for approval. However, the current request has been highly refined to meet the WC A guidelines, and has been the subject of much scrutiny by the MCWD staff and consultants as well as aTechnical Evaluation Panel (TEP) consisting of representatives from the MCWD, the Board of Soil and Water Resources (BWSR), and Hennepin County Environmental Services. It passes muster with the other agencies as resulting in positive impacts to the wetland. In terms of a hardship. Planning Commission may wish to consider whether the hardship is simply that this wetland was altered in the past, and that the project will restore it to a condition more closely resembling its natural state. Issues for Consideration 1. 4. Are there any aspects of this project that will be detrimental to the neighborhood? Is Planning Commission satisfied that the project is appropriate? Does it matter whether the project is ‘necessary’ or not ? (i.e. what would be the negative or positive impacts of doing nothing... perhaps the applicant should be asked this question...) 3. Does Planning Commission have any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Reconunendation Staff is satisfied that the basic considerations regarding the functions and values of this wetland have been taken into consideration by the variety of reviewers of this proposal, all of whom have recommended or granted approval. Staff recommends approval of the variance and CUP to allow the wetland alteration project including filling of a portion of the wetland and excavation within 26 ’ of the wetland, per the plan approved by the MCWD and subject to the conditions thereof, and subject to the following provisions as recommended by the City wetlands consultant: that the City receive a copy of the executed buffer preservation declaration required by the MCWD, and that the City be provided with the required ongoing monitoring reports. Staff would further reconunend that the applicant be required to execute the standard Flowage and Conservation Easement over the wetland and its MCWD-requited buffers (see Exhibit O). i’- I w City of orono Variance Application GCH.h-i ^ntAddnu:AoeKcation# 2750 Kelley Parkway Date Received: / d H Orono. MN 55356 Amount Paid; c^d>h . o o Staff: Mein: 952*249^600 pee: S600 tec 952-249-4616 Renewat S300 MtKng Addr$9*: P.O. Box 66 ARcr*ma*fsec 11.200 Double Fte Crystal Bay. MN 553230066 • This appBcation fbnn must b« compMad in full. AppTeant v«11l be notified within IS days as to tne status of the appiieatien. Incomplete applieatlone will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPeWY INFOl^TjON: SiteAddreas: K cm > N cctu ________________________________ Property Identification Number (PIN): __________________________________ (Attach legal description to application if not included on the sunrey.) Date Property Acquired (month/year): ______□ Yes, I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of proparty: d Residential □ Other Zoning District: '<> APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legel neree and marital status required for oach irfterested party) Name: "Tesi fiuU/iuLt i: W‘5*52.^ 4-H.- aA-^OPhone (home): Address: Ftf-eNOi»up. gca»-o r\iog-TH Phone (work): ^C4- - Email: MKicuii itAiM Fax: OWNER INFORMATION: (Complete legtl names s.*d marital status required (or each interested patty) Name: Phone (honte): Phone (work): AddroM: ___________________________________________________________ Email; ____________________________Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Estimated Project Cost S 20i00o Describe the request In detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): VAieTLA-MD pp?rr;»AA^£»id j S>£g ATT/vc.Hgfs T>e^.cnPTtr?nJ REQUIRED SUBMIHALS: All of the following infbrmttion must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for yggr application to be processed. □□□□ □□ □□ Pre-AppHcation 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 Department of Finance, Government Center, A-603 300 South 6'" Street Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-5910 Original Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed sunreyor), meeting all the requirements listed within this packet, including hardcover calculations. Also provide one copy 8.S* x 1V or 11” X17* 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 ti* or 11* X17* for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor arxl 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 Planning Department, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original foe 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 ie solely responelble for submitting a eomplets application being aware that upon failure to do ae. the staff has no sKemstive but to rejset It until it Is compists or to rseemmsnd the request for dsniai of the request regardisss of Hs potential msrtt. Applicant’s Signature: Applicant's Signaturt: Date: Date: / ^ Z<i — OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authqrizei reasonable entry onto the property by City Staff, consultants, agents. Commission 1 Councii Members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request Owner’s Signature: Owner's Signature: Applicant must havt 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 bs prsssnt at sit aehtduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If sn appliesnt is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please meke arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in place of the applicant and advise the City Planner assigned to your project fr ^ cJ o V V - ..I i Page 1 of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM Thie form is « rsquirtd submittsl for ALL vtrisnee appliestfoM. An applieatien will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas unb1 this form is complete and submitted to the City. Minnesota State Statue Section 384.27. Subdivision 7 requires 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. Persons! snd eoonomic sHusOons sre not eonsid^ed velld hardshipa. In order lor an appGeation to be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a hardship having merit must be demonstrated. HOW DO I PROVE A HARDSHIP? l^is form has 12 points outlining the basis City staff uses to determine If a hardship exists and how the variance wiN 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 cede exception, you have the burden of proving that the variance ia Justified. The Information the Ci^ reech/es Is what is used in determining a denial or approval recommendation. If you leave something out it W'i 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 it due to o'rcumstances unique to his property not create by the landowner.” 3. ‘The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential charaete.* of the locality.” 4.”Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter.” 5* V jiiL A A-i IGEL LAW OFFICE January 21,2004 Mi. Michael Gaf&on Planning Director City of Otono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Gaffion: Enclosed are my client’s, Tom Cullum, application and fee for a \'axiance for a wetland restoration project we ate proposing for a diminished wetland located on his property. As we discussed on the telephone yesterday, we wocld appreciate youc insights regarding our project especially regarding the hardship critetia. The information I have submitted includes a desciiptioo of the proposed project including how the wetland will benefit fiiom the proposed improvements. A Wetland Delineation was performed in 2001 by Kjolhaug Environmental and is available for your review, if you wish to see it. This proposal is consistent with the project we discussed with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) in your office some months ago, which you and the grotip agreed was worthy of support. Since that meeting, we have received permit approval from MCWD to implement the project Upon your review of the enclosed information, please contact me and we can discuss whether additional information is necessary for our submission to the City of Orona Thank you for your assistance with our proposed project Sincerely, Enclosutts CC: Uom Cullum Mike IXRuyat, Kj<illuug l-lrnTronmcnral * $«il BIC WOHD5 BLVD, StlTH Imi.* • CH.\K1IA$KCK. MS • SSilIT BIIONK: ^lU.Utiu • h.\X: (9J3W40L#298" U i ■ A PrH IGEL LAW OFFICE TO: MIK1-; CAI-mON.CriY 0|- ORONO FROM: R.\(:IIIU.IC iI-]<^^iQ SUBJECT: RI;QL'1>"1 IOR \ ARIANCI- IOR Vti;il_\NO RTiSTOR-M ION;CUIJ.UM PROPliRlY DATE: 1/21/3004 Cullum Property Address: 785 Femdale Road North, Wayzata Legal Description:N Va of the NE Vi of Section 36, Township 118 North, Range 23 VC’est, Orono, Minnesota Site IdendGcadon:Tract B, Registered Land Sur\’ey No. 1031, Hennepin County, Minnesota As described in the Wetland Delineation Report, dated November 1,2002, the wetland consists of a Type 5 (PUBGx) pond in the western half of the property, surrounded by mowed Kentucky bluegrass lawn in all direcdons except to the north and southwest, which is dominated by common buckthorn and green ash trees. Based on a re^■iew of aerial photographs, the wetland appears to have been e.\cavated between 1953 and 1964, an assessment that was supported by observ'adons of the wetland during the December 14, 2001 and June 6,2002 site s*isits by Kjolhaug Emironmental Services Company, Inc. During these visits, the wetland was obser\*ed to consist of an open-water pon^ which had very little emergent vegetadon around the edges, and the uplands were mowed to the water’s edge. Water depths in the pond were assumed to be 1 to 2 feet. As shown on the attached grading plan, the applicant proposes to construct a small berm in the wetland along the western property line in order to provide substrate for the establishment of emergent herbaceous and woody wetland vegetadon. A break in the berm will maintain the existing drainage of the wetland toward the southwest in order to prevent changes to the pond’s water level. The berm was determined to be necessary because the water depths along the western propert)* line were too deep to allow woody vegetadon to become established. The proposed project would reestablish vegetadon around pordons of the wetland, and partially restore vegetadon to the inner pordons of the basin. TTie top elevadon of the berm will be no more than 1.0 foot abox’e the normal water level of die wetland; therefore, the project will result in no loss of wetland area. Althou^ the project will pardauy restore the excavated wetland, the placement of 2,135 square feet (sf) of M material for the construedon of the berm will be midgated through the creadon of 2,135 sf of new wedand adjacent to die e.xisdng wetland, and the establishment of 11,787 sf of nadve. O I non*invajive veg^udon in pennanent upland buffet suttounding die new and existing wedand. The proposed new wetland ateas will be created by excavating down feom the existing contours adjacent to the wetland as shown on the Grading Plan. The new wetland areas are projected to become semipermanently-flooded and seasonally-flooded wetland (PUBF/PEMIQ fringes of the existing wetland basin, with Ae berm e.xpected to become saturated forested (PFOIB) wedand. A combination of native, non-invasive seed mix and seedlings/plugs will be established along the edges of the new wetland areas. Native, non- invasive tree species such as American tamaracl^ northern white cedar, black ash, green ash, or silver maple will be planted on the proposed berm, depending upon availability. The proposed upland buffer areas will be a minimum of 16.5 feet wide along the southern and eastern sides of the wedand, and a minimum of 25 feet wide along the northern edge of the wedand. A native, non-invasive plant community will be established in the proposed upland buffer ateas using a mix similar to diat included in Attachment A. The upland buffer area along the northern edge of the wetland will be maintained in the existing v'oody vegetation, with the exception of invasive species such as common buckthorn, whidi will be removed. In summary, the proposed project will partially restore an excavated wetland basin by constructing an earthen berm, which will be used to establish emergent herbaceous and woody vegetation. In addition, 2,135 sf of new wedand and 11,787 sf of upland buffer will be created adjacent to the wetland to mitigate the placement of fill for the construction of the berm. a mW;-'' f •: .■•.■ ii • a, #29 /I MO-2 6 J- Mik • ■ % “V \c r-\ LL-50 \ LL-61 r ^ » V .* # i ♦ c \ •j mm ^.r^HiBEA?^ '■•■3 jr.^wrrfK r™4iJU®BvSl 'W^.i t!*..s,^--S V *1' :y.V^.v Ov wV •> /«<■ f/r." |V^.^--r.-.TcrSil vr-^/-^-- #■ ■•^‘'■‘^'iasstv^: ^ *■ f J., -^ • ^ r^.-r:/:'■ 5«evnr;-;.>r j>. - V *^*. 5^ «^. C • -' -J S^HiTPiC ^>^M‘ ..1 T4/ inr%i K *v\) N '^.v A ^ Avv ■Ait. "M V; :$'?■?L-.' '■ .^■xV-r-V M ,- - i «"’S V’V . L .r: r-- M ''yy ' v^->'Jl* .m r.'t y-'s ■k sfe/4 >; •. W Wi ! IsPi ■■■' 'i, v'.J'y^Cr'V / ^‘'■■’•asH4..^ t&t .- ^ ■;™^' >A <-■ 'j''*’jr; F?V«*iV ‘ x ’'-.-•‘(fJV >*'>.'jL' IP^^:'.vM. fei >aS t:>-v sfeir-Vv’t': 4^h(»fe^:&^kiih WPillL -,;ia .S., :jy -i.>: ^ ^ s / s j ‘ . •..' ;w' • \ >* I *f- :\ i •* H •i-m % % - .V \ tit V# , -• “»* '^v 44i/* *^y. -ri .;»^ ^v', • . i:^’. >?% .'. V •\\ '» ^ 5K » *^ • i »• ' « •» W •5S6it% Date:Drawn By:Scale: 08/14/02 KDK ft .irt sw*wy • 1 Memo I •ontfttoo AndtfttCi ASSDdJlfS 44rci«Ml Pri^eetNamB: Tom Cullum, 785 North Ferndale Road Client: CityofOrono To: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director File No: City # 04-2985 From: John Smyth, Water Resource Specialist Date: 2/3/2004 Re: Wetland Alteration • Proposal Review for stormwater and wetland impacts Remarks: I have reviewed the submitted information for the Tom Cullum property located at 785 North Ferndale Road. Key Facts: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Wetland was excavated between 1953 and 1964 Consists of open water with scattered vegetation around fringe Adjacent uplands Kentucky blue grass Wetland is identified as LL'612 in the Orono SWMP. No proposed improvements to wetland are listed in SWMP except providing a pipe to outlet the basin in the future. Property owner proposes to convert 2,135 square feet of the wetland from a shallow open water wetland to a wetland with saturated soils by placement of fill in the wetiar j. This will allow the establishment of woody vegetation along the western boarder of the property. Property owner proposes to mitigate lost functions and values of the wetland by excavation of upland to create 2,135 square feet of new wetland and planting a buffer around the wetland that ranges from 16.5 - 25 feet in width and totals 2,135 square feet. Buffer will convert turf grass to native vegetation. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approved this project as a No-Loss after discussions with other agencies as part of a Wetland Conservation Act Technical Evaluation Panel. Findings: 1 . if this project was processed as a Wetland Impact it has the wetland replacement necessary to meet the requirements of the Wetland Conservation Act. 2. This project will result in an overall improvement to the wetland. Bonttroo, ftetana, AndtrtOt and Aasacla^B, Ine. aSU»MilOfflM: 2335 Wmi Highway ae SI. Paul. MN 55113 PHona ssi-«3Maao Pax eS1-«3B-l311 □ MlturauliMOlIlM: 151 S Waal Maquon Read MaquoaWI 53092 Phona 262 2414460 Pax 202-2414901 Q Roehaator Offlct: ii2 7*8traaiN6 Rochaataf. MW 50906 Phona: S07-202-2100 Fax 907-362-3100 QWnifnarOfflea: 20Sa6i8iraai8W Wmar. MN 56201 Phona: 320-214-9567 Fax 320-214-5450 aSLCtoudOMca: 3721 taf*6aaaiS St Qoud. MN 90301 Phona 330281-4SS3 Qrayalako. IL 90030 Phono: 6(74464774 Fax 947-5464979 i Memo 1 1 AilitflllKtt 3. It is recommended that the City does not support conversion of wetland from one type to another unless the applicant car. show that it Is a restoration. In this case the wetland was excavated deeper in the late 1 950's as shown on aerials and the project could be considered a restoration back to a previous wetland type. Recorrvnend Approval of the Variance Application with the following conditions: 1 . The City receive a copy of the declaration for the preservation of the wetland buffer once it is executed and recorded. 2. Copies of the noonitorinc report be provided to the City to insure that the fill placed in the wetland is functioning as a wetland and also to determine the success of the plantings that are part of the buffer. 8on0»troo, Romm, And0rtlk u>d A—od*t§t, Ine. i * ; QBiPaulOfflM: OfllM: QMIHimuliMOfllot:□ lloehMiarOftiM:QWiHfiwr 0fflc8:OStdoydOMM:OOrtyaW* 2336WMlHianiMy30 RoAd iSieWftt MtquonRoed lia7*8»w(NE 206 98»8lr88l8W 3721 23r*aawi8 MSCMtNMdn StPtU.MNUlia Ptww: «143Ma00 tart* Pac M14N-1311 Mtquon.WIS30l2 Phont: 282441-4468 RochMlw.MNSasoe nww M7-2IM100 WMiiir.MN 88201 Ffiont 3204144667 Si Ctaud, MN snoi Pim: 320461-4683 QiaWWi«LH03Q Phone S«r-84S. FiC 262-241-4801 Nk l07-2t2-9ia0 Fix 320414-8458 Fix 320-S1-82S2 Pixsor-MMm mmm 9 9 3 9 9m 9 9 9 » 9 &ma 9 'i catKOJsmQ T homas Cullum Managing DlrectorAnfiltutipnal Equity Salestrading m EAST Ciovt LAN! sum 140 WAYZATA^MNSaatl * (tSa)40M3C5 (S77)S€74477 FAX (192) 404-430 MO«U(412)904m99 OkOoiMxutiiai^accoai ii V m Kjolhaug ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMPANY Scttn4 ffl/aiic4< Cam^fHie/ishv N^mrwl Homtm ‘ tf m •*1 .1 '3 m 9 9 9 9 3 3 9 9mm LT Cullum Site Orono, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Report 1 Preparedfor Tom and MicheUc Cullum Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company, Inc. (KES Project No. 2001-215) * November 1,2002 r * h 4 mm m m o 9 Cl 3 3 3 & 9 9 9 J t t M Cullum Site Orono, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Report L INTRODUCTION The Cullum Site was examined on December 14,2001, and on June 6,2002 for the presence and extent of wetland. The site was located in the N 14 of the NE V* of Section 36, Township 118 North, Range 23 West, Chy of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The site, identified as Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1031, Hennepin County, was located west of Femdale Road with unnamed property boundaries. Adjacent land uses included large-lot residentrd m all directions (Figure 1). ___ r The she consisted of a single-fiunily home with suirouiidiDg landscaped yard, woods, and a wetland. The woods, located along in the northwestern and southwestern comers of the property, wei« dominated by green ash, American elm, trembling aspen, raspberry, and common buckthorn, with some red pirre, whhe spruce, red cedar, black cherry, and prickly n. METHODS Wetlands were identified using standard delineation methodology descnlred in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Waterways Experiment Station, 1987) as required by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Minrresota Wetland Conservation Act. Wetl^ boundaries were identified as the upper-most extent of wetlands, which met criteria for hydric soil^ hydroplq^ vegetation, and wetland hydrology. Wetland-upland boundaries were marked with piri flags and subs^uentty located by Otto Associates by using standard survey r^thods. Kjolhaug Environmental Services Cotz^)any reviewed surveyed wetland boundaries for accuracy. Soils, vegetation, and hydrology were documented at representative locations along the wetland- upland boundary. Pto species dominance was estimated based on the percent aerial or coverage visualty estimated within a 30-foot radius for the tree and yhy^ib layers and a 5-foot radius for the herbaceous layer within the co mmunity type being sampled. Soils were characterized to a minimum depth of 18-20 inches utilizing Munsell Soil Color Charts and standard soil texturing methodology. Plants were identified using standard regional plant keys. Taxonomy was based on the Manual of Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada, Ed 2 (Npw York A • > .1 J- mm mm m mm mm m m m m [ .a a mm a 3 II T1 Botanical Garden, 1991). Indicator status of plant species was taken from the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 Minnesota (U.S. Fisb& Wildlife Service, 1988). in. RESULTS Review of Soils. NWf> mim I I )NR Infomation The National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 1989, Excelsior Quadrangle), shows one PUBF wetland on tl^ property (Figure 2). The Sott Survey of Hennepin County, Minnesota (USDA, 1974) shows the following soil types on the site: Glencoe silty clay loam (Gc), Dundas sUt loam (Du), Hayden clay team (HcD2), and Nessel loam (NeB) (Figure 3). Glencoe and Dundas are bydric soils characteristic of wetlmrf< in the absence of drainage. The DNR Protected Waters Map, Hennepin County (Minnesota DNR, 1981), does not show any DNR Protected Waters, Wetlands, or Waterways on the property. Lydiard Lake (DNR Protected Water 1S9P) is shown approximately 1000 feet west of the property (Figure 4). Wetland Determinations and DellnearioM Potential wetlands were evaluated in greater detail during field observations. One wetland was identified and delineated on the site (Figure 5). Corresponding data forms are included in /V ^ Appendix A. The following description of the wetland and surrounding upland reflects field U^lj} conditions observed at the time of the delineation, which was typical of earfy winter, with dormant vegetation and no snow cover. A thin layer offrost in the soil surfiu:e did not prevent ^ examination of the soils. At the time ofthe delineation recent precipitation levels had been slightly below normal and ten^)eratures were above normaL Precipitation fisr the year was above ^ normal because of an abnormal^ wet spring. Wetland I was a Type 5 (PUBGx) excavated basin located in the western half of the property. f i The extreme eastern edge ofthe wetland occurred on the adjacent property. Based on a review of historical aerial photographs, the wetland appeared to have been excavated to create open ■ water some time between 1953 and 1957, with the spofl material sidecast on the adjacent iq)lands ,) 9^ surrounding the wetland. Most ofthe wetland consisted ofopen water, which was seasonably low, exposing approximate^ 20-40 firet of pond bottom arotmd the edges of the wetland. ^ Scatteredreedcanary grass, green bulrush, and giant ragweed was observed around the edges of n the basin, and duckweed was on the surfrice of the pond and exposed mud. Soils in the wetland consisted of 18 inches of silt loam sediment which had low chroma matrix colors and distinct iron concentrations over a buried black silt bam A-horizon, which had no iron concentratbns. Water was observed whhin 6 inches of the surfrice in soil pits just beb w the delineated boundary. The adjacent uplands primarily consisted of mowed Kentucky bluegrass lawn, with common buckthorn and green ash trees to the north and southwest. Upland soils just above the wetland boundary consisted of 8 inches of black silt bam whbh had no iron concentratbns over sandy n mm M amm %m am ma a aa a m mm m m m loam wUdi had low chroma matrix colors and promment iron concentrations. No wmer was observed within 20 inches of the surfiice in any of the upland sample pits. The delineated boundary primarily followed a distinct change in plant communities and rise in topography. The delineated wetland coincided with an area indicated on foe soil survey as water. Glencoe, 1^ Dundas soils, and was shown on foe NWI as PUBF wetland. No other areas on the site were observed that contained a hydrophytic plant community or had wetland hydrology indicators. No other areas ofmappedhydric soils or NWI wetlaods were indicated on foe site. JL I'y ^ ^ • • • I mm m □ V. CERTEFICATION OF DELINEATION The procedures in the described delineatioii ire based on the COE .1987 Wetland Delineation Manual as required by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Both the delineation and rq>ort were conducted in conq>Iiance with regulatory standards in place at the time the work was completed. Delineation and Report Con^leted by: Reviewed by: Mflce DeRuvter. Soil Sci Wetlanrf Scientwt No. 00001311 Date:K/i/oz^ % Marks < Pro&ssio etiand Scientist No. 00084S m •1 3 mm jm V s mm mm a 9 ) 3ma i # m 1 a .9 i m ^ a ! a m Cullum Site Wetland Delineation Report Figures: • Figwe 1 - Site Location Map • Figure 2-KWI Map • Figure 3 -Soil Survey Mq> • Figure 4 - DNR Protected Waters Map Figure 5 - Wetland Boundary Map 5 j ^ i i \ • • liMlhtfiiifeiliiiriiiiiiiiii m mm n Ssm s 9 > 9 9 m m Note: Site boundaries on this figure are approrimate and do not constitute an olll^ survey product Oror '<ps' ■iV' • f • ^ •/ • I •!. ^ ©2001 Mictjosoft Corp. AB rights reserved. geurtry pmb Figure 1 - Site Location Map IQ oibaug Cullttin Site (KES No. 2001-215) Orouoi Mioaciota ENVmONIIEinALSEiyiGES COMMNr tN ij • »i\\TtA.,N3a mu Note: Site boudarics onthitrigiira gif appfoxinate and do not constitute an olliciai tarv^ product ^'7:^ pu6g; ViJ-: . ,E ■,;. •'■ ; i. ;■---. lii ...•'• J&E /p - Vrt.;V V «• ;; m r^tOOO/~'■:) ■i '!'C %)} PU&G”"uu• * • I » > ■ac h. *‘T* % < \ tcu£d 1 Figure 2 -NWIMap m CuDiini Site (KES No. 2001-21S) OroBO, Mi I^OLHAUG EsvaomatroLsamca commmy f^N Scale:. 1” a UOT I i ftv . » i ■' Note: Site boundaries on this figure are approiimate and do not constitnte an official surv^ product TTCDT HbD V ■m HcC2 H(D Site Local B B iv 'C’-JwY- ^ y • t Hc02 .HID HtoQ HbC Hcb2 HbB NeB B B HbC HbD ■m Hdf^7 ! -v' /- ' r- A^'‘ ^y. ■ * . ' . • Jvr .>*•- . •> . ._ N' 'f •• Jr Legend Gc- Gkncoe ulty clay kMin Du-Dundasdhloam HdD2< Hayden ch^ loam, 6-12% NeB- Nes^ loam, 1-4% Figarc 5 - Soil Surve^r Mip KfOLHAUG ENmONllEimLSEEVIOBSGOIOANy' Cunam Site (KES No. 200I-21S) Oronot Minaoota ♦N Scale: r» 1400' f' — m-m mm m m I Note: Site boundarlei oo this figare P Are Afare approiinuite and do not constitute an official survey product m m-m m m mm m m m CA fl B B B I B B B B B B B B B 3 9 & B i r * > f ■ % ;s S-X-: I .M 4 T r‘ - ■- . . < / ^ ♦* ** ’ 5' iiK:1 m l^OLHAUG ENVIRONMENTAL SEEVICES COMPANY Cnllum Site (K£S No. 2001-215) OroBO* Minnesota fN Scale: 1” = 1.500* i ^ U * i Certificate of Survey ’I mm • JJ9 4C /VupMtr Ui#IF X »• ^dMiotM Iron monument found 2^f«i wood lath \^_y ^denote* toil boring pieneteo ooroolotlon Tom Cullum Dote: 12/14/01 E52fS»SK I «ii • A# UHiatiUMl Me#v 9m tmm af fhm iU|<f MmimM s3T«irr~ .^la iKf »«M PM nCURE 5 JReviaed: Mil No. t639 H KJOLHAUG EN\aRONMENTAL SERVICES COMPAKV^ Providit)£ Sciund, Bolanctd. Comprthimtve UoturatBaourci Solutions MEMORANDUM DATE: November 6,2002 TO:Mr. Mike Wyatt, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Tom CuUum Rachel Igel, The Wetlands Company Marty Campion, O^o Associates FROM: Mike DeRuyter, Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company RE: No*Lo88 Determination and Wetland Reatoration- Cullum Site The purpose of this memorandum is to describe proposed modifications to a wetland located on the Tom Cullum property located at 785 Femdale Road, in the N '/a of the NE */4 of Section 36, Township 118 North, Range 23 West, Orono, Minnesota (Figure 1). The site is specifically identified as Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1031, Hennepm County, Minnesota. As described in the attached Wetland Delineation Report, the wctlaiad consists of a Type 5 (PUBGx) pond in the western half of the property, surrounded by mowed Kentucky bluegrass lawn in all directions except to the north and southwest, which is dominated by common buckthorn and green ash trees. Based on a review of aerial photographs, the wetland appears to have been excavated between 1953 and 1964 (Figure 2), an assessment that was supported by observations of the wetland during the Decernber 14,2001 and June 6,2002 site visits by staff from our ofiBce. During these visits, the wetland was observed to consist of an open-water pond which had very little emergent vegetation around the edges, and the uplands were mowed to the water’s edge. Water depths in the pond were assumed to be 1 to 2 feet. As shown on the attached grading plan (Figure 3), the ^plicant proposes to construct a small berm in the wetland along the western property line in order to provide substrate for the establishment of emergent herbaceous and woody wetland vegetation. A break in the berm will maintain the existing drainage of the wetland toward the southwest in order to prevent changes to the pond ’s water level The berm was determined to be necessary because the water depths along the western property line weie too deep to allow woody vegetation to become established. The proposed project would reestablish vegetation around portions of the wetland, and partially restore vegetation to the inner portions of the basin. The top elevation of the berm will be no more than l.O feet above the normal water level of the wetland; therefore, the project will result in no loss of wetland area. Although the project will partially restore the excavated wetland, the placement of 2,135 square feet (sf) of ^ material for the construction of the berm will be mitigated through the creation of 2,135 sf of new wetland adjacent to the existing wetland, and the estabUshment of 11,787 sf of native, non-inyanve vegetation in permanent upland buffin surrounding the new and existing wetland. ' 26105 Wild Rose Lane, Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 • Phone: 952-401-8757 • Fax: 952^1-8798 IT k The proposed new wetland areas will be created by excavatbg down from the existing contours adjacent to the wetland as shown on Figure 3. The new wetland areas are projected to become semipennanently*flooded and seasona]fy*flooded wetland (FUBF/PEMIC) fringes of the existmg wetland basin, with the berm expected to become saturated forested (PFOlB) wetland. A combination of native, non-invasive seed mix and seedlings/plugs similar to the mix in Attachment A wiU be established dong the edges of the new wetland areas. Native, non-invasive tree species such as American tamarack, northern white cedar, black ash, green ash, or silver nu^le will be planted on the proposed berm, depending upon availability. The proposed upland buffer areas will be a minimum of 16.S feet wide along the southern and e^em sides of the wetland, and a minimum of 25 feet wide abng the northern edge of the wetland. A native, non-invasive plant community will be established in the proposed upland buffer areas using a mix similar to that iiKluded in Attachment A. The upland buffer area along the northern edge of the wetland will be maintained in the existing woody vegetation, with the exception of invasive species such as common buckthorn, which will be removed. In summary, the proposed project will partially restore an excavated wetland basin by constructing an earthen berm, ^^hkh will be used to establish emergent herbaceous and woody vegetatioa In addition, 2,135 sf of new wetland and 11,787 sf of upland buffer will be created adjacent to the wetland to mitigate the placement of fill for the construction of the berm. If you have any questions or comments on the proposed plan, please fisel free to call Mark Kjolhaug or myself. ‘M M I../ r \ j • V \ ' V *. ♦ — V \ •. \\; **•. ,;•<: o'■: wX. O ‘•';: j|;,^; .• >.. '•• •; 1 ■'' Site Location I n/r L!^o|>ttey , % Lk^:-.V.v« * ' *» ,>*N < i^>\ *%I < J •^';v -3/OM•:^ >V y?^ =•'?-/?'. • • ^ '"<:.■ < /. - . ■^•'-'''/T k' TtS'* I ',^v^\. A\ J- ..•. r"7 v_ r"-^'i\r^' r? -v r t. ■•'-iS I' V >**^' J * ^\ ■• \ ^ I . *• I * ■' • ‘^:... (Ei^=daj_s^^« i- vp^ . ’.t A C N.V'V '^='" • '//'■iSe'<-eV-'Y v;:?v,M^'—d5SN2^j5j£Si^ OS'*. \ (: ■(GOO^ ■f''<^.;.v • V.4*«—S .P r. >.,»/: . . v\ {'^ -:z:' -V • " - '/I ..'v • \•■■f M>. •»''• -•^:- \- /Z:' t •i:j*_:‘ -> ■!^" j; ^ _ itVi-c ^ n-a^—. • -• - - • ■ . . ^ . ‘ * m- •-*• I '-• •••.r *'.- N k:|/ J?: • ■ ,5s,'-A ‘ i m 0 ^ • •i‘* ‘••- *'s*. (' f>>S^ •i.sy.f : r->- *v: /^!^•I/^?^SJL' '-'i Figure 1 - Site Location Map t^OIEAUG Callum Site (KES No. 2001-215) Orono, MiinesoU ENVIRONI4ENIALSEKV1CES COMPANY 4«ll|Scale: 1 inch »1^00 feet 5? 1 i:V I ■tm i ■ "w \'i0I '* A 1953 Photo showing the wetland in its original state. r» • • -'V • - : a. '' ' .?< y • • • » 1964 Photo showing the wetland had been excavated since the 1953 photo. Figure 2 -1953 and 1964 Aerial Photos m CiiOum Site (KES No. 2001-215) Orono, Minnesota KjOLHAUG EMVIKONMENIAL SBiVICaES COftIPAKY fN No Scale Drawn By:Sea e: KDK r^50* • Wetland & Bnffcr Seeding Flan The following seeding plan utilizes elements and recommendations from the Seeding Manual of MnDOT Office of Environmental Services, Turf Establishment and Erosion Control Unit, Draft Year 2000. Preparation and Seediny I. The smooth-graded wetland and buffer areas designated for seeding should be prepared by loosening topsoil to a minimum depth of 3 inches. The designated upland buffer areas • that have not b^ graded and contain existing vegetation should be prepared by mowing at a height of 4-6 inches in late April/earfy May or late August/early September. The grass should be allo^ to re-grow before herbicide application (1-3 weeks). Recommen ded herbicide rates are 2 quaits/acre of glyphosate and 1-2 quarts/acre of 2,4- D. The soil can then be loosened and seeded 7-10 days after herbicide treatment. 2. Seeding should be conducted either April 15-July 20 or Sept. 20-October 20. Seeding can be accomplished by broadcast or drilling. Broadcast seeding is particularly rewmtMnded for the wetland seed mixture unless the weather is hot and dry and/or the soil moisture content is low at the time of seeding. Broadcast seeding should by acconq)lished by u» of any type of broadcast seeder capable of broadcasting the seed evenly over the entire area. Seed should be mixed thoroughly prior to seeding and should be n^d occasionally in the spreader to prevent separation and settling. If the drill sec<^ method is used, seed should be installed with a Tniax-type seed drill containing a minimum of 2 seed boxes (fine seed box & box for large/flu% seeds) and equipped with disc funow openers and packer assembly to compact the soil directly over the drill rows. Maximum row spacing should be 8 inches. Small and fine seeds should be drop-seeded onto the surfiwe from the fine seed box, and large/fluflfy seed should be placed to obtain a final planting depth of 54-V4 inches. All drill seeding should be done at a right «n£i^ m su^e drainage. Recommended seeding rates arc given for the buffer and wetland seed mixtures at the end of this plan. 3. The seeded a^ should be harrowed or raked following seeding. The areas should then be pack^ usmg a cultqyacker or equivalent. Packiiig will be considered adequate when only a slight footprint is left in the soil after walking across the area. 4. Following packing, the areas should be mulched and disc-anchored at a rate of 2 tons/acre using MCIA certified weed free mulch, MnDOT Type 7 or 8 prairie hay/mulch, or MnDOT Type 1 clean straw mulch. ^ ^ ! •Maintg^a pce and Evaluation of Seeding Succggg Year 1 (spring seeding) • Prepare and seed site April 15-July 20 • Mow to a height of 6-10 inches July 20-August 20 • Optional mowing in early September • Spot spray weedy ^cies such as thistles * i • > I • Prqiare and seed site September 20-October 20 • Mow to a height of 6-10 inches June IS-August IS • Spot spray weedy species such as thistles Year 1 Evaluation • Cover crop should be growing within 2 weeks of planting • Native grass seedlings may only be 4-6 inches tall • Seedlings should be ^>aced 1-6 inches apart in each drill row if drill seeded • Flush growth offoxtail and other annuals may indicate need for more frequent mowing Year 2 • Mow to a height of 6-10 inches June 1-August IS • Spot spray weecfy q)ecies as needed • Some sites may not require maintenance in year 2 depending on seedling success Year 2 Evaluation • Cover crop will be gone unless winter wheat was used in a fidl planting • Grasses forming clumps 1'6 inenes apart in drill tows, but still short • Some flowers should be blooming • FhiA growth of foxtail and other annuals may indicate need for more frequent mowing Years • Most sites do not require much munteoance • Mow only ifnecessaty to control weedy annuals • Spot spray weedy species as needed • Plantings should look as intended with a diverse mixture of native grasses and forbs Long-term • Mowing not necessary or only occasioiudty • Spot spraying of wee^ if needed • Optional burning in a 3-S year rotation alternating spring and M bums • Optional haying in a 3-5 year rotation late summer or early fiOL Ahemate with burning or substitute for burning Wctbnd Fiioge Areas A seed mixture will be selected from local seed sources. The seed mixture will include the following species in the approximate percentages listed or an available mixture with gimtiar diversity:' Tall Wet Sedge Prairie Grass Mbc Grass/Sedge Mix Percent Prairie cordgrass Spartina pectinata 25.0% Frir^ged brome Bromus ciliatus 15.0% Canada bluejoint Calamagrostis canadensis 10.0% Fox sedge Carex vulpinoidea 5.0% Fringed sedge Carex crinata 5.0% Pordpine sedge Carex hystericina 5.0% Giant manna gra»Glyceria grandis 5.0% Fowl mana grass Glyoeria striata 5.0% Green bulrush Scirpus atrovirens 10.0% Wool grass Scirpus cyperinus 10.0% Bearded sedge Carex comosa »5.0% 100.0% Wildflowers e Percent New england aster Aster Novae Angliae 5.0% Marsh milicweed Asciepias incamata 16.0% Flattopped aster Aster umbellatus 10.0% FlatLpped aster Eupatorium maculatum 5.0% Boneset Eupatorium perfoliatum 5.0% Sneezeweed Helenium autumnale 5.0% St John's-wort Hypericum pyramidatum Z0% Blue flag Iris Iris versicolor 15.0% Swamp lousewort Pedicularis larweoiata 1.0% Cutleaf cort^.^ower Rudbeckia laeiniatum 5.0% Blue Vervain Verbena hastata 10.0% Ironweed Vemonia fasiculata 10.0% Culvere root Veronicastrum virginicum 1.0% Prairie blazing star Uatris pycnostaehya 10.0% Great Blue Lobelia Lobelia siphilitica 1.0% 100.0% fI' 1 Seeding rates for broadcast seeding are 16-18 pounds per acres for grasses and 3-5 pounds per acre for ^dflovwrs. Seeding rates for drilled seedings are 8-10 pounds per acre for grasses and 2-3 pounds per acre for wildflowers. Note: seeding rates are in pure live seed (PLS). r * 9- Upland BnAer Areas A seed mixture will be selected from local seed sources. The seed imxture will include the following species in the q;>proximate percentages listed or an available nuxture with stmilar diversity: MmIc Ofaaa mix Indian Grass Bigbluestem Little bluastem sideoats gramma Canada wild rye Switch grass Soigastrun nutans Andropogon gerardii Shizachiyium scoparium Bouteloua curtipendula Elymus canadensis Panicum virgatum WIMflowera Percent 25.0% 15.0% 30.0% 10.0% 15.0% 5.0% 100.0% Blackeyed susan Purple prairie dover Wild bergamont White prairie clover Common Yarrow Hoory vervain Gray-headed coneflower Prairie Spiderwort Stiff Goidenrod Upland Goidenrod Showy goidenrod False sunflower Smooth Blue Aster Heartieaf golden alexander Maximillian sunflower Partridge Pea Canada tick trefoil Prairie Blazingstar Rudbedda Nita Daiea purpurea Monarda fistulosa Daiea candidum Achillea millifblium Verbena stricta Ratiblda pinnate Tradescantla bracteata ' Solidago rigida Solidago Ptarmicoldes Solidago speclosa Heliopsis helianthoides Aster Levels Zizea aptera Helianthus maximilllani Cassia fadculata Oesmodium canadenses Liatris pycnostachya 10.0% 15.0% 4.0% 5.0% 1.0% 5.0% 13.0% 1.0% Z0% 5.0% 0.5% 12.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.5% 7.0% 8.0% 5.0% 100.0% Seeding rates for broadcast seeding are 18-20 pounds per acres for grasses and 3-5 pounds per acre for wildflowers. Seeding rates for drilled seedings are 10-12 pounds per acre for grasses and 2-4 pounds per acre for wildflowers. Note: seeding rates are in pure live seed (PLS). I HOV 12 % • • Miaacsota Wctlaad CoascrvatloB Act appucahon for CERTinCATE OF NO LOSS OR EXEMPTION* APPUCANT AND PROJECT LOCATION INFORMATION Tom Cullum LGU Minnehaha Creek Wat i District Name(s) of Applicant 785 FoTidale Road Project Location: 1/2 N I/4_ML S 36T118R23 UTM Coordinates: X:________Y:_________ Street Address _____Orono. MN 55391 County Kame/iNumber 20092 City, State, Zip Code Minor Watershed Name/Number:___ Size of entire wetland: 0.3 acres Wetland type: Circular 39 _____Type 5 : NWl PUBGx L_).( Telephorve (Day)_____(Everung) Check one: ■ <S0Vo □ 50%-80% or □ > 80% Check one: □ Agricultural land; ■ Non-ag. land PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION Describe the nature and purpose of the proposed pro|ect: See attached narrative («Mdi tdilitioiMi pigH iroHdtd) Timetable: project will begin on 1/15/04 (mo/day/yr) and will be completed by 3/15/04 The wetland actiyity at the above site qualifies for the following under the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) (check one): No Loss Detcrminatioa (attach plans) EiemptiOB #(per MN Rule Chapter 8420.0122) (Note: Applicant is responsible/or submitting the proof necessary to show qualification for the exemption claimed.) DcscriptiOB of Exemption Claimed: APPLICANT SIGNATURE The information provided for this determination is truthful and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I ensure that, in draining oi filling the subject wetland under ah exemption noted above, appnqmate erosion control measures wUI be taken to prevent sedimentation of the water, the drain or fill will not block fish passage, and ^he drain or fill will be conducted in oonq>iiance with all other applicable federal, state and local requirements, including best management practice and water resource protection Its established under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103H. (Signature of ^plicmit) 1;VIA. C)l(ilU/U /A/S fO'Z (Date) ^ 0 5 m3 rj C«ttiGilt ofHo^M or BMptioa (K)00) Pliilori Nott: Aity approval It not ^active until tlgHatura bOow are cotnpleU, No work should beglit uMU the 15-day appeal window hat lapsed, or, In the event of an appeal, until the appnl has been finalised. A.) LOU his received idequ«te documeotatioo fa claim ofNo-Lo88 or Exenq)tioii, and approves dm certificate IS outuned above. ---------- llus certificate expires------------------(Date) SfficS^ FOR LGU USE ONLY (Date) 9Ii oertiifeale tor an ereoptioa uada MR. 8420.0122. Subpait 1 or Subpart 2. Kern B7 LGU sigo belovir. otf n«t M mOataL and certificate is complete. IX/UwnleANbtApplicablea in signature bloA below B.) IXHJ has receivedevideoce of recording of Dedaratioo of Restrictioiis and Covenants tolnpactedWedaDdUndcrAgpcutanl Exemrtian (BWSR Fom B): (County wbere reconled)(Date recorded)(Document # assigned by recorder) IflXHJ Offidai Signature)(Datd •APPPOVAL OFTHTS CESTtFiCATE COdLY APPLIES TO THE WCA, Permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be rea* '. ed. Check with the appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. The Combined Project Application form can be used for this purpose. Within 10 days of the decision, notice of the above decision mast be mailed to: Landowner/Applicant Members of the Technical Evaluation Panel Department of Natural Resources Regional Office DNR Wetlands Coordinator @ Ecological Services Section SOO Lafiio^ Ro*4 Box 2S St. Paul, MN S515S Corps of Enginem Project Manager @ Department of the Army. Corps of Engine«s, St Paul District ATTN: CO-R, 190 Fifth Street East St Paul, MN SSlOl-1638 Members of the public who have requested to receive notice DEC 0 5 2003 r‘> ■ i I 'I J IGEL & Johnson llc R achel A. IGEL Direct Dial (952) 380 -1400 Email Address: RacheI®IgcIlaw.com Owt, February 2,2004 >o2 ■) Ms. Renae Gark Minnehaha Creek Watenhed District 18202 Minnetonka Blvd. Deephaven, MN 55391 Tiansmitted Via Facsimile And Via First Class Mail RE: Tom C ullum Property - 785 Ferndale R oad , Wayzata , Minnesota Dear Ms. Gark, Thank you for helping to organize and participate m the reconvening of the Technical Evaluation Panel (“TEP”) for the C'Jlum Property I believe that it was a very effectiw meeting, which resulted in the group designing an acceptable game plan that satisfies the participants* needs and concerns. As part of that game plan, I am writing you to summarize the results of our last meeting and to confirm the approach approved in the meeting to restore the CuUum’s wetland. Once you have reviewed this letter, we would like to have a follow up discussion with you to ensure that our application to the Mirmehaha Creek Witershed District (“MCWD*') includes your input and ultimately we hope to obtain your support for our project. To summarize the history of this proposed project, originally Li November of 2002, we presented to a convened TEP a No Loss and Restoration project, which was denied by the TEP due to disagreement over the application of the \(fetland Conservation Act Rules. A year later, we have readdressed the issues that concerned the original TEP and met with the Gty of Orono and the MCWD to create a project that supports the principals behind WCA and establishes a higher functioning wetland and ecosystem for both vegetation and wildlife. -2-FebnuryZ, 2004 I believe everyone agreed at our last meeting that the proposed project would create a good result that everyone could support. To that end, we are proposing a project that will result in a larger wetland, which will restore portions of the pond and increase the wetlands overall diversity and values. Below is a description of the proposed projert as it was presented and supported by the reconvened TEP, MCWD and the Qty of Orono at our last meeting. For purposes of this letter, I will presume that you have the original wetland delineation presented by Kjolhaug Environmental and the previous submittals related to tliis project The Proposed Project: Application for No-Loss Determination Wetland Project Historically, this weilancl was surround by lurdwoods and vegetation on the western side and a naturaUy occurring groundwater source that origituted from the northern side of the wetland. The result was a wetland that provided excellent habitat for wOdlife and naturally maintaining water levels that prevented the wetland from experiencing high evaporauon levels. The main purpose of our projea is to restore the wetland to its previous existence. To reestablish habitat areas we propose to construct a small berm along the western boarder of the wetland to provide substrate for the esublishment of emergent herbaceous and woody wetland vegetation. The proposed berm wiU be less than 12 inches above the normal water level of the pond, which will prevent the conversion of wetland to upland, but will result In a change of wetland type in this area of the wetland. This aspect of the proposed project would restore a portion of the pond to a saturated hydrology regime on the berm. It also would result in the establishment of a woody hylrophytic plant community on the berm and an emergent wetland plant community around the fringe areas of the wetland. This portion of the proposed project was heavily discussed at our last meeting with the reconvened TEP, MCWD and the Qty of Orono. After some thoughtful discussion, the conclusion of the group was that the proposed berm does not result in a wetland impact In summary, the group concluded that the project would not resuk in the loss of quantity of wetland. The group reviewed the WCA rules definidon secdon for "brpad' which means a las inthqiurtify<rbkiagcal<hr(jmity^ auedandcoeedl^dmiraig^/IIla^aaoruttoigas (hcribed in part 8420.0105. Under our proposed plan the berm area, as described above, will remain wetland and only the wetland type will change. Native, non-invasive tree species such as American tamarack, northern white cedar, black ash, green ash, or silver maple will be planted on the proposed berm (depending on availabilit)^. Secondly, we propose to excavate a portion of the uplands adjacent to the pood to expand the size of the wetland by 2,135 square feet, vdiich is equal to the area occupied by the footprint of the proposed berm Because no wetland will be lost through the establishment of the berm, the resulting wetland will be 2,135 square feet larger than the existing pood. The projected wetland types would be Type 4 (PEMlF/PEMlB/PSSlB). These new wetland areas will be created by excavating down from the existing contours adjacent to the wetland as descnbed m the atuched Figure (“Grading Plan”). The new wedand areas are projected to become semi permanendy flooded and seasonally flooded wedand (PUBF/PEMlQ fringes of the existir^ wetland basin. A combination of ruuive, non- J -3-Febniaiy2,2004 invasive seed mix and seedlings/plugs similar to the mix in Attachment A (“Wetland Buffet and Seeding PUn”) will be esublished along the edges of the new wetland areas. As mentioned eariler, these changes will improve the quality of the wetland by increasing its habitat value for wildlife, its biological diversity, and its ability to absorb nutrients before discharging to downstream waters. As an added requirement of the MCWD, we propose to esublish 1178^ square feet of native, non*invasive vegetation in permanent upland buffet (See Attachment A (“Wetland Buffet and Seeding Plan")) survounding the new and existing wetland. The piuposed upland buffer areas will be a minimum of 16.5 feet wide along the southern and eastern sides of the wetland, and a minimum of 25 feet wide along the northern edge of the wetland. However, the northern edge of the wetland will be mainuined in the existing woody vegeution, with the exception of invasive species such as common buckthorn, which will be removed. One final item discussed in our last meeting was the issue of the well and pump associated with the current wetland. As you know; it is currently run in an effort to maintam a consistent water level, which became necessary due to disruption of the wetland ’s ground water source during the excavation of the northerly neighbor’s sub-basement a few yrars ago. Recently, the neighbor to the north attempted to reroute the ground water back to the wetland through a series of drain tile and piping We are hopeful that this new system will restore the ground water flow to the wetlarid: however, only time will tell if this measure will be effective. During our meeting there was tome discussion over the desire to see this well and pump permanently discontinued. Although, no one wants to see the wetland dry up. Therefore, at the meeting it was agreed that we would aUow monitoring of the wetland by the MCWD and the Qty of Orono for a period of three years to evaluate the effectiveness of the northerly neighbor’s drain dle/ptpmg system. The Cullum’s pump system has a measuring device that provides details on die amount of water pumped from the weU. Therefore, is will be easy to evaluate exacdy how effective the neighbor’s system is relative to the water level of the wetland. In summary, the proposed project will be a No-Loss wetland in^rovement project by partially restoring an excavated wetland basin by constructing an earthen berm, which will be used to establish emergent herbaceous and wo^y vegeution. In addition, 2,135 square feet of new wetland and 11/87 square feet of uphmd buffer will be created adjacent to the wetland. Finally, a three-year monitoring period will be established to evaluate the need for the continued use of the well and pump system used for mainuining water levels in the wetland. I hope you find the above review of the findings from our last meeting and the detail of our proposed plan helpful CXu* goal is to satisfy any outstanding issues you have with our plan and then present an official application for approval at the next available MCWD Board Meeting, hopefully in December. Upon approvd from MCWD, we would then present our plan, with the support of the staff of the Qty of Orono, to the Orono Planning Commission and Qty Council W: would like to begin comtruction in mid-winter to maximize the helpfulness of the frozen ground and water. -4-Febnury2,2004 1 will contact shortly to discuss or proposed plan. In the meandnie, if )^u have any (Questions or comments regarding this submittal of uiformation, please do not hesitate to contact me at the above*ieferenced telephone number or e-mail address or Mike DeRuyeer atKjolhaug Enviroiuuental Services Gimpany at (952) 401-8798. Sincerely, Rachel A. Igel Attorney At Law Mike DeRuyter Kjolhaug Enviroomenod Services Gon^any Enclotuiet Gc Tom and Michelle OuUum 501 BIG WOODS BOULEVARD. SUITE 1000 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA • 55317 PHONE; 952.110.1400 • PAX: 952.401.1362 iU!d9« FEB-02-2e04 10:24 UA lenUnMtoMalM. niwr.(9$Z)l71-OSIO Fw:|M2)47t-Mlt Em* •a«i0n«wwhiliMrMk.Oi9 mm pm»9M J—wCOIni UKfMwr Sum Gom iMeiOiws BMtTMMi niNCHRm CREEK bVi^n\Ob/tu:r.od/«io r • atenleiPistrict tH Impnvinf Qtttluf efWittr, Qiuitty 0/ BnAlitkain 1967 Decenbei 19.2WU TomCuihHii 715 Fcmdile Retd Ot«M. MN 55)91 RE: MCWD Ptmii* AppUcition No. OJ-43 ) DMiApplkMfc appravTdils ipplieeiio* *iih ike toUowini eon*tioo$: ___J f R*iaibgmaMl«f»elliflteoittiiHhie«o«a»«fn090 of weUeea beflef which imm be cjncuted m«I ________ p five-year aeattofiei period ««leri«| of d« TkeM Ore* Ike above ineoiiowd fcei beve bc«i peid and dm odw condWoM have beM ineiai^ mtt w ie«i«ded d« v^ o« Ih. |«iod eai^ project reaidinn clmniaa 10 dm project you «tfi *d«di ftvmed pl>« •• dm MCWD fcf leview^ PIMM eta ae M 952471-0590 wMh any queftieoa. Slaecfcly. . ReatcQeik DiwktTachnciu c; CityofOfoaolUdieU|al.AmmeytiLew '<1 V' J Mit'if't('.o’ls'Mv.ilion Art N'jIk> o< 'AV‘!l.Vi(l Const /'•/ I I )• *< rnott Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 18202 Minnetonka Boulevard Decphaven,MN 55391 Name of Applicant: Tom Cullum Application Number: 02-433 JAfit Type of Application (check one):Exemption Decision ^ No Loss Decision ^ Replacement Plan Decision n Banking Plan Decision Q Wetland Type/Boundary Decision Date of Decision: December 18,2003 Check One: QApproved |2 Approved with conditions Denied List of Addressees: Tom Cullum 785 Femdale Road Orono.MN 55391 CityofOrono Mike Gafihon P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Brad Wozney One West Water Street, Suite 200 St Paul, MN 55107 Department of Natural Resources Central Region Waters Attn: Julie Ekman 1200 Warner Road St Paul, MN 55106-6793 DNR Wetlands Coordinator Ecological Services Section 500 Lafayette Road, Box 25 St Paul, MN 55155 Oecisioo Notice 02-433 - Pt|e 1 of 2 (April 2003) ■ i Corp of Bogmeen Project Mineger Depeitment of the An^. Corps of Engineett. St Pent District ATIN: CO-R. 190 Fifth Street Best StPeul.MNSSlOl-1638 Carver Soil and Water Conservation District Chip Hentges 219 East Frontage Road Waconia,MN 55387 Tim Brown Miimeiqtoiis Park and Recreation Board 200 Gr^ Exchange 400 South Fourth Street Minneapolis, MN 55415 You are hereby notified that the decision of the Local Govenunent Unit on the above- referenced application was made on the date stated above. A copy of the Local Government Unit’s Findings and Conclusions is attached. Pursuant to Miiui. R. 8420.0250 any ^peal of the decision must be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal to the Mmnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice. [LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT] Signature Title ijz^ Date t'J. Decision Notice 02-433 • Page 2 of 2 (April 2003) ‘ i i vv/ CONSENT Permit Application No.: 02-433 Applicant: _____Tom Cullnm_______ • Project: _____Wcdand Alteration_____ Location: _____785Ferndale Road. Orono Rule: Received: 11/12/02 .Complete: 12/OS/Q3 Notification: 12/10/03 Recommendation: Approval. Permit should not be issued until the foltowinf; conditions are met; 1. Reimbursement of mailing costs 2. Reimbursement of Rule J Fees . 3. Submittal of a Declaration for the preservation of the wetland butler which must be executed and recorded 4. Submittal of a surety for wetland alteration in the amount of $5,000 valid until the end five-year monitoring period. 5. Approt^l from the City of Orono______________________________________________ Background: The applicant is proposing w'etland alteration at die location cited above in the City of Orono. The project consists of a berm for the establishment of trees in a type S wetland less than one acre in size along the western edge of the property line. As shown on the site plan there will be an opening in the middle of the berm 10-12 feet wide to allow for hydrology to be maintained on the western portion of the wetland off the subject property. An application for No-Loss has been submitted for the berm. The applicant also proposes to create a 16.S-2S foot wetland buffer, converting mowed Kentucky bluegrass to native wetland buffer vegetation in addition to the creation of 2,135 square feet of new wetland in adjacent upland as part of the proposed project A permit would allow for alteration of a wetland. Rule B: Erosion control consisting of silt fence and a wetland buffer seeding plan is proposed. Ealp-Pi The proposed project will fill 2,135 square feet of wetland for the creation of a berm to support trees, provide 2,135 square feet of new wetland, and provide a 16.5-25 foot wetland buffer which will be converted from mowed Kentucky bluegrass to native vegetation. As stated above, the purpose of the berm is to provide for the establishment of trees such as green ash, silver maple, and northern white cedar. The proposed berm will less then 12 inches above the normal water level of the wetland. The low profile of the berm is to allow for wetland hydrology to persist and qualify the fill for a No-Loss exemption in the Wetland Conservation Act. A Technical Evaluation Panel consisting of MCWD staff and engineering consultant. Board of Water and Soil Resources, and Hennepin County Environmental Services met widi the City of Orono and the applicant’s wetland consultant The panel ^scussed at length the application for No-Loss defmed in MN Rule 8420.0220 which applies if the proposed work will not impact the wetland, i.e. diminish the quantity, or biological diversity of the wetland. The goal of the design for the proposed fill is to maintain the three criteria of a functioning wetland. The panel concluded that the proposed project would result in benefit for the function and value of this wetland and could function as wetland. As a condition of the permit, staff recommends a monitoring report be submined to MCWD once each year for five consecutive years regardmg status of the berm as a functiorung wetland and the success of the establishment of the wetland buffer. Attachments: 1. Perniit application 2. Site plaii/survey 3. Wetland buffer seeding plan (4) 4. Site location map ________ Renae Clark Date GRADING PLAN mw: IVamsmucr mm rj*^ moc ^ ^TOP iummm • mo (tmKumura ar mom mnum iumnoM.) mjPOKD ICIL4MD MMCr « ZtJS V WTM mmimm AmAmZfrn sr jr mjfnM MUm^rs/ m MLS ourwuf SSC4-HA30 JT mmL mmw Mcs-fjlw m Mitmm oomAm nmo mm mm fo tMMAuo wnum mmnm HAMfm&urm wgAmoit Mt/,^ Owmi m mmirnmt Lmt4 mnrn^ m HUt, MmnmAt Ommijn mmmotn ~ tm m mm mt thm mf rntm. , 'Vo'iiwr—— denotes iron monument found denotes Iron pipe set ond marked as shown:' n 9 donotos wood lath denotes soil boring denotes percolation test hole ASC4 - JLJS AC 8H.T fOCC OiTAIt I .V k. I tOrnmyoO^ z m kuommy If Sj» lie mmf fmmfm m mmi mf Requestec by: Tom CuHum Dote: 0a/t4/02 Drown By: KOK 1 Seal*: r^so' Checked By; FIGURE 3 UOM # IffOt R«viMd:n^Mm Job No. 1639 t:^ ' ** X.. ^--- ...----- ------lArnamaakarn MapQuest; Maps: print Page 1 of 1 Lov/erMyBlIIS.com r S Send To Printer Back to Mao • ♦ • ;• ALERT!c ■ 785 Ferndale Rd N Orono MN US Mortgage Rates at 40 Year Lows Selsct Vmjt Curreia Rate & Save $1,OQOt 5%-5.99% ▲ 6%* 6.99% Notes:9%-e.99% g%* •• t. -I' .“I »••• a» e# •••«•••••*•• Mieeeseeee •••••••••• ••••••••• *••••• Less-TharvPeifect Credit OK • -V : . • V, ; ' f ' " ^0S»LDSNrllrt»tea%. Click Herel I * ' •• -*• •; wureweST".-]30OM. ••Wi'-.. ’ilVdiv'd ).iLke f«rd Rd <f4L'‘p t,- 'S 9 "N ' AlueenilMd \ s. r.• ♦ ♦ - t“N 6m A vion r . • . .. \ . -V.'•N ' »• ft-jS * ^ •*^3f -••4.-V .4. e2003*MipQu«^rn. ina: 02009 Noi^atbn TeduiQbaiM^ Vsi«N^^4ss||| \ %.• \ \ * * % _ e• 0.e ^ 'f \:.v ..V^'^UMOdsod Cl *^. 4 1 Ail hahn reserved. Use Subiert to License/Coovnaht TWt iTwp w infonnatioMi «>iy. No repnMnatlon if mode or warranty given u to its oantent. Uier assumes a« risk of uae. MapQuest and Its suppiers assume no retponsiditlty for any toss or delsv resulting from such use. Privacy Policy a i >^al WaHcae C 2003 MapQuestCom, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 RUN DATE: I/IMOM M UIIU)4MA26 ntOTADOR US HOLLANDERRD OWNERNAME DAVID LA CHERYL L KELSEY TAXTAYER DAVID LR CHERYL L KELSEY NAME/ADOR MS HOLLANDER RD WAYZATAMN SS39I 31 361II23I10012 PROTADDR 7U FERNDALERON OWNERNAME MARTCCULLUMJR TAXTAYBR MICHELLE * THOMAS CULLUM JR NAME/ADOR 7U FERNOALE RD N WAYZATAMN SS39I 31 361IU3110017 PROPAOOR 71S FERNDALERON OWNERNAME RICHARD JR SUSAN K LYMAN TAXPAYER RICHARD J R SUSAN K LYMAN NAME/ADOR 7IJ FERNDALERON WAYZATAMN 3)391 3S 36IIU3I200Q2 PROPAOOR 725 FERNDALERON OWNERNAME MJSOWADARMBSOWAOA TAXPAYER MICHAEL JAMAROARET B SOWADA NAME/ADOR 723 FERNOALE RO N WAYZATAMN 33391 3t 3611123120013 PROP ADOR 31 ADDRESS UNASSKWEO OWNERNAME KAREN BELOEN FREY TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR KAREN BELOEN FREY l■S33 9TIIAVCN PLYMOUTH MN 53447 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATKM SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 3t 23IIS23440007 PROPAOOR 223 HOLLANDERRD OWNERNAME LOUIS DClOSfi A JILL K CLOSE TA3CPAYER LOUIS D CLOSE A JILL K CLOSE NAME/ADOR 223 HOLLANDER RD WAYZATAMN 33391 31 23IIS234400I3 PROPAOOR 213 HOLLANDERRD OWNERNAME WBMCKEEVERAMHMCKEEVER TAXPAYER WAYNE BA MARY HMCKEEVER NAME/ADDR 213 HOLLANDER RD WAYZATAMN 33)91 31 361II23I10013 PROPADDR 711 FERNDALERON OWNERNAME KEVIN A SHARON TAPANI TAXPAYER KEVM A SHARON TAPANI NAME/ADOR 711 FERNOALE RO ORONOMN 33)91 3S 361II23I10016 PROPADDR 773 FERNDALERON OWNERNAME B A A K J ERICKSON TAXPAYER BRADLEY A A KAREN J ERICKSON NAME/ADOR 773 FERNOALE RD N WAYZATAMN 33391 31 361112)110011 PROPADDR 3t ADDRESSUNASSIONEO OWNERNAME MAATCCULLUMJR TAXPAYER MICHELLE A THOMAS CULLUM JR NAME/ADOR 713 FERNOALE RD N WAYZATAMN 33)91 38 361II23I10020 PROPAOOR 38 ADDRESSUNASSKiNEO OWNERNAME KAREN BFXOEN FREY TAXPAYER KAREN BELOEN FREY NAME/ADOR 18855 9THAVEN PLYMOUTH MN 33447 31 3611823120009 PROPAOOR 38 ADDRESSUNASSiONED OWNERNAME JOHN A BERG A NANCY C BERO TAXPAYER MICHAEL J NANCY FREY NAME/ADOR 743 FERNOALE RO N ORONOMN 33)91 38 3611823120014 PROPAOOR 793 FERNDALERON OWNERNAME CATHERINESBLAZIER TAXPAYER CATHERINES BLAZIER NAME/ADOR 793 FERNOALE RD N WAYZATAMN 33391 I CERTIFY THATTHB PACIS REntESEMTED ARE AN ACCURAIE AND TRUE REPRESE74TATIONOF IhFORMATION AS IT APPEARS TMB DATE ON THE RBCX)RDS OPTIC HBM4EPIN COUNTY TAJCPAYBR SERVICES DEPARTM^ffi TO TH^BBST, OP MY KNOWLBOGE AND BELIEF. date BY PAGE: I * \iU Q CX! !> • Hennepin . if V' • Hennepin County Taxpayer Services Departnwnt a:'^^ mt HOy-’ f 1 (27)0*1 1 i 1 3RD AC 1 Mftr mm n I (HOLLANDER RD) afSSf mma^tT \ acres 2N f (29) A ADDN i lauranne I (U) WOODS ioav 9 /ffj 4«llf a ;, * Mtr« fS74f tSf/f 3 / i’-'*' • ■ ■ ‘ Parcel Information . ;^ farc«l ID 3611823110012 K«e>' H ohm Numb«r 7SS Nam* PIRNDALE SO N This IS not s i9g$fy neofdsd msfi. Itrspnssntsscompilstion o^Mbmuttan' snddMs horn CHy, County, and SWt nod tuthoritisssndothorsourem. ZONING REGULATIONS I 78-1236 Stairways, lifts aad landings may be ei­ ther constructed above the ground on posts or pilings or placed into the ground, pro­ vided they are designed and bu ll in a manner that ensures control of soil ero­ sion. (5) Stairways, lifts and landings must be located in the most visually inconspicuous portions of lots, as viewed from the sur­ face of the public water, assuming sum­ mer, leaf-on conditions, whenever practi­ cal. (6) Facilities necessary to provide shore area access to physically handicapped persons shall be allowed, provided that the dimen­ sional and performance standards of sub­ sections (1)—(5) of this section are com­ pleted in addition to the requirements of the Minnesota Regulations, chapter 1340. (7) A building permit shall be obtained for construction of stairways, lifts and land­ ings regardless of whether such improve­ ments are constructed above, at or below grade. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series. 9 1(10.56(16KF)), 2-24- 1992) Sec. 78-1283. Steep slopes. Any applicant requesting a permit for construc­ tion of sewage treatment systems, roads, drive ­ ways, structures or other improvements on steep slopes shall provide adequate information to al­ low the city to evaluate possible soil erosion impacts and development of visibility ftom public waters before such permit may be issued. When determined necessary, conditions shall be at­ tached to issued permits to prevent erosion and preserve existing vegetation screening of struc­ tures, vehicles and other facilities as viewed from the surface of public waters, assuming summer, leaf-on vegetation. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, 9 1(10.56(16KG)), 2-24- 1992) Sec. 78-1284. Height of structures. No structure within the Shoreland Overlay District shall exceed the height limitations set forth in the standards for the underlying zoning district. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series. § l(10.56(16KH)).2-24- 1992) Sec. 78-1285. Vegetation alterations. (a) No live tree within 75 feet of the shoreline or within the bluff impact zone with a diameter of six inches or more (or 19 inches in circumference or greater) measured three feet above the ground may be removed without first obtaining a permit from the city staff, provided that at least the equivalent number of replacement trees of a size and nature found acceptable to the staff are planted at the same setback from the shoreline as those removed. App>.als of staff determinations as to type, size and quality of the ^rees to be replaced will be to the council. Removal of trees that are dead shall not require a permit, but such trees must be inspected by city staff prior to their removal. f ! J w (b) Intensive vegetation clearing within 75 feet of the shoreline, on steep slopes or within the bluff impact zone within the Shoreland Overlay District is prohibited. Limited clearing of shrubs and trees less than six inches in diameter and cutting, pruning and trimming of trees of any size is allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling site and to accommodate the placement of permitted stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, beach and wateraaft access areas, and permitted lockboxes, provided that the screening of structures, vehicles or other facilities as viewed from the water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduced. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, 9 1(10.56(16X1)). 2-24- 1992; Ord. No. 127 2nd series. 9 7, 7-11-1994) Sec. 78-1286. Topographic sdterations^grad- ing and tilling. ^ (a) Grading and filling and excavations neces­ sary for the construction of structures, sewage treatment systems, and driveways under validly issued construction permits for these facilities do Supp. No. 1 CD78:191 ill mmm J I 78-12S6 ORONO CITY CODE not requir* theiiiuance of a separate grading and filling permit. However, all grading and filling activity approved permits for construction of struc­ tures, sewage treatment sjrstems, and driveways shall adhere to the grading and ^ing standards of this article. (b) Grading, filling or excavating of more than ten cubic yards is prohibited within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of the public waters enumerated in section 78-1217. Grading, filling or excavating of ten cubic yards or less shsJl require dty staff iwview and permit and be sulgect to other pertinent sections of this chapter. (c) Public and private roads, driveways, park­ ing areas, and public or private watercraft access ramps shidl not be constructed within 75 ftet of the ordinary high water level of the public waters enumerated in section 78-1217. If no alternatives exist, such improvements shall be subject to the standard zoning variance review procedure, and such review shall taka into account the following considerations: (1) Such improvements shall be designed to take advantage of natural vegetation and topography to achieve maximum screen­ ing from view from public waters. All roads and parking areas shall be de­ signed and constructed to minimize and control erosion to public waters consistent with the requirements of all agendes with jurisdiction. (d) Except for those projects requiring permits for construction of structures, sewage treatment systems and driveways, a land alteration permit will be required as follows: (1) For movement of one throu^ 500 cubic yards of material anywhere within the Shoreland Overlay District, a staff-issued land alteration permit snail be required. For movement of more than 500 cubic yards of material within the Shoreland Overlay District, conditional use permit approval by the dty council is required in addition to the required land alteration permit. (e) The following considerations and condi­ tions must be adhered to during the issuance of construction permits, grading and filling permits, conditional use permits, variances and subdivi ­ sion approvals: (1) Grading or filling in any type 2, 3,4,5.6, 7 or 8 wetland must be evaluated to determine how extensively the proposed activity would affect the following func­ tional qualities of the wetland: a. Sediment and pollutant trapping and retention; b. c. d. e. f. Storage of surface runoff to prevent or reduce flood damage; Fish and wildlife habitat; Recreational use; Shoreline or bank stabilization; and Noteworthiness, including special qualities, such as historic signifi­ cance, critical habitat for endan­ gered plants and animals, or others. This evaluation must also include a deter­ mination of whether the wetland alter­ ation being proposed requires permits, reviews or approvals by other local state or federal agencies including but not lim­ ited to watershed districts, state depart­ ment of natural resources, or the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Alterations must be designed and con­ ducted in a manner that ensures only the smallest amount of bare ground is ex­ posed for the shortest time possible. (3) Mulches or similar materials must be used, where necessary, for temporary bare soil coverage, and a permanent vegetation cover must be established as soon as pos­ sible. (4) Methods to minimize soil eroaicn and to trap sediments before they reach any sur­ face water ftature must used. (5) Altered areas must be stabilized to accept­ able erosion control standards consistent with the field office technical guides of the Supp. No. 1 CDT8:192 IL ZONINO REGULATIONS I 7S-1U8 local soil and water conservation districts and the United States Soil Conservation Service. (6) Fill or excavated material must not be placed in a manner that creates an unsta ­ ble slope. (7) Flans to place fill or excavated material on steep slopes must be reviewed by the city engineer for continued slope stability and must not create firdshed slopes of 30 percent or greater. (8) Fill or excavated material must not be placed in bluff impact zones. (9) Any alterations below the ordinary high water level of public waters must first be authorized by the commissioner of the department of natural resources under Minn. SUt. { 103G.245. (10) Alterations of topography must only be allowed if they are accessory to permitted or conditional uses and do not adversely affect adjacent or nearby property. (11) Placement of natural rock riprap, includ­ ing associated grading of ^e shoreline and placement of a filter blanket, is per­ mitted if the finished slope does not ex­ ceed three ftet horizontal to one fbot ver ­ tical, the landward extent of tho riprap is within ten feet of the ordinary high water level, and the height of the riprap above the ordinary high water level does not exceed three feet. A riprap permit shall be obtained per the requirements of section 78-969. (ff Excavations where the intended purpose is connection to a public water, such as boat slips, canals, lagootu and harbors, are prohibited above the ordinary high water level. Such excavations below the elevation or the ordinary high water level are subject to approval of the department of natural resources and other agencies with concur­ rent jurisdiction. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, 9 1(10.5€(16XJ)), 2-24- 1992; Ord. No. 127 2nd series,« 8,7-11-1994; Ord. No. 163 2nd series, { 3, 12-&1997; Ord. No. 171 2nd series, i 2, 4-4-1998) Sec. 78-1287. Stormwater management The following general and specific standards shall apply in addition to those standards found in article VIII of this chapter and section 82-222: (1) When possible, existing natural drainageways, wetlands and vegetated soil surfaces must be used to convey, store, filter and retain stormwater runoff before discharge to public waters. (2) A development must be plaimed and con­ ducted in a nanner that will minimize the extent of disturbed areas, runoff velocities and erosion potential, and reduce and delay runoff volumes. Disturbed areas must be stabilized and protected as soon as possible and faculties or methods used to retain sediment on the site. (3) When development density, topographic features, and soil and vegetation condi­ tions are not sufficient to adequately han ­ dle stormwater runoff using natural fea ­ tures and vegetation, various types of constructed facilities, such as diversions, settlmg basins, skimming devices, dikes, waterways and ponds may be used. Pref­ erence must be given to designs using surface drainage, vegetation, and infiltra ­ tion rather than buried pipes and manmade materials and facilities. (4) When constructed facilities are used to perform water management, documenta ­ tion must be provided by a registered professional ci^ engineer that they are designed and installed consistent with the field office technical guide of the local soil and water conservation district. (6) New constructed stormwater outfalls to public waters must provide for filtering or settling of suspended solids and skim­ ming of surface debris before discharge. (Ord. No. 101 2nd series, $ l(10.56a6KK)), 2-24- 1992) Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 foet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. Supp. No. 1 CD78;193 gw. o 5. Wetlands Management ^5.1 General As described in Section 3, the formation of the landscape in Orono has resulted in the creation of many wetlands. The City recognizes a variety of functions and values provided by its wetlands, including: ❖ Acting as part of the natural surface water management system • maintenance of water quality • flood attenuation • erosion and sedimentation reduction ❖ Providing habitat for a variety wildlife ❖ Preserving open spaces and natural landscapes ❖ Contributing to an enharx:ed overall quality of life Orono's leaders formally recognized these values In the 1960's and adopted the City's first comprehensive wetland protection ordinance in 1970. Based on various water quality/quantity studies that supported the 1974 SWMP, Orono adopted additional ordinances in 1975, which proNbited filling or dra'ning wetlands, and required a 26-foot setback from a wetland boundary to any construction or grading activity. This section of the SWMP describes the City's multi-faceted resource management approach to maintaining or improving the City's wetland resources. Stemming from the goals and policies of both MCWO and Orono, the following process serves as the backbone of Orono's wetland management plan: ❖ Discussion of impacts to wetland resources (Section 5.2) ❖ Inventory wetlands likely to be affected by runoff (Section 5 3) ❖ Assessment of wetland functions and values (Section 5.S) ❖ Determination of a runoff susceptibility rating (Section 6.3) ❖ Develop protection strategies to minimize impact (Section 5.4) • dassify wetlands by recuired level of protection • volume and rote control (quantity) to manage bounce • phosphorous limits to maintain or innprove water quality • buffer strip standards for quantity and quality ❖ Plan for enhancement or restoration of wetlands (Section 5.5) • identify candidate wetlards • create an improvement plan for each Otyof Orono Suri^ Water MmgementPlin S-J Wedan/s nanaaememt ^ 5.2 Impacts to WsTLAmDS With the passage of wetland protection legislation, and construction of ponds for runoff management, the rate of degradation from urban development has been greatly slowed. However, with intensive land development, agricultural production, and housekeeping practices in developed areas, degradation of wetlands continues. The focus of recent wetland legislation, policy, and practice has been to preserve the functions, values, and overall quality of wetlands by minimizing poor water quality and unmanaged quantities of mnoff associated with ogro- urban Impacts. 5.2.1 Water Quality Impacts Water quality plays a significant role in the overall quality of a wetland. When the quality of incoming water dedines. the plant community may degrade to fewer of species and retain only species tolerant of high nutrient and sediment loads. A degraded plant community results o less valuable ecosystem in terms of biodiversity, habitat, and aesthetics. There are two primary factors that affect the quality of runoff entering a wetland, and therefore to overall water quality within the wetland: 1. phosphorous, as the primary nutrient of concern 2. sedimentation, resulting from erosion of soil. 5.2.2 Water Quantity Impacts Recent surface water management plans have protected wetlands from nutrients but not from fluctuation of water elevation (bounce) or duration of inundation. In fact, it was common to use wetlands to reduce floodirig potential by sizing pipes to maximize bounce and duration. The findings of the (State of Minnesota) Storm Water Advisory Group were published in a document called Guidance For Evaluating Uhoan Storm Water and Snowmelt Runoff Impacts To Wetlands (1994). The fincings indicated that there is a broad range of tolerance to bounce and duration among different wetland typjes. And to a lesser extent, the range of tolerance con be attributed to the characteristics and quality of a given wetland. Some wetlands (e.g., bogs and fens) are sensitive to any disturbance and will show signs of degradation with even low-level inputs of runoff. Conversely, some wetlands (e.g., floodplain forests) are better adopted to handle fluctuating water levels often associated with runoff. OtyofOnno Sijrtiee w»terMan»gwtmtPlan I'^5.3 Inventory and Assessment of Wetlands 5.3.1 Wetland Inventory As stated earlier, the City's objective is to protect, enhonce, and/or restore wetlands that may be directly affected by runoff os development and redevelopment occurs. Therefore, only those wetlands located within 20 feet of a proposed or existing stormwater outlet pipe were inventoried and mapped as part of the SWMP. This inventory also served os the base of information for development of other parts of the wetland management plan. The wetlands inventoried for this SWMP are listed in Appendix I and are shown on the SWMP System Map. 5.3.2 Stormwater Susceptibility Assessment The Guidance For Evaluating Urban Storm Water and Snowmelt Runoff Impacts To Wetlands was the source material for rating a wetland's susceptibility to runoff. Potential impacts associated with storm and meltwater runoff include fluctuation in water levels (bourTce) within the wetland, the duration of inundation at the varying bounce elevations, and the quality of the water being directed to the wetland. A given wetiand's susceptibility to ojnoff Is dependent on the wetland type, and the characteristics arxi quality of its plant community. As an example, a sedge meadow, which likes a particular hydrologic regime is much more susceptible than a floodplain forest, which depends on fluctuating levels of water associated with seasortal flooding Also, a wet meadow with a variety of grasses and flowers is more sensitive than one dominated by reed canary gross. The runoff susceptibility rating for each of the evaluated wetlands is indicated by color-coding on the system map. The ratings described in the guidance document are ❖ Highly Susceptible ❖ Moderately Susceptible ❖ Slightly Susceptible ❖ Least Susceptible. Further discussion on susceptibility and associated wetlarxl community descriptions, modified from the Guidance For Evaluating Urban Storm Water and Snowmelt Runoff Impacts To Wetlands, is presented in Appendix H. Each susceptibility rating category describes different wetland types, including plant commurtities and hydrology. OtyarOrono Surftct mter Manag&neri Plan 1 A 5.3.3 Functional Assessment Orono's 1980 Community Management Plan articulated the general basis for wetland protection, but lacked a functional assessment of the values attributable to each of its protected wetlands. Such an assessment was needed to be able to develop protection or enhancement strategies for individual wetlands. The New Hampshire Method, slightly modified for conditions in Orono, was used for the functional assessment of wetlands. The Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MnRAM) was also modified, and used in conjunction with the New Hampshire Method. The intent of combining these methods was to allow for city staff to assist in future assessments of wetlarKls. The New Hampshire Method is designed to be “user friendly' and is specifically set up so that non-sdentlsts can fill out the method. MnRAM is a technical method that needs to be filled out by a wetland scientist. It was necessary to include MnRAM because the New Hampshire Method does not adequately address floral diversity, (an important factor with regard to runoff protection and buffer strips). The New Hampshire Method allows for a comparison between wetlands within a project boundary. It is one of the few methods that gives an actual number ranking. This allows for comparison of functional values. The method addresses up to 14 functional values of wetlands, which are listed in Table 5.1. Table 5.1 Functional Values Under the New Hampshire Method Of these 14 functional values, the City chose the following three for assessment of the wetlands identified for the SWMP: ❖ Ecological Integrity determines the degree of human influence. ❖ Wildlife Habitat assesses the overall suitability of a wetlarxj for wildlife typically associated with wetlands. ❖ Visual/Aesthetic Quality ranks the wetland's scenic beauty. Functlorxal value iridlces for each wetland are presented in ApperxHx I, including the MnRAM rating of a wetland's floral diversity/integrity. OfyoTOnna Surt^ Water Manaaeme/^ Pt» 5-# WWtanth Matiarmitmitt 1 J, I Ecological integrity Water-based recreabon Shoreline anchoring 1 Wildlife habitat Flood control potential Urban quality of life j Fish habitat Groundwater use potenbal Urban quality of life | Educational potential Sediment trapping Noteworthiness ! Visual/aesthetic quality Nutrient attenuabon | . I dttiilyluii MCWD Assessment As of the approval date of this SWMP, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was in the process of completing a function and value assessment of wetlands in the District. It is anticipated that that project will be completed arid a final report will be published in the near future. The City of Orono will refer to MCWD's data for the following considerations: 1. Source of data for wetlands not inventoried for Orono SWMP 2. Cross-reference with Orono SWMP data 3. Gain perspective on the wetland management strategies set forth in the Orono SWMP 5.3.4 Non-lnventoried Wetlands UrKlerstandlng the value of an inventory and evaluation of all wetland resources, the City will take the following general approach to achieving a comjDlete data set for remaining wetlands: ❖ Inventory and assess wetlands os cost-sharing opportur^ties become available ❖ Incorporate data from similar projects by other agencies, notably the MCWD wetland assessment project ❖ Require data from any land disturbing activity near a wetlarxj The last of these will happen when there is development of land r^ear any wetlands that have not been accounted for in o previous effort. When a preliminary plot is received by the City, proximity to wetlands will be among the review items. If a nearby wetland has not been accounted for, the developer of the land will be required to have a runoff susceptibility evaluation completed and submitted to the City. The developer may request that the evaluation be done by the City, in which case a fee will be assessed. By requiring this, the plot approval process will take into account the quality arxj setTsitivity of a given wetlarxJ. as well as add that wetland to the City's database. ^ 5.4 Wetland Protection The goal of this management strategy is to maintain or enhance the ecological integrity of wetlands in the City during site development. Given the variability of the type and quality of the wetland communities, a two- step wetland protection process has been developed. WetlarTds subject to runoff must initially be classified os to the level of protection required. From there, an appropriate protection strategy can be planned for each wetland. aty of Orono Surieco Witer Management fitan S‘S fMet/anda Manaoenmni i Information needed to form a wetland strategy for each wetland will be derived from one or aii of these sources: 1. Wetland inventory and assessment completed as part of this SWMP 2. Wetland inventory and assessment completed by MCWD 3. Non-inventoried wetland procedures detailed in Section 5.3.4 5.4.1 Protection Classification Orono's wetland protection dossificotions are based on a wetland's susceptibility to impact from runoff (see Section 5.3.2). Because the runoff susceptibility rating can be used as an indicator for the overall quality of most wetland types, it can also serve as the basis for determining the level of protection to be afforded to a given wetland. In some cases, wetlands with a “utilize" classification can actually be enhanced when used for runoff management, by rasing water levels or by excavating. In other situations, restoration of Protect II or Protect III wetlands may provide treatment for downstream waterbodies and improve the habitat and aesthetics of the subject wetland. Table 5.2 Wetland Protection Classifications 5.4.2 Protection Strategies Ewsting federal and state regulations address potential impact to the “areal" extent of wetlands from placement of fill material. In concert with MCWD. the City also Intends to protect the overdi ecdogicd integrity of its wetland communities. The protection strategies in Table 5.3 were developed to address potentid impact to the type, character, and qudity of a wetland community, from runoff. The Protection Strategy for each wetland is based on its Protection Oassification. OfyofOrono &jrfK»W^f^n9genm^Plan S-€ I \ Protection Classification Susceptibility Rating Description Protect I Highly Susceptible Highly susceptible to both quantity and quality impacts from runoff; have the highest degree of protection. Protect II Moderately Susceptible j Moderately susceptible to quantity and quality impacts; protection is less sthngent than Protect I, provides | protection to maintain their characteristics \ Protect III 1 Slightly Susceptible Less stringent protection than Protect n wetlands; j maintenance of characteristics is desirable Utilize Least Susceptible Wetlands are significantly degraded (e.g., cultivated or canary grass monotype) or lade wetland characteristics; not typically impacM by runoff; no quantity and only limited quality treatment of runoff is required Considering that runoff reaches a wetland both from a storm sewer and from adjacent uplarxJs, the followir>g three issues will be managed to minimize impact from runoff: ❖ Bounce - deals with the volume of stormwater input, in terms of the change in water levels and the duration of that change. Ponds will be designed to manage bounce associated with runoff from storm sewers. Based a runoff event with a 100-year recurrence interval. ❖ Phosphorous (P) - addresses the amount of phosphorous being delivered to a given wetland via runoff from storm sewers. ❖ Buffer - addresses both the quality and quantity/rote of runoff entering a wetlarxj as surface flow from adjacent uplands. Protection Classification Protection Strategy ®®nnce: Maintain bounce at or below existing conditions : Protect I1 P‘: Limit loadings to predevelopment loading (0.14 Lbs/Ac/Yr) « L_Buffer: 50 feet wide 1 Bounce: Maintain bounce at or below existing conditions plus 0.5 foot Protect II P: Umit loadings to predevelopment loadings times 2 (0.28 Lbs/Ac/Yr) Buffer: 35 feet wide Bounce: Maintain bounce at or below existing conditions plus l.O foot Protect III f P: Umit concentration to predevelopment concentrations (200 ppb) i Buffer: 25 feet wide ”* 1 •Bounce: No quantity requirement ! utilize P: Umit concentration to 225 ppb ~ ^ P a ohosohoraus Buffer: 15 feet wide The City of Orono has taken a somewhat different approach to the sizing and location requirements for wetland buffers, for a couple of reasons: 1. It is generally known that, assuming all things equal, a larger waterbody has a greater assimilative capacity than a small wetlaryj. i.e. some given amount of phosphorous can be more easily ‘absorbed ’ by a 14 acre marsh than by a 0.8 acre fen. 2. A given wetland's runoff susceptibility rating is a good indicator of it's overall quality in terms of its functions and values. Sensitive communities with a diverse assemblage of plants, provide scarce and/or Ngh quality habitat (remember. Protection Classifications are tied to runoff susceptibility). Otyo/Orone SUrfte Witer Managemnt PImt 5-Z ml Buffers It should be noted at the outset of any discussion on buffers, that this requirement is not the same as a 'setback' requirement. In fact, the beginning point for a setback requirement may actually be the buffer's up*gradient' edge. The City will adopt the buffer strip widths indicofed in Table 6.3, along with other buffer guidelines discussed below, with approval of this SWMP. During implementation of this SWMP, the City will include these requirements and guidelines in an appropriate ordinance. A buffer (or buffer strip) is an area of undfsfuitoed vegetation surrounding a wetland. It con consist of trees, grasses, shrubs, flowers, or any combination, as long as it is the vegetation (or enhancement oO that is in place and well established before any grading activities begin. An undisturbed buffer can reduce Impact to a wetland by: ❖ Keeping soil stabilized to minimize erosion ❖ Filtering nutrients and sediments from overland runoff ❖ Slowing and/or retairiing overland runoff ❖ Providing habitat adjacent to wetlands During construction, a buffer is an area in which there will be no vehicle or equipment traffic, stockpiling of soil, or staging of any type of construction material. After construction, these guidelirTes should be followed: ❖ No mowing, fertilizing, or other maintenance • management of native or natural vegetation is OK ❖ No placement of lawn clippings, leaves, etc • limited brushpjiles may be OK. check with City* No sheds or recreational features ❖ No trampling or paths, except as allowed, check with City paths should be parallel to the wetland edge occess to wetland shauld be meandered ’Drushpies may serve os hcbitot for wildlife If done properly ^5.5 Wetland Restoration/Enhancements Four wetland complexes have been Identified as high priority restoration/ enhancemerit sites. Additional wetlands will likely be Identified during the implementation period for this SWMP. Funding sources for the wetland restoration/enhancement sites can come from a variety of sources, discussed further in Section 7.7.4. QtyofOnno Stance Water Mansgerntr^Pen 5-S — Tn iiiii uTafifc I A summary of each of the wetland restoration/enhancement sites follow* Enough information was collected to begin the process of applying for grants. The cost shown in the tables below are approximate and may be modified if additional information becomes available, or for cost increases. 5.5.1 Wetland PC-L-31 Approximate Site Size: 10 acres Township_11 8N Range 23 W Section 31 Watershed Name: Mississippi River (Metro) Watershed #: 20 City Watershed Name: Painter Creek General Deaerlption of Site This wetland is located in the upstream portion of the Painter Creek watershed. A tributary of Painter Creek bisects the wetland. McCulley Road is located at the south end of the wetland. Approximately 85 percent of the wetland is a wet meadow and 15 percent is a lowlond hardwood swamp. The wet meadow is dominated by reed canary grass with patches of willow located in the middle. The lowland hardwood swamp is dominated by willow end cottonwood. The Painter Creek tributary has been ditched through the wetland. A lateral ditch connects with the Painter Creek tributary. These ditches have partially drained the wetland and contributed to the degraded condition of the basin. Restoration Objectives and Proposed Construction This site is high profile due to its location adjacent to the Luce Line Trail and within land publicly owned by the City. The goals for wetland restoration will include the following: • Control runoff rates to Painter Creek • Restore native diversity of wetland vegetotioa induding wet meadow and emergent marsh plant communities • Enhance the wildlife and aesthetic viewing of the wetiand for the public using the Luce Line Trail ■ Enhance the Painter Creek wildlife corridor Steps in the proposed wetiand restoration include the following: 1 . Construct a series of low berms across the ditch to eliminate the scope and effect of the ditch. OtyofOrono Surface Water Management Plan ■■■ S-9 J 2. Complete two controlled bums of the site to aid in controlling reed canary gross. Provide a spot treatment of herbicide to further control reed canary grass. 3. Plant a diverse mix of wet meadow grasses and forbs. Table 5.4 Project Cost for Wetland PC*L-31 Tasks Description Approximate Cost Surveys Field and topographic survey of site $ 3,000 Design Complete site design including draft plan and final construction documents $ 8,000 Meetings I Meetings with Gty staff and surrounding landowners Permits Restoration Obtain necessary permits complete two prescribed bums and spot herbicide treatment to control exotics Seed with wet meadow mix Construction of low berms across ditch $ 1,300 $ 2,000 S 3,000 $ 15,000 $30,000 Approximate Project Cost $ 62,300 5.5.2 Wetland PC-M-31 Approximate Ste Size: 13.5 acres Township 118N Range 23 W Section __ Watershed Name: Mississippi River (Metro) Watershed #: 20 Cih/ Watershed Name: Painter Creek General Description of Site This wetland is located in the upstream portion of the Painter Creek Watershed. A tributary of Painter Creek bisects the wetland. McCulley Road is located at the north end of the wetland. The wetland contains the following communities and species: • 40 % shallow marsh - cattail, lake sedge, water plantain • 40 % wet meadow - reed canary grass, stinging nettle, giant goldenrod, and sedges • 20 % shrub swamp - willow The Painter Creek tributary has been ditched through the wetjand. A lateral ditch connects with the Painter Creek tributary along the trail. These ditches have partially drained the wetland and contributed to the degraded condition of the basin. Off of Onto Si/rfSee WBto-HmiagimtntPItn 5-10 WettmOs Manaoemem t Restoration Objectives and Construction Proposed This site is high profile due to its location adjacent to the Luce Line Trail and within land publicly owned by the City. The goals for wetland restoration will include the following: • Control runoff rates to Painter Creek • Restore native diversity of wetland vegetation, including wet meadow and emergent marsh plant communities ■ Enhance the wildlife and aesthetic viewing of the wetland for the public using the Luce Line Trail » Enhance the Painter Creek wildlife corridor Steps in the proposed wetland restoration include the following: 1. Complete two controlled bums of the wetland site to aid in controlling the reed canary gross and cattail. Provide a spot i.eotment of herbicide to further control reed canary grass. 2. Plant a diverse mix of wet meadow grasses and forbs in the wet meadow. 3. Construct a control structure at the outlet of the wetland. Table 5.5 Project Cost For PC-M-31 Tasks 1 Description 1 Approximate | Cost Surveys | Field and topographic survey of site s 2.000 : 1 nesian = Complete site design including draft plan and final * ' constnjction documents S 4.0C0- with surrounding j , ^ . Permits OOtain necessary permits S 2.000 i i 1 Restoration 1 ! 1 Complete 2 prescribed bums and spot herbidde treatment to control exotics 1 Seed with wet meadow mix i Construction of control structure % 3.000! $ 7.500 1 a $ 15.000 * i Approximate Project Cost $34,800 5.5.3 Wetland LL-G-26 Approximate Site Size: 14.5 acres Township 118N Range 23 W Section 26 Watershed Narr>e: Mississippi River (Metro) Watershed #: 20 City Watershed Name: Long Lake (DNR 834W) atyofOnno Surf^ WetarMinageirmtPen S-n Wedandi Managmemt ii II 11 « r Qtneral DaaeripUon of Sito This wetland is iocated in the Long Lake watershed just upstream of Long Lake. TNs iocotion provides an exceilent opportunity for water quality treatment. It has a ditch that is ajDproxImately 10 feet wide through its center. Water flows through the ditch rather than across the entire wetlafxJ, creating a condition in wNch the wetiand serves a limited nutrient function. This wetlarxi is not under Oty ownership. The topographic relief of the wetland would confine the limits of the project to the wetland. The wetlarKl is a shallow marsh/wet meadow dominated by reed canary grass and cattail. Rootontion Ob/ectf ve« and Conatnetion Propoaad ■ Restore hydrology to the wetland basin with a control structure at the outlet (may require a berm upstream, dependent on driveway elev.). • Provide water quality treatment for Long Lake . • Enhance the wildlife and aesthetic functional values of the wetland. • Restore the plant community along the fringes of the wetland. Table 5.6 Project Cost for Wetland LL<G-26 Components Description Approximate Cost Surveys Field and topographic survey of site $ 2,000 Design 1 Complete site design Including draft plan and | flnal construction documents S 5,000 ! Permits i Obtain necessary permits > S 2,0CG Meetings Meetings with Qty staff and surrounding landowners I $ 1,300 Land and Legal Purchase of easements around wetland or access to control structure $ 9,300 Restoration 1-------------------- Complete 2 prescribed bums and spot herbicide beatment to control exotics Seed and/or plant fringe areas Construction of control structure S 3,000 $ 7,500 $20,000 atyorofxxto 5-12 WtOKiA Mmg memt i i ■i Steps In the proposed wetland restoration Include the following: 1. Construct a control structure at the outlet. 2. Complete two controlled bums of the wetland site to aid iri controlling the reed carTory grass and cattail and increase the nutrient uptake of the wetlarxj with new growth of vegetation. Provide a spot treatment of herbicide to further control reed canary gross. 3. Seed and/or emerging plants along the fringe. 5.5.4 Wetland SB-E-31 /\pproximate Wetland Size: 65 acres (Restoration Site - 35 acres) Township 118N&117N Range 23W Section 3_i &3 Watershed Name: Mississippi River (Metro) Watershed #: 20 City Watershed Name: Stubbs Bay (DNR 140P) General Description of Site This wetland is located in the lower portion of the Stubbs Bay watershed just upstream of Stubbs Bay and south of the Luce Line Trail. This location provides an excellent opportunity for water quality treatment and enhanced aesthetics and wildlife habitat for users of the Luce Line Trail. It currently has a main ditch with two laterals that have partially drained the wet meadow portion'of the wetland. Water flows through the ditch rather than across the entire wetland, creating a condition in which the wetlard sen/es a limited nutrient removal function. The portion of the wetland that should be considered for restoration is a 35-acre wet meadow community that is predominantly reea canary grass. There are currently isolated portions of rtgher quality sedge meadow that contain lakebank sedge, blue joint grass, joe pyeweed, and boneset. A tamarack swamp is located in the northwest portion of the wetland at a ttigher elevation (approximately 833 - 836) than the wet meadow (833). Raising water levels to restore the wet meadow would need to be limited to the 833 elevation to protect the tamarack swamp from inundation. Permanent inurKlotion in tamarack swamps can cause rTTortality. The wetland area is not under public owr>ership and one driveway crosses the wetland to gain access to a house that is located between the Luce Line Trail and the wetlard. atyofOrono Surface Water Mifi9ifement»an 5-J3 Wetiandt Managememt R§»iontlon ObJ^elivta and Conatruetlon Fropcaad • Provide worfer quality treatment for Stubbs Boy • Enhance wildlife and aesthetic functional values • » Restore the wetland plant community within the reed canary grass portion of wetland • Restore hydrology to the wetlarKl basin with a series of ditch blocks orxj a berm with a control structure. Stapa In the propoaad afatland raatoration Ineluda tha following: 1. Construct a berm arxJ outlet control .structure. 2. Complete two controlled bums of the wetland site to aid in controlllrxj the reed canary grass and Increase the nutrient uptake of the wettarKl with riew growth of vegetation. Provide a spot treatment of herbicide to further control reed canary gross. 3. Seed selected portions of the wetland with wetland gross and forbs. Table 5.7 Project Cost for Wetland SB-E-31 « i Components |Description 1 Approximate Cost Surveys Field and topographic survey of site $ 3,000 a Design Complete site design including draft plan and final construction documents Permits • Obtain necessary permits $ 2,500 1 Meetings Meetings with Oty staff and surrounding landowners $ 1,300 i Land and Legal Purchase of easetnents around wetland or access to control structure. Easenients should already exist along public road for access to control structure. Rtftorabon Complete 2 prescribed bums and spot herbicide treatment to control exotics Seed and/or plant fringe areas ; Construction berm, cfitch blocks and control structure $ 1,500 $ 5,000 $ 7,500 $35,000 Approximete Project Cost $64, atyofOnno SuH^WiiDrHaagementPan 5-14 ywdtndi Mantg mn mt Date Application Received; 12-3<M)3 Date Application Considered at Complete: 02-0S-04 60-Day Review Period Eipires: 04-0^3 COIIMril MFFTING FEB 2 3 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO Date: February 19,2004 Q Item No Department Approval:Administrator Approval: Name: Melanie Curtis Title: City Planner '______ Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #04-2981 - Jeff Martineau - 2565 North Shore Dr - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential 2-acre minimum Lot Area: Gross: 1.47 acre (64,2S0 s.f.) Wetland: 33,000 s.f.^ Net Dry Buildable: 31,250 s.f. ^ Lot Width: 162’ List of Exhibits: A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation B - PC Action Notice 02-18-04 C - PC Memo & Exhibits as of 02-16-04 Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a hardcover variance in order to replace a grade level deck with a smaller stone patio, thus reducing hardcover level by 52 s.f. within the 0-75’ zone to reach a level of 21.18% where 21.61% currently exists and 0% is allowed. Planning Commission Recommendation On February 17, 2004, Planning Commission voted 5-0 on the consent agenda to recommend approval of the hardcover variance. Staff Recommendation Approval per the attached Resolution. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Adopt or amend the attached resolution 1 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-1288 SUBDIVISIONS A & B FILE NO. 04-2981 WHEREAS, Jeffrey L. Martineau and Melissa L. Oninger, husband and wife (hereinafter “the applicants”) are the owners of the property located at 2565 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter the “City”) and legally described as follows: Attached as Exhibit A (hereinafter the “property”); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 to allow a reduction in hardcover from 21.61% to 21.18% hardcover within the 0-75’ setback from the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. 2. 3. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-2981. The property is located tn the LR-IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential zoning district, which requires a minimum lot area of 2 acres. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at a public hearing held on February 17, 2004 and recommended approval of a hardcover variance based on the following findings; a. A total of 2,608 s.f. of hardcover exists in the 0-75’ setback zone where none is allowed. This hardcover consists of a home, deck, patio and retaining walls. b. There is cunently 21.61% hardcover in the 0-75’ setback zone, and a total of 25% or 7,530 s.f for the combined areas of 0-75’ and 75’- 250’ setback zones. The applicant is proposing to reduce this level by 52 s.f Page 1 of S u 4. 5. c. The existing grade level deck is located entirely within the lake setback. d. Any proposed change in the hardcover within the 0-75’ setback zone requires a variance as the hardcover level in the area is non­ conforming at 21.61 %. e. The applicant is proposing to reduce the hardcover level by 52 s.f. with the removal of Ae existing deck and adding a smaller stone patio to achieve a level within the 0-75’ zone of 21.18%. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the public, and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property arc peculiar to it and do not tqiply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; 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 tq>on one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1288 Subdivisions A and B to allow a hardcover variance within the 0-75’ setback zone in order to reduce the hardcover from 21.61% to 21.18% subject to the following conditions; 1. Coimcil approval is based on the site plan submitted by the iq)plicant and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. Any amendments to the site plan which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council review. 2 . Hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone shall not increase above the 2 1.18% per the proposed plan and hardcover allowance summary as depicted on Exhibit B. Applicant is advised that any future requests to increase hardcover or change the nature of Page 2 of 5 i fi existing/approved hardcover shall require City approval, and increases in hardcover will not likely be approved without concurrent reduction in existing hardcover. 3. Applicant shall remove all plastic or fabric liner material from the decorativ;; landscape beds on the property to ensure their permeability as non-hardcover surfaces. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, 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 23,200S). S. 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. 6. The undersigned iqjplicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the applicant and the applicant's heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 23"* day of February, 2004. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of S STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _ diy of , 2004 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 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of S • ! r State of Minnesota ) ) ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this __day of ,2004 husband of Melissa L. Ottinger, husband and wife. Notary Public State of Minnesota ) )ss. County of Hennepin ) This instrument was acknowledged before me this __day of ,2004 . wife of Jeffrey L. Martineau, husband and wife. Notary Public ■ - Page S of S HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA EXHIBIT A u Th.H.ld»».»<M‘y »0U.I, “**• »•“ •* EHIE *• “ ‘ . hm u rt. ----------- *• *•“"• *•*“ _____- •“ W »». .-4 . «.—• - •• •“ *”• ** WU, -«... «-'»-*• —• *• —"• If. .» mU ..M - . '»•«•• *«•«** .^.lU. - ...4 »— •“ -** ’'•*• *“• •* 1,^.. *«,. .«* - «“• - •* 4«.y U-. « . »- U »x. »... H.. - C»-«- U. ., ..Uwu.. K» u- •-» - »• •* ’'*“ “•• . *. .-««..-‘.-4 C««, E«4. MU MU. *4>M - - •* • cr.u» •»*. UM uUMM-4. BMUM^Mir —• •- “ ,M UU..MHM MB. : UM 4m« U,M.A mU. - -4 »«mU, M l.Url.. M|U U »• M- -*U U* •' % iit lf«a yjt tkU M*. •» tM %. *«“•" *• Tm~XI» »»y.. i:;;;:tM.». ^u-m. m..4u.. 4m«.m4m..u^. UMB-U, M . mu- U *. .mmHU.- CM.., MM M. ». »->•. CMHIMM. U... wuux MU... *04 UM »-M..un, u. «.M,UM - MU ,M4 Hm. .u UU,M.M.-1* u. WM. U« - -14 t- .........HU. - *HU-14-M U* - U.4 4M4—MMH. B.H.MWMM-4T.-. IU.-U W 0M41. MH - 0-4., M.. U. - H-M- CmM,. »0- .MU, —« •—«•««.» *^4 *• “ •“* "** *... .M-.M..H, M.«M M -.1. - 4»- - U* “*h‘ U^ ------------------------------------------------------- - MU W... UM -i* *4 — - MU CMM, MM M4 HIM MU. U -.. *. «... MH...I, MMM - U. 4m4 » am. .mum W a— m4 T.U. UU,.Hi *— ——4 **“ ■***?“» ^ - mU •— U.U. 440. lUM. - U. MU. - HllMUf • ' ..U .M...*U. *• - . -U *“* ,«*«., U-. ..U "U>" '“4 “ - U,U.U, HU, *. M,Um.u,I, M.".r - . .«*. - U- ««.,* b, AM. «. ,H.UM m4 hMkM4 W M.UU .4. 0r.0».«.. W 0m4 ta M- *H - D.-., Ml* «>• U*"“ »•-*-..»'»» -•H U* **"**‘» "*• " *. U.« - IM4 M 4.-.4 -HU. .. H.-U. .. - K. .... 4UU- 4.M. a. .MUrtu. - M.4 .«4 .. ... -.... ~'4 •" *• - -4 "•* *MM M.U.., .U.I *. U- “ *4* ”“4. Ml iMlk OMM— »U. — U. -«-4 U.U ♦ -4 H— -mm .W- ». “4U. H..-M..M., -><«•». «u lu* *. -4 *U.B -* E.MMI, .U. - U. tt.«. - U«4 -'H- H, A- — T.U. « *— a »*«.M br 4.- u MM »». - 0.*4.- H». »»• “ * MU. - „u M.U .M4. W. IM. £..urtr - u. H«.. - *U‘»»U| -4 CM« —« WMiMi, .U., mI4 - .*« H*. - cxcrw U»4 4...HHU .. I-..— eM«..«U, .. . - U* .4 — - Uk. M«—ta. mUmU. »U*I »« .M.W.....I, .1-1 .-4 *b.r. IrM. lMa.-...«»y «—•* -MS. I..UM 4. t—W, UT. M.W. »U H*. — 4-U4 *~*“- MU ..«.., - UH «- m»4H M- >'• *• ■4*«* -.^bMMM., -M4 lu. - ...4 MU..««.•*.• "U*" •' ................ “ A^, ..UMi-HUt .44 1 — u... ....... MriU...urlrl.«. - mU ..MMlU. - ..'4 ,mA -lU. UM H...M M*. 4 »»* *• .-4 ••-"‘i 0.MC. lM.HM.urlr -Ml — »..Ur.MHM -Uh mMM - . ,„MU 4.1*.-., .— «4 .Hm.. I~*-..Urt, -.-4 ..‘4 - SlliijUUr • TH. mH - i-U 4 M4 4. ..t. -..4. «M„ IJ. w... - *• W* 4 —‘Ml —4«m. 4«.rtWMf-U«= ....Ml., ... MU.« U4 - u. ~U c—r fc4»4: ,—1 ,..,..1, m4 -.*- -U *- **• “*’' .1 thBl Wi li O tru. ond corricl reprooantotlon of 0 OMHoy of w bou*-'r:; rrrj:;:; «- tt«ro vt MOW ortblflultta m Wt i*o*o ug- ' fe 2 i I EXHIBITB CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway POB0X66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 952.249.4600 ZONING nLE 04-2981 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE; February 18,2004 TO: Jeff Martineau 2S6S North Shore Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: TYPE OF REQUEST: 0-75’ Hardcover Variance DATE OF MEETING: February 17,2004 Planning Commission recommended as follows: Approval of the proposal as submitted VOTE;5 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday. February, 23 2003; Meeting sUiis at 7;00 p m__________ 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 Foth at 952.249.4627. 1 ■ 1- r.y - V EXHIBIT C FILE# 04-2961 February 10. 2004 Paga 1 of 4 Date Application Received: 12-30-03 Date Application Considered as Complete: 02-05-04 60-Day Review Period Expires: 044)6-04 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse. City Administrator From: Date: Melanie Curtis, City Planner February 10,2004 Subject:04-2981, Jeff Martineau, 2565 North Shore Drive, - Hardcover Variance - public hearing 2toning District: Lot Area: LR'IA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 acre minimum Gross; 1.47 acre (64,250 s.f.) Wetland: 33,(XX)s.f.± Net Dry Buildable: 31,250 s.f. ± Application Summary: The applicant is proposing to remove an existing elevated deck (252 s.f.) and replace it with a smaller, stone patio (180 s.f.). The application consists of the following: ^ A hardcover variance for 21.18% hardcover within 75’ of the OHWL where 0% is allowed and 21.61% currently exists. The applicant is proposing to remove 52 s.f. of hardcover in the 0-75* setback zone which equates to 0.43% hardcover for this zone. Staff Recommendation: Planning Department staff recommends approval of the hardcover variance to reduce the hardcover within the 0-75* setback zone by 52 s.f.. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or impervious surface shall be placed, located or constructed within 75 feet of the ordinary high water level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes as regulated elsewhere in this Code. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1,000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. List of Exhibits A. Application B. Hardship Documentation Form C. Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan D. Submitted Hardcover Calculations E. Property Owners List F. Plat Map FILE«04-2M1 Ftbruuy 10,2004 Pag* 2 0(4 Background 2565 North Shore Drive is a 1.47 ac.-e lot. The property contains a large wetland over most of the north half of the lot which accounts for nearly half of the total lot area. The residence was constructed prior to adoption of the zoning ordinance (January 1975), and the location of the wetland most likely dictated the location of the existing home toward the lake. The applicant has proposed a reduction in hardcover in order to replace a grade level deck with a smaller stone patio. The proposed net decrease in hardcover is 52 s.f., or 0.43%, of the 0-75’ area. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET Lot Area/Width; LR-IA Lot Area Lot Width Required 87,120 s.f. (2 acre)200’ Actual 64.250 s.f. (1.46 acres) Gross 31.250 s.f. (0.72 acre) Dry 157’-163’ Setbacks; LR-IA Required Existing Proposed Rear 50’Deck ® 260’-t-Removal of Deck SE Side 30’Deck ® 36’Removal of Deck NWSide 30’No encroachment Removal of Deck Lakeshore 75’Deck @ 19 ’Removal of Deck Structural Coverage; Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 64,250 s.f. (1.47 acre)Allowed: 9,638 s.f. (15%) ExisUng: 3,434 s.f. (4.4%) Proposed: 3,434 s.f. (4.4%) No Change yr ,, FILE* 04-2981 Fabruary 10, 2004 Pag* 3of 4 Hardcover Calculations; Hardcover Zone 0-75 75 - 250 TOTAL 0. 250’ 250 - 500 Total Area In Zone 12,070 s.f. 30,120s.f. 22,060 s.f. Allowed Hardcover Os.f (0%) 7,530 s.f. (25%) 7,530 s.f. 6,618 s.f. (30%) Existing Hardcover 2,608 s.f.* (21.61 %) 4,731 s.f.* (15.7 %) 7,339 s.f. 550 s.f.* (2.5 %) Previously Approved 10-27.2003 No change 4,922 s.f. (16.3 %) 7,530 s.r. No change Proposed Hardcover 2,556 s.f. (21.18%) No change 7,478 s.f. 550 s.f. ( 2.5%) After exclusion of fabric or plastic-lined landscape beds Hardcover Setback Variance The applicant is proposing a nninor reduction in hardcover within the 0-75’ zone, in order to remove the existing deck and replace with a smaller stone patio. Currently, there is a total of 2,608 s.f. of hardcover in this zone where none is allowed. This hardcover consists of a home, deck, patio and retaining walls. There is currently 21.61% hardcover in the 0-75’ setback zone, and a total of 25% or 7,530 s.f. for the combined areas of 0-75’ and 75 ’- 250’ setback zones. The applicant is proposing to reduce this level by 52 s.f.. The existing grade level deck is located entirely within the lake setback. Any proposed change in the hardcover within the 0-75’ setback zone requires a variance as the hardcover level in the area is non-conforming at 21.61%. The applicant is proposing to reduce the hardcover level by 52 s.f. with the removal of the existing deck and adding a smaller stone patio to achieve a level within the 0-75’ zone of 21.18%. Hardship Statement The applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form, attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysis In considering applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed variance upon the hetdth, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic coiuUtions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrouttding area. The Planning Commission shall consider recommeruting approval for variatues from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cattse undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property tutder consideration, and shall recommend approvrd only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of Orono Zoning Code. The applicant wishes to remove a total of 52 s.f. of hardcover from the 0-75’ zoi.e. The deck will be removed; therefore a variance is required to put nonconforming hardcover back in the form of a non-structural patio. 7 i i • r 1 r- > ^ FILE# 04-2981 February 10, 2004 Pao«4ol4 Most of the applicant’s existing home, including 2,608 s.f. of the hardcover for the property, is located within the 0-75 ’ zone. The nonconforming hardcover square footage f^rom the 0-75 ’ zone has been applied to the 75 ’-250’ zone, in addition to the 4,922 s.f. (16.3 %) currently approved for the 75 ’-250’ zone, for a 75 ’-250’ total of 25%. The reduction of 52 s.f. as proposed will bring that total to 24.8% or 7,478 s.f.. Staff flnds that a hardship exists due to the location of the home and nearly half of the property consisting of wetland. The proposal will improve the visual impacts from the lake and decrease the amount of structure on the property. Staff feels this improvement is minor, and because of the reduction in hardcover and removal of the deck structure the request should be granted. Issues for Consldcratim Does the Planning Commission have any issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation Planning Staff recommends approval of the hardcover variance in the 0-75 ’ zone in order to removed the existing deck and replace with patio, thus reducing the level of hardcover in this zone by 52 s.f.. .1' life.*; Vi i) City of Orono Variance Application EXHIBIT A Stf99t AddfBSs: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 55356 m Main: 952-249-4600 fax: 952-249-4616 Mailing Addnss: . P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Application # \ Date Received: \2.-So -O Amount Paid;^ u? OO. o c? Staff: JiB Fee: S600 Renewal: S300 After-the-fact $1,200 Double Fee This application term must be completed in full. Applcant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the application. Incomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas. PROPERTY INFORB^TIDN:./ K Site Address: Property Identification Number (PIN): (Attach legal description to application if i^ncluded on the survey.) Date Property Acquired (n^h/year): ly fi/h □ Yes, I own the adjacent parcels. Present use of propgi^: b other Zoning District:A APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal narres and marital status rMuired for each interested party) Name: rXPCT) ________________/% / Phone (home): 4^7:5- '^OJ^ Phone (woik)/ 12-10 ^2JL)U^ Address: KJof7)^ ^/yrrii. ^ Email:Fax: ^ Phone (home): Address: Email: FORMATION: (Complete legOWNER INFORMATION: (Coiyplete legal names ar.d marital status required for each interested party) Name: Phone (work): Fax: DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:Estimated Project Cost: $ D^ribe the request in detail (attach ^^iongl sh^ts if necessary): ^ ^ ^__ f Ijn I ik REQUIRED SUBMITTALS: p®ro “^ ™*‘ *“ Pre-Application Meeting Form, completed by a Citv Planner Completed Application Form Completed Hardship Documentation Form«isa-p STif .-;"sr& 17-for reproSon™'''*'*"® hardcover caleulaUons. Also'provide one copy ll-'x 7r or n “''i''!?''®'’ wortraheets (as provided wHhin the variance packet) ?Xr repradu" °"® “W 8.5- x 1 r□□ w. I • ^ If IWI l^pi WUUUUUII. APPLICANT ’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: ,sstn:s^ s. ssiz^izsts! Applicant ’s Signature: Applicant ’s Signature: OWNER ’S ACKNOWLE^RfENT:' •=’-srs Owner’s Signature: _______ Owner’s Signature; _______Date: Date: ^plicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 davs h^foro tho Dio«n:«« i- • • Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are normally held on the third MonHaw # 6 J c exhibit b Page 1 of 3 HARDSHIP DOCUMENTATION FORM This form is a required submittai for ALL variance appiicatlons. An appiication will not be considered complete or placed on any meeting agendas untii this form is complete and submitted to the City. Minnesota State 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 property as variances run with the iand 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 poirits outlining the basis City staff uses to determine if a hardship exists and how the variance will affect the surrounding commun'rty. 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 wilt 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/aliowed by the official controls.”Mk. 2.*The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not a ri. h.c. 3. 'The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.” considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if le use for the property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter." 4^- ; 'tf’\•f L ‘% Ti i M Page 2 of3 5.“Undue hardship also includes, but is not limKsd to, inadequate access to direct sunligiy for solar energy systems. Vanances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes. Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in hapMpy with this Chapter* 44b ------------------------------------------- 6.“The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a varianm any use that is not permitted under this Chapter for property in the zone whei|^e affected person*s land is located *_________________________ t 7.oard or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a mily dwelling as a two-family dwelling.* 8. “The Special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are pecuFiar to M(jh property or immediately adjoining property.“ 9. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district In whicK said land is located.“-m------—_______________ 10. “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and er^oyment ^ 3TK>vr7T. 11. “The granting of the proposed variance will not In any way impair health, safety, comfort morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code.“ V|CS JJ. #i.if ^ r Page 3 of 3 12.“The gra^ng of such variance will not merely lerve as a convenience to the appllcahy but necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty." Hardship Statement . . ^ Should you feel the hardship cannot fully be described in the above cntena. descnbe the unique hardship, practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance virith Zoning Ordinance requirements In the following lines (attach additional sheets if necessary): k: i 1*.-‘ r EXHIBIT C \ ' UiL maiWiiiili iiiiiii liiiiiiiii HARDCOVER C^LCULATlUiN WUKK5tUsEl SliTBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE)75-250'250-500' EVISTTNG HARDCQ\T:ft IN ZONE A. House . ■ 500-1000’ •• t, L#n|ih WidUl X X X B. Garage * C. ' Driveway a X D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Oeck X X F. 'iiMidietga***^ '^idulain^^ By riajili _ Or Ftbrrt 25 X X X LlL G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A- 2^«9 + B fZ07C X 100 - PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ____X LcDfth Width X X X B. ' Cange ■ C. Drivewiy X X D. Sidewalk X X /yzs"_S.F. S.F. • 1 S.F. • ”S.F.« •* 1 • -S.F. S.F. * *I S.F." S.F. is•I S.F.• • Z32.S.F. H3 I S.F. /!3 S.F.m so S.F.r • . I S.F. . • -S.F. • S.F. /loyo S.F.B .... ZJ.^f _Jk % - S.F. ’ k . • • • S.F.... f "S.F.\ I S.F. -SF. .r- C- S.F. I S.F.# ti •S.F. •i "S.F. E. Paiio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X G. Other ■ > i ^ \ \ ' \ - 2.5 Z S.F. 5((k i^O S.F. A 45 Air/o S.F. S.F; . S.F. • I* TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A • B , 2€0? - 52 X 100 ■ 2SS€ S.P. S.F. za^2£—«/• 9J. £M % A B 1 * HARDCOVER CALCULATigil^UKKSi^l StTBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) •-<•••• • • 0-75'250*500*500*1000’ C//Vpi PVISTTNG HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. Houie • _____________SAS S.F. « «L«n|ih Width X X X B. Garage * C. * Driveway X X 32-1^ D. Sidewalk X X es a 200 E. Picio/Deck_________X X F. Lm^iea^e 2^- Vndirliin ____________ ByFtaaric ________ OTFlBrte X X X 0» 9 G. Other /-4 0 0 X Z TOTAL HARDCOVER IN LONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE ^ • A ^7>V + B _l£l20. 42ir ^Of'ZO X 100 PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _____________ X UnfUi Width X X X • f B. Garage 8AA 7 T zee etusT/A/c *■ S78 c. X /rA«#(/r . 38 o - — ’7^'7 D. Sidewalk X X E. Patio/Deck X X % • F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric X X X 0. Other S.F. S.F. • S.F. • I' 220 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. .S.F* S.F. S.F. S.F. A S.F. B % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.Ft • S.F. * II* S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A • __________ + B ---------------X 100 - 0722 A * # • 9 X ut hardcover CALCLLAllUiN WUK • StTBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) O-TS’75-250’ '/p/cj 4/0 500-1000’ 1 gVtSTINr. HARDCQ^TR IN ZONE A. House L<nfl^ X X X B. Garage C.* Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X B, Paiio/Deck X X F. Landscape Underlain By Pluiic Or Fabric X X X G. Other -.7; « • TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A. PHQPQSgP HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _______ L«n|ih X X X B. danfe C. Driveway X X D. Sidewalk X X E. Paiio/Deck X X «• F. Ludscape Underlain By Plasiie Or Fabric X X X 0. Other WidUi + B X 100 « widih TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A :___________- B .X 100 jm^ S.F. S.F. S.F. • S.F. • I- S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A B S.F. S.Fi • S.F. S.P. S.F. S.P. II A B •. » • i \ , RUNOATii:2/y20m » MIITSMICMmi riior AOOR as4s north shore dr OWNER NAME EDWARD JCALUHAN JR TAXPAYER EDWARD J CALLAHAN JR NAME/ADOR BOX 72 CRYSTAL BAY MN SS323 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST Jt 0011731410004 PROP ADDR 3SAS NORTU SHORE DR OWNERNAME JLMARTINEAY4ML0TTIN0ER TAXPAYER lEPPRBY L MARTINEAU NAME/ADDR MELISSA LOTTINOER 2S6S NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 )t OQI1723410009 PROP ADDR 38 ADDRESS UNAS8IGNE0 OWNERNAME CHARLESRBIROITTASCHOEN TAXPAYER CHARLES A BIROITTA SCHOEN NAME/AOOR 2430 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATAMN 55391 PAUL: I 31 0911723420003 PROPAODR 2623 NORTHSHOREOR OWNERNAME BBUTZERAETBUTZER TAXPAYER BARTHOUJMEW/EUZABETHBUTZER NAME/ADOR 2623 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATAMN SS39I I CERT IFY THATTHE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS riFTHP. MF.WJEPIN rfujNTY TAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMgiT. TO THE^BECT OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEUEF. , - DATE-^j±lf/ BY 5l>’! r i J ' ■ t-. ‘a;. 4. , •> 1 . -i: " 9 ^mmrnm • /- m0sv; . A.../- : ■ Hennepin "EXHIBITT Hennepin County tiuepayer Services Department ' I f ■: • • t • m >V -V;. ■ . ■ . i • •• : v^, A.-’ A' ' 1-‘-i-V.-SA :. L-A ■ - "-fVj ’• ' '■' V *** % ’* ■' • •■ •- * * •,« - • • *v f t <»•. . f ' A'- .C Parcel Information areal ID 0911723410004 Houa•Nliyl)ir2B68;^ StraM Nama NORTH OHOM OR 7Mb <• not • /opoiiy ncorded It rafini»at8 a compIMIon d Information end data from Ot/, Ooontf, and SM» road auttortdaa end dhat aounaa. i Date Application Received: 06-19-03 Date Application Couidcred ai Complete: 1(M)7>03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 12*07-03 60-day Review Period Extension Expires: 02-07*04 Additional 60-day Review Period Expires: 04-08*04 COnM'^M MPPTING FEB 2 i 2004 City of orono REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Date: February 19,2004 Item No ^ ^ DcpartmcDt Approval: Name: Melanie Curtis Tide: City Planner ______ Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #03-2923 - Stevan Wagner - Commercial Site Plan Review Zoning District: B>1, Retail Sales Business District (20,000 s.f. minimum) Lot Area: 1.163 acre (50,682 s.f.) Lot Width: 250* List of Exhibits: A. PC Action Notice 01*20*04 B. PC Action Notice 10*20*03 C. PC Memo & Exhibits 01-08*04 D. Minutes from October 20,2003 Planning Commission E. Minutes from January 20, 2004 Planning Commission F. Letter from Tom Kellogg, City Engineer, dated January 22, 2004 Application Summary: The applicant is requesting a commercial site plan review in order to construct a 1,770 s.f. addition to an existing building. The application consists of the following: 1 . Conunercial site plan review in order to obtain a building permit to remodel and expand and existing 2,310 s.f. concrete block building on the property to a 4,080 s.f. building, a 1 ,770 s.f. total expansion. 2. Sign setback variance in order to allow the existing sign to be refaced and remain at its current substandard setback. The sign is setback 8’ from the front property line where 10 ’ is required. The signage will extend an additional 4’ into the setback area for a sign setback of 4’ where 10 ’ is required. 3. Hardcover variance in order to construct a 1,770 s.f. addition to the existing building. The .expansion will be constructed over existing hardcover. This application was first reviewed by the Plamiing Commission on October 20,2003 and was tabled in order for the applicant to respond to requests for the following additional information: 1 . Storm water management plan (drainage and grading indicated) 2. Detailed landscape plan (including vegetative screening). 3. Lighting plan. 4. Detailed outdoor storage plan, including staging - existing and proposed. 5. Exterior building materi2d detail. 6. Hazardous waste management solutions. The iq>plicant was asked to i^pear at the Planning Commission’s November woiic session to discuss the additional information. After this November work session it was determined that the applicant would be required to receive approvals from the Pollution Control Agency and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District prior to any approvals from the City. The {q>plication was finally heard at the January 19,2004 Planning Commission meeting. At that time Planning Department staff recommended approval subject to the following conditions; 1. Implementation of City Engineer* s recommendations. 2. Compliance with all other jurisdictional controls. 3. Compliance with City Code 58-l(a) Maintenance of Private Property prior to being placed on the City Council agenda for fmal review.* *Due to the weather and the nature of several of the items in question, the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy will be contingent on compliance with City Code 58-1(a) Maintenance of Private Property. There are a number of unused, inoperable, and unlicensed vehicles and inoperable equipment and debris currently on the property in exterior storage. In order to achieve compliance with City Code 58* 1(a), the vehicles, inoperable equipment and miscellaneous debris must be removed. Planning Commission Recommendation At their January 20, 2004, Planning Commission voted 6-0 to reconunend approval of the application based on the staff recommendation. In addition to the staff recommendation, the Planning Commission wished to have on record that the exterior storage and use of this site has reached its maximum capacity and the exterior storage and use should not be allowed to expand further in tlie future. Staff Recommendation Approval of the application subject to the following: 1. Implementation of the City Engineer ’s recommendations. 2. Compliance with all other jurisdictional controls. 3. Compliance with City Code S8*l(a) Maintenance of Private Property prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Direct staff to draft a Resolution for adoption at die March S’** City Council meeting. exhibit A CITY OF ORONO 2750 KeUcy Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN SS323 952.249.4600 ZONING FILE 03-2923 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: January 23,2004 TO: Stevan Wagner S440 Momingview Ct Mound, MN SS364 COPIES: TYPE OF REQUEST: Commercial Site Review DATE OF MEETING: January 20,2004 Planning Commission recommended as foUows: Unanimoua vote to approve the request ner staff recommendation. The recommendatioa of staff was as follows: Approval of the proposal subject to the following conditions being met: 1. City Engineer ’s reconunendations must be implemented. 2. Compliance with ail other jurisdictional controls is maintained. 3. Compliance with City Code S8-l(a) Maintenance of Private Property prior to being placed on the City Council agenda for fuial review. VOTE:6 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant’s next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council — Monday, Februjiyj3jj004jj4eetingjtiMrm_nt_7^0(ygm__________ 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. if'■pTafA'-- ' 'V-' iinttii ■dll f exhibit B CITY OF ORONO 2750 KcUcy Parkway PO Box 66 Crystal Bay« MN 55323 952.249.4600 ZONING FILE 03-2923 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: October 22,2003 TO: Stevan Wagner S440 Momingside Dr Mound, MN SS364 COPIES:Martin Woody Martin Woody Architects 294 East Grove Lane Suite 200C Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF REQUEST: Commercial Site Review, Hardcover and Sign Setback Variances DATE OF MEETING: October 20,2003 Planniny ConMnission recommended as follows: Application tabled until the next scheduled Planning Commission work session on W^esday, November 5,2003. Tbc following information was requested by the Planning Commission to be submitted by October 30,2003: 1. Storm water management plan (drainage and grading indicated) 2. Detailed landscape plan (including vegetative screening). 3. Lighting plan. 4. Detailed outdoor storage plan, including staging - existing and proposed. 5. Exterior building material detail. 6. Hazardous waste management solutions. 7. Any otner information that will assist the review process VOTE:5 FOR 0 AGAINST Applicant ’s next scheduled meeting is confiiined as: Planning Commission Work Session - Wednesday, November 5,2003; Meeting starts at 5:30 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 Foth at 952.249.4627. iaa&b EXHIBIT C F!LEi03-2923 January 8.2004 Paga 1 of 8 Date Application Received: 06*19-03 Date Application Coniidered as Complete: 10*07>03 60*Day Review Period Expires: 02-07>04 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Melanie Curtis, City Planner January 8,2004 Subject:03-2923, Stevan Wagner, 3607 & 3609 Shoreline Drive, • Commercial Site Plan Review for building addition and Variances • public hearing Zoning District: B-1, Retail Sales Business District, 0.45 acre minimum (20,000 s.f.) Lot Area: 1 .163 acre (50,682 s.f.) Application Summary Recap: In September 2003 the applicant submitted an application for a building expansion and remodel in the B-1 Zoning District. As per City Code Section 78-642 any application for a commercial building permit prompts a site review by the Planning Commission and City Council. The applicant has requested the following: 1) Commercial site plan review in order to obtain a building permit to remodel and expand an existing 2,310 s.f. concrete block building on the property to a 4080 s.f. building, a 1,770 s.f. total expansion. 2) A setback variance in order to re-use the existing sign pole which is setback 8' from the from property line where 10’ is required. The signage itself will extend an additional 4’ into the setback area for a sign setback of 4’ when 10’ is required.* 3) Hardcover variance to allow existing driveway hardcover to become structural hardcover.* *Each of these items will be reviewed in part with the overall commercial site review._________ Application Update: The application was presented at the October 2003 Planning Commission meeting and the November 2003 work session. Th': following information was requested by the Planning Commission at the October meeting for the applica.nt to provide for their review: 1. Storm water management plan (indicating drainage and grading). 2. Detailed landscape plan including any vegetative screening. 3. A lighting plan. 4. Existing and proposed exterior storage plan, including any equipment staging area. 5. Exterior building material detail. 6. Hazardous waste management solutions.____________________________________ Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the proposal subject to the following conditions being met: 1 . City Engineer’s recommendations must be implemented. 2. Compliance with all other jurisdictional controls is maintained. 3. Compliance with City Code 58-l(a) Maintenance of Private Property prior to being placed ______on the City Council agenda for final review.__________________________ y I' * : FtLEi03-2923 Januaiy S. 2004 Pag* 2 of 3 List of Exhibits A. Application & Exhibits as of 10'20*03 B. Exhibits from work session 11-0:3-03 C. Letter from City Engineer dated November 10,2003 D. MCWD • permit application materials E. MPCA* Industrial Storm Water Permit application F. Best Management Practice (BMP) - Information Sheets G. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting 10-20-03 H. City Code S8>l(a) Maintenance of Private Property Background In October and November 2003 Stevan Wagner presented information to the Planning Commission regarding a commercial site plan review for a building expansion on his commercial property at 3607 & 3609 Shoreline Drive, within the B-1 Zoning District. The application was tabled at the October 9* Planning Commission meeting and was brought to the November 5*** Planning Commission work session for further discussion. During the November work session Planning Commission asked the applicant to provide more detailed information and receive approval from other jurisdictional permitting authorities such as the Hennepin County Environmental Services, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). To date the applicant has complied with Hennepin County Environmental Services hazardous waste generator requirements, applied for a MPCA Industrial Waste Water Permit and received a permit (for Rule B: Erosion Control and Rule N: Stormwater Management) from the MCWD. The Rule B permit states that erosion control consisting of a silt fence and a gravel construction entrance have been approved, and the Rule N permit states that the applicant ’s project requires Best Management Practices (BMP) and rate control in order the fulfill the stormwater management practices of Rule N. The MCWD has determined that stormwater runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed project. The applicant has proposed to the MCWD that he will convert a 3’ wide area along the west property bound^ fix>m gravel to Minnesota wild grasses and will install a rock drain with a skimming structure (PIG) for the proposed equipment wash site as BMPs. The following definition was taken from Minnesota Statute §103F.711, Minnesota Clean Water Partnership Act: Best Management Practices (BMP) are practices, techniques, and measures that prevent or reduce water pollution from nonpoint souices by using the most effective and practicable means of achieving water quality goals. Best management practices include, but are not limited to, official controls, structural and nonstructural controls, and operation and maintenance procedures. nLGI03-2923 JanuafyS, 20M Paga3of3 Staff perfonned a site visit with Hennepin County En\iranmental Services staff and addressed the issues Planning Commission brought up during ^e woric session. Those issues were: the appropriateness of curbing, paving the west paAing area vs. gravel, and how effective is the proposed waste trap and skimming stnctuxe. Hennepin County did not feel that the existing site would require extensive improvements regarding the afore mentioned items and felt that they would best be addressed if isecessary, by the MCWD. Additionally, during this site inspection it was noted that ue area behind the building to the rear had an accumulation of scrap, scrap metal, inoperible trailers, tires, and general debris. bsues for consideration 1. Is the Planning Commission satisfied that the applicant has provided sufficient information & obtained the proper authorizations to proceed with the project? 2. Does the Planning Commission feel that the debris arid other waste located on the property be removed in conjunction with the approval of this project? Recommendation Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the proposal provided the following cchditions are met: 1. City Engineer's reconunendations must be implemezced. 2. Compliance with all other jurisdictional controls is isaincained. 3. Compliance with City Code 58-l(a) Maintenance of Private Property prior to being placed on the City Council agenda for final renew. 1.: .. * ■ ■ ■ -}k 4^ EXHIBIT A RLEi03-2923 Odob«r 9,2003 Pag* 1 ofO Date Application Received: 06*19^ Date Application Considered ns Complete: 10-07>03 60-Day Review Period Expires: 12-07-03 0 To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Melanie Foth, Citj* Planner October 9,2003 Subject:03-2923, Stevan Wagner, 3607 & 3609 Shoreline Drive, - Commercial Site Plan Review for building addition and Variances • public bearing Zoning District: B-1 , Retail Sales Business District, Lot Area: 0.45 acre minimum (20,000 s.f.) 1.163 acre (50,682 s.f.) Application Summary: The applicant has submitted an application for a building expansion and remodel in the B-1 Zoning District. As per City Code Section 78-642 any application for a commercial building permit prompts a site review by the Planning Commission and City Council. The applicant has requested the following: 1) Commercial site plan review in order to obtain a building permit to remodel and expand an existing 2310 s.f. concrete block building on the property to a 4080 s.f building, a 1,770 s.f total expansion. 2) A setback variance in order to re-use the existing sign pole which is setback 8 ’ from the front property line >riiere 10’ is required. The signage itself will extend an additional 4’ into the setback area for a sign setback of 4’ when 10’ is required.* 31 Hardcover variance to allow existing diw-eway hardcover to become structural hardcover.* •Each of these items will be reviewed in part widi the overall commercial site review. List of Exhibits A. Application B. Existing & Proposed Survey/Site Plan C. Proposed Plans and Elevations D. Sign Information £. Submitted Hardcover Calculations F. Property Owners List C. Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections H Photos I. Aerial photo Background The property located at 3607 Shoreline Drive has historically served as an equipment rental business. Lawn and garden equipment rental is a permitted use in the district; however, there is a great deal of outdoor storage associated with this business. Outdoor storage is a conditional use in the Industrial district only. There are no provisions within 1 f I V i f > F1LEM3-2923 Oc3Db«f 9,2003 Pag«2of8 the B-1 District to allow for outdoor storage. The Planning Commission should discuss this issue and determine the amount, if any, of outdoor storage that should be allowed. There m not grandfather rights for outdoor storage as it has never been aUowed in the B- 1 district and staff has found no indication that the existing outdoor storage is a legal use by past City actions regarding this site. The applicant would like to improve the main building and add considerable indoor storage space to acconunodate his business. The expansion of the building will allow for the primary business site to move from the smaller 33’x52 ’ building at the rear of the lot Currently there are three buildings on this property; one-12’x 24 ’ open faced stcra«e shed, one i3’x 53’ building located 4.5 ’ from the east property line, and the 33‘x 70 ’ main building which is the basis for this proposal. This 33’x70 ’ building will be expanded to accommodate more indoor storage and updated retail and office space. LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET ......................................................................... Setbacks; B4 Required Existing Proposed Front (street)10’ (sign) 20 ’ 8’ (sign) 49.5 ’(buildinB)No Change Rear 30’120’No Change East Side (B-District)15’4.5 ’No Change Right Side (R-District)35’90’75 ’ Structural Coverage! Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage 50,682 s.f. (I.l63acrc)Allowed: 7602.3 s.f. (15%) Proposed:6132.75 s.f. (12 %) Hardcover Calculations! Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone AUowed Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover 500-1000 48,150 s.f.16,852.5 s.f (35%) a • € ft a A 35,030 s.f* (72.75%) 35.009 s.f (72.71 »'o) FILEf03-2923 Octob«r9, 2003 P«g«3afe Front Yard Setback Variance for Sign Replacement The existing sign is located 8’ from the front property line, where a 10’ setback is required. The applicant is proposing to re-use this sign in part including the non ­ conforming setback. He will be re-painting the pole and hanging new signage from it, however the new signage will extend an additional 4 ’ into the 10’ setback. Thus, the applicant is requesting a 4* sign setback variance where 10’ is required by City Code. Hardcover Variance This property is almost entirely whhin the 500’-1000’ hardcover zone. Currently, there is 35,030 s.f. of hardcover constituting 72.75 %. Most of this hardcover is gravel and paved parking areas with buildings consisting of only 6,132.75 s.f.or 1/6 of the 72.75%. This proposal will increase strucniral coverage, staying within the 15% allowance, but will not significantly reduce hardcover. Site Characteristics/P-j Reouired/Allowed Proposed/Existing Site Area Defined Lot Width Building Setbacks Front Lot Line Rear Lot Line Side Yard Adjacent to “R” District 20,000 s.f. (0.46 acre) 50,682 s.f. (1.163 acres) 100’250’ 35’ 35’ 35’ 15’ 30’ (2'/a stories) 191 s.f. 49.5 ’ 120’ 75’ Proposed 90’ Existing 4.5 ’ Existing/Proposed 150 s.f. Side Yard Adjacent to “B” District Building Height Signage *I s.f. per each front foot occupied by building, plus I s.f. for each front foot not occupied by building [cite; City Code 78-14d8(l)] Additional standards required for the B-1 zoning district appear in Chapter 78 Article IV Division 12. Those standards are attached as Exhibit H. Parking Requirements A. Location . Parking spaces and. or garages shall be located in areas other than a required yard; except that parking may be located in a rear yard to within three feet of the rear or side lot line unless the rear or side lot line is in common with an R district; in which case the setback distance shall be 35'. The applicant ’s property is irregularly shaped surrounded at the rear and on the west side by residential property. The eastern side lot line abuts another B-1 district. B. Number of parking stalls^ Required = 1 per 500 s.f. of floor area in excess of the 1" 500 s.f. (Net ” 5829 s.f. - 500 =5329 s.fJSOO = 10.65 stalls required) Total stalls •squired -11 Total stalls c. Isting »18 ■ FILEiO»-2fl23 Octob«r9,2003 P«g«4of0 Section 78-1516 of the Zoning Ordinance states that where the principal use of the stnicture served is a furniture store, appliance store, warehouse under 15,000 square feet of floor area, auto sales, grainhouses, kennels and studios, the minimum pai^ng facilities (open or enclosed) shall be at least one for each 500 square feet in excess of the first 500 square feet of floor area in the principal structure. The combined floor area of the proposed principal building including the two accessory buildings totals 5829 s.f therefore, the applicant meets all parking requirement Surface Water Management Plan A grading and drainage plan ^ould be submitted with two-foot contour interval or spot elevations on a 100-foot grid if the two-fbot contours are over 100 feet apart. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the council, and those plans shall be reviewed by the city engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and the Council for approval. No use shaU be permitted that results m water runoff causing flood, erosion or deposits on adjacent properties. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural watercourse, ponding area, storm dr^ or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff, whether onto adjacent property or otherwise, must be in compliance with the surface water management plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. [Cite: City Code Section 78-646(h)] A drainage and surface water management plan should be submitted to the City for Engineer review prior to flnal approval The drainage and surface water management plan shall address the above listed bsues of section 78-646(h) Road and Pedestrian Access qccefi This property has 2 accesses to Shoreline Drive, a one-way in and a two-way out in a horseshoe s^pe. The easternmost access is the primary entrance and exit. Customers who are renting a larger trailer or driving a larger vehicle, which backing out difficult, exit using the western access by using the drive-through to the gravel tniiler storage lot. PfflffMan Wgew Sidewalks currently exist along the front of the property providing connections to the properties east and west. T>' nire of this business does not cater to pedestnan traffic as most of the equipment avai„..,ie for rent is difficult to transport without a vehicle. However, pedestrians do use the sidewalk to access the commercial area of Navarre. Signage The subject property is allowed 250 s.f. of signage, based on Cit>- Code standards: 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 foot of lot not I . it 1 FILEM3-2923 Cetobar9,2003 Pag*9ori occupied by a building.” The frontage is 250’ along Shoreline Drive, allowing the property 250 s.f. of signage. Additionally, no indi\-idual sign may exceed SO s.f. Anew pole sign is proposed at 83 s.f and wall signs totaling 67 s.f. The property is alio wd signage up to 250 s.f The proposed signage of 150 s.f is in compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Landscaping Plan The applicant has proposed additional vegetative screening bem een the w est side of the proposed building and the western drive. The western property line is screened with a buffer of trees over 6’ tall. The Planning Commission should discuss whether the proposed and existing vegetation is adequate for screening the outdoor storage in the western parking/storage lot. LighHng A lighting plan has not been provided with the application. The applicant should address how or whether the individual buildings, entryways. or p<arking lot will be illuminated. BuUding OuaMtv and Materials The attached sheets labeled A1*A5 depict the floor plans and elevations for the proposed building. The iq)proved exterior wall finishes as designated by City Code must be frtce brick, natural stone, specially designed precast concrete units, factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel constructioa or other materials as may be approved by the Council. Combinations of such materials shall be permiced. The applicant has proposed vertical wood siding with a field stone base for the exterior facade of the building. The Planning Coimnission should discuss whether these **rerldentiar’ materials are appropriate for the B*l district. Summary of tssuei for discussion; 1. Is the outdoor storage use non-confonning? Should h be allowed to be improved and/or expanded? 2. Should the building be constructed to accommodate sU of the equipment storage for the business, including the equipment currently being stored outdoors? 3 . Should one or both of the accessory stnictures be removed? 4. Should, if permitted to remain, the outdoor storage be restricted to a specific amount, type and location of equipment? Should additional screening be installed? 5. The west and south lots on the propert>- are gravel. Is gravel an appropriate paridng surface for a business district? Should all of the lots be provided with curb and gutter? ...uaaJbllil f FILEMM923 Octob«r9,2003 Pao«6oro 6. Is the vertical wood siding as proposed an appropriate exterior wall finish for a commercial building? 7. Should the pole sign be relocated to a conforming location? 8. Will there be tenants in the other building on the property? How will that use impact the site? 9. Are diere any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation; 1. Planning Department staff recommends ^proval of the sign variance. 2. Plaiming Commission should advise staff and the applicant regarding issues ^i^ch the applicant should address regarding the commercial site. r • • • * • CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee S250.00 (SSO.OO per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee S150.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non*confonning structures S2S0.00 After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) AppUcatton » ^ ^ ^ Date Received "j t& Amount Paid . eo exhibit a PROPERTY INFORMATION Site Address ____ ON C>tjO<LCctiOE. Property Identification Number (P.LD.) 111" ^ 00%^ Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Propoty Acqtiired_____55g^r^ ‘Loo^o_______________ I (do) also own the adjacent parcels of land. .(month/year) Present use of property: Zoning District:______ residential other (specify). APPLICANT . Name fl’a/Q g-iC ifiJcAddr: : Phone (home) «(7v 7IiO ______ Phone (work) ~ ^ ^ 7 7 o Q <k£-.... City. MOuiJo ~~7AiJZva\ / 5TYA*/ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address:City:, Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Zip:, DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST- Est^ted Con^ction Cost S____________ Describe request in detail: S! t^zT~ (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover ,Lot Coverage Setback: Other (specify) Front Sw3.n) Side Rear Average Lakeshore 4 HARDSHIP/DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code requiremenis: ______ (attach additional sheets If necessary) #2923 required si^NIITTALS ^V tiT 1M. I, ori,r 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. S. Completed Application Form H5L°“ “iy”* property. This would include name(s) of aMLantfsHf^^r ^ As an addendum to this application. o e^e SS^^ >f not current ou-ner(s). you wish notified of this appUcatiwi.*^ separate Ust cf any other persons Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Propertj' Owner must sien this anniiratinn m mhacc wpllctlon h .0. ..n,,.,.. ,r... ^.... ““ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE Sn.S^zr.l'p'LE.K,^ “ «iS £S'2S Applicant's Signatur<D^te OWNER'S SIGNATURE entry onto the property bi'a^ ^ff!^aUaI!te agente'CoiJrfs^'''' «“onal>le members for purpose^imesU^on and veriHcation of toreJUet!”" Owner’s Signature L Date ^^'ettar Tit; ” t: tr,?' »*^1/G.\jr iT% 4 J Application # ^3-2 ^tZ 3 Date Received” Amount Paid 37^ CAJ CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION _ Site Address '3^0*7 f S Type of Application to be Filed , Property Identification Number (P.LD.) APPLICANT Name $Tgjc. T Address C-r Phone (home) ^$’2- */7v *7:/<3 Phone (work) V7t ~ ^70o City _Mvu^o Zip rrgdy OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Address City Phone (home). Phone (work). Date Property Acquired I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - _____S 75.00 For each variance request with CUP application ____ S2S0.00 Residential Accessory Use _____S250.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _____ 5250.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _____S250.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg • 5325.00 Commercial/Industrial Use _____ 5250.00 Land Alteration ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain ____ Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more ____; Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75’ of lakeshore PRD/PID - see Fee Schedule 5150.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current >^plication Fee OTH^ APPLICATIONS ^ 5275.00 Commercial Site Plan Re\iew (+ consultant fees) _____ 5300.00 Vacation _____ 5250.00 Easement Vacation _____ 5100.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _____ 5350.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _____ 5375.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment _____ 5100.00 Appeals _____Other - see Fee Schedule Zip, (month/year) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. required submittals . Completed Application Form. . Describe request in detail. ■ “■* "“p O'OU A-«03. Government Center. Ss-s"?!) Depanmat of Ftaace surveyor) - refer to hantlou. for aurvey cl^ges in eievstion (grades/ ^ ^ contours) if land alterations involve With m. interest in .He Construction plan, if applicable (see naff .i? "‘W “o' current owner(s). As tut »ldendum to Xs apUcLn „u «qunements). persons you >«sh notified ofXs applicate ““ “>’ other 9 sirm, TO*"*SbI^^DOCUMENTS OR COPY •» ofXiToc^tis*: p^^T^be The Applicant and Property Ch^ner muRt «s«, .u- »o„isnotcomp,ntHer riZioX'Xit;"m^^^^^^‘™*“on nas not been included. InitifJs of Cle*a?St^^ department that Land Use Application is complete. --------------—--------------__ Date applicant s signature A^ftraX! !l^a to*'w fsSr^°e“ "J 'D' «» Zoning and/or uiiusual expenses incuned in review of rtuT 'overed by original fee navmenrt supplied is true and c^^o th^ of hisfiier knwIedS"”’ ‘“'“"“"■on Applicant's signature ^ V"/~7 fliDate owtver ’s signature ' ------- Xrabem f *' ’£"°coi!l!I?- reasonable nerabers for putpop^Sr^sug^n and verificatiX of ulis «X'eT° Owner's signature Date 9-n~^ Applicant must have all lubounals th« «- ------------- Kafd^:sr“ h-*... scheduled meetinK elease maV. Conmusnon and Counefl. If «, ^ P^“* **Buttaio. ^ z.4or.',rs •*» prid-adTj r* ski r or\vV •. H fM CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices l$SH$ Street Addrets: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orano, MN 55356 Maillni Address: P.O. Box 66 Ciystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 , data priva cy advisorv In accordance with M.S. 13.04, Subd. 2, "Rights of subjects of data", we would like to mfonn you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential infonnation. You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2.You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or kcense. ' ^ 3.The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4.your requested permit or license requirci Council action to approve, some information may become public. 5.You have cenain rights under M.S. 13.04 (see following page) to review private data on yourself. 6. First Your full name is required to process this application or permit. Middle ' Last Ct- 5 (0 Phone I mjiefefand my 6d my ^ts as stated abo^ e. Signature Tdcphooc (952) 249-4600 • Fax (552) 249-4616 wwi»xl.oronojan.ui HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA SHORELINE DRIVE COUNTY ROAD NO. 15 S 89*56' 30" E LEGAL OESCRifiTlON Of PREMISES ; Th« Wttt 250.00 f««t Of tho Cost of Lol 7. Block 7. TownoUo o< Longdon Pork. 6 t doAotoi ironnvrkor [BITB i| From:"Doucette, Elise" <Elise.Doucette<8state.mn.u8> To:"Melanie Curtis" <mcurtisOci.orono.mn.u8> Date:1/19/04 1:39PM Subject:RE: Stevan Wagner Melanie, From discuMions with Mr. Wagner, I have instructed him to notify the state of the maintenance of the treatment system, if the P.i.G was replaced, if the system was pumped, etc. on the Industrial Storm Water permit's Annual report due March 31 tor the previous year. An engineer reviewed the plans you faxed to us and had no comments on the design. Mr. Wagner is covered under the permit upon sutmission of the application. The state will be updeting the irtdustnal storm water rules, and therefore vwn’t issue a permit until that time. Mr. Wagner will be operating under the old permit requirements. It is appropriate to say that state approves of the system, but we will not be submitting anything to the company in writing. Also, the industrial storm water permit covers activities and materials that may come in contact with storm water. This includes the washing of vehicles and treating of the wastewater. However, the permit will not be specific to the system. This is the reason I told Mr. Wagner to be specific about maintenance on the treatment system in the annual report. I hope this satisfies the cities questions and requirements. Please let me know if there is anything else that can be done. Thanks, Ellse M. Doucette Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Regional Environmental Management Waste Management and Wastewater Unit (651)290-7290 ■Original Message* From: Melanie Curtis [mailto.mcurtisOci.orono.mn.us] Sent Friday, January 09,2004 9:11 AM To: Elise.OoucetteOstate.mn.us Subject: Stevan Wagner Elise- In my report to Orono's Planning Commission is it safe to say that Mr Wagner's proposal received approval by the PCA permitting process? Are there any special conditions placed upon the project or property? Melanie Melanie Curtis City Planner 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, Minnesota 55356 p: 952 249.4627 f. 952-249-4616 ? IIN L.\Jl HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA SHORELINE DRIVE COUNTY ROAD NO. S B9»56'30" E 4J 250.00 ....... Y'ilM. coNCfwrrr siJ)ewai .k %\!\i **wV5EtflAO< LWe''» v^-....... •-10W. ^ ' ' ' \ 3 250.0 POMK i>aic «cnr. \ •. / *•• vwMU«\ / I lA ■'•--------------- base » I _____If.*___Js,-----------------—------------------________350.0-----------------.—r-f--;-'---------tr ^ __ ^ f ✓ ■ \ . SSSS^ \ TO «MM GRAVEL SURFACE \ \ k to K MHQWO< PROroSEO , IM 4 f 4 - ^EXISTNG; f 4 »> U>Y y./ / i a BUILDING; aoM . •SjD BLACKTOP SURFACE y I ^ feflNBKIt•\§E mf ;EXis'nNG POX 5»<>'_ JTilG ^^ULDNG efi^y fS7ttttt a ' BUILDING; noM j 1 JUUX. DECK —# «B. • /COHC. ' / . •» 8 j —..044- j^^iii.iatiif--,,.,y .L.,' . y-'* ■. - • V.-' .’• ?’Y- V ■' : ■ •: •• ' X sMi. m "■: -V SOTA y* V \ I. m*.»»m*»^»*^*^***** '■'l •*ff***»**#»»****W*««»»***»«****** • ••♦•••• ••••^ (••••••«««**««^*ifi'***^*************< --lOOO'VSEWACK Lic'\2500 !•••»••*«•••** Irac ;tm6 ..-C«r. !<UMU • •MC I V^“----------- ■* -*. WEL SURFACE gLtOKMMMO \ ' ' V \A '' '' \> W\ '> 3M OMI ®a4) EXISTING BULGING FVOOR I .............................................../ BLACKTOP SURFACE -----------1 ^ *4 rUMM i?£U ;existing EXISTMG 5UL0M6 --------952"' 'r'- , •'SWU ' BULDMG FUKM ^iSSwJ CONC. «MU. U (WINuc 1-30' LEGAL DESCRIPTION CF PREMISES If*Lor7.^B?i2k 7!®To2Lite oflangdiS^pi^k! j ■ * fc 4:- an fci'. -J > \ LOMIR LEVEL PLAN F" A-x Minmetonka Rental Inc 3607 Shoreline Dr. Wayzata. Ma 55391 952-471-9700 :<: I [BHD WB RENT ANTTHING ^ ALMOST S<s- 1L tO P^s*'r TOf I'T^ f*Ai A#31- 1 ^4 i*e4S • ISui^Ar /'T / *>- 37 34,»1 3o u a 5 ?e«. /STJ Q r 1 ll I r T 18* 4' 14- 3' 8* ^7. •'- V‘- w$ • ^ . - ‘ i • ■ !**• *y , jum |w ^on V. V • ' ’ !< ■ ** V «. 'ir-..w.s^4?^ • / -sii^y} MINNETONKA Itli RENTAL .i ;■■ v^v'.r., ...-,•.............j.;-, God Bless America ® r •«- V.* / K^%iV. -'i* if v*.•I'. "Sv- •/Rmi h> i , r* > 11:1 :/'I-■•>■*■•>?/'•••'•. '•;.. •• . • ‘ •. r.*» "*•* ^ :V. •. ‘ V* •/ •. Truck Rental • Mw ••• • *•. •■ •f. * • I• ^ "GRAND!LP'1 REX'I'Al STATION # I;;--;’ :■ '•V';>^:T^%<i i'V • ^JT' ‘••V » • - .*• PJSDPtJS^ r w Y^T' TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE = 10' TOTAL HEIGHT ' ?1 Zl I r A i • rf ! ii I lO ii 0 ' o » r4fc/54'.V < * ■J jHimrirSV-’A-::---——*li :. /'fiW 4.* /■ •^-. • --i* C Bucigei Truck Roniei ' V, Ti 1^ i.l6}KJ ■’ ,i 5-* -fi r r r /!♦ , 1 -{l», . , - M.* 4<U< »^».t.»i .'• IMJ Ul< . 2^ —V ., » • • ■'v.-vT.^;:: ■ *s2fe •5-vl •“ \ t • urn - c"- V'v • v ‘.:j ;V-^:*(i..V \ V -^O j 7; J’-Vr • >•<*. "t'iiBteis..# "Ti'!?;^-' '5=*. k-.»*'*; f -LlJew:; T-i «V ' gr>.>ivSB^ ' ' "V. ■,-r''-^'- •■•*:) i!<- tecisr?Aife? ««kjM ll A. 5- -l^'V5I. h - k.‘d* j Budget I La J< ie.»a».\!r.-i»: • Rfvi)£0 U a IIDCOVEU ca SETBACK ZONE! (CIRCLE ONE) 0.73’ EXISTING HARnCOVEn IN ZONE A. ___________ •'* CXISTIH6 I3uiu Oi/h«5 ____________ / I /yilHNETONfeA KEHT/I- ^^^IOi?’\%l!bcSHEET ______ 250-S00' ^^OO-lOOOp •/ "T^HSiTC LAH6ACf4 75-250* Wi&h X X X 12. S* « m B. CL'Sgt wRTtfF ajT iUU Of UXT 01^ D. Sidewalk E. Petio/Deck vPSifrt^U X X X X X X ■I m AMUSES dW ■nrarf- PM«r aRw®- AT «A ettti s Jtf? 0. Other TOTAL H>,TDCO\cR IN ZONE TOTAL ?/.2?ERTV AREA .•%' ZONE A » B xi:o - PROPOSED HARDCOVEP. IN ZONE ' A Houje _____________ Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Undertaia By Plaaiic Of Fabric 0. Ocher X X X X X X X X X X 7CTAL HA.’CCOVER IN ZONE 15^010 * II- TOTAL ?a 3?ERTY AREA IN EON'S A ♦ B ■_________ xlCO Z^Z n7 76(77 Z7l4- A4- 177- ^\^o \S3 72.7S 4. 46? HjK -562 7?.7I SF. M02t)4I A - c a___SF.-64ST0lO^^ SF. -SAvau-^ gv;iLO'<<^dr S F.-C0Md.Si6H SF-0«-AO4 toP S f‘-.C^KCR£T£ 0lAZK7®P/(CtfO’. S.F- StPeiW>*U^ SF. S F.-06tl6f STE|35 S.F. S.F.-AOOiDohAL CONCRETE 5.r “ vvAU-S S.F. A S.F. B 7i S.F. |F. ADOfXiOtl ftAlrf S.f!-ado 1710 NdlV. <VH«tTE S.F. NET «4tH • #• S F.-6SAVEL RO«vee S.Fv S.F. SF. S.F. >.F. S.F. SJ. S.F. i£_2fl2__ S.F. A 4fl 1^ sf. b RUNIMTE:VIMaU U I7II7U3400I2 ITAOOII 2319 DLAINEAVE NERNAME RIIANMIIAKOINO ^AYER ROBERT HHARINNO M&AOOR 2394 BLAME AVE WAYZATAMN 33391 31 1711723340046 ITAOOR 3613 LYRIC AVE NERNAME aiARlOmiCJACKLEY VAYER CHARLOrrECJACKLEY NEMOOR 3613 LYRIC AVE WAYZATAMN 33391 31 201172)210029 WmOOR 3607 SIK>R£UNE0R NERNAME STEVANJ*DEBRAJ WAGNER a>AYER STEVAN JR DEBRA J WAGNER I4E/A00K 3440MORNINGVIEWCT MOUND MN 33364 b S HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 1711723340044 rROPADOK 3633 LYRIC AVE OWNERNAME DEAN W A MURIEL LATHN TAXPAYER DEAN W A MURIEL LATTM NAME/ADDR 3633 LYRIC AVE WAYZATAMN 33391 31 171172)340043 PROPAOOR 3625 LVRR;AVE OWNERNAME KATHLEENLFINE TAXPAYER KATHLEEN LFME NAME/ADDR 3625 LYRC AVE WAYZATAMN 33391 31 1711723340047 PROP AIN3H 38 AMNUiSS UNASSIQNyi) OWNERNAME RANHARDINO TAXPAYER ROBERT H HARDMO NAME/ADDR 2394 BLAME AVE WAYZATAMN SS39I 38 2011723210028 PMOPADUH 3603 SIIORIiLINE UK OWNERNAME NW BELL TELEPHONE CO TAXPAYER QWEST CORPORATION NAME/ADDR ATIN PROPERTY TAX 1801 CALIFORNIA ST 02300 DENVER CO 80202 38 201172321003) PROPADOK 3701 SHOHEUNEDH OWNERNAME CASCO RUN LTDP1HRSHP TAXPAYER CASCO RUN LTD PTNRSIIP NAME/ADDR PO BOX 163 CRYSTAL BAY MN 33323 I CERTIFY THATTHB FACR REPRESENTED ARB AN ACCURATE AND TRUE KliPKESI Nl AIION OP INFORMATION AS TT AII'EAKSTT NS DAT E ON TT Ui RECORDS OPTIIE HENNEPIN COUNTY T/LXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT. TO THE BEST OP MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEUEP. DATE OY kLi PAGE:I • • ••(A o c6 o .< I bitg Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections 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 referred to the planning conunission for review. (Code 1984, § 10.40(2)) Sec. 78-646. Area, height, lot width, setback requirements and design requirements. (a) Area. In any B-1 district, the minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet (b) Lot width. The minimum lot width shall be 100 feet. (c) Front yards. The minimum front yard shall be 20 feeL (d) Rear yards. The minimtim rear yard shall be 30 feet, a side yard adjacent to any R district shall be IS feet, and a side yard adjacent to a street shall be ten feet. (e) Setback requirements. No building shall be nearer than 35 feet to any front lot line, 35 feet from any rear lot line, 15 feet from any side lot line, or 35 feet to a side lot line adjacent to a street; except abutting or across the street from an R district, no building shall be less than 35 feet from such lot line. (f) Fencing. Wherever a B-1 retail sales business district abuts an R district, along the side or rear lot line, a fence or compact evergreen hedge no less than 50 percent opaque nor less than six feet in height shall be erected along the abutting lines except within the required front yard. (g) Building design and construction. In addition to other restrictions of this chapter, the use, construction, alteration or enlargements to any building or structure within the district shall meet the following standards: (1) All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be: a. Face brick; b. Naniral stone; c. Specially designed precast concrete units if the surfaces have been integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture; d. Factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction, if the panel materials are of any of those noted in subsections (gXI)^' -c of this section; or e. Other materials as may be approved by the council. Combinations of such materials shall be permitted. (2) All subsequent additions and outbuildings constructed after the erection of an original building or buildings shall be constructed of materials comparable to those used in the original construction and shall be designed in a manner conforming with the original architectural design and general appearance. (3) No building or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the property except as accessory to and during the constmetion of permanent buildings. (h) Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that ‘ results in water rtmoff causing floods, CTOsion or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the council, and those plans shall be reviewed by the city engineer before submission to the planning commission and council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural watercourse, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff, whether onto adjacent propeny or otherwise, must be in compliance with the surface water management plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or provisions of this Code and subject to the approval of other agencies hav'ng jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. (i) Height. No str wture or building shall exceed 2 1/2 stories or 30 feet in height except as provided in section 78*1366. (Code 1984, § 10.40(6)) Sec 78*1468. Signs in B and I districts. Within the B and I districts, nameplate signs and business signs are permitted subject to the following regulations: (1) B-1. B-2 and B-4: size. Within the B*l, B*2 and B*4 districts, the 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 foot of lot not occupied by a birlding. No individual sign shall exceed 50 square feet (4) B-1, B-2 and B-4: height. Within the B*1 , B*2 and B-4 districts, no sign shall extend in height more than two feet above the highest outside wall or parapet of any principal building, nor shall any sign be located closer than ten feet from any propenv* line; except that any sign over ten square feet may project two feet into any required vard area from the principal building. Sec. 78*1516. Required off-street parking. Where the principal use of the structure served is as listed, the minimum parking facilities (open or enclosed) shall be as shown. (17) Furniture store, ^pliance store, warehouse under 15,000 square feet of floor area, auto sales, grainhouses, kennels and studios, at least one for each 500 square feet in excess of the first 500 square feet of floor area in the principal structure. Sec. 78-1573. Glare or heat Any use requiring an operation producing an intense beat or light transmission «baV be performed with the necessary shielding to prevent such heat or light from being detectable at the lot line of the site on t^ch the use is located. Lighting in all instances shall be diffused or directed away from R districts and public streets. (Code 1984, § 10.60(8)) Sec. 78-1575. Screening. (a) Screening shall be required in rerldential zones where : (1) Any off-street parking area which contains more than four parking spaces and is within 30 feet of an adjoining residential lot line; and IN i N' I % .'•i' 8!,. (2) Where the driveway to a paridng area of more than six parking spaces is within 15 feet of an adjoining residential lot line. (b) The screening required in this section shall consist of a solid fence or wall at lffl5t SO percent open, not less than four feet nor more than five feet in height, but shall not extend within IS feet of any street or driveway opening onto a street The screening chaii be placed along the property lines or in case of screening along a street, 1S feet from die street right-ofiway with landscaping (trees, shrubs, grass and other planting) between the screening and the pavemenL A louve^ fence shall be considered solid if it blocks direct vision. Planting of a type proved by the planning commission may also be required in addition to or in lieu of fencing. (Code 1984, § 10.60(10), (11)) 1 .1^1* rm-A'I#:--.mA' A, r -^' .^'•’ V**t/ * ^ j.„* '» . «• . - » • • • *. -^ *' > C/ ’' • /• i:. '■•*•:** v-':-;t r-— r t ■ ■>' Ftov-:.... n ’ I Lfu.’i;', lA>(''« '>Ai} iV .V. .• ,. / ■ ■> V .'I ■. . JftVJT'Wi: I Hi . • . f %•.. ■ ■ m,'4» K*' • r • 'v ,>• ^'. • •>;./• V.- v>.; .'• % ' ' • '•■^.; ' •’.'... .‘Y '■ ('•' ‘V,., .; < ■ -A'. , ' ;». V ' ■• ^ • ' w ■' * .'■> '* ^ V . * * » I 9W V ' ' • * \ •. /. • ■k i* , - ' ..'h\'. • , V, /••■ "»■., •-.vr /• “T'ry\ {crrui^ •.Lu 1..^- .^'lirr^ •; y . i •'^'T »*> V usssr.^a/Sw H-'2- 1 K • /• j ^ ^ w ,i *-«4.4K T. •■ .V, *L • ,'• • .. •' -r' >' X V; J»V. * •. ’j iV-S jm * •. .*^.# •;•-1 I • . • • • • • ^ V'- —-9'“ “ -■-• ’■* ^ ~ - '.5 ft y ‘jn^-'^y^-'P. /it— -• ,‘^J* a'^ r _ ^ ' • - V •',> ' ■> ^ •. ■ . ■ .-V c .' •• . . !■•', *-t •.' c* » *4^ 4‘’ ' w.-' ]\''i> *4 S i ) ::^Jm c'’- V X' ^'■•'^t.-r* ,'->^ ;■: '. -t-,. ' • 1l • 1 *'• :r'/ >5i2i- »:»•••-' . - ^' . V • < i^r PA^2.J^;<J4 ur Jiik H H File 03-2923 3607 & 3609 Shoreline Dr Commercial Site Review exhibit I • •EXHIBITB f A-1 MINNETONKA RENTAL DRAINAGE SL’MMARY October 31,2003 BEFORE CONDITIONS Drainage Area ■l.IS acres Time of Cone. ■10 minutes Runoff“CN” Qi « 2 c6 Qio • 4 c6 89 Qioo ■ 7 efis • AFTER CONDITIONS Drainage Area ■*1.15 acres Time of Cone. ■10 minutes Runoflf“CN” Qi * 2 c& Qio ■ 4 eft Qioo • 7 c6 89 GRONBERO & ASSCX:iATE5. INC. 44S N. UmOW OIL VWG LAKE. MN S535A iMMIft. Quick TR-SS Ver.5.47 S/N: Executed: 08:35:52 10-31-2003 A-1 MINNETONKA RENTAL Before conditions RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER DATA :::::::::::::: Conqposite Area:i 1 AREA CNSURFACE DESCRIPTION (acres) Existing Buildings 0.101 98Existing Blacktop/Concrete 0.2^6 98Gravel, C Soils 0.493 89Grass, c Soils 0.312 79 COMPOSITE AREA --->1.152 89.0 ( 89 ) ■ •••••••••••• ••••••• ••••••I i Quick TR-5S Version: 5.47 S/N:Page 1 Retuxn Frequency: 100 years TR-55 TABULAR KYDROGRAPK METHOD Type XI. Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storm) Executed: 10-31>2003 08:44:41 Watershed file: --> MRA .MOP Hydrograph file: --> MRAIOO.HYD A-1 MINNETONKA RENTAL After Conditions »» Input Parameters used to Compute Hydrograph <<<< Subarea Description AREA CN (acres) TC (hJT») * Tt (hrs) Precip. (in) Runoff (in) la/p input/used 1.15 89.0 0.20 0.00 5.95 1 4.69 1.04 .10 * Travel time from subarea outfall to compobite watershed outfall point. 1 -- Subarea where user specified interpolation between la/p tables. Total area > 1.15 acres or 0.00160 sq.mi Peak discharge » 7 cfs >>>>computer Modifications of input Parameters «<<< Subcurea Description Input values Rounded Values la/p Tc * Tt Tc • Tt Interpolated (hr)(hr)(hr)(hr)(Yes/No) 0.17 0.00 0.20 0.00 No la/p Messages Computed Xa/p < .1 •Travel time from subarea outfall to composite watershed outfall point. Quick TR-55 Version: 5.47 8/N:Page 1 Return Frequency: lo years TR-55 TABULAR KYDROORAPH METHOD Type IX. Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storm) Executed: 10-31-2003 08:44:41 Watershed file: —> MRA .MOP Hydrograph file: --> MRAIO.HYD A-1 MINNETONKA RENTAL After Conditions >>>> Input Parameters Used to Confute Hydrograph «<< S\ibarea Description AREA CN (acres) TC (hrs) * Tt (hrs) Precip. (in) Runoff (in) la/p input/used 1.15 89.0 0.20 0.00 4.15 11 2.96 1.06 .10 I * Travel time from subarea outfall to composite watershed outfall point. I -- Sxabarea where user specified interpolation between la/p tables. Total area ■ 1.15 acres or 0.00180 sq.mi Peak discharge 4 cfs >»> Con^uter Modifications of Input Parameters ««< Input Values Rounded Values Subarea TC * Tt Tc * Tt Description (hr)(hr)(hr)(hr) 0.17 0.00 0.20 0.00 la/p Interpolated (Yes/No) la/p Messages 4 ^ No Cooputed la/p < .1 * Travel time from subarea outfall to conposite watershed outfall point. Ml ^ick TR-5S Veriion: 5.47 S/M:Page 1 Return Frequency; 1 years I TR-S5 TABULAR RYDROORAPK METHOD Type IX. Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storm) Executed: 10-31-2003 08:44:41 Watershed file: —> MSA .MOP Hydrograph file: --> MRAl.HYD A-l MIMMETONKA RENTAL After Conditions »» Input Parameters Used to Con^mte Hydrograph <«< Subarea Description AREA CM (acres) TC (hrs) * Tt (hrs) Precip. (in) Runoff la/p (in) input/used 1.15 89.0 0.20 0.00 2.35 1 I 1.32 I.11 .11 I T!‘"SbarerwhSre Sser specified interpolation between la/p tables Total area ■ 1.15 acres or 0.00180 sq.mi FeaUc discharge ■ 2 cfs »» Computer Modifications of Input Parameters <«« Subarea Input Tc Values Rounded Values la/p * Tt Tc * Tt Interpolated (hr)(hr)(hr)(hr)(Yes/No) 0.17 0.00 0.20 0.00 Yes I a/p Messages • Travei'time'fr^'subarea outfall to con5>osite watershed outfall point I % i J ]uick TR-55 Version: S.47 S/l>.Page 1 Return frequency: 100 years TR-55 TABULAR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type II. Distribution (24 hr. Duration Storm) Executed: 10-31-2003 08:40:12 Watershed file: --> MRB .MOP Hydrograph file: --> mrbioo.HYD A-l MINNETONKA RENTAL Before Conditions Input Parameters Used to Conqpute Kydrograph <<<< Subarea sscription AREA CN (acres) Tc (hrs) * »pt (hra) Precip. (in) Runoff (in) la/p input/used 1.15 89.0 0.20 0.00 5.95 4.69 1.04 .10 Travel time from subarea outfall to con^oslte watershed outfall point. -- Subarea where user specified interpolation between la/p tables. Total area > 1.15 acres or 0.00180 sq.ml Peak discharge « 7 cfs >>>> Computer Modifications of Input Parameters <<<<< Subarea sscription Input Values Tc * Tt (hr) (hr) Rounded Tc (hr) Values * Tt (hr) la/p Interpolated (Yes/No) la/p Messages 0.17 0.00 0.20 0.00 No Computed la/p < .1 Travel time from subaurea outfall to cooposite watershed outfall point. Quick TR-5S Version: 5.47 S/N; 3^ .. Return Frequency: 10 years TR-SS TABULAR HYDROGRAPH METHOD Type 11. Distribution (24 kr. Duration Storm) Executed: 10-31-2003 08:36:19 Watershed file: --> mrb .mop Hydrograph file: --> MRBIO.HYD A-l MINNHTONKA RENTAL Before Conditions >»> Input Parauneters Used to Conpute Hydrograph <<<< Subarea Description AREA CN (acres) Tc (hrs) * Tt (hrs) Precip. (in) Runoff (in) la/p input/used 1.15 89.0 0.23 0.00 4.15 1 [ 2.96 1.06 .10 * Travel time from subarea outfall to composite watershed outfall point 1 — Subarea where user specified interpolation between la/p tables. Total area a l.is acres or 0.00180 sq.mi Peak discharge « 4 cfs Computer Modifications of input Parameters Subarea Description Input Values Tc * Tt (hr) (hr) Rounded Values la/p Tc * Tt Interpolated (hr) (hr) (Yes/No)la/p Messages 0.00 0.20 0.00 No Corputed la/p < .1 * Travel time from subarea outfall to composite watershed outfall point. 1 1 I: i I id Quick TR>55 Version: 5.47 S/N:Page 1 Return Frequency: l years TR-S5 TABULAR HYDR06RAPH METHOD Type II. Distribution (24 hr. Duration storm) Executed: 10-31-2003 08:36:19 Watershed file: --> MRB .MOP Hydrograph file: --> MRBl.HYD A-l MINNETONKA RENTAL Before Conditions »» Input Parameters Used to Cooqpute K>*drograph <<« Subarea Description AREA CN (acres) Tc (hrs) * Tt (hrs) Precip. (in) Rur-of f (in) la/p input/used 1.15 89.0 0.20 0.00 2.35 1 1 1.32 I.11 .11 * Travel time from stibarea outfall to composite watershed outfall point. 1 .. Subarea where user specified interpolation between la/p tables. Total area - I.IS acres or O.OOIS-: sq.mi Peak discharge - 2 cfs ’ X Computer Modifications of Input Parameters <«« Subarea Description Input Values Tc * Tt (hr) (hr) Rounded Values Tc * Tt (hr) (hr) la/p Interoolated (Yes/No) la/p Messages 0.17 0.00 0.20 0.00 Yes -- * Travel time from subaurea outfall to composite watershed outfall point. i Quick TR-SS Ver.5.47 S/N; Executed: 08:35:41 10-31-2003 A-1 MINNETONKA RENTAL After Conditions Tc or Tt DATA Subarea: DESCRIPTION LENGTH (feet) 300 • •••• •••• • ••••••••• ••••••••••••• • • • •• • • • • VELOCITY TIME (ft/sec)minutes hours 0.50 10.0 «0.17 minutes hours j Tc- ->10.0 -0.17 • ••••••••••••••••••••••••• -r» ■ *^ "* *-- • 1 Quick TR-55 ver.5.47 S/N: Executed: 08:34:18 10-31*2003 A-1 MIMMBTOMKA RENTAL Before Conditions TC or Tt DATA Subarea: DESCRIPTION LENGTH (feet) VELOCITY (ft/sec) TIME minutes hours 300 0.50 10.0 » 0.17 TOTAL Tc-> minutes 10.0 hours - 0.17 • •••••••••••••••• •••••••#•••• J I rel EXUiUll 07 Size Disc TWe Yr 2001 xl2 BOBCAT TRAILER #3 T10006332 85 CTK7425 7x14 BOBCAT TRAILER #4 G 0440K032 80 CTS6402 5x10 BOBCAT TRAILER 553 7x12 EXCAVTOR TRAILER 6x16 CAR TRAILER #3 G2180CS56 91 CTC1741 TOW DOLLY DETH 94 30 094 G12138 TOW DOLLY TOW DOLLY FISHHOUSE TRAILER HM 87 3000 87 C3S126 FISHHOUSE TANDEM TR G12137 BIKE ALUMA 6x10 1YGUS12161B0016191 H65322 8x10 DITCH WITCH TILT HD G0480F178 87 CTW7902 3x4 KWIK TRENCH ■ 3x4 KWIK TRENCH 14SFS0817K1140266 95 B52867 3x4 TILLER 0 HP TRL 2003 4x10 LADDER TRAILER 2001 J11953 3x4 EQUIPMENT TRAILER K21906019 86 E78166 3x4 EQUIPMENT TRAILER K21906017 86 A16042 4x5 EQUIPMENT TRAILER G0480F190 94 G65951 4x5 EQUIPMENT TRAILER G0480F191 94 E78168 4x5 EQUIPMENT TRAILER G0480F192 94 E78167 CABLE PONTOON TRAILER G2150E207 92 H32604 NARROW PONTOON TRITON 4TCSP1228WHN22008 98 h58498 NARROW PONTOON TRITON 4TCSP22401HN245931 H65323 4x8 • MOWER TRAILER OLD CAT VI3904280 84 J11948 8x8 SNOMO TRAILER H33901574 79 G49809 4x4 REESE BACKPACK 4Z5KC0816VG000703 97 G49-811 4x4 • REESE BACKPACK 4Z6KC0818VG000704 97 G49-810 4x8 FLOE SQL SNOMO E78-210 4x8 • FLOE SGL SNOMO ■4L*^T30815TH000880 96 6x10 FLOE DBL RAMP GC480K247 93 C51704 8x10 • FLOE DBL RAMP 8x18 FLOE QUAD RAMP GC480K248 94 C93874 8x20 FLOW QUAD RAMP GCS60M363 00 C93853 4x8 UTILITY TRAILER AB-58-1500 58 G12-136 5x10 UTILITY TRAILER AB-63-1500 63 012-137 5x10 BOX TRAILER REDDY HAUL G21S0E208 93 H32608 5x10 ‘BOX TRAILER REDDY HAUL 478U101T1X1015380 69 H32607 5x10 BOX TRAILER REDDY HAUL 47SU1O1T3X1O15301 99 H32606 6x10 COVERED FLEATHERLITE V 6x12 COVERED FLEATHERLITE V • . 5x8 VERT LIFT TRAILER 2003 5x8 COVERED KEIFER G1410BS05 90 W81818 5x8 COVERED FEATHERLITE 4FGL0081XYD029966 00 C93840 5x10 COVERED KEIFER G1020G294 93 Z71194 5x10 COVERED FLEATHERLITE 4FGL010XYD035977 00 H13198 12 TRITON JS SINGLE 15 TRITON JS DOUBLE 12 TRITON JS DOUBLE 17 EZ LOADER TRAILER BOAT 10 V TRAILER 22 V TRAILER BRAKE 25 V TRAILER TANDEM 28 V TAMDOM TRAILER ssssa YRPUR TRUCKS DISC 1967 INT PANEL 1907 FORD 15'RAMP #1 1992 FORD 15'RAMP #2 2000 CHEV LO RIDE PROJECT 2000 ISUZU 15' 2000 FORD F2S0 2001 CHEVY VAN 3500 10' 2001 CMC VANDURA ASTRO 8' RYDER//BUDGET LOCAL TRUCKS x3 ONEWAY X 3 AUTO TRAILERS x2 TOW DOLLY x 2 OUTDOOR EQUIPMENT GENIE LIFT GENIE LIFT 13' CANOE CRES*'" NER LADDER RACK LADDER RACK STEEL RACK 4TCSM111XYHX84430 00 4TCSM1121UH072310 97 97 1ZE1REV11NE029314 92 G1380B395 G1380B394 X29902019 90 90 96 82 TITLE# Y G1 4402099 EAR 67 M29308556 D16740171 J11914 E78285 A79168 CTA8304 CBT5941 CGT8558 CTD1370 GO40OF175 88 C0040N072 76 CYM194 C0030N785 97 YAF8352 C0750M416 2001 C1360N269 2001 YAL0971 368 MKA 91 5806GA X27 7 AL (j ^ cJo<; /o UiJi'rs 5b CEMENT MIXER E aZ CEMENT MIXER 6ASx2 DOCK BARRELS x6 PARKING LOT SWEEP ENGINE HOIST x2 BOBCAT X 2 753 BOBCAT X 2 553 DINGO SKID BOBCAT BUCKETS x 4 BOBCAT AUGER HEADS X 2 BOBCAT AUGERS X 4 TRACTOR ALMAND EXCAVATOR TRACTOR RIDING LAWN x 2 POWER POST AUGER TR x 2 BLOCK SAW w/ TRL CHIPPER x3 LOG SPLITTER X 3 AERATOR TOWABLE TRENCHER x 2 WHEELBARROWS X4 GRILLS 3" X 5 GRILLS 5" X 2 SIGNS 3X6 X 4 DUNK TANK CHAIR WASHER X:i •t \ ! i > I i ! I ; i il \ 1 I AVEL SURFAC iVlK %m-EXISTING I s ¥«r BLACKTOP SURFACE BULOINGJM" . SAi riL;, 11 ^CJkt<*^s i”7 ' am m.7 5-0 sassr BULDINGja <C/K-C 5. /O ; legal description of premises The West 250.00 feet of the Eost 350.00 feet of Lot 7, Block 7, Towns!te of Longdon Pork.V o (9083) 910- denotes iron marker denotes existing spot elevation, mop seo level dottm denotes existing contour line, mean'sea tevel datim Bearings shown ore bosed upon an ossijrted dattin. ! f goMC. mmTt 0um S 89*56* 30" E koO.OO R *352^CONCRETE SOeWALK -95« !\M"' i \-----250.0* • •• *«•••••••♦• 7 EXISTING BUILDING a«, MMIJ) BLACKTOP SURFACE JHM0 M IJTtuMnh "I ft 0uit ^i C>€. isa.) ; EXISTING : BUILDING 'j£@k^¥»j) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES : The West 250.00 feet of the Eost 350.00 feet of Lot 7, Block 7, Towns!te of Longdon Pork. / o : denotes iron morker L SIGN BASE.. EXISTING BULGING -------S52- -V’.. CONCfi uTaiS^ I ■ f I H ’ I ■ i f- • !! ! ; xMcixix- c uiA Aiuui wdici utiliis am* iumps. EXmBITBV- Absorbs up to 1.8 ^.’ -'/ins of petroleum based liquids Repels water, absorbs only oils Available in 2 sizes I 'A. \y R'.- - - -■«- ; :v '■V- . **' . ‘ vT>' uc'tf r , Vr’ >> Tie a rope to one of these Sump Skimmers and lower it into your sump, pit, tank or bilge. Eliminates a breeding area for bacteria and helps prevent odor. 3"-diameter Sump Skimmer is great for small sumps and bilges. 8*'- diameter is perfect for large tanks and pits. SKM403 iJcjEl404 ;5^PIG* Sump Skimmer 1-2 3-9 104 SKM404 • 2S ncMwx Atsorbs up to 9.4 oaliboft Ul Oii 3*x18*l«9l)S $91 $87 $83 SKM403 • 12 ncMmi AtHOftos up to 21 6 gal A)o« £xl Da 8- X 18\ • 23 lbs. $98 $93 $89 Phone to order 1-800-HO'PHOGS*(468-4647) ?|UT >-rr i I I I I I r I TJTJiJ MINI' l i i i i ^^C'T^v A. ^rocv,. i • • • I I I* * • • i * • • 4-r ' '1-^ -• ; U-O 'T'f to^T 4cjf •. 0\L/dT/Vi I fi •3 ® 1 «" 1 5*3*0 “ ------------------ (Oi L. /<1^/1 S' T/2/ P U^t\evJ Sd£ca/4 r P. Itr. c f. u 5> H tT ^ P.X.6-. , S 74, <jP^Lt^OK> - 60U-C cn 'i i‘m -n+ • S u sC ^ MU1-A4 /?F»t»»tr [ '/ nAtti Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik& |\|| Associates Engineers & Architects in Affirmaitvc Actlon/E^ual Opportunity impioytt■onticroo. Potont. AnOorlik onp Aiioclotoi. Ir. ontf Empioyoo Owrnod Princtpoli: Olio O. Bontitroo. P.E • Morvin L Sorvoio. PM. • Citnn • Cook. PC. • Pooort G. SchunicN. P.1 • Jtrry A. Bourdon. PC. • Mark A. Hanion. PC. Sonler Coniultonli: RoOcrt W. Roicnc. PC • Joioph C Anderiiii. PC. • Rxfiofd C Turner. PC. • SusonM Cbcrie). CPA. Aiiociott Principoli: Krilh A Cordon. PC • Rooerc R Pitffwrtt. PI • Richord W Potter. PC. • 0«vid O Lotkotn. PC • Michofi T Rautmjnn. PE. • Ted K Field. PC • KennetA P. Anderson. PC • More R. Roifs. PE. • Oovid A Bonestroo. MJ A. • Sidr^ty P WiMijmion. PC. L S • Agnes M. Ring. MBA* Alien Rick ithmtm. PC • Thomas W. Petertoa PC • James R Maiand. PC • Miles B Jertsen. PC • L Phiiiip Gravel HI. PE • Daniel J Edgerton. PC • itmaei Martesei. PE. • Thomas A Sy^ko. PC • Sheldon j Johnson • Oa<e A. Grove PC • Thomas A Roushar. PC • RoOert J Oevery. PC November 10,2003 Offices: St Paul. St. Cloud. Rochester and Wiiimar. MN • M>twaukee. Wi • Chtcago. H. MMbsite: WWW bonestroo com EXHIBIT C Ms. Melanie Foth Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN SS323 Re: 3607/3609 Shoreline Drive File No. 139^3-000 Plat No. 03-2923 Dear Melanie: We completed a site inspection plan review of the property located at 3607 and 3609 Shoreline Drive. The proposed improvements include a building addition and some minor grading. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • The current and proposed use of the site is for a rental center. Our site visit indicated that most of the rental trucks and trailers are stored outside on a gravel surface parking lot. There was no evidence of curb and gutter or any type of storm sewer system. The site lies immediately noith of an existing wetland. We strongly reconunend that the plans incorporate some type of storm water treatment system to treat the site runoff prior to discharging to the wetland complex. This might include storm sewer, a treatment pond, vegetated buffer strips, paved parking areas with curb and gutter, or a combination of the concepts mentioned. • The plans should be submitted to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for review and approval • The draiiuge calculations indicate that the proposed storm water discharges will not increase from the existing discharges. The calculations do not include the “future 12-foot wide bituminous drive ” shown on the landscape plan. We recommend that the storm water calculations reflect proposed and future site improvements so storm water treatment systems can be sized accordingly. • The draiiuige calculations should include existing and proposed drainage area maps for the total drainage area to the site. • The flammable waste tr^ design should be submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for review and comment The site may require an industrial permit from die MPCA. • Final plans should include temporary and permanent erosion control plans. If you have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4863. Yours very truly. BONESTROO. ROSENE, ANDERLK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Oreg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 ■ St. Paul, MN S5II3 • 6SI-636-460O • Fax: 65l*636-t3lt EXHIBIT D CONSENT Pennit Application No.: 03-591 Applicant: Stcvan Wagner Project: Commercial building addition Location: 3607 Shoreline Drive. Orono Rule: Received: 11/12/03 Complete: 12/10/03 Notification: 12/12/03 Recommendation: Approval. Permit should not be issued until the following conditions are met: 1. Reimbursement of mailing costs 2. Reimbursement ofRuleJ Fees 3. Submittal of a Declaration for maintenance of the skinuning structure which must be executed and recorded. Background: The applicant is proposing building addition at the location cited above in the City of Orono. The site is approximately 1.1S acres in size. The increase in impervious surface will be 1,570 square feet. A pennit would allow for the creation of new impervious sur&ce. EulgJ; Erosion con',rol consisting of silt fence and a gravel construction entrance has been proposed for the site. Rule N: The proposed project requires Best Management Practices (BMP) and rate control to fulfill the stormwater management requirements of Rule N. Stormwater rtmoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed project. The applicant has proposed to convert a three-foot wide area along the West proper^ boundi^ from gravel to MN wild grasses and install a rock drain with a skimming stucture for their equipment wash site as BMP's. Attachment!: 1. Pennit application 2. Site plaii/survey (2) y___Site location map Renae Clark Date December 19,2003 Steven Wegner 3607 Shoreline Drive Weyiete,MN 5S391 RE: MCWD Permit Applicetion No. 03-S91.3607 Shoreline Drive Deer Applicent: The Minnehehe Credc Wetershed District Boerd of Menegen reviewed the ebove mentioned permit epplicetion et their Boerd meeting on December 18,2003. It wts the eciion of the Boerd to epprove this epplicetion with the following conditions: • Reimbursement of meiling costs in the emount of $39.60 • Peyment of Rule J fees in the emount of S227.8S • Submit e Decleretion for meintenence of the skimming structure which must be executed end recorded Due to the size end complexity of certein projects, the Boerd, by Rule J, requires thst site inspections be conducted. In these ceses, the spplicent it requM to pey to the District, s fee equel to the ectuel costs of snelysis of the project, field inspection, engineering services, legel services, end eny subsequent monitoring of the work. These costs ere referred to es Rule J fees. Once the ebove mentioned fees heve been peid end the other conditions have been met staff will issue the permit. You ere reminded that work on the project cannot begin until the permit has been issued. This permit expires one year from the date of this letter. If final municipal approval of the project results in changes to the project you must submit revised plans to the MCWD for review. Please call me at 932-471-0390 with any questions. Sincerely, Renee Clerk District Technician c:CityofOrono Rachel Igel, Attorney at Lew , I u ' •• •• MM A WWW Mlnoetonl^^ meeting proposed penritt^^e -4^ul^ to uke ectioD of ttoY^owiM - Wnotice to til property ^thm 60(^|to. ‘ _______ Atiw nii#>^iofis or concenis.V'.i:v * •.vr« ^KlUirc uUUCC WJ '•; 1!^ in the event there tre tny questions or conc«n».y_2 v; .• .«.• : _* - te> cxpanrion at 3^^ ShoieUne Sirivc, Wayzata • • . ' ®nvc, We) If you vrould lStb review the ipplicttion in detail, please call the 47 14»90 to make an appointment If you plan to attend this meeung. pleare wll 9Wnfim th|T*»f Tpl*ypauT»»««fcy»-i11^ Hi ill !)l ! i •••••••••**•*'**** •. • ••••••• • • • •' V *’*r PUBLIC MECTNei,, announced ,v- ■ ■ ■; wv-. -------- . *• m • . ^ . * . . • vU • * V.• - • , • ♦ *' ^,»» »• » -/-,*• • - s i "• ►'* • • •• . - ■■ ■t -/M c'TYCfO«--'-0 * • •. t -'J *•.*'• • w*—» ?!■». —el ^ ^ r* —r—*■»; .«* ■. •• • • • • * .*' n » V* .%•••.■ . , • • , ■ * •• .• 4*., ’ * p e V I ■ «; I [BITE From: To: Date: Subjact: "Doucette, Elise* <EHse.OoucetteOstate.mn.us> "Melanie Foth" <mfb(hOd.orono.mn.us> 1/6/2004 8:42AM RE: 3607 SnoroHne Orivo Melanie: 11 ' •'< Mr Wagner to copy the city on any permits sent to us, as well as the Storm Water Pollution Prt x)n Plan (SWPPP) he needs to aeate to comply with the permit Unfortunately, because of the sec^.. J phase of the storm water program, wo are backlogged In inputting the data to our system. I will need to contact support staff to see If a application was sent in. I will try to get an answer for you later iQ^gy Of tomorrow. As for approval, I only gave verbal approval, upon ttre condition that an Industrial Storm Water permit application was submitted and a Plan developed. I also talked to him about delle^ng storm vmter upstream from the treatment system to limit the possibility of overtoading it and about stating in the Annual Report (required by the permit) when the last time the system was cleaned. Again, I'll send you an e^ail with more information. Elise M. Doucette Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Regional Environmental Management Waste Management and Wastewater Unit (651) 266-7290 UA# WU# AA • • •» f/»n iirn hi^CA W99 9nh r*T.T PIcnsr^Typc or Print Nojtly rriTikif »l IWI HI W %w9 v««If • • for Industrial Activity (MN Q610000) MInnMOla Pollution Control Agtney REM Divtolon, Industrial Stonn Watar Parmit Program 820 Lafayotta Road North. St Paul, MN 85156-4194 Minntsota Pollution Control Agonqr ■1 R^ftr 10 ifu appItcoiloH burtructioM uyoii complete thitfirm. Fkast type or print neatfy. Site or Facility IntorrTi.ilicn 1. Municipally Owned or Operated FadlMaa M oMars skip to port A. 2. For anmlcipaUy owned or opented tnduiirial ftcHitics, designate smgle or multiple site pcimit coverage. 0 Single site pannit - □ Multiple aits pennit If multiple aitea, number of aitaebed application fonni:______ P«r mmklm^h eiwiW *r cp^attPhiAistri^MMUll. nth «tthtelr awMtnMce smwpu, fat muti anaih • tomplttt cppllemlon, prtptrfyJUInl ant, fitt Mdk tOt. In tmktthtO pann wuh •mmO rtomilMliy «r «n ^ffittellf rqmmwtM mar r(pi tadi ippnetikn^rm. 2. SHa or Facility Ueeatien NsmiofStttor FtelHty ^ lfoo-7 ^►iP<LC. l^ 1 Vl £■bfi..• She Strw Aaarew (Atttal toeaHm Imktvtjka %far • rural tilt, (f aefin S mdieott laeotirm m s rood mtA gS#f«tyCt !9 nearttl mu.^^MpQHty. Dc not wrt m AQ. dw./ 5T3K Hevu CtcyorTowfiihlpI (a).^rfeofr Scots Zip Cods Couaty Siift CtMilACl Lssi Msffil Firm Ntms • * Titls MN Ste Cwact MalUDa Aidnai y<x 411 9-700 < AL iU^t^T IT-^ ^0 L ‘SlMl Seals ZipCodfi J9kfikm9 (Iti^hkk §rm EeMatl Additit PMT adrfpiiir 0&OMtJ ( MN :iiy ScKS ZiD Code Pdblic Land Survey (legal deacription) information for tbs iHa. Refer to property tax itaiementa, Em county auditor's office, or county plat maps to ob^n this infomvUioa. Tba site or fcciUty U locamd in the DNE DNW QSE QSW quarter of the D n E D n W D se QSW quarter of in /.atr *7 jtownship. Township #________Range P .section 3. Owner Informatlen Is die sita'i owner Infotmation difCereat from the site infbnnatioo prov'ded above? If yea, provide owner QYas QNe OwntrNAms I OwnerCo«lMiU«Hiim WruNsnw . , Tills At , Td^lWMnot^, 5^ Cr /vlotiiJ:> /W/J sXig</ Owfitf Adtfmt 4 Bp Cast •swnaj-r;hrOUrnkMftlbmnWmo *mKP4f^kaskB Ihfs 11 ;! !: II '»toi"Ti Or.rn.if Dom storm water (atonn water and anew msK ninoff, aurfaea runoff, and diaeharea rosuk Jng from | pradpitellon) drain off tha aMa7 If yea, provide tbe name of the neareit wat» body (hkt, rfver, stream, vmamed wetland itons. watar fbet dralni ime 00 DNo «aC^i,<kJb Non-Storm Wotrr Dr:.chnigc^. rmd Pormtts 1. Doaa the alto or teelifty have any other NP0E8/SDS permit (for discharge of waataw iter), a • Haaardoue Waste Oonerator 10 • or any other type of MPCA permit? ■If yea, indicate: Typeofpennit Permit or ideotifiwtimaainber □Yea □No I 1. Does tha site or teellltydiaeharganoncontaetceenngwaier(a.g. water used in poerargoneratlofi 0X00 BNa and refrigeration, etc.)? If yea, rdwre does noncontact cooling water discharge to7 (check an that apply) G Municipal storm Mwer □ Sanitary sewer n Septic tauk/draJn field □ OUier. indicike where wder diadiargea to (dtteh, detention pend, etc). 3. Does the site or fSollltydIaehargeproeaas wastewater (e.g. water ueed In an industrial process-. □Yes pNe food or othsr produel wsahing)? If yes. ^irfiere doai proosM wastewater discharge to7 (cheek al) teat apply) n Muaicipal atonn sewer G Sanitary sewer Q Septic tartk/drain field G Other, indicate' where watar fischasgea to ' (ditch, detents. H pond, etc). PiOM"foi Afiplyifig tor «t Pi rmit nr L Apo'j>urf? Cntificjlum 1. Deaertee tha primary acttvlty at lha site or facility (whet are die prfne/pel produeta areenttcee). Indicate the Standard loduatrial Oasaificatioo (SIC) code for 1)uU activily (see qppUcatlOH Inspvctlens /or a list of all aetfvities and SICcodei(). Ptimarv: Secoodaiy: 2. la tha primary aefivily or SIC code you indicated in questton 0.1. Hated under the Itet of primary activUloa and/or SIC eodta In tha application tnatruedona? (Ifeppheeble) □Uatad □Not Listed If not listed, pctmit ewversgc is not req;uixed for your site. Skill to part H and sip the Owner TOpanter CtitifieaiiaB, iSfCAtnentmeiSnmWmwHme/^famSen I No Expofiijrc? Exclusion from NPDLS 1. Wa» the site or faelllty previously covered ur>der an NPDES storm water permit? If yes, enter NPDES penait identification nuniber (l.e.A 00000001) ________ 2. What is the total size of site associated with Industrial activity? □Yes Acres 3. Have you paved or roofed over a formerly exposed, parvio^sarpa in order to qualify for the no □Yea (3N o exposure exduaion? lUsponding yo to ihli quertion doe* not disqualify you for the no expostj^ welusion However, the N2>CA may use thit inlbfmiUon in coiuidsrlng whether itnnn water disdw'ges from your site are likely to have srt ndvsrw irntnet on water Quality, io which case you could be rtQuircd to obtain penT^il coverage. If yes, please indicate approximately how much arts was paved or roofed over. O ^***^^*” D More than five acres 4. Are any of tho following materials or aedvitlas exposed to p eclpiUtlon or storm water runoff, now or in the foreseeable future? s) Using, storing or cleaning industrial machinery or equipment, and areas where residuals from using, wYes aNo storing or cleanwg industrisi machinery or equipment rctnqin and are exposed to stont water b) Materials or residuals on the ground or uistonn water inlets from spills or leaks c) Materials or products from past industrial activity d) Material handling equipment (except adequately maintained vehicles) e) Materials or products during loading or unloading or transporting activities f) Materials or products stored outdoors (except final inducts intended for outside use, .such as new cais, where exposure to storm water does not result in the discharge of pollutants) g) Materials contained in open, deteriorated or leaking storage drums, barrels, tanks aod similar containers □Yes SNo □Yes 02No □Yes SNo □Yes SjNo □Yes (3N o □Ves QBNo h) Materials or products handled or stored on roads or rsilwayp owned or maintained by the discharger □Yes SlNe Ores Qno □Yes SNo □Yes BNo i) Westc material (except waste in covered, non-lesking conifers like a covered dumpster) j) Applicatioo or disposal of process wastewater (unless otherwise permitted) k) Particulate matter or visible deposits of residuals from roofjstacks aod/or vents not otherwise regulated (i.e. under an air quality control pennit) and evident in the Storm water outflow If you checked yes to ANY of the items in question E. 4. a - k, you are not eligible for die no exposure exclusion. Skip to partO. If you cheeked no to ALL of the items in question E. 4. a • k, you are not required to obaia permit covenge. Continue to part P and sign the No Exposure Certification. f4o Exposure Certification 1 certify ■m'iw penalty of law that 1 have read and understand the eligibility requirements for claiming a condition of “no exposure "and obtaining an exclusion from NPDES storm water pennitting. I certify under penalty of law tiiat there arc no discharges of storm water contaminated by exposure to industrial activities or materials from the industrial facility or site identified in this document (except as allowed under 40 CFR 122.26(g)(2)). 1 understand that I am obligated to inibmit a no exposure ceitificatioo form once every five years to the MPCA and, if requested, to the operator of the local municipal separatr atonn sewer system (MSS) inU) which the facility discharges ('vbere applicable). I understand fiut 1 must allow the MPCA, or MS4 operator where the discharge is into the local MS4, to peilbnn inspectians to confirm the condition of no exposure and to make such inspection reports publicly available upon request I undcirjnd that I must obtain coverage under an NPDES pennit prior to any point source disebuge of storm water from <bc facility. wf^ifm3*S2 k4K4 trduMHat StBrm WaUi Fstmit Jqf4 VXtUOi^UOH X'nJt^Ld.3 II S'SS£S3S^5fH^„.„, recnoniible for ^>*t**^f the Infbnmtioa, the ixvfonnedoii suteiitted is to Ac best of my kaowlcdgc end bchrf ttoe, lawTSte Bid coBvIete. 1 im ww there ire ligBificttJt peneltiee for eubnittmg &lie infonnation, including die poMibilhy of fine and huprisonmeni for knowing violations. ■u N mm / lx Sr€6C- D ud PlntNuM iruk Skip to part H. Cf itilic.ilmn r,i the Moiin W.it< i Polliitinn Pt«‘v<-ntion Plan (SWPPP) A Storm Wtim PoOutloo Prevootlon Plan omit be developed to meet foe requirements offoeponiut and to at foe site or ftcUity. The applicants’ Ikilure to conq>leia foe SWPPP prior to submitting foe wlUrsault in foe spplfcation being leoiraed and the storm water discharges associated with foe industrial activity wul not ^ )iy tiie pemiit MmldpalMts eppfytng/arptrmit eomvgt/or mutt^ liras must drva/op a SWPPP for toot tUe. 1. Hava you developed a Storm Water PoUuSon Prevention Plan for your faelllty or alta 2. Who |a raopofuttila for ImptomanSng th# 8WPPP7 qYes QNo rtittMiiM This MN MUlhif AddNM Sou ZisCate 3. Whore ahouW the annual permN foe Invelee be maSad? 03 The dts or fociUty contact person and contact mailng aldrcsa indicated in ^etdon A.2. n The owner and ownar mailing addraii indicated in question AJ. ContiauetopmtH. ■Uwi‘L-f (jc Opor.ttor Ci.ititii.,ition r Minify imMar |>fi«hy af law tSu thti dacMHunt ind ill sttschments were prepated under mv direction or superviaion in ■fyjwtanw »«y«em<le«ign»<lmM«uv diet q;ualifiedpefioonel properly eafocitd and evaluated the information ntHmtitted. Baaed on my inqiiiiy of foe pecaon, or persons, who manage foe system, or fooae penons directly respooable forgsthering foe mfonmiion, foe infontnatioo aobmltted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief; trae, Mceuta^ and complete. 1 am aware that foere ere significant penalties for submitting folse mfonnition, isehiding the possfinliQr of civil end criminsl penalties. ifUid SlpiMi ^ . /a - P3_ AmhofUid SlpiMi ^rgJg. iMiNsmfo a )iH pusim PAL£S, ' TWd MaO your applicetloo to Mtnnesota Pollution Control Agency, RKM Divtelen, Industrial Storm Wntir Permit Prognm, S20 Lniayelto Reed North, St Paul, MN 5515S-4194. Lo not cdc Iom any appUeatfon fee payment You will racalvi an iivekc from the MPCA, if appUeable. wfmmi>52 tdPCA !hS»nrt0lUum Hrmn 0oJ4 1 MIRCJM I Hi.rnuK KID A*1 Minnetonka R ental Inc MorlMMyMntWW««n,l»iSU«1 IHI)4n-«7M*na{M3)47144M Minnesota pollution control agency Waste management plan . 1. WASTE OIL a . storage in MARKED DRUM W/ CONTAINMENT B. Pumped out as needed by waste oil collection company 2. Major wash area for rental equipment A. Inside building w*th sediment trap and flammable waste trap B. U sed with reusable absorbate sock . Sock from PIG # rezIOS 3. SECONDARY WASH AREA OUTSIDE FOR RENTAL EQUIPMENT A. OUTSIDE ON SLAB. WATER RUN OFF GOES THRU A SEDIMENT TRAP. B. A FLAMMABLE WASTE TRAP WITH REUSABLE ABSORBENT SOCK. C. THEN THRU A ROCK DRAIN TO CONTROL RUN OFF WATER. 4. Green space increase to control run off water . Wl RENT ANYTHINO.. AJMOET ,. : V *--------- « M i 5 i ^ * I** * *' I 10'Vw * •JltFACC Te W«sP.& ?Vl.M®f=iF t/^irii <s> toS^ i/0^-rf£/2_ ‘^tC. pair HP?.rj‘^S \ ^•ts t\ r--*vy!V-l »•*. NASTB TflAF t)omNa BUILOtNQ OfUlN j^:-TT»«mMuiiirini V/tT-W PL4NT riATE|UAL teMIOULB MJAibrC «i^w Kir QUMrrrrr C0nrioNi4AnK MT^ICfA NAMC BOM ROOT A 4 4*MR }m «M-LaiH mAORANT aUHAC R»4« ARpnATWA '•R0-L0M*4Q POT t c 4 DAVID TM0r»ia4 •HM« MOM RODA RU(MA •DAVID THOnPWN*«Q POT ► •SluT TIA.^ • KVC'T*'- • l^c«)Cw • I 9% 3 » 17" L ft»<n-r U:tf »■ 0\*u/ciTAi T«U^ /**•'- i l i.1 <m • • •»*«I A»•“ • y o ----------^ 0 OCt~ uirtBU 1^5 Ct> IPA(> ^ } A«si>ce>wT •p> J ^ Plt-iZiH. C.T doLt-^t-T . 5 7& <ilkt.uO*JC«u.e i <rr% <£ isri A<^T c<; iiu -n+i s ^ A*v-rA» 3 1^ HtTh, , ioitefc s T^a" t^ik9tftr Jj*- - f»/T^ < 141 u6>”4tUU«f 4^Ji« HL PI09 indusxrUl «bsorbeit. ibsorbent mats, absoibent socks, wipe. jU qpiU re^nse, mati Page 1 of 2 < •; ■• .•i :-.-',^ .r- -■'. -flv, • A* **Waieoffl* toNtw Mgl Shoppintiioo>Hor*ho Shopping Cait i 3ws»lhop j^fmam |Xlifn«/K«ywore* ^ j. PIG^ Re-Uz-lt(^ Absorbents GQoiacOeoea “ low|ttofn« jltam# |tCim# |q«7 1q«7 Ccttfc' G iaowai Cataims Uak A Spill Absortantt ContairfTMint nitratlM Uak and Spill MainNnanea Matariai Handling Panonal Safaty Plant Safaty Timining A Mtaranca W/part Facility Savar^ Cans A CaWnati Drain A Stermwacar MaintananoB Mats A Platibrma Strucaira PretaetkNi Traffic A Safety rvico Tach Xnfo Canter Tach Tips Rtguaeons P160 Tach BHafS Tachnleal Artkias Compatibility Infb Saiactlon Tools Absorbent AacycUng Cuftemar Hara's a money-^var! Absorbant Soefca that you can wring Todi and ra-usa. ProdUi a t •Si PIGO Aa*Uz-ltS Absorfiwits a Highly absorbant — aach Sock absorbs .75 ii^os gallons of oils, water solvants and coolants (not for usa with aggrassiva liquids) • Dasignad for multipla usaga — wring and iw'usa up to 10 times • Polypropylene skin, callulosa-basad fillar — specialty formulated to ba durable and kaap its shapa through multipla usas • Minimizas your disposal liability — lass waste going to landfilis llGfll#OaaajipCIon Prlcififl for this praduc 1<2 3*6 7^ ME2103 Socks'* ao tocks/box • Absorbs 15 gaiTb^ • Absorts 96 oz./sock • 48* L x 4* Wt 24 lbs. $76.00 $69.00 $63.00 1 1 ii 11 * l; I Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Managing Used Oil and Related Wastes Hazardous Waste #4.30, September 1999 This fact shtit describes used oil management requirements for businesses, such as: • vehicle repair shops • service stations • highway maintenance garages • railroad and marine terminals • manitfacturing and industrial plants with engines or compressors • utilities and • machine shops. What Is **Used Oir? Used oil includes petroleum or synthetic oil used as s lubricant, heat transfer fluid, hydraulic fluid or any similar uses. Some examples are: • engine oil, • transmission fluid, • lubricating oil, • hydraulic oil, • gear cil, • transformer fluid, • cutting oil, • tempering or quenching oils, • grease and • brake fluid. NOTE: Antifreeze; fuels, such as fuel oil; and solvents arc not used oil. What are 'Used Oil-Related Wastes'*? Used oil filters and materials used to soak up oil (sorbents) are common used oil-related wastes. Used oil filters are filters having a metol exterior and paper, packed bed, wound or similar interiors that are used in vehicles or machines to filter lubricating oil. Examples of sorbents often used to clean iq> used oil include: • polypropylene or other plastic resin pads, tubes, sheets or granules; • peat; • corncobs; • cellulose fiber, • sawdust; ■ wood chips; • paper wipes; • cloth towels or other reusable materials; • rice and cotton-seed hulls; • granular clay; • diatomaceous earth; • amorphous silica; • cork and • pumice. Environmental Concerns Used oil, filters and used oil-contaminated sorbent materials often contain hazardous contaminants, such as flannnable fuels and their additives, lead and other toxic metals. Used oil diat is disposed of inqiroperly can kill vegetation and wildlife and pollute surface water and ground water. For this reason, it is illegal to: * pour used oil on the ground, * pour used oil down a drain or sewer, * put used oil in the trash, or apply used oil to roads for ast suppression {Minn. Rules 7045.0S45). Waste Prevention To decrease the amount of used oil generated, encourage and practice alternative transportatioii, such as carpooling, busing. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 520 Lateyette Road North. St. Paul. Minnesota 55155-4194 (651 )296-6300. toll-free (800) 657-3864. TDD (651) 282-5332 or (800) 657-38W This material can be made avaOabie In aWamatlve formats for people with disabilities. ^Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20 percent fibers from paper recycled by consumer. MInnmeti Ponutlon Control Agonev biking or walking. Here are ways to decrease used oil< related wastes; • Use drain systems designed for used oil. • Use drip pans to capture vned oil drips and spills. • Pick up used-oil spilled outside of drip pans in liquid form by using a dustpan and squeegee (rather than using sorbents and generating another waste). • If sorbents must be used, choose those that can be recycled, that is. wrung and reused, laundered or cleaned or burned for energy. • When possible, purchase product in bulk to eliminate multiple small plastic containers. • If using plastic quart containers, design a drain system to empty them sufficiently to allow the plastic to be recycled. Containment* Storage and Labeling Before storing filters, drain them well or process them to remove all free-flowing oil. Processing includes crushing or dismantling the filters to separate the metal from the paper portion. (Before crushing, check with the filter hauler you intend to use to make sure crushed filters tvill be accepted.) Place collected oil in the used oil-storage container destined for recycling. Before storing sorbents, remove all free liquid. Place collected oil in the used oil-storage container destined for recycling. Store used oil, used-oil filters, paper removed from used-oil filters and used oil-contaminated sorbents in closed, leak-proof tanks or containers. (Containers receiving used oil directly from filter crushing equipment or oil-water separation equipment may have an opening sufficient to receive that oil.) Paper filter media and combustible sorbents may be combined in the same container provided they will be disposed of in the same way. Mark containers (including used-oil tartks and tank fill pipes) to appropriately identify the contents: Used Oil [Filters, Filter-Paper Media, or Sorbents]. Do not mark containers of used oil destined for recycling with the words "Hazardous Waste." Place containers on a sur&ce diat is reasonably impervious to used oil (Minn. Rules 7045.0855 Subp. 2). Asphalt that is in good condition may qualify as ‘‘reasonably impervious" for awhile; however, oil will Hazardous Waste #4.30, September 1999 break down the asphalt, allowing it to filter through. If solvents, fuels or gasoline are present in the used oil, the rate of breakdown increases. Sealing an asphalt and concrete surface or using a secondary con tainment system designed for used oil provides better protection and may reduce the possibility of releases and their related liability. TIP: When possible, store used-oil ' containers indoors to prevent releases caused by rain seeping into closed containers and displacing the oil. Storing in Tanks All tanks (including fill pipes) must be labeled as outlined above. If using almve-ground storage tanks (ASTs) and underground storage tanks (USTs) larger than 110 gallons to store used oil, they must he registered with the MPCA. For additional requirements, refer to Table 1. For more information, call the Tanks Hotline or access the MPCA Web site at httD://www.nca.state.mn.ua. At the site, click on Programs, then Aboveground Storage Tank Systems or Storage Tank Compliance and Assistance Program for more information. The Minnesota Uniform Fire Code (MUFC) Article 79 and Article 80 contain provisions relating to the storage and contaimnent of combustible liquids. Contact the State Fire Marshal Division for requirements specific to your operation. Mixing Do not mix antifreeze, chlorinated solvents (such as many carburetor or brake cleaners), gasoBne, engine degreasers, paint thinners or anything else with used olL Used oil that has other waste mixed with it must be evaluated (tested). The mixture may be a hazardous waste. TIP; To prevent inadvertent mixing and the increased disposal costs diat often result, separate used-oil rontainen from solvent and other waste jontainers in your storage area. Mark the containers! One exception regarding mixiag — Very Small Quantity Generators (dtose producing less dian 220 pounds — about 22 gallons liquid—of hazardous waste per month) may mix petroleum-based parts Managing Used Oil and Related Wastes Pago2 .' 1 J 'vasher waste that is hazardous only because it is aitable with their used oil and manage the mixture as * used oil provided: • the solvent does not contain metal-bearing paint; • the solvent is not an F-listcd hazardous waste, such as many carburetor and brake cleaners; • the solvent is not gasoline; • the solvent does not exceed 10 percent of the total volume of the final mixture; and • the flash point of the solvent is above 100* Fahrenheit (Afinn. Rules 7045.0800 Subp. 4(C)). Recycling/ Disposal Options Used oil is prohibited from land disposal by state law. Recycling options include: • re-refining and burning for energy on or off site. Used oil filters and the paper media, if separated, are prohibited from land diqwsal; fliey must be recycled. Recycling means sending the complete filter to a scrqt etal-recycling fiwility. Iftheptq>er media has been removed from the filter, it should be sent to a burner that is permitted to accept filter media or managed as a hazardous waste. Contact the burner to which you intend to send waste for additional requirements. recovery. Businesses also have the option of burning used oil and sorbents on site for heat provided: • • the used oil is generated on site, brought in by the general public (do-it-yourselfers) or by farmers generating less than 25 gallons per month on average, or from another location owned or operated by the same business. (You may accept used oil from other businesses only If it has been tested at least once per source and shown to be on- specification. “On-specification" means the used oil meets the conditions listed in Table 2. The party claiming the used oil is on-specification is called a “used-oil marketer" and has additional requirements. For more information, see MPCA Hazardous Waste fact sheet #4.34, Marketing Used Oil.) • the unit bums for energy recovery. • the used oil and sorbents are burned in a furnace designed for that purpose and the furnace is rated at less than 500,000 BTUs per hour and is vented to the outdoors. Used oU-coBtaminated sorbents are prohibited from land disposal unless they have been tested and diown to be nonhazardous. ^ere is no need to test oil- contaminated sorbents if they are: • wrung and reused; • launderedor cleaned (Sorbents sent to a commercial laundry cannot contain free li(|uid8.); or • burned for energy (Sorbents destined for burning must have a heating value of at least 5,000 BTUs per pound.). If you bum used oil on site, contact local building code personnel to determine requirements for installation and use of the burner. Contact your local fire department to determine whether there are additional local requirements. The Minnesota Uniform Fire Code (MUFC), Unifinm Mechanical Code (UMC) and State Statute 299F.015 contain provisions relating to used-oil burners. Contact the State Fire Marshal Division for requirements specific to your operation. Spills When developing guidelines for managing oil, start at the beginning-—avoid spills! Here are some tips: • De>-elop and practice proper handling procedures and careful work habits. Used oil-contaminated sorbents diat have been shown to be nonhazardous can be burned at a facility that does not bum for energy recovery, disposal at a landfill is not recommended. Use appropriate tools, such as funnels and spigots. Perform regular preventive maintenance, such as tightening or replacing leaky seals, gaskets snd dispensers. burning for Energy Currently, most used oil collected in Minnesota is shipped to asphalt plants to be burned fi>r energy Next, be prepared. Keep spill-containment and clean-iq) materials in a convenient, nearby area. Train employees when and bow to use them. For help preparing for spills, contact the MPCA Emergency Response Team. Managing Used Oil and Related Wastes Paged \i f i < I ; i : I __^ Minntsola Poltution Control Agan Table 1: Tank Raquiremanta for Storing Used Oil Hazardous Waste »4.30. September 1999 11 \ mil ust il oil f.i nk In Above pouod and Indoors and Situated on an impermeabk suifice These tasks are exempt fiom tank niies pixjvided contents of ibe tank are contained hdoors (Le., cannot escape through walls, doors, floor drams, etc.). Above pound and Outdoors and Holds 1,100 pdloos or bn god b more than 500 feet torn sucfice water Above pound and Outdoors and Holds more than 500 galons but 1,100 galons or bss tai b withm 500 feet of sutfece water Above around and OiSdoors iad Holds more than 1,100 galons Undeigpound ind Holds 110 galons or burn b a UST of 1,100-galoQ or less capaci^ used on site fer beatmg oi or tesidefXial or finn tanks stocxig motor fuel fcr nonconmeicial use Underground aixl Holds more than 110 galons TIP: To sinplify lesk*detectba requaemenb fer the ppfeg on undeigroued storage tuks, use a 1,000-galon or smaller tank fer collecting used oi Menaging Used Oil and Related Wastes The tank is exempt from regulations. The MPCA strongly lecommends using the regulations outfeied bebw as best management guktefines. The tank must 1. have secondaiy containment that can hold the entie capacity of the lank and 2. be labeled with the words Used or (hchidi« fD ppes) FoDow both requiemetXs above phir. 3. if bstaled prior to November 1,1998, have 'conosbn protection by November 1, 2003 (al ASTI afier this date must have roirosion protection at the tine of mstalatiodk 4. have secondaiy containmeat for capacky of largest AST n coDtaamoBot area; if exposed to precpitatioi^ Kcd an additional 10 percent contaioment byNovenfoer 1, 2003. If instaled afler November 1,1998, ml to precpMation, need 110 percent capacky et tfaetme of mstalatfoa 5. have oyerfll protectionat tine of mstalbtba oi; if kutaled prior to November 1, 1998, by Novenfoer 1,2003 and 6. have stfostanc^traiiafer area safeguanb by Novenfoer 1, 1999 (if mstaled prior to November 1, 1998) or at tine * of istalhtioa (if mstaled alter this date;) and 7. have ■laitoliate feak-detectioD and moniori^ These tanks are not lepihtmL The MPCA stroi^ recommends usmgtfae regubtfons bebw as best manj^gnmiinr mikleines. The tank requires: 1. coirosbn piotectbn; 2. spil protection and oveifiD prctectioo unless i receives less than 25 galons at a tane; 3. certified cotiiacton b«t»llwg^ igjpadbg or lemovbg the tank; 4. notification to the MPCA10 days before any actions out&aed n #3; 5. notification to the MPCA wihn 30 (bys of conpletioo of actioos (#3); and 6. F9 pi>es l^led TJaed Oi” Pagn3 Mlnnwoti PoButlon C«...4rol Ag»ney Hazardous Waste #4.30, Saptemtoer 1999 Some shops have oil- water separators on the drain connected to the sewer to collect small drips, spills and grit To ensure oil does not enter the sanitary sewer, service the separator regularly: skim off the oil and place it in the used-oil container and remove and evaluate the collected grit How often this must be done depends upon how much oil and grit is allowed to enter the drain and the size of your grit chamber. Table 2: Conditions for On-Spsclflcatlon Usod Oil lit in ( mididon Response fact sheets and others available on the MPCA Web site: Flash posit Arsenic Cadmsan Chromum Lead 100* Fafarenhek msihaim S.O ppia* maxinum 2.0 pptn* maxhaim 10.0 ppmf maximum 100.0 ppm* maxsiun Ibtal Habgens 1000.0 ppm* maximun* Contain and clean np liquid spills on impcnneablc surfaces by using squeegees and dustpans or mops or *parts ptr mUlioH **A l€vtl of htdogm up zo 4,000ppm b (uiowed f it ciat be proven that hazardous waste has not been mixed with the used oil • 6.3, Prevention and Preparedness for Oil Delivery Companies • 6.4, SpUl Prevention and Planning • 6.6, Minnesota Spill Bill • 6.\1, Small Petroleum Spill Cleanup • 6.14, Spill Debris Disposal Options • 6.16, Thin Spreading Small Quantities of Petroleum Contaminated Soils Shipping*Requirements (Minn. Rules 7045.0855 Subp. 4) vacuums designed for liquids. Combine and recycle with other liquid used oil. If sorbents are required, use sparingly and only after all liquid oil diat can be recovered is recovered. Control spills on land by using soil, sand, sorbent socks or granules to build a barrier to contain flowing oil. Recover liquid oil using appropriate pumps or vacuum trucks (a contractor may be needed to assist) and place in a container for recycling. Cont amin ated soil, sand and clay sorbent must be excavated or recovered and treated at a permitted facility. If the quantity is less than 10 yards and if approved by the MPCA Emergency Response Team, treatment on site may be an option. Used oil generators may transport up to SS gallons of used oil sorbents in their own vehicle or any amount of used-oil filters without being subject to the used oil/filter transporter requirements. If haulin g your own oil wastes, you must: • take the oil, filters and/or sorbents to a collection site or to an aggregation point owned by the generator. • ensure that filters and sorbents do not contain fiee- flowing oil. ensure that used oil does not leak during transport. Report all used oil or other petroleum spills of five gallons or more to the Minnesota Duty Officer at the 24- hour emergency number given on the last page. For additional information about reporting spills, see MPCA Emergency Response Fact Sheets 6.1, Reporting Spills and Leaks, and 6.2, Reporting Hazardous Material Spills. If not hauled by the generator, used oil must be hauled by an oil hauler having an U.S. Environmental Protection .agency (EPA) identification number. Used oil filters must be hauled by an oil-filter hauler that Las a license from the MPCA or a metropolitan county. MPCA Hazardous Waste frict sheet M.OO, Used Oil Hauler Services, includes a list of oil service providers. NOTE: Neither a hazardous-waste manifest nor a hazardous-waste transporter is tequired when transporting used oil destined for recycling. (However, bodi must be used for oil that is too contaminated to be recycled and requires disposal as a hazardous waste.) Regardless of amount, if your spill enters a sewer, ditch or surface waterway of any kind, report the spill to th« National Response Center. Records For more information about spill prevention and clfctttup requirements, see the following MPCA Emergency Generauxs must keep reccuds at the ', businesses of all shipments of used oil, used-oil filters and sorbents, including those records they make themselves. Used oil and used oil-filter haulers are required to give receipts Managing Used Oil and Related Wastes Pages tAiai Mliwtota PoUuMon Control Ao«nov whenever they pick up oil or filters; generators may use these receipts as their records or they may use a log. Records for used oil, used-oil filters and used-oil- contaminated sorbents should include: * the date of the shipment; * the amount shipped (gallons of used oil, wei^t, number or volume of filters/sorbents); * the name and identification number of the transporter (if applicable); and * where the waste was taken. Very Small (Quantity Generators who mix parts washer solvent with used oil must also: • keep records of the amount of solvent mixed; • report it annual!}^ and • if generating more than 10 gallons of hazardous waste per year, obtain a Hazardous Waste Generator ’s License. (Some metropolitan counties may require businesses generating less than 10 gallons to get a license.) Reporting Businesses located outside the Twin Cities Metro Area that generate and recycle only used oil, used-oil filtns and/or used oil-contaminated sorbents are not required to report annually or to obtain a license from the MPCA, but they must still manage the waste as outlined in this fiict shMt. Businesses located in the seven<ounty metropolitan area may still have reporting and licensing requirements. Contact your county hazardous waste office for details. Retiring Equipment, Closing or Selling Your Business When taking equipment out of service or when ceasing operations, generators must either remove or clean up used oil-storage equipment and any site contamination. For More information Your metropolitan county and the Minnesota Pollution . Control Agency have staff available to answer oil- management questions. For general information, contact your metropolitan county hazardous waste office or the MPCA office closest to your county. Hazardous Waste #4.30. September 1999 Metro County Hazardous Waste Offices Anoka County ...................(612) 422-7093 Carver County ...................(612)361-1800 Dakota County ..................(612) 891-7011 Hennepin County ..............(612) 348-8100 Ramsey County .................(651) 773-4466 Scott County ....................(612)496-8177 Washington County ............(651) 430-6655 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Toll-free ..........................(800) 657-3864 Brainerd ..........................(218) 828-? J92 Detroit Lakes ......... ........(218)847-1519 Duluth..............................(218)723-4660 Marshall ..........................(507) 537-7146 Rochester ........................(507) 285-7343 St Paul .............................(651)297-8363 Tanks Hotline ....................(651) 297-8367 Web Site: httD://www.pca.gtate itm Signs Wei^ts and Measures .......(612) 639-4010 Spills, Planning for Emergency Response Team . (651) 296-6300 Spills, Reporting Minn. Duty Officer (Metro) .(651) 649-5451 Duty Officer (Greater Minn) (800) 422-0798 National Response Center.... (800) 424-8802 Storage Tanks Above-ground ..................(651) 297-8679 Underground ....................(651) 297-8367 SUte Fire Marshal Division ... (651) 215-0500 IVansportation Rcqnireoicnts (Department of Transportation).................(651) 405-6060 ......................................(888) 4-Safety Used-Ofl Burners Building Codes (Department of Administration )................(651) 296-5639 Air Permit Requirements....(651) 282-5844 Pngn6 f 1 ^ MinnMOti Pollution Control Agonoy Thu fact sheet dbcusses recommended waste management options for Jloor drains and JIammable traps. Keeping hazardous substances out of drains and plumbing makes trap wastes easier tmd cheaper to manage. In this fact sheet Problem ......................1 Solution ......................1 Maintenance................2 Waste Management Options ..................2 BMP Chart.................2 For more information ...4 ■............................- Managing Floor Drains and Flammable Traps Hazardous V\teste Division Fact Sheet #4.18 April 1998 Problem Diagram 1: 3-Phase Trap Waste Washing and maintenance of vehicles, machinery, trailers, other equipment and floors could allow a lot of vehicle fluids and other materials into trc'K v; r v-i '-1 , accumulateda floor dram- sediment resulting in a three-phase waste (floating oils, dirty water, sludge) collecting in traps that must be evaluated and managed appropriately. Using good housekeeping methods and following the Best Management Practices outlined on page 5 will help to make sure this waste is nonhazardous, making it easier and cheaper to manage. to sewer or holding tank floating oils dirty water— sludge — Solution Prevention is the best solution! Here are some preventive measures to consider Businesses discharging industrial wastes to a holding tank or an on-site disposal (septic) system have additional concerns. If discharging to a holding tank, businesses must carefully monitor materials enterir.g the tank to ensure contents can be pumped and land applied or discharged into a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) system. Do not discharge industrial materials into septic systems as ground water contamination may occur and result in expensive environmental cleanups. I. Use good housekeeping techniques and follow the Best Management Practices outlined on page S. 2. ’’ How good storage procedures: Use curbs or berms when possible; consider additional measures bey ond those required for insurance purposes. 3. Cap drains in storage areas; eliminate them, if possible. Minnesota Foltution Control Agency. 520 Lateyette Road North. SL Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 (612) 296-6300. TDD v6l2) 282-5332. toll-free (800) 657-3864 Upon request, this metenai can be *race avaiiaPie m eNemativt formats for people with dieabiiitftt. 0 Printed on recyced paper contair r; at taut 20 percent fibers from paper recycM.by consumen. 7. Hai ou$ Waste Fact Sheet #4.18 Aph11998>> Check with tiie Department of Health Plumbing Program for requirements and recommendations for capping drains. (See page 4 for the phone number.) Prohibit engine and transmission washing in vehicle wash and vehicle repair shops. Sweep up nonhazaidows solids on the floor and dispose of them in the solid waste. Hazardous materials should be collected separately and stored following hazardous waste requiremeats. For more infonnation about hazardous waste storage requirements, request hazardous waste fact sheet # 1.04, Labtl and Store Hcaardous Waste Correctly, from the Business Assistance Unit 6. Use screens in the drain to prevent solids from reaching the trap. Use drip pans to collect fluids. Try first to pick up liquids from the floor using a squeegee and dustpan. Combine recovered liquids with waste of the same type. For example, oil spills recovered with a squeegee and dust pan may be placed in the used oil container. If you cannot collect or recover liquid, use a sorbent material to so^ '< it up. If using sorbent materials, they must be managed in the same way as the waste material they contain. (If they contain used oil, for example, they may be wrung and reused, burned for energy recovery or recycled.) Disposal of sorbent material in the solid waste is not allowed unless it has been shown to be nonhazaidous. 8. Prepare and train for emerj.encies. Have a plan and the necessary equipment in place to quickly clean up a spill before it can escape. 9. Design and implement a plan to reduce the amount of slush and snow/sand/salt carried in on tires before parking indoors. , For more information or help with prevention, conWt the Minnesota Technical Assistance Program (MnTAP). (See page 4 for telephone number). Maintenance Maintenance is second only to prevention in importance. Traps that are not cleaned regularly may allow oils and other chemicals into a septic syslrm, holding tank or sanitary sewer, resulting in disposal • problems and/or environmental damage. Be aware that maintenance of these systems may involve entry into a confined space and require additional employee training and precautions. Waste Management Options If yon have not followed the Best Management Practices (BMPs) on page S, you will need to test the liquid and solid portions to determine whether or not each is hazardous. Test results will determine how to manage each portion. Nonhazardous trap waste may be managed according to the guidance below. Hazardous waste must be managed according to the hazardous waste rules. For more infonnation about hazardous waste management requirements, contact the Hazardous Waste Business Assistance Uni^ If you carefully follow the BMPs, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) allows you to assume the drain and trap wastes are nonhazardous. Here are the options for managing them: • Floating Layer. IfBMPs are carefully followed, little or no floating oily material should accumulate. (If there is a significant floating layer, the MPCA must assume that BMPs were not followed.) If a thin floating layer of oil is present 1. Skim or vacuum it off and recycle it with other used oil. 2. Use an absorbent pad to remove the oil. Wring and reuse the pad or recycle it with other oil-contaminated so^nt materials by laundering, oil-extraction or burning for energy recovery. If these i i r Hazardous Wiste Fact Sheet #4.18 April i998 options for managing the absorbent material are not possible, test it for metal and volatile contaminants using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). (See Hazardous Waste fact sheet #2.04, Characteristic Wastes, for more information.) If the material is nonhazardous, it may oe managed as an industrial solid waste and sent to a solid waste landfill or burner that can accept it. Check with the landfill operator before shipping! • Lk|nld Layer: Carefully following BMPs will keep levels of hazardous roeuls and organic compounds below maximum allowable concentrations. Your county* solid waste officer and/ or local wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) operator can provide infonhation to help you determine which of the following management options will work best for you: I. If you are hooked up to a WWTP and discharge is approved, you may discharge it to the sanitary sewer. The WWTP may require testing prior to discharge. Check with your local treatment plant operator first. 2. Nonhazardous liquid wastes discharged to a septic system or bolding tank, may be managed like domestic septage. A certified septage hauler can pump out the waste and dispose of it at a WWTP or by land application in accordance with an MPCA-approved land application management plan. The WWTP may require testing. Check widi your local treatment plant operator. 3. Send it to a solid waste incinerator or power plant that is able to incinerate it. They may require testing. Check with your county solid waste officer to determine your local options. 4. Pretreat it using an appropriate pretreatment unit, such as an oil*water separator, reverse osmosis or activated carbon filter. Treated liquid may then be hauled or discharged to a WWTP, (if approved by the plant operator), or land applied in an approved manner. Check with the Solid Waste Section (see page 4) to determine if land application is appropriate. If the liquid waste has been sufficiendy treated to meet drinking water standards, it may be able to be discharged to a septic ^stem outside a wellhead protection a:ea. Contact MPCA’s Underground Injection Control Program for guidance. (See page 4.) For help with pretreatment options, contact yjur local WWTP. • Sand/SIndge: Carefully following BMPs will keep levels of hazardous metals and organic compounds below maximum allowable concentrations. These are your management options: 1. De-water and send the sand/sludge to an approved mixed municipal or industrial ludfill that is able to accept it Contact the operator first; they may require testing. 2. Incinerate or thermally treat it (only if organic compounds are not halogenated) at an approved facility. For a listing of facilities, contact the MPCA Emergency Response Section. (See page 4.) 3. Some soils can be land treated in accordance with an MPCA-approved management plan. For more mformation, contact the MPCA Solid Waste Section. 4. Send de-watered sludge to a mixed mimicipal compost facility if there is one in your area that will accept it Contact the operator first • Liquid and Saad/Sludge Together: If acccfXed, take or discharge to a WWTP. You must first get approval from your local WWTP operator to disctuuge. j HaZfc .ous Waste Fa^ Shaat #4.18 April 1998 » • Thrtt Phases Tofstkcn Iftfae waste is hazardous, or you are not sure whether or not it is hazardous, vacuum it out Then, ship it with a hazardous waste transporter who meets the U.S. Department of Transportatioo standards for transportation of hazardous wastes to a permitted hazardouH waste dispusal facility. ' (This may require testing; check with your transporter). You may send this waste to a registered petroleum recycling tecility. A list of transporters, recycling fimilities and treatment, storage and disposal tecilities is available from the Hazardous Wute Business Assistance Unit (See below). For Moro Information Department of Health Plumbing Program (Capping Drains) Minnesota Duty Officer-------------------------------------- Minnesota Pollution Control Agency- Emergency Response Section Hazardous Waste Business Assistance Unit Solid Waste Section------------------------- Underground Injection Control Program — Brainerd Regional Office-------------------- Detroit Lakes Regional Office-------------- Duluth Regional Office Marshall Regional Office------- Rochester Regional Office -----------(612)215-0836 ----------(612) 649-5451 or (800) 422-0798 ----------(612) 296-6300 or (800) 657-3864 -(612)297-8565 or (800) 657-3864 —(612) 297-8362 or (800) 657-3724 —(612) 296-8595 or (800) 657-3864 (612) 296-7764 or (800) 657-3864 Metropolitan Hazardous Waste Offices Anoka County----------------------------- Carver County----------------------------- Dakota County--------------------------- —(218) 828-2492 or (800) 657-3864 -(218) 847-1519 or (800) 657-3864 —(218) 723-4660 or (800) 657-3864 -(507) 537-7146 or (800) 657-3864 -(507) 285-7343 or (800) 657-3864 Hennepin County Ramsey County— Scott County Washington County Minnesota Technical Assistance Program (MnTAP) Pretreatment Help:............................................... -----(612)422-7063 -----(612)361-1800 -----(612) 891-7011 -----(612)348-8100 -----(612)773-4466 -----(612)496-8473 -(612)430-6655 •—(612) 627-4646 or (800) 247-0015 Contact your local wastewater treatment plant } j i Hazardous Waste Fact Sheet #4.1S Ap 998 Best Management Practices for Managing Floor Drains and Flammable Traps (Post in Shop) Using these best management practices in your shop will enable you tc nanage flammable trap waste as an industrial solid waste rather than a hazardous waste. Use aerosol solvents or other degreasers These chemicals can compound waste management problems by contaminating wash water and sludge with hazardous materials. Clean parts ever a drip pan — not on the floor; collect waste. Use a parts wzsber to clean engine parts and manage the solvent in the washer as a hazardous waste. To prevent contaminaticn of the parts washer by listed* solvents, do not spray listed aerosols over the unit Change y^icle ^ fluids (mlvVrake^;;.- fluid, WiWeze»^V^^ etc.) = Thi»e.c£emicals ^ cbm&und. wa^ management pmlems by contaihrnating w^^j^^d sludge with baztudbwimm^ ■Um.drip pans imder yeliidiM to.dollectflu^ ‘ Jkec^le trimsz^s^ Drain radi^ors before-flushing and recycle wiii^ antifrd^ -V‘‘- . •. :-;V : Clean shop floors Hosing down the floors with water of solvent can flush contaminants into floor drains, contaminating liqui^ and sludgea in the drain system. Use drip pans to collect fluids. Use dry sweeping compounds. Reuse them as long as they remain absorbent Combustible sweeping compounds may be burned to heat your shop if burned in an approved burning device. \ccideiitally spill; ‘ material • . V . , ; Many ihaterials us^jn vehicle mamtenance may bqmzardous an^ contamina^^^er wastes'in the pfuihbiMsyste ; -v;< Clean up spills immediately. Notify the Miruiesota Duty Officer—(612) 649-54Si^or (800) 422-0798 — if.it is a petroleum splfl of more th^ S gallons or if it js a spill pf any materi^ of &*:> size that unpacts soil or .wa Have appropriate'^ill cl^up materials bn hand and train employees how to propwy.use them. Store solvents . ^ ■• . > * J # ■ u -■ ?; '- ■ f ■ Spilled or leaked solvents vid their vapors are dangerous jmd can contaminate other wastes in the plumbing system Keep containers sealed when not in use. Store solvents in a “flammables'* cabinet. Do not use solvents near drains. • Store waste vehicle, fluids in a ropm with a flobr draihi>i , . .. .,4. . T, . . . , . ^ ' • • • ^ . 1 Spilled or leaked saly^ts and their vapors am dangrrau^and ^contaminate p^efvu^ in the plumbing systeih • V.- . . . i^p contaiceis sealed w^^ not.in use;>^Keep wute'l^ containers in a separateiti^^e am with no floor,^in.y; Lbfitall a curb cr berin to’j^ntaih ahy v^^.that^ai^,&flc from storage containers. Inspectfcojitainers for leakspn^'w^kly basis. See NIPCA.flazai^^ Waste fact'sheej# 2'^ \ Documenting Container-rnspeciions. * * • . Wash engines * a • • ■ * 1 The resulting wastewater is likely to be hazardous from greases, oils and solvents. Only wash eczines if absolutely necessary. If you do. separate the resulting wastewater and evaluate it. .* • .• a • Listtd solvents Solvents on F-list like methylene chloride. methA ethyl ketone. :e(rach^:^oethylene. toluene and xylene. i (MG TAP Under^ondlng Floor Draih Systems Minnesota Technical Assistancs Program ■ FACT SHEET Basic utilities usiially are not diought about until a problem arises. Plxunbing systems typically. fvuKtion for many years without needing attention. This fact sheet gives tips on preventing plumbing problems. It focuses on sewer traps (separators) and includes basic mfonnation and single maintenaiKe ideas. Whore Do Liquids GoT. Many buildings have floor trench systems^ floor drains, or wash and service bay areas udii^ allow liquids to drain away. The Minnesota Plvunbing Code provides specifications for constructing and installing separators in fliese buildings. These devices separate ax\d collect flammable and oily waste from wastewater before it enters fltc municipal sewer system. The code applies to any business location where flammable or oily liquid wastes are produced— including: 1) enclo^ garages over 1,(XX) square feet; 2) vehicle maintenance or washing operations, or 3) garages housing more than four vehicles. NOTE: Buildings not connected to a municipal sewer system generally use on-site wastewater treatment, such as a sepdc system, drainfield or drywell. Contact the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) at 612/297-7574 or 800/ 657-3864 for fact sheets and information on regulatory requirements for discharging into these kinds of systems. Generally, businesses with on-site systems are permitted very limited discharge. How do Separators Work?. A separator uses gravity to separate liquids fluit float (like oils, fuels and other petroleum products) and problem wastes (like sand axui sludge) horn wastewater before it enters a sewer. Paget Sewer Sjstem When wastewater collects in the separator petroleum products collect on top and heavy materials settle to the bottom. The water is discharged at a height between the outlet and inlet pipes. If a separator is not used, petroleum products could accumulate in a sewer systeov which could resxilt in a high cotKentration of explosive vapors in the sewer Or the petroleum wastes or other solids could plug the sewer. Why Maintain Separators? Sooner or later, too much oil and/or sludge accumulates in the sewer trap, causing contaminants to discharge with the wastewater or plug die sewer trap outlet When this happens, you have problems, such as full floor trend\es, backed up sewer discharge or authorities investigating contaminant sources. To fix diis problem, you will need to: 1) identify the separator location, 2) assess the problem and probably hire a dean out service, and 3) arrange for proper dispesaL (omHmmD MnlV « MM I |fM tarn M UwiiMi Offlu t( £mwn«MH MfflMMti fnm Mnne AneMMMMMMlimMiMMntHMl aMUMti%gtUMttaa.Scraai3iPbBlcMafl)L Oi9M MnTM Mw OR iKydM Rinr ewanne 1 nAMtm or in «to. MnTAP • 1313 5tb Street SE. Suite 207 • Minneapolis, • Mirresota 554144504 612/6274646 • 800/247-0015 (Minnesota only) • FAX r 2'6274769 i ■ p DANGER: Below grade spaces, like separators, where various orgaiuc liquids have accumulated over time may be hazardous due to volatile compounds (explosive atmosphere) or lack o£ oxygen. Worker enliy of conned spaces requires extensive training and precautions. Discharge of significant amounts of oil or solvent wastes can interim with maintenance and safety in d\e sewer lines and with the functioning of the wastewater treatment plant Discharge of other liquids is typically also highly regulated by ttie sewer autfiority. Sludges accumulated in traps may contain organic contaminants and heavy metals, whidr truy classify die sludge as hazardous waste. Expensive testing may be required to evaluate the waste for determining the proper disposal method. Prppar Waste Management Generally speaking, floating accumulated oQs can be collected, and numaged and recycled widi other used oil waste. Other floating luuuudous materials collected in significant amounts, such as petroleum solvents or corrosive cleaners will ne^ to be maruiged as hazardous waste. Bottom sludges may be nothing more than accumulated dirt llie hazardous waste program in metropolitan counties or at the Mirmesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) can provide guidance on how to best evaluate the wastes in your business setting. You can then consult with your service contractor about its ability to properly dispose of this materiaL Can the Problem be Minimized or Prevented?_____________ A floor drain system is often necessary for business operations. However, drains arc often neglected and often a surprise source of problems when things go wrong. Routine mainteruu.^e is required to prevent plugging and to keep collected materials from discharging to the sewer. Measures described below can reduce or elimixute maintenance frequency and save you money. Operationi Have onncttssary floor drains capped. Determine if all your floor drains are necessa^. If the location of a drain could cause or contribute to problems with traps, consider consulting with a licensed plumber to cap the drain. The Minnesota Department of Health Codes recommends that a licensed plumber cap drains. Improperly done, abandoned drains can be dangerous sources of accumulated sewer gases. Temporary snver plugs can be used in emergencies to help contain spills and prevent disdurge to die sewen Liquids Capture all solvents, fuels and oUy liquids. Oils are easily recycled if captured and manjigfwi separately. Tliis is done by collecting oil in drip pans and trays, radier than allowing it to foil onto die floor When oil does fall onto the floo^ collect it by using a dust pan and squeegee. This recovers the recyclable oil and minimizes absorbent use. Lost solvents, cleaners or other industrial liquids cost you money to replace. These lost chemicals ako cost you money to dean out of traps and to dispose of properly. Sludge that accumulates in traps also may be hazardous waste if you are careless about die materials and contaminants that enter the floor ^ain. Prepare for spill emergencies and keep industrial liquids away from floor drains. Solids and Dirt Good housekeeping takes effort Don't use floor trenches as a convenient receptacle for end of the daydeanup. Clcaa the floor using dry methods and don't take shortcuts. Use a broom and dustpan instead of a garv.cn hose. (cfmUnued) I Solids will cffectivdy shut down operations when enou^ aocuxniilate in piping, drains and traps. Consider filter screens at floor trench ouflets to capture dirt conveniently before it gets deep under the floot Following good housekeeping practices mw can he^ ninimiae the potential for costly problems laten For Mori Information Waste liquids or solids generated by cleaning out a separator maybe dashed as hazardous waste. Reg^tocy information legaidirtg proper management and disposal is avail^le hoai metropolitan county hazardous waste offices, or the hOPCA at 612/297-8363 or 800/657-3724. For information relating to Miimesota's Plumbing Code requirements and specifications, call the Minnesota Department of Healh at 612/2154)836. MnlAF staff can provide additional waste reduction insight to your specific operations cither over flic phone or with a visit For free, nonregulatory assistance, call MnTAP at 612/ 627-4646 or from greater Minnesota 800/247-0015. .. I EXHIBIT G MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. (#5) m-2858 SCOTT STANDA, 2659 CASCO POINT ROAD, Continued Mabusth moved, Raha seconded, recommending approval of Application #03-2858, Scott Standa, 2659 Casco Point Road, granting after-the-fact variance approval for the reconstruction of a 4*X7* deck and 3’ wide access stairs to the accessory structure, subject to the removal of the concrete slab, sidewalk along the side of the residence, and all landscape plastic prior to the final inspection; Duly noting that the structure is considered a nonconforming structure and limited structural repair is allowed. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Fritzler dissenting. Fritzler stated that he neither supported the work being proposed to the nonconforming structure nor could support the after-the-fact request. (#6) #03-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINE DRIVE, VARIANCE, 6:43 - 7:40 P.M. Stevan Wagner, the Applicant, and Martin Woody, the Architect, were present. Foth reported that the applicant has submitted an application for a building expansion and remodel in the B-1 Zoning District. As per City Code Section 78-642 any ^plication for a commercial building permit prompts a site review by the Planning Commission and City Council. The applicant has requested the following: 1) Commercial site plan review in order to obtain a building permit to remodel and expand an existing 2310 s.f. concrete block building on the property to a 4080 s.£ building, a 1,770 s.f. total expansion. 2) A setback variance in order to re-use the existing sign pole which is setback 8* from the front property line where 10* is required. The signage itself will extend an additional 4’ into the setback area for a sign setback of 4* when 10* is required.* 3) Hardcover variance to allow existing driveway hardcover to become structural hardcover.* *Foth noted that each of these items would be reviewed in part with the overall commercial site review i Foth explained that the property located at 3607 Shoreline Drive has historically served as an equipment rental business. While lawn and garden equipment rental is a permitted use in the district, there is a great deal of outdoor storage associate with this business. Outdoor storage is a conditional use in the Industrial district only. While the existing sign is located 8* from the front property line, where a 10* setback is required, Foth stated that the ^plicant is proposing to re-use this sign in part including the non-conforming setback. The property is allowed signage up to 250 s.f; therefore, the proposed signage of 150 s.f. is in compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Page 7 of29 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. (U6) #03-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued ^though this property is almost entirely within the 500’-1000’ hardcover zonFoth indicated that currently there is 35,030 s.f. of hardcover constituting 72.75 %. Most of this hardcover is gravel and paved parking areas with buildings consisting of only 6,132 75 s f or 1/6 of the 72.75%. With regard to parking spaces and/or garages, these shall be located in areas other than the required yard; except that parking may be located in a rear yard to within three feet of the rear or side lot Ime unless the rear or side lot line is in common with an R district; in which case the setback distance shall be 35’. The applicant’s property is irregularly shaped and surrounded at Ae rear and on the west side by residential property. The eastern side lot Ime abuts another B-1 diilrici. Based on the size of the business, it is required to supply 11 parkmg stalls; however, cumently there are 18 stalls. Foth not^ that a drainage and surface water management plan should be submitted to the City for Engineer review pnor to final approval with two*foot contour interval or spot elevations on a 100-foot grid if the two-foot contours arc over 100 feet apart. The appHcant has proposed additional vegetative screening between the west side of the proposed building and the western drive. In addition, a lighting plan has not been provided with the application. The applicant should address how or whether the individual buildings, entryways, or parking lot will be illuminated. With reg^ to the building quality, Foth explained that the applicant has proposed vertical wood siding mrh a field stone base for the exterior fa?ade of the building. The Planning Co^ssion should discuss whether these “residential” materials are appropriate for the B- 1 district. In conclusion, Foth presented a summary of issues for discussion: 1. Is the outdoor storage use non-conforming? Should it be allowed to be improved and/or expanded? 2. Should the building be constructed to accommodate all of the equipment storage for the business, including the equipment currently being stored outdoors? 3. Should one or both of the accessory structures be removed? 4. Should, if permitted to remain, the outdoor storage be restricted to w specific amount type and location of equipment? Should additional screening be installed? 5. The west and south lots on the property are gravel. Is gravel an appropriate parking surface for a business district? Should all of the lots be provided with curb id gutter? iriiiiiiliiilAiililiiiiiiillia i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. (U) Mi‘292i STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued 6. Is the vertical wood siding as proposed an appropriate exterior wall finish for a commercial building? 7. Should the pole sign be relocated to a conforming location? 8. Will there be tenants in the other building on the property? How will that use impact the site? 9. Are there any other issues or concc ms with this ^plication? Foth indicated that it would be staffs recommendation: 1. To Improve the sign variance. 2. Planning Commission should advise staff and the applicant regarding issues which the {q>plicant should address regarding the commercial site. Mr. Wagner stated that it was his intent to beautify the existing site and sign. He indicated that he has proposed a north woods feel for his improvements which would improve the views fi-om County Road IS dramatically. In addition, he noted that he has attempted to further screen the storage area. Chair Smith asked what the building nearest County Road 15 is used for and whether the proposed additions were simply to move the business around. Wagner replied that the building currently houses two offices, the one upstairs occupied by an interior designer. He maintained that it was his goal to better manage his current business versus increase or grow his business further. Chair Smith questioned whether the circle drive is effective. Wagner stated that the circle drive allows his customers to maneuver one way in andfout of' his business easier, especially with big equipment. Hawn acknowledged that the site offered unique challenges of its own, along County Road IS, the edge of a marsh, etc. She voiced her concern that propane tanks were left near the marsh which could potentially leak into the wetland. She asked whether gas or oil tanks ' must be kept on concrete pads. Page 9 of 29 f. 1 i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o'clock p.m. m m-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607SHOREUNEDRIVE, Continued Wagner stated that any fuel storage is contained within the required double wall tanks, in addition, he uses oil waste traps to collect waste. He indicated that he could put a slab near the diesel fuel area but didn’t know how the City would react to that suseestion. Woody added that any waste that is collected with runoff is filtered in traps before allowing the runoff to reach the stormwater sewers. Rahn noted that this was a common practice to use waste traps which can be pumped out and cleaned once waste is collected. Hawn asked for more specifics regarding the sign. Gaifion pointed out that, while the applicant is allowed a certain square footage he has fallen below his allowance. ’ With regard to the issues for discussion, Hawn stated that she would prefer to see more storage moved inside. While she recognized that many pieces of equipment cannot be kept inside for practicality, Hawn requested that these items be moved towards the back of the site. Mabusth ask'd about the dock sections kept in the north yard. Wagner stated that these would be removed in an effort to clean up the site. With regard to the trucks and equipment, Wagner stated that he would try to screen these better and move them to the best of his ability. Mabusth asked if there were a staging for rental of vehicles etc. Wagner explained that once an item is reserved, it is typically, moved to the west side to be picked up. He noted that further jostling of the arrangement could be done; however, added that certain arrangements are necessary to ensure efficiencies. Rahn pointed out that they would be gaining a great deal more space indoore, approximately 1700 s.f. Fritzler questioned whether the industrial business itself was compatible with the B*1 Zoning standards of the site. He believed the applicant should be more amenable to screening and moving things around. Noting that it was not her wish to see the business go away. Chair Smith urged the applicant to utilize the indoor space by moving more of he equipment inside. Page 10 of 29 I Jj • I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 * 6:00 o'clock p.m. (U) m-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued While he could not get specific until the remodel was complete, Wagaer acknowledged that he would strive to move equipment around and inside as best he could. Hawn suggested the applicant provide the Planning Commission and City Council with a schematic where everything would go in the new plan. Chair Smith recommended he include the landsc^ing and lighting plan m this schematic. Mabusth agreed that she, too, would like to see a final site plan relative to placement of all of these rental things. With regard to the outdoor versus indoor storage, Rahn suggested the applicant consider installing overhead doors versus patio doors to the lower level in order to ease the nonconformity of outdoor storage to a certain degree. Chair Smith concurred, stating that she would look favorably upon further effort to store less equipment outdoors. She questioned whether the Commission should limit the type or amount of equipment Rahn felt they should not attempt to further limit the type or amount of equipment necessary for him to mn his business. Hawn suggested they have him designate a specific number of stalls for his items in the schematic. Gaffron pointed out that the business is allowed a certain number of parking stalls, warehousing may require fewer, however, rental may require more. Mabusth asked how many trucks the business typically houses. Wagner stated that, between Budget and Ryder, they have 7-10 trucks on hand. He indicated that he could draw up the landscape plan, as requested, designating where diose trucks will go. Rahn stated that the site plan detail phase will allow him to do this. Fritzler maintained that the City may need to be more restrictive with this applicant, if the business requires more than most other businesses in the zone. Hawn agreed that a specific site plan would be helpful, since this business has been found to be acceptable. Page U of 29 I MINUTES OF THE orono planning commission meeting Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o’clock p.m. m M3-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607SHOREUNE DRIVE, Continued Chair Smith asked for comment on gravel versus blacktop. Mabwth stated that she believed that gravel had been recommended by the Engineer the last time due to the business’ proximity to the wetlands. Wagner pointed out that, long ago, gravel was not considered hardcover and was preferable to blacktop in containing some of the runoff. Mabusth suggested the City allow that some kind of concrete pad be placed near the tanVg and wetland for contai^ent purposes, a waste trap. She further suggested that the western access drive be paved if the Engineer agrees. Woody believed the Engineer would support a paved apron on the west. Hawn recommended the ^plicant gather this information and report back to the Commission. Wagner stated that he was facing time restraints if he were forced to wait to report back next month. Hawn suggested the Commission review the appUcation and schematic during theii November work session. Chair Smith asked if the Commissicn found the exterior finish and sign acceptable. Hawn stated that, personally, she would prefer horirontal, but was comfortable with the sign and siding as proposed. Wagner stated that the proposed sign would not be as tall and extend less close to the road than the existu;g sign. Rahn stated that the proposed sign did not seem out of place. Chair Smith suggested the applicant supply the Commission with specific detail, a lighting and landscaping plan, runoff and drainage plans, stalls, bays. etc. before they move the application forward to Council. She recommended the applicant also consider overhead doors and paving the west entrance, subject to the Engineer’s report. Wagner stated that he would get those items done to meet the work session dradlinr Mabusth asked what the shed was used for in the back and suggested that it be moved in order to use its current location to store other items out of sight. Page 12 of 29 I I MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday, October 20,2003 6:00 o ’clock p.m. {U) n03-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued Wagner stated that the shed is used to store unsightly items, such as scaffolding and parts. He indicated that he would give serious consideration to relocating it. Rahn agreed that relocating the shed to a lower site on the property would free up valuable paricing space for large equipment. Mabusth asked how long Mr. Wagner had been in the rental business. Wagner replied that it’s been a family owned business since the 60’s. Dan Crear, 3701 Shoreline Drive, the adjoining property and business owner stated t^at he was curious to see the proposal and decided to attend. He pointed out that this remodeling project is a p^e example of what was accentuated at the Navarre Town Meeting last year. Crear maintained that, if Orono had a concrete master plan or vision for the redevelopment of the Navarre area, the City could provide Mr. Wagner with valuable direction in his remodeling efforts. He felt this was one of the reasons to look at that overall vision, as opportunities to beautify and clean up sites like this occur. He believed this site would better serve the community as a ‘people site’ and was pleased to see any efforts to beautify and clean it up. Chair Smith shared with Mr. Crear that, the City too, has put the Navarre vision or master planning process at the top of its priority list in the Navarre beautification effort. Chair Smith moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #03-2923, Stevan Wagner, 3607 and 3609 Shoreline Drive, to allow the applicant time to provide the Commission with a detailed site plan at its Work Session in November. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (#7) #03-2934 JASON BLISS, 3445 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD, VARIANCE, 7:40 - 8:04 P.M. Jason Bliss, the Applicant, and Paul Larson, the Architect, were present. Gaffron explained that the applicant has requested a number of variances to construct a new residence on the property. The variances include: 1 . Lot area and width. 2. Side street setback (required 15 ’ proposed - 1 r-12.5'). 3. 75-250' Hardcover (existing = 1 ,985 s.f. = 30.6%; allowed «1,623 s.f = 25%; proposed » 1,668 s.f.« 25.7%; adding AC pad, minimal sidewalk and probable future 8x12 deck yields 1824 s.f.-28.1%). Page 13 of 29 I Exhibit H See. 58-1. Maiah of private property. (a) It is the duty of the owner of every vacant property and the owner and occupant of every occupied property to nuuntain the property in a neat, clean and presentable nuumer five of any junk, debris, refuse, litter, dead trees, or noxious weeds, and to remove all other public health or safety hazards &om the propeity. il Exhibit D (#6) #03-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINE DRIVE, VARIANCE, 6:43 - 7:40 P.M. Stevan Wagner, the Applicant, and Martin Woody, the Architect, were present. Foth reported that the applicant has submitted an application for a building expansion and remodel in the B-1 Zoning District. As per City Code Section 78-642 any application for a commercial building permit prompts a site review by the Planning Commission and City Council. The applicant has requested the following: 1) Commercial site plan review in order to obtain a building permit to remodel and expand an existing 2310 s.f. concrete block building on the property to a 4080 s.f. building, a 1,770 s.f. total expansion. 2) A setback variance in order to re-use the existing sign pole which is setback 8 ’ from the front property line where 10’ is required. The signage itself will extend an additional 4’ into the setback area for a sign setback of 4’ when 10’ is required.* 3) Hardcover variance to allow existing driveway hardcover to become structural hardcover.* *Foth noted that each of these items would be reviewed in part with the overall commercial site review Foth explained that the property located at 3607 Shoreline Drive has historically served as an equipment rental business. While lawn and garden equipment rental is a permitted use in the district, there is a great deal of outdoor storage associated with this business. Outdoor storage is a conditional use in the Industrial district only. While the existing sign is located 8 ’ from the front prop>erty line, where a 10’ setback is required, Foth stated that the applicant is proposing to re-use this sign in part including the non-conforming setback. Tlte property is allowed signage up to 250 s.f; therefore, the proposed signage of ISO s.f is in compliance with Zoning Ordinance requirements. (U) m-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued Although this property is almost entirely within the 500’-1000’ hardcover zone, Foth indicated that currently there is 35,030 s.f of hardcover constituting 72.75 %. Most of this hardcover is gravel and paved parking areas with buildings consisting of only 6,132.75 s.f or 1/6 of the 72.75%. With regard to parking spaces and/or garages, these shall be located in areas other than the required yard; except that parking may be located in a rear yard to within three feet of the rear or side lot line unless the rear or side lot line is in common with an R district; in which case the setback distance shall be 35’. The applicant ’s property is irregularly shaped and surrounded at the rear and on the west side by residential property. The eastern side lot line abuts another B-1 district. Based on the size of the business, it is required to supply 11 parking stalls; however, currently there are 18 stalls. Foth noted that a drainage and surface water management plan should be submitted to the City for Engineer review prior to final approval with two-foot contour interval or spot elevations on a 100-foot grid if the two-foot contours are over 100 feet apart. The applicant has proposed additional vegetative screening between the west side of the proposed building and the western drive. In addition, a lighting plan has not been provided with the application. The applicant should address how or whether the individual buildings, entryways, or parking lot will be illuminated. With regard to the building quality, Foth explained that the applicant has proposed vertical wood siding with a field stone base for the exterior fa9ade of the building. The Planning Commission should discuss whether these “residential ” materials are appropriate for the B-1 district. In conclusion, Foth presented a summary of issues for discussion: 1. Is the outdoor storage use non-conforming? Should it be allowed to be improved and/or expanded? 2. Should the building be constructed to accommodate all of the equipment storage for the business, including the equipment currently being stored outdoors? 3. Should one or both of the accessory structures be removed? 4. Should, if permitted to remain, the outdoor storage be restricted to a specific amount, type and location of equipment? Should additional screening be installed? 5. The west and soudi lots on the property are gravel. Is gravel an appropriate paricing surface for a business district? Should all of the lots be provided with curb and gutter? (M6) m-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued 6. Is the vertical wood siding as proposed an tq)propriate exterior wall finish for a commercial building? 7. Should the pole sign be relocated to a conforming location? 8. Will there be tenants in the other building on the property? How will that use impact the site? 9. Are there any other issues or concerns with this ^)plication? Foth indicated that it would be staffs recommendation: . % ; !i 5 i j i i 1 . To approve the sign variance. 2. planning Commission should advise staff and the applicant regarding issues which the applicant should address regarding the commercial site. Mr. Wagner stated that it was his intent to beautify the existing site and sign. He indicated that he has proposed a north woods feel for his improvements which would improve the views from County Road 15 dramatically. In addition, he noted that he has attempted to further screen the storage area. Chair Smith asked what the building nearest County Road IS is used for and whether the proposed additions were simply to move the business around. Wagner replied that the building currently houses two offices, the one upstairs occupied by an interior designer. He maintained that it was his goal to better manage his cunent business versus increase or grow his business further. Chair Smith questioned whether the circle drive is effective. Wagner stated that the circle drive allows his customers to maneuver one way in and out of his business easier, especially with big equipment. Hawn acknowledged that the site offered unique challenges of its own, along County Road IS, the edge of a marsh, etc. She voiced her concern that propane tanks were left near the marsh which could potentially leak into the wetland. She asked whether gas or oil tanks must be kept on concrete pads. (U6) U03-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued Wagner stated that any fuel storage is contained within the required double wall tanks, in addition, he uses oil waste traps to collect waste. He indicated that he could put a sled) near the diesel fuel area but didn't know how the City would react to that suggestion. Woody added that any waste that is collected with runoff is filtered in the traps before allowing the runoff to reach the stormwater sewers. Rahn noted that this was a common practice to use waste traps which can be pumped out and cleaned once waste is collected. Hawn asked for more specifics regarding the sign. I M <i < Gaffron pointed out that, while th applicant is allowed a certain square footage, he has fallen below his allowance. With regard to the issues for discussion, Hawn stated that she would prefer to see more storage moved inside. While she recognized that many pieces of equipment cannot be kept inside for practicality, Hawn requested that these items be moved towards the back of the site. Mabusth asked about the dock sections kept in the north yard. Wagner stated that these would be removed in an effort to clean up the site. With regard to the trucks and equipment, Wagner stated that he would try to screen these better and move them to the iMst of his ability. Mabusth asked if there were a staging for rental of vehicles etc. Wagner explained that once an item is reserved, it is typically, moved to the west side to be picked up. He noted that further jostling of the arrangement could be done; however, added that certain arrangements are necessary to ensure efficiencies. Rahn pointed out that they would be gaining a great deal more space indoors, approximately 1700 s.f. Fritzler questioned whether the industrial business itself was compatible with the B-1 Zoning standards of the site. He believed the applicant should be more amenable to screening and moving things around. Noting that it was not her wish to see the business go away. Chair Smith urged the iq)plicant to utilize the indoor space by moving more of the equipment inside. (U6) ms-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued While he could not get specific until the remodel was complete, Wagner acknowledged that he would strive to move equipment around and inside as best he could. Hawn suggested the applicant provide the Planning Commission and City Council with a schematic where every^ng would go in the new plan. Chair Smith recommended he include the landscaping and lighting plan in this schematic. Mabusth agreed that she, too, would like to see a final site plan relative to pbcement of all of these rental things. With regard to the outdoor versus indoor storage, Rahn suggested the iq)plicant consider installing overhead doors versus patio doors to the lower level in order to ease the 1ii 4 L Chair Smith concurred, stating that she would look favorably upon further effort to store less equipment outdoors. She questioned whether the Commission should limit the type or amount of equipment. Rahn felt they should not attempt to further limit the type or amount of equipment necessary for him to run his business. Hawn suggested they have him designate a specific number of stalls for his items in the schematic. Gaffron pointed out that the business is allowed a certain number of parking stalls, warehousing may require fewer; however, rental may require more. Mabusth asked how many trucks the business typically houses. Wagner stated that, between Budget and Ryder, they have 7-10 trucks on hand. He indicated that he could draw up the landscape plan, as requested, designating where those trucks will go. Rahn stated that the site plan detail phase will allow him to do this. Fritzler maintained that the City may need to be more restrictive widi this applicant, if the business requires more than most other businesses in the zone. Hawn agreed that a specific site plan would be helpful, since this business has been found to be acceptable. (»6) M3-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued Chair Smitli asked for comment on gravel versus blacktop. Mabusth stated that she believed that gravel had been recommended by the Engineer the last time due to the business* proximity to the wetlands. Wagner pointed out that, long ago, gravel was not considered hardcover and was preferable to blacktop in containing some of the runoff. Mabusth suggested the City allow that some kind of concrete pad be placed near the tanks and wetland for containment purposes, a waste trap. She further suggested that the western access drive be paved if the Engineer agrees. Woody believed the Engineer would support a paved apron on the west Hawn recontmended the applicant gather this information and report back to the Commission. I I I Wagner stated that he was facing time restraints if he were forced to wait to report back next month. Hawn suggested the Commission review the application and schematic during their November work session. Chair Smith asked if the Commission found the exterior finish and sign acceptable. Hawn stated that, personally, she would prefer horizontal, but was comfortable with the sign and siding as proposed. Wagner stated that the proposed sign would not be as tall and extend less close to the road than the existing sign. Rahn stated that the proposed sign did not seem out of place. Chair Smith suggested the applicant supply the Commission with specific detail, a lighting and landscaping plan, runoff and ^ainage plans, stalls, bays, etc. before they move the application forward to Council. She recommended die applicant also consider overhead doors and paving the west entrance, subject to the Engineer’s report. Wagner stated that he would get those items done to meet the work session deadline. Mabusth asked what the shed was used for in the back and suggested that it be moved in order to use its current location to store other items out of sight. (U6) m-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3607 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued Wagner stated that the shed is used to store unsightly items, such as scaffolding and parts. He indicated that he would give serious consideration to relocating it. Rahn agreed that relocating the shed to a lower site on the property would free up valuable parking space for large equipment. Mabusth asked how long Mr. Wagner had been in the rental business. Wagner replied that it’s been a family owned business since the 60’s. Dan Crear, 3701 Shoreline Drive, the adjoining property and business owner stated that he was curious to see the proposal and decided to attend. He pointed out that this remodeling project is a prime example of what was accentuated at the Navarre Town Meeting last year. Crear maintained that, if Orono had a concrete master plan or vision for the redevelopment of the Navarre area, the City could provide Mr. Wagner with valuable direction in his remodeling efforts. He felt this was one of the reasons to look at that overall vision, as opportunities to beautify and clean up sites like this occur. He L believed this site would better serve the community as a ‘people site’ and was pleased to see any efforts to beautify and clean it up. Chair Smith shared with Mr. Crear that, the City too, has put the Navarre vision or master planning process at the top of its priority list in the Navarre beautification effort. Chair Smith moved, Hawn seconded, to table Application #03-2923, Stevan Wagner, 3607 and 3609 Shoreline Drive, to allow the applicant time to provide the Commission with a detailed site plan at its Work Session in November. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. t •» Exhibit E (#4) #03-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3609 SHORELINE DRIVE, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW (6:15-6:25 P.M.) Stevan Wagner, the applicant, was present. Planner Curtis reported that in September 2003 the applicant submitted an application for a building expansion and remodel in the B-1 Zoning District. As per City Code Section 78-642 any application for a commercial building permit prompts a site review by the Planning Commission and City Council. As such, the applicant has requested the following: 1) Commercial site plan review in order to obtain a building permit to remodel and expand an existing 2,310 s.f. concrete block building on the property to a 4080 s.f. building, a 1,770 s.f. total expansion. 2) A setback variance in order to re-use the existing sign pole which is setback 8’ from the front property line where 10’ is required. The signage itself will extend an additional 4 ’ into the setback area for a sign setback of 4 ’ when 10’ is required.* 3) Hardcover variance to allow existing driveway hardcover to become structural hardcover.* *Each of these items will be reviewed in part with the overall commercial site review Curtis continued, stating that the application was presented at the October 2003 Planning Commission meeting and the November 2003 work session. The following information was requested by the Planning Commission at the October meeting for the applicant to provide for their review: 1. Storm water management plan (indicating drainage and grading). 2. Detailed landscape plan including any vegetative screening. 3. A lighting plan. 4. Existing and proposed exterior storage plan, including any equipment staging area. 5. Exterior building material detail. 6. Hazardous waste management solutions During the November work session Planning Commission asked the applicant to provide more detailed information and receive approval from other jurisdictional permitting authorities such as the Hennepin County Environmental Services, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Curtis indicated that to date the applicant has complied with Hennepin County Environmental Services hazardous waste generator requirements, applied for a MPCA Industrial Waste Water Permit and received a permit (for Rule B: Erosion Control and Rule N: Stormwater Management) from the MCWD. The Rule B permit states that erosion control consisting of a silt fence and a gravel construction entrance have been approved, and the Rule N permit states that the applicant ’s project requires Best 'll ’; Management Practices (BMP) and rate control in order the fulfill the stormwater management practices of Rule N. The MCWD has determined that stormwater runoff rates (#03-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3609 SHORELINE DRIVE, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW - Continued) will not increase as a result of the proposed project. The applicant has proposed to the MCWD that he will convert a 3* wide area along the west property boundary from gravel to Minnesota wild grasses and will install a rock drain with a skimming structure (PIG) for the proposed equipment wash site as BMPs. Curtis stated that staff performed a site visit with Hennepin County Environmental Services staff and addressed the issues Planning Commission brought up during the work session. Those issues were: the appropriateness of curbing, paving the west parking area vs. gravel, and how effective the proposed waste trap and skimming structure would be. Hennepin County did not feel that the existing site would require extensive improvements regarding the afore mentioned items and felt that they would best be addressed, if necessary, by the MCWD. Additionally, during this site inspection it was noted that the area behind the building to the rear had an accumulation of scrap, scrap metal, inoperable trailers, tires, and general debris. Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the proposal subject to the following conditions being met: 1. City Engineer’s reconunendations must be implemented. 2. Compliance with all other jurisdictional controls is maintained. 3. Compliance with City Code 58* 1(a) Maintenance of Private Property prior to being placed on the City Council agenda for fmal review Acting Chair Mabusth indicated that the current debris behind the building would have to be removed prior to addressing City Council. Mr. Wagner stated that he had done his best to comply with the Planning Commission recommendations, and worked with staff to come up with a plan which works for the City, as well as, fits his needs. While he is awaiting specific direction from the City Engineer with regard to plant material, Wagner indicated that he would be planting a 3* buffer of Minnesota wildflowers. He requested that, if recommended for approval, his application not be heard until the February 20 City Council meeting which would allow him adequate time to remove the debris behind the building. There were no public comments. Hawn thanked the applicant for supplying the City with all the necessary information; however, questioned how the hazardous waste exposure would be contained and washing of equipment handled. Wagner indicated that he had been instructed by the MPCA to continue to use the waste ' I • I ! r • : ) . i jj trap system both inside and outside for vmshing, which is later removed by a licensed (#03-2923 STEVAN WAGNER, 3609 SHORELINE DRIVE, COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW - Continued) hazardous waste hauler. With regard to the proposed diagram of the site, Hawn questioned whether Wagner ’s intent was to add more to the site and expand his operation. Wagner maintained that he had no intention of expanding the operation, and in fact, believed he had maxed out his facility. He stated that it is his intent to beautify the whole site and make it more comfortable. Hawn asked whether additional hardtopping of the surfaces was intended. Wagn er indicated that he had no intent to blacktop the lower area, and believed this woiUd not be feasible. Curtis interjected that, during the site walk, Hennepin County did not feel blacktopping the lower area was necessary at this site. She pointed out that further discussion will take place between the City Engineer, Applicant, and the City with regard to stormwater maiurgement before being heard by the City Council. Acting Chair Mabusth voiced her concern that the ’use ’ of this site would be increased. She agreed with Hawn that the site use had been maxed and suggested that the City take an inventory or record the specific items that exist on the property currently. Rahn stated that the renovation would hopefully alleviate the concerns expressed by the Commission, since some of the pieces of equipment could be stowed away more readily. He recommended the City use the plan as a record to track increased use. Acting Chair Mabusth moved, Hawn seconded, to recommend approval of Application #03-2923, Stevan Wagner, 3609 Shoreline Drive, granting approval of the proposal subject to the following conditions being met: 1. City Engineer’s recommendations must be implemented. 2. Compliance with all other Jurisdictional controls is maintained. 3. Compliance with City Code 58-l(a) Maintenance of Private Property prior to being placed on the City Council agenda for final review VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. » ^ J Bonestroo Afririn«it¥« Acii«fi/f Auat Ofipartuatty ftfipiayar Rosene Anderlik & |\|| Associates Engineers & Architects January 22,2004 •oneitreo. toitne. Andtrllk and Aiioclaiti* lac. and Implayca Owned Prlficlpalt: Otto G. Bontiiroo. PE • Marvin L Sorvaic PE. • Glenn t Coo«. PE. • footrt O ScmiAicht. PE • Jerry A lourdoa PE • Mark A. Hanson. PE. Senior ConiuNantt: ffoOert W. ffosene. PE. • Joseph C AnderM. PE • eichard E Ibrner. PE • Swian M Eberiin C pa Associate Principals: Iteiih A. Gordon. PE. • PoOeri a Pfefferie. PI. • Ihchsrd W Poster. PC • Osvid O. Loikora. PI • Michael T Rautmann. PE. • Ted K PleW. PE • Kenneth P Andenon. PC. • Marti C eoirs. PE • Oavto A •onetiroo. Mi A • Sidney P Wiitamson. PE. LS • A^s M irng. MM A • AMan Pick Scrtmidi. PE • Thomas W Peterson PE • James R Maland. PE. • Miles ■ Jensta PE • L Ph»iiip Giavei w PE • Oantei J Edgtrton. PE • fsmaet Martnei PE • Thomas A Syfko. P£ • Sheldon j, Johnson • Dale A Grove. PE • Thomai A Roushar. PE • foben J Oevery PE OMiccs: St Pam. Sc. Cloud. Rochester and Willmar. MN • Milwaukee. Wi • Crvc.^go. H. MProsice: wwwoonestfoocom Ms. Melanie Curtis Planner City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN SS323 exhibit F J/S^•<J2 C., 3607/3609 Shoreline Drive File No. 139-04.000 Plat No. 03-2923 Dear Melanie: Thanks you for providing me with a drainage area map for the above-mentioned site. I have reviewed our comment letter ^m November 10,2003 and there are still some outstanding issues. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • The plans have not been revised to show paving of the gravel area or installation of curb and gutter. As noted in our previous letter, we strongly recommend that the plans incorporate some type of storm water treatment system to treat the site runoff prior to discharging to the wetland complex. This might include storm sewer, a treatment pond, vegetated buffer strips, paved parking areas with curb and gutter, or a combination of the concepts mentioned. • Has the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District had a chance to review and comment on die plans? If so could you please forward a copy of their comments to me. • The drainage caloulationa ahould be revised so that “after conditions" assume all gravel parking and drive areas are paved. This should be done so that storm water treatment systems can be sized accordingly. • Final plans should include temporary and permanent erosion control plans. If have any questions please call me at (651) 604-4S63. Yours very truly. BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLDC & ASSOCIATES, INC. Tom Kellogg Cc: Greg Gappa, City of Orono 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 ■ 651-636-4600 • Fax: 651-636*1311 * J •--'A COliMrii r^petING f£B 2 3 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITYOFORONO DATE; February 23, 2004 ITEM NO: // Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Service Director's Report Item Description: Schedule Assessment Hearing for West Farm Sanitary Sewer Project- Resolution We have solicited for and received quotations from three contractors for this project. The total estimated project cost based on the lowest responsible quotation received is $44,800 which results in an assessment of $6,400 for each of the seven properties in the project. All of the project costs will be assessed to the benefiting property owners. This assessment is less than the proposed assessment that was presented at the Public Hearing for this project based on the competitive quotations received. We are recommending Council approval of the attached resolutions declaring the costs to be assessed and scheduling an assessment hearing for 7:00 p.m. at the March 22nd Council meeting COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to approve resolution declaring cost to be assessed and ordering preparation of proposed assessment for the West Farm Sanitary Sewer Project. Motion to approve resolution for hearing on proposed assessment for the West Farm Sanitary Sewer Project. 1 <• «v A RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR WEST FARM SEWER PROJECT WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the West Farm sanitary sewer improvements project and the estimated contract price for such improvement is $34,91 5 and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvement amount to $9,885 so that the total estimated cost of the improvement will be $44,800 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO, MINNESOTA: 1 . The total cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $44,800 Assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2005, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.25 per cent per annum from the date of the adoption of the assessment resolution. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the clerk's office for public inspection. 4.The Clerk sliall upon completion of such proposed assessment, notify the Council thereof 2004 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 23, ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor -'-1 >■ r--<T>^ ; ■ »-• V^i "'Jf* » *1#V t‘ L .> , r^'-M.\ fc. •'’ ■t:,. ' .‘'r.'^w.i Assvilsniest Roll for West Farm Sanitary Sewer Project Date: 23 February 2004 Municipal Code: 38 Municipality: ORONO Levy Number: Levy Description: West Farm Sanitary S<;wcr Project Total Project Assessment: $44,800.00 Interest Rate: 6.25% Number of Years Payable: IS PID Number Total Principal Property Owner’s Name Property Street Address Property Owner's Mailing Address 27-118-23-43-0016 S6.400.00 J. W. &. J. A. PierponI 1849 West Farm Road 1801 West Farm Road Ung Lake MN 5S3S6 27-118-23-44-0016 $6,400.00 J. W. A J. A. Pierpont 1801 West Farm Road 1801 West Farm Road Ung Lake MN SS3S6 34-II8-23-II-0002 $6,400.00 J. D. A P. M. Stavid 780 Brown Road N 780 Brown Road N UngUkeMN SS356 34-118-23-11-0001 $6,400.00 R D. Benson A BA. Luikens 776 Brown Road N 776 Brown Road N Long Lake MN 55356 14-118-23-11-0007 $6,400.00 V.&D. Stein 800 Drown Road N 800 Brown Road N Ung Lake MN 55356 34-118-23-12-0006 $6,400 00 H A 1 Mutter 770 Brown Road N 770 Brown Road N Ung Lake MN 55356 34-118-23-12-0005 $6,400.00 T. M. Schultze A M. L. Steil 744 Brown Road N 744 Brown Road N Ung Lake MN 553S6 Total Asscument S44JQ0.00 • • <4 A RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT WEST FARM SANITARY SEWER PROJECT WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council on Febriutry 23,2004, the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessmen; of the cost of the West Farm area sanitary sewer, and WHEREAS, the Clerk has notified the Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in the Clerk's office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO, MINNESOTA: 1 . A hearing shall be held on the 22nd day of March, 2004 in the Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, at 7:00 p.m. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opporttmity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. The clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. 3 . The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City, except that no interest may be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the assessment. He may at anytime thereafter, pay to the City the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with the interest accmed to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 23,2004 ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor . I REQUEST FOR COUNOL ACTION MPfrriNG FEB 2 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO DATE: February 19,2004 ITEM NO: / 2_ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Long Lake Fire Station Change Order Number 7 Agenda Section: City Administrator's Rq>ort Attached is Change Order Number 7 for the Long Lake Fire Station Project, and related information. The change order is a compilation of a number of additions to the construction contract. The total change order amount is $23,113.00. The Architect and Project Manager have approved the change order. The project is still signiflcantly under budget. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve Change Order Number 7 to the Long Lake Fire Station construction contract, in the amount of $23,113.00. i ‘5 I < I M BKV G R O U f“ itavMMclun MariorOMign Cngkiaarlng 222 NorA 2nd Sipmc MinnM(>ofa.MNSSdOI n>eiM6l2-339-3752 Fw (12-339-6212 Date: February 2004 Attention: BilWokers Address: Constructive Ideas 901 Jefferson Avenue St Paul. MN 55102 .1:? Project No.: 1515.01 fli i M u f £B ' ^■]) 7 C\r,TlVC Re: Long Lake Fire Station WE ARE SENDING YOU: □ Shop drawings □ Prints □ Plans □ Samples □ ^ifications □ Copy of letter l~l Change order |3 Other n Messenger O Fax d OtherTRANSMITTED VIA:□ Mail X .~r*r.O'-**C.T-:^, *>-x COPIFS DATF N«.)DESCRIPTION 6 ChanKe Order No. 7 ------ _ _ THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: —iM For approval Approved as submitted For your use Approved as noted At roqueited For review ar.d comment Returned for corrections Other — FOR BIDS DUE □ prints RE Resubmit Submit__ Return copies for approval copies for distribution corrected prints REMARKS: Enclosed are tbc copies of Change Order No. 7. which have been signed by the Architect Rease review this document and obtain Contractor and Owner signatures. A fully executed copy of the Change Order should be returned to our office. Thank you. Nan Gustafeon COPY TO: Fde t »iulo«iirM «r» wo« i» wowd. Idbdy nodfy m w oi>e«.AMid:2M«4 IT i' * a wart MW CHANGE ORDER OWNER ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR FIELD OTHER AIA DOCUMENT G701 THIS DOCUMENT HAS IMPORTANT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES: CONSULTATION WITH AN ATTORNEY IS ENCOURAGED WITH RESPECT TO ITS COMPLETION OR MODIFICATION. AUTHENTICATION OF THIS ELECTRONICALLY DRAFTED AIA DOCUMENT MAY BE MADE BY USING AIA DOCUMENT 0401. PROJECT:Long Lake Fire Station 340 Willow Drive Long Lake, MN CHANGE ORDER NO.:SEVEN(7) DATE:FEBRUARY 5, 2004 TO CONTRACTOR:Rochon Corporation Suite 120 3650 Annapolis Lane North Plymouth. MN 55447 ARCHITECT S PROJECT #: 1515.01 CONTRACT DATE: The contract is changed as follows: CONTRACT FOR:Complete Construction 1. Miscellaneous cost item No.7; Add opening 224A to door schedule. (Architect Requested) 2. Miscellaneous cost item No. 8; Revise door size from 3'-0’ to 3’-6*. (Architect Requested) 3. Miscellaneous cost item No.41; Paint Owner Installed conduit connections at PW & Co2 (Owner Requested) 4. Miscellaneous cost item No. 42, Rewire kitchen refrigerator from 120 to 208 V. (Owner Requested) 5. Miscellaneous cost item No 44; Change door hardware on toilet partitions. (Owner Requested) 6. Miscellaneous cost item No. 40; Add epoxy floor finish in rooms 120,121,123,123A, & 124. (Owner Requested) 7. Miscellaneous cost item No. 46; Add furniture casters to podium at turn out room. (Owner Requested) 8. Miscellaneous cost item No. 49r; Added wiring for OH door locations (Owner Requested) 9. Miscellaneous cost item No. 50; Added mechanical pads at mezzanine (Mech. Engineer. Requested) 10. Miscellaneous cost item No48; Add 1-1’4" strips to dispatch cabs for ADA.. (Owner Requested) 11. Miscellaneous cost item No. 56; Remove & replace curbs at parking - winter damage. (Owner Requested) 12 Miscellaneous cost item No. 60; Revise finish grading & sidewalk replacement. (Owner Requested) 13. Miscellaneous cost item No. 59, New Countertop & sink. (Owner Requested) 14. Miscellaneous cost item No. 62; Rework mitigation area per S.E.H. (Owner Requested) 15. Miscellaneous cost item No. 54; Speed Controls for fans = PR # 19 - item U 2. (Engineer Requested) 16. Miscellaneous cost item No 52; Integral ttiermostat- UH # 1 - P% # 5. (Engineer Requested) 17. Miscellaneous cost item No. 55; Upigrade MAU #1-30 amp to 60 amp. (Engineer Requested) 18. PR # 23. Add new door & sidelight at Hall # 116 & turnout gear locker room. (Owner Requested) 19. Add offset door pulls to exterior doors, as requested by the owners. (Owner Requested) $ 78200 $ 111.00 $ 525.00 $ 367.00 $ 118.00 $ 638.00 $ 37.00 $ 1.913.00 $ 646.00 $ 121.00 $2,961.00 $ 6,305 00 $1,235.00 $ 2,940 00 $ 31900 $ 213.00 $ 42500 $3,145 00 $ 312.00 L \I5I50I\BUS\CO-7DOC j I Total of items # 1 - # 19, including Contractor ’s overhead & profit $23,113.00 The original Contract Sum was Net change by previously authorized Change Orders The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was The Contract Sum will be increased by this change order in the amount of The new Contract Sum including this Change Order will be $ 1,981,000.00 $ 227,178.49 $ 2,208,178.49 $ 23,113.00 $ 2,231,291.49 The Contract time will be increased by 0 days. The Date of Substantial Completion was January 7,2003 NOTE: This summary does not reflect changes in the Contract Sum, Contract Time or Guaranteed Maximum Price which have been authorized by Construction Change Directive.!5 Authorized: ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR OWNER Boarman Kroos Vogel Group, Inc. Address Rochon Corp. Suite 120, 3650 Annapolis Lane North City of Long Lake 1964 ParkAve. P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 BY DATE AIA DOCUMENT G70I * CHANGE ORDER • 1987 EDITION * AIA - COPYRIGHT 1987 • THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECPS. 1735 NEW YORK AVE., N.W., WASHINGTON. D C. 20006-5292 WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying vioiates U S copyright law and is subfect to legal prosecution. Ttus document was electronically produced with permission o( the AIA and cannot be reproduced wtthoul violation until Ihe date of expiration noted below________________ Constructive Ideas Planning & Preconslruclion Services • Project Cost Analysis • CPM Scheduling January 21,2004 Mr. John Rail BKV Group, Inc. 222 No. 2"^ Street Minneapolis, MN 55401 JAN 2 3 2004 Re: Long Lake Fire Station - Change Order No. 7 Dear John; Attached is my breakdown of outstanding items which should be included in Change Order No. 7 for the Long Lake Fire Station. This includes the following items; Rochon Cotp. miscellaneous items nos. 7,8,40,41,42,44,46,48,49r, 50, 52,54, 55, 56, 59, 60 and 62; Proposal Request No. 23, and an Owner requested item which added offset door pulls to the exterior of the station to resolve a clearance problem with the fire^ fighter’s keys and the straight pulls which were specified for the project. The Grand Total for Change Order No. 7 is Twenty-Three Thousand One Hundred Thirteen Dollars ($23,113.00). Please issue a change order to Rochon’s contract in this amount. If you have any questions, please contact me. bmcerely, CONSTRUCTIVE IDEAS, INC. /lai Enclosure cc:Steve Stahmer, City of Long Lake Ron Moorse, City of Orono 901 Jefferson Avenue. Suite .100 • St. Paul. IVIN 55102 *(6511 225-4740 • Fa* (651) 225-4741 www.consiructivcideasinc com II ^, , i I Jba I Constructive Ideas. Inc. 901 Jefferson Avenue. Suite 300 St. Paul. Minnesota 55102 (651) 225^740 • Fax 225-4741 Project: Long Lake Fire Station Orono. Minnesota Architect: BKV Group Minneapolis. Minnesota Outstanding Items for Change Order No. 7 Rochon Item 7 Type Arch Description Add opening 224A to door schedule Amount 7no nn Remarks 8 Arch 41 Arch 42 Elect 44 Arch 40 Arch 46 Arch 49r Owner 50 Mech 48 Arch 56 Owner 60 Owner PR 23 Owner 59 Owner 62 Owner 54 Mech 52 Mech 55 Elect Owner Coordinate door - 3* on sched.. 3-6" on plan Paint "Owner Installed" conduit connections Rewire kitchen/refngerator from 120 to 208 volt Change door hardware on toilet partitions Expoxy floor finish in rooms ^20. 121. 123. 123A. 124 Add furniture casters to podium at turn-out room Added wiring for overhead door control locations Added mechanical pads at Mezz Add 1 1/4" strips to dispatch cabs for ADA Renx)ve & replace curbs at parking - wiriter damage Revise finish grading and sidewalk replacement New door and sidelight at Hall 116 A Turnout New countertop and sink Rework Mitigation area per 5.E.H. Speed controls for fans - PR«M9-ilem 2? Integral thermostat - UH#1 • PRffS Upgrade Make-up Air Unit <M • 30 amp to 60 amp Change 4 door pulls per Fire Chief for key clearance Total outstanding for Change Order No 7 ’ 111.00 525 00 Conduit for pressure washer & C02 detection system 367.00 118.00 638.00 37.00 1.913.00 646.00 121 00 2,961 00 6.305.00 3.14500 1.235 00 2.940.00 31900 213 00 42500 312.00 Added location for overhead door controls Curbs cracked and chipped by plowing and/or settlement Revisions made to grading at North side of building Added to keep smoke smell out of Admin area Replace top where hole was drilled at Orono’s inspector direction Changes required alter Aug 1. 2003 per Mr Miller’s complaints New Item - just showed up with “claim package" 12/17/2003 New Item - just showed up with "claim package" 12/17/2003 New Item - just showed up with "claim package" 12/17/2003 23.113 00 mk Constructive Idea Planning & Preconstruction Services • Project Cost Analysis • CPM Scheduling January 21,2004 Mr. Jeff Wellman, Vice President Rochon Corporation 3650 Annapolis Lane No., Suite 120 Plymouth, MN 55447 Re; Long Lake Fire Station - Open Items Dear Jeff; On December 17,2003 I received a package of miscellaneous correspondence from you relating to the Long Lake Fire Station, Orono, Minnesota. Among the documents is what apparently is a draft of a letter relating to what you believe are open cost issues on the project. This letter is dated December 15, 2003 printed on plain white paper and unsigned. Following is my response and understanding of the status of these items referred to in your letter. The numbering follows your “Miscellaneous Cost Log,” page 1 thru 5 dated 12/16/03; Items Nos. 7, 8,40,41,42,44,46,48,49r, 50.52,54, 55. 56, PR23, 57. 59, 60, and 62 have been accepted and are being included in Change Order No. 7 to your contract. The total of these accepted items is Twenty-Three Thousand One Hundred Thirteen Dollars ($23,113.00). Items Nos. 18, 19. 20, 24,31.34,36. 43, 45,47,49,51,53,61,63 have been rejected. Some of these items were priced, but the work was never done. Please see the attachment for the description and remarks regarding the reason for their not being accepted. The total of these items, which will not be included in a change order, is Fifty-Five Thousand Six Hundred Forty-Seven Dollars ($55,647.00). Please be advised that item No. 26 was previously approved and included on Change Order No. 5 to your contract. The amount of this item is Two Thousand Fifty-Eight Dollars ($2,058.00). 901 Jetferson Avenue, Suite 300 • St P«ul,MN 55102 •(651) 225-4740 *F«x (651) 225-4741 www.cosandKhedule.com UL. i i Mr. Jeff Wellman January 21,2004 Page 2 I believe this should address all the items you had listed on your “Miscellaneous Cost Log” for the project. If you have any questions please contact me. Sincerely, CONSTRUCTIVE IDEAS, INC, V/illiam A. Wolters President /lai Enclosure ohn Rail - BKV Group, Inc. Steve Stahmer - City of Long Lake i /:4® .#^%e^r}V - - ‘ ’ ‘ Constructive Ideas, Inc. 901 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 300 St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 (651) 225.4740 • Fax 225-»741 Project: Long Lake Fire Station Orono, Minnesota Response to Items Shown as "Open" by Rochon Corp. Description Architect: BKV Group Minneapolis, Minnesota Rochon Item _________________uescripiion steel erectors Installed 16 rooftop (fames lor tiie roof drains 18 from underside Ihe decking 19 Additional cost to widen Ihe gale at the mezzanine Fabricate and install 2-line rail around the air handling unit Rail to be consirucled ol 1 1/2" x 1 1/2" lube. 3'-6‘ high 20 painted safely yellow ' Cost to extend sanitary manhole 137 two feet. This cost is associated with PRSi pr*m explicitly gave direction to install 24 manhole 137 at an elevation of 998' Cost to rent a 3-inch pump with suction and discharge hoses for two months. This was due to the unusu.'illy wet site 26 conditions Amount Action Remarks 1.698.00 Rejected 2.098.00 Rejected Refer to detail 4/S-5. Angle frames were a requirement at all mechanical roof openings. This was not accepted and the work was not done. 1,328.00 Rejected This was not accepted and the work was not done. Add 22 SF of retaining wall to base bid Add base material and labor for ext» xJing retaining wall • 50 LF Add for additional excavation for extension of the retaining wall and 31 spreading Ihe excess material on Install a four-inch storm sewer line with a yard drain cover In the grass area and day-lighted out of Ihe curb per discussion In the field with United Water. Bill Wolters and Rochon Coro, at 34 the north side of office Furnish and install two coals of solvent based epoxy finish lo 36 the floors in rooms 120. 121, 123. 123A and 124 2.146.00 Rejecled This was not accepted and the work was not done. 2.428 00 Rejected This proposal was not accepted and the vyork was not done. Extra cost lo remove water for utility work that was not 43 included in original proposal request Epoxy floor coating on mezzanine and mam level rooms, a lotaJ of 2.500 SF This cost supersedes Miscellaneous Cost 45 «I40 that was submitted January 22 Cost lo install timer switch lo inlerlock with exhaust fan f^3 that 51 was not shown on the plans Cost lo provide one disconned for Make-UP Air Unil - refer lo bo PR tfS Extra costs assoaated with removing existing class 5 base 61 ar>d areas 11,153 00 Rejecled An allowance was accepted In miscellaneous cost No 26 for pumping due to the wet construction season. This claim wasn't made for dewatering bur for controlling rainwater and wasnT even mentioned for for six months after the utility work was done 1,328.00 Rejected Split costs With city on dyring out, demo and repair work of 63 interior. 606 00 Rejected 128.00 Rejected 25.538.00 Rejected 3,114,00 Rejected The agreement w/ Kirby Thompson was according lo miscellaneous cost No. 40, and that item is being included m Change Order No. 7. Please see explanation from "Approved Equal Co." regarding this timer and whether it should have been on EF-3 or EF-6 This should have resulted in a credit from the mechanical and an add to the electrical See PR #9. Tlus^ was pre-approved at $6,305 and that amount .s being included in Char>ge Order No 7. ^ The City has rw responsibility for these cos^ 1 025 00 Reiecled f'eid before the manhole wasKeiecled installed. There was no extra for this work Approved in Change order 2.058,00 #5 This is item No 1 on Change Order No. 5 dated Janu.iry 14. 2003 This change was rejecled. and Ihe cost to modify the modular block • 1 187 00 Rninrina Rochon’s Contract under miscellaneous ' 1.187.00 Rejected 'lem No. 33. This was included in Change Order No 5. ■ rwi la‘> ^Aiitii iaiAi.Ilb-ai Constructive Ideas Planning & Preconstruction Services • Project Cost Analysis • CPM Scheduling January 22, 2004 Mr. Jeff Wellman, Vice President Rochon Corporation 3650 Annapolis Lane No., Suite 120 Plymouth, MN 55447 Re: Long Lake Fire Station - Paving Dear Jeff: I have your letter dated November 25,2003 addressing the final costs of installing the bituminous at the Long Lake Fire Station project Please be advised that the City of Orono is aware of the situation, but has not made a decision on whether they will pursue the paving through an alternative contractor or if they will accept your claimed extra to furnish the paving in the spring. A final decision will be made prior to the spring paving season, and agreement with you reached prior to your proceeding with the work, if that is the direction the cities choose. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, CONSTRUCTIVE IDEAS, INC. William A. Wolters President /lai cc:y^olohn Rail - BKV Group, Inc. Ron Moorse - City of Orono Steve Stahmer - City of Long Lake 901 Jefrerson Avenue. Suite 300 • St. Paul, MN 55102 • (65 i) 225-4740 • Fax (651) 2254741 www.coscandschedule com ♦ ^ V I' rco t Ji 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO Date: February 19,2004 Item No: f 3 Department Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name: Title: Ronald J. Moorse City Administrator Item Description: Funding of LOGIS Police Records System Assessment In May of 2003, the Council approved the payment of an assessment for the LOGIS police records system upgrade in the amount of $95,567.00, to be paid to LOGIS over a three year period, and to flnance these payments over a six year period through an internal loan with a 3% interest rate from the PIR (Permanent Improvement Revolving) Fimd. The Council also approved a budget adjustment in the PIR Fund to reflect the payment of the first installment in 2003. The final arrangement with LOGIS was to delay the initial assessment payment umil 2004, and to make the payment in two annual installments rather than three. COUNCIL ACnON REQUESTED I) Motion to rescind the 2003 budget adjustment in the PIR Fund related to the LOGIS Police Records System assessment, and to adjust the 2004 PIR Fund budget to reflect the initial payment to LOGIS in the amount of $48,500. c\ippsNifwiB6(Awpdocs\siie\cd^ Miiiiiinii I [liMhi tv; REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CnilMril fEB 2 3 2004 CITV OF ORONO DATE: February 19,2004 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse THIc City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: City Administratoi's Report Item Description: Western Hennepin‘’'Affordable Housing Land Trust (WHAHLT) CDBG Application Tbe WHAHLT is applying for funding through the CDBG grant process to assist the organization in purchasing either single-family lots or existing homes to enable affordable housing. The Land Trust facilitates affordability by eliminating the land costs from the housing cost equation. When the Land Trust purchases a vacant parcel, it builds a house on it. When it sells the house, it does not sell the land. Rather, it retains ownership of the land, and provides a long term land lease to the home buyer. In this way, the new owner does not have to pay the land costs. This makes the house affordable. Also, over time, as the house is resold, the cost remains affordable because the appreciated value of the land is not included in the price of the house. If the grant application is successful, it would enable the Land Trust to purchase one or two properties. The Land Trust would like to work with the Cities of Orono, Shorewood and Tonka Bay to find properties that would be a good fit for the Land Trust. The City ’s support for the grant application would assist in making the grant application successful. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion regarding support for the WHAHLT CDBG grant application. r li ["■ i REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION »<PETING FEB 2 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO DATE: February 1% 2004 ITEM NO: l5 Department Approval: Nane Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: __Mf__ Agenda Section: City Administrators Report Item Description: WeCAN CDBG Fundin^Request Attached is a letter from Ginny Lozano, Executive Director of Western Communities Action Network (WeCAN), requesting the City Council's support for a WeCAN CDBG funding request. WeCAN is requesting $15,000 of the CDBG funds that are administered by Hennepin County for the smaller cities in the County, to assist in funding the human service activities carried out by WeCAN.. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion regarding support for the WeCAN request for CDBG frmding. ‘ f - - OFFICERS Devid L. Sutton President CoB«unlt)rVolaiiteer IJlienscn Vice President Aiiorutr f«ttor. Fauvirw Co««n«iit Cb«Kh Manrin Johnson Treasurer Miftn of lndrpfo4cncf Sue WilUams Secretao CoBBUnlty VolunlMt BOARD OF DIRECTORS Craig Andcraoii MuiaftrutB Foticc Chief Vcrn Brandenburg CoBBMity Vofufitecr Sharon Cook Cob nullity Volunteer Mary DeVinney Ucelonke Food Shelf Dave Garwick *''1101. Chrut Uthcran Church ten Harrell CoanuDa) Yoluntcer Mary Hughes SopertMor, BestonU COBBUOS) IdttCJtlOII ilm Kurta Moimd Police Chief ■ay McCoy Direclor, Weel Hrnoepia Publk Sefety Dorothy McQueen CoBBaaSy Voluateer Charles Pugh CoBaaaity Volaaleer BohToaialka CoBBanity Volanteer Mark Winter iBBtdiatff Put President Vice Preeident, Crow tteer Sank STAFF GIm9 Losano iMcatm Dlfoelor Audrey Ogland MtiU 00 WheaU AtentBirative Aimtont LiudaHllk tapfornmi Coaaielor Vaianlotr Coordmotor Krisdn Perry PoBiiy Adeacalt Western Communities Action Network Family Support Services Meals on Wheels EmpIo>'meDt Counseling Human Serv ices 2434 Commerce Blvd Mound. MN 55364 (952) 472-0742 Phone (95^) 472-5589 Fax January 2004 Mayor Barbara Peterson And City Council Members City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, a 9 200^ On behalf of the Western Communiiies Action Network (W'eCAN) Board of Directors, I am asking the City of Orono to support our request for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. WeCAN is the community-based human ser\ice 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 western Hennepin County for over 14 years. WeCAN is the sole designated provider of emergency human ser\ ices in your community. Our mission is to provide a safely net to these families during a time of crisis. Our programs include emergency housing and utility assistance, job counseling, family support services, public assistance intake services and Meals on Wheels. In 2003, we served over 1,700 households in our serv ice area. This reflects a 40% increase in the number of households sen ed in the prev ious year. During these tough economic times and a climate of job lay-offs.O- we have seen an increase in the number 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. W'eCAN was able to provide the guidance and assistance needed to maintain some family stability. Enclosed for your review is detailed 2003 demographic information about the services provided in your community and surrounding area. WeCAN serves the fcUowUigoaiiuniinities: Greenficid, ladepcadeooe, Loretto, Maple Pkia. MiniiMnnks Beach, MinaetrisU, Mound. Rockford, St Bonifodus. Spring Pirk. Tonka Bay k WcMem Orono m. - \ 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 continued support and a resolution or letter from the City to be included in our application by February 27,2004. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please feel free to contact me. Thank you for your continued support. Respectfully, Ginny Lq^o Executive Director Enclosures ■4-‘ ," , -' V _ ‘ r c<.- i REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COIlwril MEETING FEB 2 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO DATE: February 23,2004 ITEM NO: | (j> Dcpartncnt Approval!. 1/ / Adminlslralor Reviewed: Agenda Section:ra« yi Name Tom Title Finance Director h City Administrator's Report Item Description: Declaration of Reimbursement Intent for Police Vehicle Costs and Public Works Capital Equipment Costs - Resolution Attachments: Resolution Declaring Intent To Reimburse Police Vehicle Costs and Public Works Capital Equipment Costs With Equipment Certificate Proceeds. This year the City is purchasing three squad cars for the police department. These vehicles are replacing three current squad cars. In addition the public works department is purchasing a pick up truck, a roadside mower/sweeper, and a brush chipper. The City will issue equipment certificates to finance these costs and to reimburse any City expenditures for these vehicles or equipment. The attached resolution is required for the purpose of complying with treasury regulations to permit the reimbursement of expenditures prior to the sale of the equipment certificates. The resolution also estaolishes the Council meeting of March 22,2004 to consider those proposals solicited. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached Resolution Declaring Intent To Reimburse Police Vehicle Costs and Public Works Capital Equipment Costs With Equipment Certificate Proceeds. AcaiMV20O««aM*.lai«M.PD-rw VA wpd i A RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENT TO REIMBURSE POLICE VEHICLE COSTS AND PUBLIC WORKS CAPITAL EQUIPMENT COSTS WITH EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATE PROCEEDS BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City is acquiring three police cars for use by the Police Department. 2. The City is acquiring a pick up truck, a roadside raower/sweeper, and a brush chipper for use by the Public Works Department. 3. This Council expects that a portion of the acquisition costs and related expenses will be reimbursed from the proceeds of equipment certificates of indebtedness to be issued by the City pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.301. The maximum principal amount of certificates to be issued for this purpose is $208,000. This resolution is for the purpose of declaring the City’s official intent for purposes of Treas. Reg. § 1.150-2. 3. The Finance Director shall solicit proposals for the sale of the certificates from available financing sources for consideration by this Council at the regular council meeting on Monday, March 22,2004. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 23,2004. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Word Pw*cfNTOMtoiMM«l Ll r T MPETING FEB 2 3 2004REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: February 23,2004 ITEM NO: | 7 Department Approval: Name Lin Vcc Thle City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval TEMPORARY ON SALE LIQUOR LICENSE 1.Orono Rotary Minnetonka Center for the Arts 2240 North Shore Drive SPECIAL EVENT 2.Applicant: Event: Location: Date: Time: Peter Erpenbach Fred Kur/ Memorial 10 Mile Run Luce Line Trail starting at the Wayzata Middle School • approximately 4.5 miles out and back. Saturday, April 10, 2004 8:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses. T 1 r ' I I f . ■ 1 I Rachel Dodge • Orono Rolarty Page 1 From:Kurt Erickson To:Rachel Dodge Date:2/18/04 4:24PM Subject:Orono Rotarty Rachel, I have reviewed the application of the Orono Rotary to provide On Sale liquor at the Minnetonka Center for the Arts on Tuesday, April 27,2004. I find there would be no problem if the 6 sample conditions Lin attached to the application are followed. Please advise if you need copies of the sample conditions. Thanks. Kurt Minnesota Department of Public Safety Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division 444 Cedar St-Suite 133 St. Paul.MN 55101-5133 (651 )296-64391DD (651 )282-6555 APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR A TEMPORARY ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE TYPI- OR PRIM INFORMATION NAME OF ORGANIZATION ORONO Rotarv STREE^5g§R|^^rtown Rd. NAME OF PERSON MAKING APPLICATION sanne ManolesChry DATES LIQUOR WILL BE SOLD 4A27/04 ORGANIZATION OFRCER S NA.ME ORGANIZATION OFFICER S NA.ME Kurt Baldry ORGANIZATION OFFICER S NAME Mike Bash DATE ORGANIZED 2/U/2001mno TAX EXEMIT NUMBER STATE MN BUSINESS PHONE (QS7)- Lift I SSI HOME PHONE ^ ^ s ame TYPE OF ORGANIZATION ECLLfB nCHARITABLE GRELIGIOUS GOTHER NONPROFIT ADDRESS ADDRESS 1A72 Meadow Lane, Maple Plain, MN 55359 ADDRESS 1680 Bo Hum Lane, Lor.c Lake, liN 55356 Location where license will be used. If an outdoor area, describe MlnnpFonlffl Canroi- for rha ARTP; ?9Zifl N^^T•^h ghn-ro Ttri oo nyrmrtStjtOt (Indoors) Will the applicant contract for intoxicating liquor services? If so, give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service NO Will tlie applicant carry liquor liability insurance? If so, the carrier’s name and amount of coverage, aah non (NOTE: Insurance is not mandatory.) yes . Aon -Ri-".lv-Ser-v-ice5 , Inc . of -I APPROVAL APH.1CATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR CXH’VTY BEItNlE SCBMITriNG TO ALCOHOL & GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT CITY/COUNTY____________________________________DATE APPROVED_________________________________ _____________________________LICENSE DATES__________________________________CITY FTiE AMOUNT DATE FEE PAID___ SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OFFICIAL APPROVED Akohot A CuDbling EofcrceineGi Directoi Note: Do not icparate Umm Ino parte, send both parts to Uw address above and Bm origiaal signed by Uns diviston vriM be retamed as ibe Uccasc. SabaiM to ibe city or Coaaty al least 30 days befare tbe event. PS-0M79(teW| 1 State of Minnesota County of Hennepin City of Orono License No: | 2004-10 Amount: | $25.CK) ' V'. P^liquor License •> ^__i. - 1 '.H' r ' ^ Upon investigation and satisfactory evidence of the qualification of the licensee, this license is granted and pursuant to application and payment of fee thereof, and is subject to all the provisions and conditions of the laws of the United States, the laws of the State of Minnesota, the regulations and ordinances of the City of Orono, and the rules and regulations of the Liquor Control Commissioner, pertaining to such; and subject to revocation according to law for violation thereof. This license is not transferable except by consent of the Issuing authority. Granted To: Bualneta Name; Buainesa Address: Commencing: Terminating: Business Description: Orono Rotary Minnetonka Center for the Arts 2240 North Shore Drive April 27, 2004 April 27. 2004 Fundraiser-Silent Auction Issued by authority of the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota on: February 23, 2004 Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Attest; Linda S. Vee, City Clerk 2780KsS^ftdMiy, P.O.Bmes. CrytWBiV.im 6KB3 nuns; (082) 240-4000/Fsk (982) 240^0 m Temporaiy On Sale Liquor License : * f *» - ' - . jf* ‘ tv* - * l I 2^10 ^ Oroni Rotary *! 2240 North Shore Drive : The following conditions have been placed on this license: 1. Any alcohol purchased at the site must be consumed on site and not taken aboard buses or other transportation. 2. Alcohol sales are to be restricted to persons 21 years or older. Encourage and "ID under 35" policy. 3. No sales to intoxicated persons. 4. Non-alcoholic beverages must also be available and food of some type. 5. The name of the responsible person for the control of the event must be provided to the Oroiio Police Department with contact phone if problems occur. 6. The Orono Police Department may revoke the licence at any time for any violations. TS^ Rachel Dodge • Fred Kurtz Memorial Run Page 1 From; To: Date: Subject: Kurt Erickson Rachel Dodge a 18/04 4:32PM Fred Kurtz Memorial Run I have reviewed the permit application for the Fred Kurtz Memorial Run to be held on Saturday April 10, 2004. This is a reoccurring annual event that has not caused any problems in the past. I would recommend approval of the permit using the same conditions set last year. I would also add item number 9 from the State of Minnesota permit to the Orono permit. Please let me know if you need copies of last years conditions. I might have a copy. Thanks Rachel. Kurt RECE/veo ^^6 I 0 2004 C'TVOFOfiowo I. Special Event Permit Application City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Fee: $50.00 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Date Received: ^ ‘ ixfo*/ Objective: To ensure the health, safety and welfare of the community.____________ Type of Special Event (check all that apply) □ Activity which generates parking needs for more than 20 vehicles off site □ Block Partym □ Carnival □ Circus □ Commercial/movie shoot □ Fishing Contest □ Live Music - Noise Exemption ■ Marathon Event O Parachute Jump □ Parade of Homes/Home Tours □ Street Parade □ Theatrical performance or exhibits □ Use of Public Property □ Hot Air Balloon Event ______________________________^re4 Kur* 10 Applicapt Information • » Address A v £ City, State, Zip: Phone SlpSia Organization (if applicable) Address sno\K)or City, State, Zip: Phone ssa 0*183 Event Details Location:Lm%MLC^"TrAi \ M.S’ eifT H-b<ick -Cm** Datets): ^^rfurelw Hours: W.CO Brief Description of Event: ............................ ............. ............ Ce«vV<‘<i\ 1 tip \/^\C-6buf<i L back. t. *Ve> Ao()l lej: Use additional paper if necessary. I am aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding parades and special events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the City of Orono harmless from all liabilities that may' arise directly or indirectly from the parade or special event approved by the granting of this permit / understand some events may require off-duty or reserve officers and a fee may be required for these services. In addition, applicant agrees to pay actual costs up to $1.500for processing of application. Signature se services, Jn addition, applicant a; atiirp I Date i Special Event Permit Application (continued) Submittals Please give consideration to the following list of documents and/or i-mits which mav be required prior to City and Council approval. The application should be submitted at least 30 days prior to the event. Documents □ Site plan identifying buildings, driveways, local streets, parking locations, temporary structures (include size), temporary restrooms, or any cordoned off area(s) o Proposed route of event □ Letter of Approval from the Police Department Certificate of General Liabilit)' Insurance - The City, its agents and employees must be named as additional insureds, providing public liability insurance in the amount of at least $300,000 for injury of one person, $500,000 for injury of two or more, and $50,000 for property damage. □ Approval of Homeowners Association if the event affects private property where a Homeowners Association has been established. □ Notification and'or approval of affected neighbors for events involving the following: - Shows and large assemblies (over 300 people) - Fireworks — Live or amplified music - Parade of Homes/Home Tours Licenses/Permits bT DNR □ Fireworks □ Fire Department (Fire Marshal) □ Gambling □ Health Department (County) □ Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) □ Solicitor’s □ Temporary Sign □ Vendor License □ Temporary On-Sale Liquor License (State and Local) □ Hennepin County Sheriffs Water Patrol □ Other For Office Use Only Review by Administration: □ Approved o Denied Q NA By: Review by Building & Zoning; □ Approved □ Deni^a NA By: Review by Fire Marshal: □ Approved □ Denied a NA By: Review by PoUm Department: □ Approved □ Denied o NA By: J CITY OF ORONO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT Date Issued: Date of Event: Februai^ 23, 2004 Saturday, April 10, 2004 TinH*:8:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. Name of Person(s) And/or Organization Spon.M»ring this Event: Peter Erpenbach Minnesota Distance Running Association 5701 Normandale Boulevard Edina. MN 55424 Phone:952-927-0983 Locution of Event: Luce Line Trail starting at the Wayzata Middle School - approximately 4.5 miles out and back. Type of Event: Fred Kurz Memorial 10 Mile Run (approximately 75 participants) The fulhming d«icuni«iiLs an* required and on lil« al the Gilt Adminulnitive UfficK: • CemtiL'alc ut General Liabilily Insurance • Permil Ironi DNR lor use of Luce ' .me Trail • Approval from Orono Police Department The foiiowing condiliom have been placed on this event; • This special event permit is subject to immediate revocation by the Orono Police Department upon violation of any City Ordinances or identification of hazards to safety of tiie public. • Applicant must provide enough volunteers to direct runners/UaiTic at intersection roads along the race route. • Applicant must provide first ei<t to the runners. • The PemiiUcc agrees to indciimify and hold hanniess the Stale from all claims arising from said eveni. Pcrmitlee waives and release all claims against the Slate of Minnesota, its officers or employees for any <laiiiage to person or property, arising from the exercise of pnvileges granted by this permit, and agrees to hold hanniess said stale and its employees from any such claim. Approved at City Council meeting on: February* 23.2U04 (City Seal) Ronald J. Moorse, City Administrator 2750 Kelley Parkway. P.O. Box 66. Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Phone: 952-249-4600/Fax: 952-249-4616/wwrw.ci.orono.mn.us A CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® m 12:25 PM Pagel FEBRUARY 2004 Check Amt Cnuwrn fJ.PETING 2 i 2004 CITY OF ORONO (H) IfWOiM Cowiiiwnl ItIM MmnyCiCMh 0101-21701 FwtoralWIIMMiding 0 101-21703 FICATaxWilMMMIng 0101-21703 FICATaxVWMwMIno ToM FWST NATIONAL BANK OF LANES FIRST NATK)NAL BANK OF LAKES 30,714.54 $4,365.07 $4,365 07 $17,444 60 PaUdMJ wnii iknoM iouretniement trust -4S7 0 101-21705 Oliwf RaliramwiI $626 62 ToW ICIIARETIRENENTTRUST-4f7 $626 62 FaUCyj bmw 2/40004 law enforcment labor servke 0101-21707 UnioiiOuM $000 Tom law enforcment labor service $000 Paid Chkf 077617 2/4/2004 MN CMLO SUPPORT PUT CTR 0101-21712 OttMfDaducliona ____$0 00 Total MNCHILO SUPPORT PUT CTR $0 00 PaldChM 077(il4 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 0101-21702 Stale Withholding Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $3,671.70 Paid ChMP 077610 $3,671 70 MN STATE RETNtEMENT SYSTOi 0101-21716 Post Emptoymofll Heatti ToM MN STATE REnREMENT SYSTEM $24043 $240.43 PaMCMJ 077626 2/4/2M4 NATIONWIDE STNtEMENT SOLUnON 0 101-21705 Olhor Roliioment $1,677 00 0 101-21705 Other RaOramaflt $9 86 ToM NATIONWIOERETWEMENT SOLUTION $1,886 86 PaMChki 077621 2/4/2004 ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST O 101-21705 Other Retirement $4,129 66 ToM ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST Paid Chki 6^^622 $4,12968 2/4/2604 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETNtEMENT O 101-21704 PERA $6,743 42 O 101-21704 PERA $5,264 63 ToM PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETNtEMerr $12,006.25 Paid ChW 077623 2/4/2004 UMTEOWAY 0101-21708 UnMdWay $70 00 ToM UMTEOWAY $70 00 Paid ChW 0f7S37 'jnrzri WISCONSIN 8CTF 0101-21712 Other Deductions TetM WISCONSW SCTF I1S4 62 $184 62 16160 PftmaryCesh $40.262 84 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 10100 Pftmery Cash $40,262.84 $40,262.84 FEDERAL W/H FiCA 8 MEDICARE W/H FICA A MEDCR CITY SHARE DEFERRED COMP-302030 UNION DUES M Car1son#0014164432 STATE TAX W/H post retirement USCM - ENTITY 2339 OBRAi2343 MN STATE RETIREMENT PERA CITY SHARE PERA EMPLOYEE W/M CHARITY DONATIONS #0002796688 CITY OF ORONO clMck regittar 02AMAM 11:58 AM Pagtl Ch9Ck Numter Employe Namo 053S17 053816 053616 053620 053621 053622 053623 053824 053625 053826 053627 053628 053629 053630 053631 053632 053633 053634 053635 053636 053637 053636 053639 053640 053641 053642 053652 053644 053645 053646 053647 053646 053649 003173 003174 003112 003113 003114 003115 003116 003175 003176 003177 003176 003179 003160 003161 003162 003163 003164 003165 003166 003167 003166 003169 003190 003194 003193 003195 DCXX^. RACHEL II LESKINEN. DENISE M SILUS. BARBARA G ANDERSON. BRUCE L. BOBZIEN. SUE A. BORIS. SCOTT W. BUDIG. SIACIE M DEMBOUSKl. JAY C. ERICKSON. KURT R FARNIOK. CORREY L. FISCHENICH. DAN T. MADSON. ADRIENNE M. MCNICHOLS. DAVID L. MOROWCZYNSKl. JAMES PERSEU. WILLIAM R. RUSSETH. KYLE M SCHOENHOFF. JOHN B. TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. TOMCZYK.MARKW WITTKE.ANTHONYA. HERMAN. JOHN R QAFFRON. MICHAEL P. MEYER. WiaiAMC. OMAN. LYLE E. VANG. BRUCE L GREGORY. JAMES D HANSEN. STEVEN OBRIEN. RANDY L. PALMER. GREGORY A. RATHBUN. BARRY J SKREEN. DALE S ROSS. JOHN A STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD MOORSE. RONALD J. VEE. LINDA S KUEHN. THOMAS M. OLSON. RONALD J. PETTIT. SANDRA K. ANDERSON. BRUCE L BOBZIEN. SUE A BORIS. SCOTT W BUDIG. STACIE M. CORNICK. JAMES L. FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K. GOOD. STEPHANY R JOHNSON, JEFFREY MCNICHOLS. DAVID L TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. LEE. JOSEPH P BOLTERMAN. MATTHEW A. CURTIS. MELANIE QAFFRON. MICHAEL P. QAPPA. GREGORY A. QUNDLACH. JANICE J. Omn, LYLE E DEBAERE. DONALD L. VOID VOID VOBI Pay Padod 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 ChtcK Amount SI.042 63 $639 56 $505 47 $699.06 $795.90 $1,431 35 $758 78 $1,641.86 $1.596 36 $1.844 62 $1.508 20 $696 36 $487 44 $1,691 05 $230 99 $1.21985 $644.61 $379 25 $1.430 35 $1,407.19 $903.43 $1.428 50 $549.87 $64 72 $1.323 53 $966 75 $788 22 $1,017.80 $648 30 $1.233 42 $1.174 68 $103.33 $1.343 17 $2,245.04 $1.26669 $1,328.20 $1,161.81 $1,111.81 $1.135 00 $110.00 $20 00 $60 00 $1.32668 $1.376 50 $2.640 46 $1,532.12 $1.100 00 $900.00 $346.59 $1,027.27 $1,056 36 $125.00 $1,610.50 $1,156 07 $1.400.0U $1.37366 $0 00 iooo $0.00 Chacli Data Chacli Status 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Out^andina 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 OuManding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Oulstamfing 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2M/2004 Outstanding 2M/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 OutNsndmg 2M/2004 Outstanding 2M/2004 OuMandsig 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2M/2004 Outstanding 2M/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstantfing 2/4/2004 OuManding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2MM 2/4/2004 Outstanding 2M/2004 Outstanding 2Mm>4 OuManding 2M/2004 Void 2M/2004 Void 2M«04Vdid cmroFORONo 02^D4/04 11:56 AM Page2 clwck ragister ClMCfc Chack Chtcli liumhtr Employ—Mmw PoHod ^Amount DaM Ch—k SMim 003191 VOID 3 90.00 2/4/2004 Void 003192 VON)3 90.00 2/4/2004 Void 003196 HANSEN. STEVEN 3 975.00 2/4/2004 Oulstinding 003192 OBERAIQNER.SCOTTO.3 91.166.69 2M/2004 Outstandinp 003193 OBRIEN. RANDY L 3 9500.00 2M/2004 OulttandinQ 003194 PALMER. GREGORY A.3 $3SO.OO 2/«2004 OuMwtding 003195 RATHBUN. BARRY J.3 $200.00 $60,721.05 2/40004 OuMandIng Chtcfc Numbtr Employe Nam Pay Parted 053859 053800 053881 053882 053883 053864 053865 053866 053887 053868 05380i 053869 0538*0 0*'-671 053872 053873 053874 053875 053876 053877 053878 053879 053880 053881 053882 0538L3 053884 053885 053886 053887 053888 053889 053890 003197 003196 003109 003200 003201 003202 003203 I nv'.r 003206 003208 003207 I tKVr. 003209 003210 003211 003212 003213 003214 003215 003216 003217 003218 003219 1 003222 DODQE, RACHEL M LE8KINEN. DENISE M SILUS.BAfttlARAG. ANDERSON. BRUCE L BOBZIEN.SUEA BORIS. SCOTT W DEMBOUSKI. JAY C. ERICKSON. KURT R FARNIOK. CORREY L FISCHENICH.DANT. GOOD. STEPHANY R. IM)60N. ADRIENNE M. MCNICHOtS. DAVID L. MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES PER8ELL. WILLIAMS RUSSETH. KYLE M. TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. TOMCZYK.MARKW. WITTKE. ANTHONY A HERMMN. JOHN R GAFFRON. MICHAEL P. MEYER. WILLIAM C. OMAN. LYLE E. VANG. BRUCE L. GREGORY. JAMES D. HANSEN. STEVEN OBRIEN. RANDY L. PALMER. GREGORY A RATHBUN. BARRY J. SKREEN, DALE S. ROSS. JOHN A SMYTH. KATHERME R. STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD MOORSE. RONALD J VEE. LINDA S KUEHN. THOMAS M. OLSON. RONALD J. PETTIT. SANDRA K ANDERSON. BRUCE L BOBZIEN.SUEA BORIS. SCOTT W. BUDIO. STACE M CORMCK. JAMES L. FISCHER. CHRISTOPHER K. GOOD. STEPHANY R JOHNSON. JEFFREY MCNICHOLS.OAVIDL SCHOENHOFF. JOHNS. TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F. LEE. JOSEPH P BOLTERIMN. MATTHEW A CURTIS. MELANIE GAFFRON. MICHAEL P GAPPA.QREGORYA GUNUACH. JANICE J. OIMN. LYLE E mAERE.DOIMi)L »Wi9EN. STEVEN OBERAIQNER. SCOTT G CITY OF ORONO chRck ragister Chack Amount 11.042.63 9856.75 1474.72 $77823 $66.27 $1.774 70 $1.655 77 $1,598.36 $1.828 62 $1,506.20 $688 85 $621.42 $628 38 $1.69105 $732 30 $1.275 50 $51845 $1.430 35 $1.518 75 $754 99 $1.428 50 $54987 164.72 $1.323 53 $924.37 $366.57 $513.41 $909 79 $1,161.70 $1.070 35 $76 99 $29 03 $1.343 17 $2.36 1 54 $1.266 69 $1.328 20 $1,161.81 $1,121.32 $1,135.00 $830.00 $2000 $832.32 $2.135 57 $1,376.50 $1.15910 $1,825.34 $1.100 00 $1,514.67 $900 00 $65967 $904 64 $1,058.36 $126 00 $1,810.50 $1.155 07 $1,400.00 $1,551.24 $775.00 $1,105.36 ^MClwcIi Status 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18^2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Omatanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 OulsMnding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2M8/2004 OUistanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18M04 Outstanding 2/18m04 Outstanding 2/18^04 Outstanding 2/18m>4 Outstanding 2/18m>4 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/20C4 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstanding 2/18/2004 Outstandkig 2/18/2004 OuNtandlng 2/18/209 2/18/2004 OidNawdkig 2/18«04 OuNteidkig 02/17/04 4 00 PM Page 1 i cmroFORONO 02/17/04 4:00 PM Pa0*2 clwck ragitttr i Omtk ClMck Afiiounl ClMCfc 003223 OeRlEN. RANDY L M PALMER GREGORY A. RATHBUR BARRY J. I 4 4 4 5500.00 5350.00 5200.00 2/10/2004 OultMnding 2/18/2004 OutMandlno 2/18/2004 OmManObm 883.071.28 ■3^ •' ^ •• y jt 1 J Lit,'; fV'3 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register^ 02/18^ 8:13 AM Page 1 FEBmiAflY2004 Cliack Amt ImMiiM Cmmnantae v^^pe ae 10100 PaidChk# 007773 2/18/2004 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Q 101-21701 Foderal WHhholding $9,121.14 FEDERAL W/H Q 101-21/03 FICA Tax WBiholding $4,503.09 FICA & MEDICARE W/H Q 10121703 FICA Tax WMtihotding $4,503.09 FICA & MEDCR CITY SHARE Tout FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES $18,127.32 #aWChki 007774 2/18/2004 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 0 101-21705 CXher Retirement $626 62 DEFERRED COMP-302030 Tow IdMRETMIEMENT TRUST-4S7 $626.62 Paid Chk# 007775 2/18/2004 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Q 101-21707 Union Dues $618.26 UNION DUES Tow LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE $618.26 Paid Chk# 007776 2/18/2004 MNCHILO SUPPORT PMTCTR Q 101-21712 CXher Deductions $0.00 M.Cafl8on#0014164432 Tow MNCHILO SUPPORT PUrrCTR $0.00 radChk# 007777 2/18/2004 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Q 101-21702 Slate WHhholding $3,862.82 STATE TAX W/H ToW MNOEPT OF REVENUE $3,862.82 Paid Chk# 007778 2/18/2004 MN STATE RERREMENT SYSTEM G 101-21718 Post Empicyment Health $244.42 post retirement Total MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM $244.42 J*ald6^# 007779 2/18/2004 NATIONWnE RETIREMENT SOLUTION Q 101-21705 Other Retirement $1,877.00 USCM - ENTITY 2339 O 101-21705 Other Retirement $9.79 OBRA #2343 Total MATK)NWIDe RETIREMENT 80'.UTK>N $1,686.79 Paid Chk# 007780 2/18/2004 ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEEA^UST 0101-21705 Other Retirement $2,979.68 MN STATE RETIREMENT Tow ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEBCUST $2,979.68 PoidChk* 007761 2/18/2004 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RfriREMENT 0 101-21704 PERA $6,943.03 PERA CITY SHARE Q 101-21704 PERA $5,396.61 PERA EMPLOYEE W/H Tow PUMJC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $12,339.84 l^idChk# C07782 2/18/2004 UMTEOWAV Q 101-21708 UnHed Way $70.00 CHARITY DONATIONS Tow UMTEOWAY $70.00 ^Chk# 007783 2/18/2004 WISCONSBISCTF Q 101-21712 Other Deductiont $184.62 JOHNSON # 0002756006 Total WmCONSiN 8CTF $184.62 10160 Primary Caeh $40,940.37 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 10100 PrimaiyCaih $40.940.37 $40,040.37 CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 02A2Q/04 12:25 PM Pagel FEBRUARY 20M Check Amt Invoice 10100 MmoiyCMli PaidCkiO 077704 2/2(V20M PfUJOeHTUL LIFE INSURANCE 0101-21710 UNInWfanoe $87.75 1/2004 0101-21710 UfilnsuranM $886.50 1/2004 0101-15098 Non-EinployM HmMi Ins $30.50 1/2004 ToM PRUC Jan 2004 UN Jan 2004 UN Ian 2004 UN niAL LIFE INSURANCE $784.75 PaUCtM 077785 2/23/2004 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER E101-42400-433 MamtwnNpa A SubacOpOons 10,080 LAM $50.00 2004 2004 ICC Membarahip Total CHAPTER $50.00 Paid ChHP 077786 2/23S004 APMK E 802-40450-433 MambonhIpa A SubacrtpOona Total AP.WA $147.50 131203 2004APWAMambonMp $147.50 PaUChki 077787 2^0004 ABRA AUTO OLASS E 101-43000402 RapainMaint-AuloEiiuip Total ABRAAUTOGLASS $282.31 113242-1 WMahNId RapNoo #421 $282.31 PaUChhi 077788 2/23/2004 ACCLAMBENEFITS E101-41900-489 Olber ISaoalanaoua Chaigoa E101-41000409 Other MaooaanoouaChaiaeo Total ACCLAIM BENEFITS $99.00 341011 $550.00 341012 COBRA Adm-1/2004 FSAAdm-1/2004 $649.00 PaUChk# 077789 2/23/2004 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES E 101-41900-201 Office auppNoa $57.00 6013-370346 E 101-42110-201 Office auppaoa E 101-41000-201 Office aiypWea Total ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES $115 56 6013-370347 $115.40 6013-370348 ColNe- Coffae-PO ColNe-PW $287.96 ^aM Chk# 077790 2/230004 BANVON DATA SYSTEMS E 601-49400-20 Smal TooN Minor Equip Total BANYONOATA8Y8TEII8 $1,805.18 $1,80518 11283 Ikon Deyica Niteftee Paid CtM 077791 2/23/2064 BETTER ROAOB E101-43000433 MamboraNpa A SubacMpliona Total BETTER ROADS $2400 K4 00 36142 2004 Sutecrtplion E 10141000-201 E 101-41900-201 E 101-42110-201 Office aupptlea $28.04 $210.44 $121 85 29869 29961 30041 Total BUDOETPRMTMO Laga Doc CopNa Tbne 08 - Request Fonm Timo 08 - Requaat Fornta $381.23 PaidChk# 077793 2/23/2004 NUDIO, STACK E 101-42110-437 Training A ayelopmant $140.00 2/13/04 TaaM BUOlO, STACK $140.00 PaUChhTDTTTOt 2/23/2004 BUSSKSS FORMS A ACCOUNTBIO E 101-41900-201 E 101-41900-201 Total BUSINESS FORMS A ACCOUNTBIO $394.08 32356 32357 Laaar P8t Cbadta Laaer A/PChocka $789.96 PabidW* uTTTU 2/Sy E 001-40400-216Chemicals end Cham Piaduds Total CARQRXSALT $1,852.00 057074 SoNrSaN $1,852.09 cmroFORONO *Check Detail Registers) 020(V0412:25PM Page 2 FEWHMRVatM E 101<4211(M02 E 101-421HM02 E 101-42110402 E 101-42110-402 E 101-42110402 E 101-42110-402 E 101-42110-402 LAKEtMOREAtnO RapairaMaM-Aulo Equip $160.80 Rapaifi/Maint Auh) Equip $232.07 Rapaifi/Maint-Aulo Equip $672.70 RapairaOMnl-Auto Equip $22.45 RapairaMaM-Aulo Equip $452.04 Rapaira/Mainl-Auk Equip $312.00 RapafeaMainl-Aulo Equip $228.57 24943 24945 24149 25005 25007 25016 25022 *193 S«wor*191 BnkM. Rotor. ON *197 Fum*196 ON, Trant, Tuna *190 Ba0aty.Brakas*188 ON. Trans *195 ToM CNUNKSLAKEOHONEAUTO $2,08943 PaUChh* 077707 ^30004 CONSTRUCTION BUUETM E 101-43000-224 SIraol MaM. MalaiialNSiq>piy E 101-43000-224 SIraal MainL MatorWa/Suppiy Total CONSTRUCnONBULLETM $11842 $5921 2517042 $59.21 2520388 MatorWi & Equip BU Mat S Equip Bids Paid 6iiJ 2/2Vi004 CONSTRUCnVEnEAS E 425-48945-304 Enginaaiing-ConsuMng $2,500.00 4364 Ptav Fire Station Total CONSTRUCnVEIDEAS $2,500.00 Paid CMP 077799 2/23/2004 COUNTRY CAKE CUPBOARD E 101-42110439 MaettoQ Espanses $4000 Herman Reception - Herman Total COUNTRY CAKE CUPBOARD $40 00 E42548945-489 OttiarMNsosNanaousCharges E 425-40945-489 Other MisoeNanaous Chatgaa Tolai COVERALL OF THE TWIN OTIES $11183 82544 $188.38 82740 JanNoriai • Nav Fire Janitorial - Nav Fire $29021 PaMChW 077801 2/23/2004 CULUOAN E 813-40830-403 RapairaANaint-Misc Equip Total CULUOAN $1500 101-09083678-SollanerSarvioe $15.00 Paid Chk* 077802 2/23/2004 CUNNMNS ALU80N E101-42110-201 Office suppNaa Total CUINNHN8 ALLISON iJ8.89 497182 Bags - Shiedder 1136 89 Paid CIM 077803 1^3/2004 OANLGREN SNAROLOVV B UBAN E 101-43280-304 Enginaering^kmyttng $90 Total OAHLORENSHARDLOWAUBAN 35 24675 StonaOay $806.35 PaidChki 077804 ^/23^004 OCA-MREONLY 0101-21710 OCA/SpandingAooounts 0101-21719 OCA/SpendingAoooufits Total OCA-IMREOiiLY $1.195 40 2/18/04 $324 69 2/18/2004 Flax Spend 2/18 - 2003 Flax Spending 2/18 $1.52009 PafeR99dr077806 2/23/:4 OELTAOENTAL 0101-15998 Nofv€ff$iloyeaHaa8hlna 0101-21709 Denial Inauranoa Talal DELTA DENTAL $134 90 37220072 $1,457.10 37220072 Dental Piamiunw 3/2004 11.592.00 2/23/2004 OEPTOFAIMi-BnERTECHONOUP 0101-20200 Aocounta PayMa $37.00 OM031: E 101-41900-321 Tetspinna ($0.03) W03060800 ToNN OLPTOFADNN-BfTBnECHQIIOUP $38.97 PaudiU ffyyW S/Uaoo4 o^tifr AIMffcAk E 101-43008-441 UcantsSTOM $14J0 106807 fVC 120003 CiadionAooounl yoenae Tate-708 T"' CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 02/20/04 12:25 PM Pages FEBRUARY 2004 ChecfcAml Invoice E 602-49450441 E 602-49450441 E 61S49630-441 E 10143000441 E 10143000-441 E 101-43000441 E 10142400-441 E 101-43000441 E 61349630-441 E 10143000441 E 10143000441 E 10145200-441 E 10143000441 E 10143000441 E 60249450441 E 10143000-441 E 60249450-441 E 101-43000-441 E 60249450441 lioefites & Taxes Lioenies A Taxes Uosnses A Taxes Uoenies A Taxes Licenses A Taxes Uoenses A Taxes Licenses A Taxes Licenses A Taxes Licenses A Taxes Lloenees A Taxes Licenses A Taxes Licenses A Taxes Uceraes A Taxes Licenses A Tam Licenses A Taxes Licenses A Taxes Licenses A Taxes Licenses A Taxes Licenses A Taxes Total DEPUTY REGISTRAR $14.50 145726 License Tabs-710 $1450 145729 License Tabs-711 $1450 160551 License Tabs - 610 $1450 160552 License Tabs - 424 $14.50 168900 License Tabs - 431 $14.50 176826 License Tabs-426 $14.50 176834 License Tabs 210 $14.50 176835 License Tabs-422 $14.50 191250 License Tabs $1450 197506 License Tabs- $14.50 197510 LIcenseTabs $14.50 197527 License Tabs $14.50 901415 License Tabs • 427 $14.50 901421 License Tabs - 432 $1450 906029 License Tabs - 709 $14.50 906030 UoanM Taba • 428 $1450 906977 License Tabs - 713 $1450 909054 License Tabs - 425 $14.50 915877 License Tabs - 712 $290.00 l^aklbiMP 07780# 2nV30Si OWVERSLICENSEOmOEcd E101-42110-221 Equlpmafil Parts S AcoaMortm $26 95 427047 2004IOOuMe ToW DRIVERS UCEN8EOUIOE CO.$26.05 \\ PaMChM 077809 2«3fl004 ENGINEERINO REPRO SratOln E 101-41000-201 Offloa suppHas $62.84 63026 Total ENOIIIEERN40REPRO SYSTEMS ?SITCS3n5778io' Scan/Copy $62.84 r 2/23/2004 PARM40TE EQMPMENT E 101-43000-221 Equl|Nnanl Parts 6/Mxaaaortaa Total FARM-RITE EQUIPMENT $1611 34931 Misc Parts $16.11 PaUChM 077811 2nV2004 FORTOlSSmS G 101-21713 LTD Inswranoe Total FORTIS BENEFITS $851.42 4019625-1 LTD Premiums • 3/2 $651.42 Paid CMdl 077812 E 602-49450-226 E 601-49400-226 E 61349630-226 E 101-43000-226 E 101-41900-404 E 101-42110404 E 10141900404 E 10141900404 E 80149400-226 E 10143000-226 E 60249450-226 E 61349630-226 E 101-43000-221 E 101-43000-226 E 61349830-226 E 60140400-226 E 60240450-226 i/ii/2(k)4 OAKSERVICES ClothirHi A psfsonel eqiMpment Cldhing A personei equipmem Clothing A personal eguipmenl Clothing A personal equipmenl RepairsAiaint-ei(t(^/Grounds RepairsAiainl-Bldgs/Qrounds OMQt/iifounot RepeirsAyieinl DMgs/Qrpunds Clothing A persorial equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Clothing A personal equipment Equipment Parts A Accessories Clothing A personal equipmenl Clothing A personal equipmenl Oolhing A persofuri equipment Clothkig A personal equlpmertt $36 36 $12 12 $5.75 $72.70 $94.25 $147 03 $54 90 $62 07 $11.67 $70.03 $35.01 $5.75 $49 52 $67 04 $5.75 $11.16 $33.54 1006817178 1006817178 1006817178 1006817178 1006817178 1006817179 1006817180 1006817181 1006623641 1006623841 1006623641 1006623641 1006623641 1( Unilorms Met Service Mel Service Mat Service Mil Service Uniomis UrMiormi I I I .'r 1 1006630504 Uniforms Untforms CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 02/2(V04 12:25 PM Pa0e4 FEBRUARY 2004 CtMcfc Am( hwoic* Commant Total OAK8ERVICES $774.67 l>aidbM 0776^3 TmnxXl OENUBCRARTS^ E 601-49400-222 VaMda Equipiiwfil & Parts ($7.12) 775811 Ms Head E 101-43000-222VeNde Equipment A Parts $3.04 776713 Fittings E 101-43000-222Vehlde Equipment A Parts $0.67 776747 Fittings E 101-43000-221Equipment Parts A Accessories $25 20 777368 Shop Supplies E 101-42110-221Equipment Parts A Accessories $29 92 777420 Booster Cables E 101-43000-221Equipment Parts A Accessories $54 35 778377 Shop Supplies E 101-43000-222Vehicle Equipment A Parts $12 55 778447 Circuits Total GENUME PARTS CO.$118 61 E 101-41900-223 BMg/Qratirate M«nt. Sufiples Total HENNEPMC04)I> SEED EXCHANGE $5321 64973 SldewakSall $5321 f>akl 6hlJ 0>7815 2/23/2004 NEMNEPM COUNTY INFOR TECH DPT E 101-41900-329 Other Communications $76 20 24017178 $7820 Data Base Access 1/2004 ToUl HE9#IEPrN COUNTY INf OR TECH DPT Paid ChMI 077816 2/23/2004 HENNEPIN COUNTY TR-PROP TAXES E41S-48930-319 Other Prolessionai Services $317 38 2700 Total NENNEPINCOUNTYTR-PROPTAXES $317 38 TIFAdm Costs ^aWChldP 077817 2030004 HENNEPIN COUNTY TR-TAX PYR SRV 0101-20200 Accounts Payable $667 65 12/30/2003 TNT Notices Total HENNEPINCOUNTYTR.TAXPYRSRV $667.65 Paid ChidP 077616 2/23/2004 MTL ASSOC OP PLUII.IIECH OPFIC E 101-42400^33 Memberships 6 Subscriptions $150 00 17410 2004 APMO Memben^ipOman Total HTTL ASSOC OP PLUM,MECH OPFIC $150 00 Paid Chki 077619 2/23/2004 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL E 101-42400-433 Memberships & Subscriptions ___424000 Total INTERNATIONALCODECOUNCIL $100 00 2004 ICC Membership l^aid ChidP 077620 2/23/2004 KENNETH PL POTTS. PA E 101-41600-306 Legal^hoseaition $2.50000 2/2A)4 1/2004 Prosecutions Total KENNETH N. POTTS. PA $2.50000 TWCNdP 077621 2/23/2004 LABOR RELATIOI» ASSOC E 101-42110-319 Other Proliessionai Services K369 00 2/1/2004 LELS Grievance ArbitratlOfl Total LABORRELATIONSASSOC $4.369 00 Paid ChUP 077622 2/23/2004 LAKE MTKA AREA CHAMBER OP COM E 101-41300433 Membersh ips A Subscriptions $257.00 3720 Total LAKE MTKA AREA CHAMBER OP COM Membership 2004 $257 00 chli 67^aii 3753^35! lano equ «>«ent E 101-43090-221 E(|uipmenl Parts A Accessories $1333 103513 OilFiier $1333 Paid ChIdP 077624 2/23/2004 LOOM E 406-46~*20-310 lOGISAiplicaiions T 146.500 00 73739 P*oMoe Aasessmenl Pmt 1 olal LOOM $46.500 00 Paid Chki 077625 2^3/2004 LUBE TECH cmr OF ORONO *Check Detail Registei® 02O(MM 12:25 PM PagtS c an—I wn. —■■niTjU|ipiy Tom lube tech FEBRUARY20M Chock Amt >245.21 1037059 1245.21 Hyd Fluid Paid Cl*# 077826 2/23/2004 E101-41300-433 Mombonhipa A Subook«ona Tota' $50.00 878 $50.00 MAMA Mbnhip-2004 Paid Cl*# 077827 G 101-21706 G101-15908 G101-21706 G101-15900 G101-21706 G101-21706 20312004 MBMCA HoopdalgalioolMedlcal Ira $11.662.30 Non-EmployM Hoalh Ira $1,549.87 HrapilalizaiionMedical Ira $1,760.70 Non-Employ— Haatti Ira $2,883.99 HotpkaHtalion/Medlca l Ira $9,747.09 HrapdaliiBlion/Madic al Ira $731.11 Total MONCA $28,335 oT 104061102552 Medica High 30004 104061102552 Madk.j High 30004 104061122585 Modica Low 30004 104061125488 Modica Eiod 30004 104061125488 Modica Elod 30004 104061134225 Modica EsaonI 30004 ^atdu. ..i 077828 2030004 MET COUNCIL ENVNtONHENTAL SVCS E 602-49450-383 MHVCC-Cunonl Chargot $24,379.07 769275 WasiaWalor 30004 Total MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS |i>OidCI*# 077829 2030004 MENVEST ASPHALT E 101-43000-224 Spool MaMt MaNriaN/Sopply Total MENVEST ASPHALT $24,37907 $3 07 3982S AddtionalO— $3.07 ^aldChk# 077830 2030004 illCNNRIMMECHANICALMAWIT E60M940(M05 Ref»airi/Mairil4A^alefmains/^^ $1,818.50 Total MLLBiNIUII MECHANICAL MAINT $1,818.50 t^aM Chki 077831 2/23/2004 MIMNCAPOLI8 OXYGEN COMPANY E 10M3000-224 Street Maint Materlato/Supply $31.69 Frozen Water Lines E 101-42110-221 Equipment Parts 8 Aooesaories Total MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY $15 85 $47!54 RI01040864 RI01040865 CySnder Invoice Oxygen Cylinder Paid Chki 077^2 2/23/2004 MN DEPT OF PUEUC SAFETY E 101-42110-437 Training A Oevetcipmant $125 00 Borte Total MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY Hemeiand Security Conf $125.00 Paid m§ 077833 2/23/2004 MN GOLF ASSOCIATION SIC. E 613-49830-433 Memberships A Subscriptions $90.00 Total MN GOLF ASSOCUTION SIC. $W.ob~ 6080 2004 MGA Membership Paid QM 077834 2/23/2004 NAVARRE HANOWARE E 602-49450-227 UMity System Maint Supplies $1821 129334 Keys, rings E 101-41900-201Ofiloa supplies $339 130083 Key E 101-43000-224 Street Maint. MatariaS/Supply $13 83 130171 Charger E 101-45200-223 }1$7.44 130242 Tarp E 101-43000-221Equipment Parts A Acoaaaortas $3 20 130265 Screaw E 101-42110-221Equipment Parti A Aooesaorte $31.94 130284 neawr E 801-49400-223 Bldg/Orounds Maint Suppies $7.32 130309 Coniar Tubing E 101-43000-221Equipment Parts A AnCTttnftff $262 130318 Hantmn E 101-4300CL224 UtmN Makd. MatartaNISnpply $1915 130349 CabtaTies E 101-41900-223Std^Qraunda MaML SiM#8aB $43 94 130442 WatOryVac E 101-42110-221E<|uipinanl Parts A Aooaaaoriaa $4887 130574 Haatar. Kays ToM NAVARRE HARDWARE $199.61 PaUCI*# 077835 2I330004 NONTHBtN E 101-42110-221EquBmam Parts 8 Aooaaaortra $».61 9436617 HandTruck-POFum cmroFORONO 02/20/04 12:25 PM Pages *Check Detail Register© FEBRUARY 2004 ToM NORTHERN $2661 PaldCIM 0T7M6 2/23/2004 CTSULUVANS AUTO RE^ E10M21KM02 RepairtAMainl-Aulo Equip O 101-20200 Aoooums Payable E10M211O^ RepairaAAaim-AutoEqi# Total OSULUVANS AUTO REPAIR $66 00 $299 50 $149 50 546 546 547 Jan Car Washes Car Wash Tickets Jan Car Washes $51500 PaidChk# 077637 2/23/2004 OBRIEN.RANOY E 10M3000-226 CkAhing A personal equipmefit Total OBRIEN. RANDY $100 00 2/18A>4 Steel Toe Boots $100 00 PaMChki 077636 2/23/2004 OFFICEOEPOT E 101-41900>201 Omoe supplies E10M1900-201 Omoesupolins E 101-42110-201 Omoe supplies Total OFFICE DEPOT ($15 20) 231201157-00 Return $246 58 232666650 (Moe Supplies $248.59 232656650 OBoe Supplies $461.97 i/Ji/2004 pKMiSr E 101-42400-340 Oenerat Advertising Total PIONEER $129 35 1901 Applications $129.35 Paid Chki 077640 2^3^004 PORT-A-WELOBiG E 601-49400-405 RepalrsAialrd-Walerfnains/plant Total PORT-A-WELOING $1,147.50 2/7/2004 Thaw Water Lines $1,147.60 raraBTSmST JUSJSSR ^omerclean company me! 0101-20200 Accounts Payable 0101-20200 Aooounls Payable 0101-20200 Aooounls Payable 0101-20200 Aooounls Payable 0101-20200 Accounts Payable 0101-20200 Aooounls Payable Total POWERCUEAN COiaPANY INC. $1,442.07 $1,762.52 $931.34 $762.01 $851.95 $1,041.28 10237 10237 10239 10239 10240 10240 Carpel/Taa Cleaning Carpet/me Cleaning JanlloriaM 1/2003 Janitorial 11/2003 Janlorian2/2003 Jantorial 12/2003 $6,791.17 Paid Chki 077642 2/23/2004 PRAMEOFF8ET E 101-41900-201 Otiloe supplies Total PRAIRIE OFFSET $123 30 119725 BuskiessCan^ $123.30 Paid Chki 077643 ^/^i/2(kM G 101-15996 G 101-21710 G 101-21710 PRUDENTIAL LIFE SISURANCE $4 95 2/2004 $67 75 2/2004 $666.50 2/2004 Fab 2004 Lie Feb 2004 Lis Feb 2004 Lis Total PRUDENTIAL UFEBiSURANCE $759 20 PM CM* 077844 i/^VS664 RICKS SURatVALUT E 613499004)93 Conoesaions For Resala TiBI E 61349900-093 Conoesaions For Resale TjBI Total Rims SUPERVALUE Paid Chki 0V7I45 2/2^/2004 SAFtiv tkWsi E 00149400415 OOiar Equipment Rentals $1924 1/23A)4 $9.95 2/12AM $29.19 $161.56 400S4 Total SAFETYSIQm $161 56 077846 TmmM E 10142110-321 Telaphone E 10141900-321 Teliphono 130.56 M1.58 4 D 02043 FmM-FH r • • •CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Registei® Q2/2(V04 12:25 PM Page? FEBRUARY 2M4 Check Amt biwotaa Comment ___ ______________ Total BBC PAGING $92.16 PaUChM 077847 203/2004 SEMOR COMMUNITY SERVICES E101-41000-490 ConMwIiontlwCMcOB't $4,145.00 Total SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES K145.00 2/6M l8l Qtr 2004 - Sr Sarvioas Paid Chki 077S48 2/23/2004 BILUS. BARBARA E 10141300437 Training A Development E 10141300-331 Travel Ejqwnses Total SILUS, BARBARA $25.62 $2363 $49.25 iiMileage K/Maaga PaMChMI 077M9 2mm04 8MYDCR DRUG fSOZS 0101-20200 AccounGPayMe Total SNYDER DRUG M025 $74.18 12/2A13 $74.18 Fam PaMCMi off I 2^3/2004 SNYDER DRUG MOSS E10M2110-201 Office Mipplies E10M2110-201 Office supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies E10M2110-201 Office supplies E10M2110-201 Office supplies E 101-41900-201 Office suppHas £101-42110-201 Officesupplies Total SNYDER DRUG §5039 ($0.70) $3053 $17.01 $14.22 $318 $11.38 $29 76 1/1CV04 1/1SM 1/22A)4 1/27/04 1/6M 1/7/04 Credit Battefy. Polsh Film. Processing lueenex PholProc Band Aids - Shop Batteries. F8m $105 36 wsrcKHnsTTiSi 2/23/2004 STAR TRIBUNE E 101-421KM33 Memberships A Subscriptions Total STARTR»UNE $27.95 1069427 Subscription - PD $27 95 Paid Chki 077852 2/23/2004 STRUCTURl E 10M1900404 Rapairs4yiaint-BldgsA3rounds Total STRUCTURED NETWORK SOLUTIONS NETYVORK SOLUTIONS ^^.10^11313 $63610 Cabling - Copiers dliU 07^853 2/23AM04 TOU OA8 ft WEUNNO SUPPLY E 101-43000-224 StiMi MaM. MatofMa/Supply $6.17 439043 Cyinder Total TOLL GASS YIELDING SUPPLY $617 Paid Chki 077854 2/23/2004 TWIN CfTY OARAGE DOOR CO. E 101-41900404 RapairsB«ainl-BldgaAkounds $813.82 210486 E 60249450404 RapairsBiainl-BldgsAkounds $406.92 210486 E 60149400404 RapaimBtoint-BidgaAkounds _____$135 ^ 210486 Total TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO. Overhead Door - PW Overhead Door - PW Overhead Door • PW $1.356 38 UNTORMS UNLIMITEDPaid Chki 077855 G 101-20200 Accounts Payable G 101-20200 Accounts Payable G101-20200 Acoowits Payable E 10142110-226 Clothing A personal equipment E 10142110-226 Clolhino A personal equipment E 10142110-226 Ctottung A personal equipment Tr $110.45 $109.75 $49.37 $3595 $153 35 $307.45 202284 203439 206069 206496 206401 206402 Badge Shieid-Erickson Bar^SMald-Eficlaon Chg. Shirt Uniforms - Tomcayk $766 32 Paid Chki 077896 2/23/2004 E10142110404 RapeirsBiaifm Tetal VOGTHEATMGBAM $666.00 16751 Repair WIrHb-PO $668 00 PaidCIM01^7 2/23/2004 y. Vi- CITYOFORONO *Check Detail Registeiig) 02/20MM 12:2SPM Pa0*8 FOf«MIIV20M E 101-413C»31« T t205.00 lubkLhBSi E60S-4«48(M81 OwEEImMc E61»4M3IM81 EeOI 4M00 381 OmEB mMc E ioi-4aao(M8i omaeimmc E 101-41900481 Q«0ElMtt*s E 101-43000-380 ShMtUgMino E 101-43000-361 QwOEImMc E101-42110481 OmOEImMc 0101-10800 SMpMwaAooount E101-42110481 OmOEImMc E42M0B4S489 OOmtMmsOmwowOiaign ToM XCELBNEflOY raniBTmsr $1,368^ 1180S0877704 EMricaiS«via» $207.45 118050077704 ElMMctfSwvte $3,138.05 118058877704 ElKMcaltafvio* $23.13 118050877704 ElaciricalSwvte $1,301.07 118088877704 EtoctricalSwvio* $1,270.84 118090077704 ElKMcalSwvka $206.25 118080877704 EMriCtfSwvto* $0.42 118090877704 EMricalSwvio* ($183.10) 118050077704 IMmOUtoFM* $885.07 110080877704 ElMMeil8««to $753.48 118154914703 ElK-NmFimCoMl $8,780.64 VBUOW BOOK USA E 81349030-340 OwwfaiAdMflWng Tom yellow book USA $85.84 303060 OiraciiMyAdv $65.84 2(23/2004 ZREOLBR E 101-43000-221 Equipnwnl Parti 8 AooMMiriM Tom 2IBOLER $319.50 PC120021079 Onan $31990 10188 PrtmanrCaWl $188,468.09 Fund Summary 101 OENEfUL FUND 406 PEKftMNENT aff>ROVEMENT REVOLVE 419 2001 SENIOR HOG TT CONST FUND 425 NAVARRE FS«E STATION PROJ FUND 801 WATER 0PERATBI6 FUND 802 SEWER OPERATBIO FUND 613 OOLF COURSE 10100 Primaiy CMh $09,034.83 $48,500.00 $317.38 $3,551.67 $10,113.71 $26,497.37 ________$463.73 $158,468.09 T INFOIIMA.TION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING COllunL VEETING FEB 2 J 2004 OF CITY OF ORONO % %•‘1 4 d 4 *^feting FEB 2 3 2004 CITY OF OHONO GlTYof ORONO MHakifMl Offices Smtt Mirttt: 2750 Kelley Parkway Orono, MN 5535$ iaitiag Mireu: P O Bo« 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 0^ February 20. 2004 Mr. Dave llionipson 2542 Fast 9800 SouUi Sandy 111 84092 Dear Mr. Thompson; We have reviewed the drainage concerns you have expressed in your January 28. 2004 letter to the Mayor and City Council members. 1 hese drainage issues are related to the Maxwell Landing development project, completed by Robert Waade. which is ItKated adjacent to your porperty «>n the w est side Your concerns are related to a low area on the southern portion of your property. Exhibit A is a year 2000 air photo base with 2* contours and spot elevations superimfK»sed on it. Exhibit B is a copy of the aerial topography and contours information these contours and elevations were developed from a 1992 City wide project to develop topography and elesation contours utilizing aerial photogramic methods. This exhibit shows that the existing conditions for y «iur property and Mr. Waade’s property were relatively flat with a “low area" located on the southern portion of the profKrilies in \shicli v\atci could pond during wet periods. I he elevations show two possible outlets from this low area after water has ponded to approximately a one foot depth. The tmrtheast outlet elevation is 933.0. the northwest outlet ele\ation is 933.3; so the water would flow out of the low area to the northeast across y our prt>perty first before flowing to the m>rthwest across Mr. Waade's property . Sur\ey s for both properties have been recently completed that confirm the existence ol the low area. I he elevations between these twi> surveys vary slightly , and this variation was most likely caused by dilTerent benchmark elevations being used for each survey. I he variations between the two new surveys, and the existing aircal photogramic elevations, are within a 6" diflerence However, these slight differences in the elevations do not substancely change the drainage pattern for the.^e properties and still validate the existence of a low area with pt'ssible ptmding of water during wet periods. Exhibit C is the proposed drainage plan lor the Maxwell Landing project which reviewed by Tom Kellogg. City Lngineer. The existing drainage boundary shown on this plan is the western edge of the “low area" and shows 0.69 acres of area on Mr. W aade s property that is included in the "low area" drainage basin. I he proposed drainage boundary mov es east about 70’. so the area from Mr. Waade’s property that is in the "low area" drainage basin is reduced from the ■Kkfhom (952) • fki (9S2) 24M91* r f^PETING FEB 2 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO existing 0.69 acres to 0.18 acres. A new storm water detention pond was constructed as part of the Maxwell Landing project. This pond treats most of the water that formerly drained into the low area and discharges into the lake on the west side of Mr. Waade’s property. There is an emergency over point located at an elevation of 932.50 to prevent an overflow back into the low area during large rainfall events. This approved drainage plan reduces the amount of drainage into the “low area” and provides for treatment of the water from the Maxwell Landing project on Mr. Waade’ property. In summary, this new development does not increase the flow of water onto your property. However, there is still a low area on your property that could pond water during wet periods. The solution to this problem is to either raise the level of the low area on your property to provide for positive drainage to the north, or to construct a swale on your property to drain the low area to the north. The shed in this low area is at an elevation of about 932.5 which is too low considering the “low area" without adequate drainage. I'he new buildings on Mr. Waade's property were constructed at an elevation of 935.0 which is more prudent for this vicinity. Any new structures on your property should be built at a higher elevation and provisions also made to correct the low area drainage problem before constructing any new buildings. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Please contact me at 952-24-4621 should you have any additional concerns. Sincerely; Greg^appa Director of Public Sei^’ices Copy: Mayor and Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator Tom Kellogg. Bonestroo Engineers Lyle Oman, Building Oflicial ■i NW AHfK CVWLOI^ 113.1 N£ LOV AtrA CUtILMW iHmtfgt __-1- f X A \ 1 *Jf iJ^i? f: f IU / ' ’ ilf »vr s ■' *r ’'---^r'V-.3^ " I ' fi - ^^- y 4;l * 0 • ■ ■t ??■ -t* * ^ * j. * r - ♦ - 4 *' s *m XTO,^ £L£if\WM%Tn010 M1<H2 Af3.rHtfT to >i:lASCf^^RLAMOtiJE NMIM lirf0Cp|AlMA^^---- ifMiLE M/AA3t r».<»yfcT LOW Ail A r . ▼ ^ MU/ MAXWELL hfr rnoM 201'- II'WC €0 n't pfiEIU futy oHtnoy^ Lbrni^ I ■toM ctiy taemra RwMtfft tLM CLw»«py^ _( (loVibv cOA'iflOU vn ftNtttHP) r%0roifb PILAlUMf v-iypjc •.01J1. fwn -A PWUi UmonU LCWf^fA Euik tmtuMiU 1 r QQiiKirii ^^PETING FEB 2 3 2004 CITY OF ORONO 2497 KELLY AVENUE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 Td: 952 471 1170 Fai: 952 471 11S4 February 7,2004 City of Orono 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attention: Planning Director, Planning Commissioners and City Council Members Re: Applicatioo MM-2977 - Proposed Restaurant with Liquor License at 3425 Shoreline Drive^ Navarre. I write to confirm my comments made at the Public Hearing in respect of the above application held on January 20,2004 My comments were made in the capacity as the nearest property owner to the subject property and as a concerned citizen of the City of Orono. As the nearest neighbor I coainiented as follows: a) I strongly backed and endorsed the concerns and objections of Mn. Doris Schlampp which raised concerns that; i) access to the car park is offKelly Avenue - a residential road; ii) The noise element that will be or could be generated will be untenable (her remarks about the Narrows are understated), and iii) The amount of traffic that will use Kelly Avenue to travel South and also avoid the tortuous access to County Road 15. b) The current use, wdiile not ideal or desirable is one which I have learnt to live With. But then it does not have a full Liquor license; it is not a 2,000 square foot Restaurant with possible seating for 75 patrons; and It does not generate some extra 50/75 cars per night if wc assume turning each table over 2/2.5 times per night. c) The applicant may say it is only to be a Pizza Factory - But what guarantee do wc have as to its future use? d) Such increase in traffic will only compound the dangers of turning on to County Road 15 as they compete with traffic exiting from Rick ’s Supermarket, The Liquor Store, Champion Auto Store, the coffee Shop Builduig, the Citgo Service station, the traffic coming fro the East on 15 and the trafiic turning both ways i i mm L from county Road 19. As a citizen I conmeatcd as follows: I reminded the Commissioners; a) That the subject property was a 1.6 Acre site within 200 feet of Lake Minnetonka Water and HAVING 90% HARDCOVER. b) That the applicant has not provided a landscape plan and that the present landscaping is only 6.8% of the total site area. c) That the application provides no setbacks whatsoever in its parking plan. d) That according to the City’s 2Loning Ordinance the combined use of the Bowling Alley and the proposed Restaurant requires 91 car parking spaces but the applicant only proposes 84 and that at the cost of no setbacks or grcca area. The parking situation is further compounded by the existing number of parking spaces for the retail space of only 30 whereas the Ordinance requires 53. e) There is no provision for garbage containers and loading/unloading areas which would further reduce the number of parking spaces possible. Approximately a year ago there was a Navarre Town Meeting (1 was not present) but from watching a video of the proceedings on the Cable Community Channel I seem to remember the following points being made; i) Navarre is Oroiw ’s town center and belongs to its citizens; ii) Why cannot there be more landscaping to make it more pleasant like Wayzata and Excelsior, and iii) why caimot the buildings be updated. If this application is approved then; i) are we not as a community perpetuating what is at present a very unsatisfactory state of affairs? ii) are we not itKreasing the active use of this building at the expense of regulations designed for the safety and enjoyable use of the conununity? iii) are we not prolonging the life of this building with uses that flaunt the planning regulations and only serve to delay a “Plaimed Unit Development", which was considered as a possibility within 2 years, at the Town Meeting? When the amended plans are submitted for the continuation of the Public Hearing then I shall be commenting further on this application. Yours truly. Jf![l- d. ^ Austin H. Evans r im L ftom county Road 19. /y acitisni I coaaieBtcd as follows: I reminded the Commissioners; ( 1 ' i ■ ,M< 1 ! •1 1 a) That the subject property was a 1.6 Acre site within 200 feet of Lake Minnetonka Water and HAVING 90% HARDCOVER b) That the applicant has not provided a landscape plan and that the present landscaping is only 6.8% of the total site area. c) That the application provides no setbacks whatsoever in its parking plan. d) That according to the City ’s Zoning Ordinance the combined use of the Bowling Alley and the proposed Restaurant requires 91 car parking spaces but the applicant only proposes 84 and that at the cost of no aetbacka or green area. The parking situation is further compounded by the existing number of parking spaces for the retail space of only 30 whereas the Ordinance requires S3. e) There is no provision for garbage containers and loading/unloading areas which would further reduce the number of parking spaces possible. Approximately a year ago there was a Navarre Town Meeting (I was not present) but from watching a video of the proceedings on the Cable Community Channel I seem to remember the following points being made; i) Navarre is Orono ’s town center and belongs to its citizens; ii) Why cannot there be more landscaping to make it more pleasant like Wayzata arid Excelsior; and iii) why caimot the buildings be updated. If this application is approved then; i) are we not as a community perpetuating what is at present a very unsatisfactory state of affairs? ii) are we not increasing the active use of this building at the expense of regulations desig^ for the safety and enjoyable use of the community? iii) are we not prolonging the life of this building with uses that flaunt the planning regulations and only serve to delay a “Planned Unit Development'*, which was considered as a possibility within 2 years, at the Town Meeting? When the amended plans are submitted for the continuation of the Public Hearing then 1 shall be commenting further on this applicatioiL Youn truly. AiminR Evans ) P } I i !'i \ Ij r- I!1 ..........d Hennepin Hennepin County Board of Commissioners A-2400 Government Center 300 S. Sixth St., Minneapolis, MN 55487-0240 Receptionist: 612-348-3081 Internet: www.co.hennepin,mn.us The Board of Commissioneis heads Hennepin County government. County services encompass transportation, health programs, suburban libraries, social services, financial assistance, law enforcement, courts, corrections, and solid-waste management. Meetings of the board and its committees occur Tuesdays at 1:30 p.m. and are broadcast on Metro Cable Network/Channel 6, with rebroadcasts Fridays at 8 p.m. The board approves a county budget and tax levy, establishes policies for delivery of services, approves contracts, and appoints key staff members. The seven commissioners are elected by district and serve staggered, four- year terms. For informatior about the board's calendar and meeting agendas, for copies of the board’s approved resolutions, and for general questions or comments, use the phone number, address or Internet site noted above. To send e-mail to a commissioner, follow the example below. Mike. Opat@co. Hennepin, mn.us Muuutti nw« MPmUBINU Each commissioner represents a district with about 160,000 residents. To verify which district you live in, call 612 348-3081. T History & Facts Tht name Htnntpin In 1660, Father Louis Hennepin, a Belgian priest on a missionary journey, discovered a waterfall he named for 5t. Anthony, Later, the city by the falls is called Minneapolis. Fort SntlHng built In early ISOOs Land purchased by U.S. government from native inhabitants, the Dakota. Hennepin County Established in 1852 by the Territorial Legislature. Largest of Minnesota's 87 counties In terms of population, budget and estimated market value. 611 square miles; 46 municipalities Minneapolis is the county seat: two-thirds of the population is in the suburbs. Hennepin population • 1.1 million residents • One-fo(>rth of Minnesota • Half the metro area $1.72>bllllon budget • 63 percent funds . «.alth and human services programs. • 13 percent funds courts and law enforcement. • Fees for services are the largest county revenue source. • Property taxes account for less than 30 percent of revenues. Trtple-A ertdit rating • A strong measure oF financial and operational stability. • Only about 20 of the nation's 3,100 counties have this rating from the three top agencies. • A 27-year record. Hennepin works for you HCMC and other health services More than half the doctors in Minnesota studied at Hennepin County Medical Center, one of the nation's top teaching hospitals. A Level One Trauma Center also renowned for its research, HCMC is ranked by U.S. News & World Report as one of the country's best. Visit www.hcmc,org. In addition. Hennepin provides i number of other health-related services. Social and financial services Many county programs help people and families have a better quality of life by protecting children and vulnerable adults, serving people with mental illness or developmental disabilities, and assisting those working their way out of poverty and those unable to provide for themselves. Public safety and judiciary The District Court, the County Attorney's Office, the Public Defender, the Sheriff's Office, and probation and corrections services work to uphold justice and enforce the law. For 35 communities, the Sheriff's dispatch answers calls to 911. Suburban Ubranes Hennepin County's library system in ?00? was rated one of the top six systems in the nation (Hennen's American Public Library Ratings index). Users boriow 11 million times a year! There's such an array of services you'll just have to vibit one of the 26 area or community libraries to see for yourself. (Library cards are free.) Or check it all out at the e library: wmv.hchb.Ofg. Licensing and records, voter services If you want to drive, fish. hunt, get married, or any number of other things requiring a license, you can visit one of the five Hennepin County Service Centers. Get birth and death records and register to vote. too. Online you can register your motor vehicle, or look up a sample ballot. Public works, environment Hennepin County builds and repairs roads and bridges, plows snow, plans bicycle paths, develops light rail and commuter rail transit systems, coordi ­ nates emergency preparedness, and partners with others on community works projects. It is also a leader in turning waste into energy, recycling and cleaning up contaminated land. Hennepin County needs you! • Serve on an advisory board or committee — 612-348-3257 • Volunteer to make a difference — 612-348-9900 • Jobs - 612-348-4698, (TTY) 612 348-546/; or apply online ' Information: 612-348-3000. (TTY) 612-348-6646 ' Or consult the blue pages of the Q»%est phone directory. j Hennepin on the Internet: www.co.Hennepin,mn.us Produced by Hennepin County Public Affairs This matenai can be gtven to you in different forms, such as in large print or on top^ If you caU 612-3^8 3848 (voice) or 612 3^8-68/2 (TTY). ^ FrintMl on recycled paper 70 partem poit coniMmat lontam. 4 1 n \ ■ty L M M Hennepin County Hennepin M Budget & staff reductions 2002-2004 As a result of reductions in state funding during the 2003 legislative session. Hennepin County must cut its budget by approx ­ imately $100 million by the end of the state's 2005 fiscal year. Because of the magnitude of the shortfall. Hennepin is taking a two-year approach, with the goal of balancing its budget by the end of calendar year 2004 Hennepin County actions I July2002 In anticipation of the 2003 state reductions, the Hennepin County Board approved a 1-percent reduction in the budgeted property tax for all county departments, totaling approximately $5 million. April2003 County Board approved a $27-million reduction for 2003 which included layoffs of employees at Hennepin County Medical Center. An early retirement/resignation incentive program was approved to reduce the number of layoffs in subsequent budget action By September 2003. 3^2 staff left county employment. August 2003 Human Ser\ ices conducted six public meetings to work with the community, providers, clients, and others to identify new ways of doing business with fewer dollars Transition funds of $450,000 were approved for service providers whose funding was reduced in the April board action September 2003 County Administrator proposed a 2004 budget of $1.64 billion, a decrease of 5 percent ($87 4 million'i from the 2003 approved budget. The proposed maximum property tax levy for 2004 is $495 6 million, an increase 2 1 percent ($10 3 million) from 2003 The budget proposal included significant program and sLiif reductions in the Health. Human Services and Criminal Justice lines of business. Dcctiiibcr2003 Countv B*’ard appro\ed a $1.64 billion budget for 2004 During amendments, the board restored 54 7 million to Human Scr\-ices and $1 9 million in Public Safety programs by reducing the contingency budget and using one-time funds The change in the net property tax levy from 2003 to 2004 remained at a 2.1-percent increase, the smallest increase in the last decade Impact on major programs Public Works The backlog in ongoing road repair has grown by $1.7 million, which includes both the bituminous overlay ($1.3 million) and concrete repair ($.4 million) programs. The number of vacancies held open and funds reallocated to structural road repair will likely result in unplowed snow routes. Central Mobile Equipment Division (CMED) reduced rental rates by 3 per cent, which will further reduce cash in the CMED fund and may require much higher rates or a future infusion of funds. In 2004, the AITordable Housing Incentive Fund will receive $4 million of the remaining $5.3 million from the sale of the Elwell property. The reduction in property tax funding in 2004 will have a minimal impact on environmental programs PuMk Safity and Judiciary Traditional super\ ision caseloads will increase in Adult and Juvenile Probation, and more clients will be placed on administrative probation. The County Home School is reducing program staffing and may not be able to accommodate all referrals juvenile Detention staff are being reassigned from attending detention hearings to performing intake functions. While some program funding w'as restored at the Adult Corrections Facility, staff and funding reductions were approved. Contracted services of nearly $ I million were reduced due to underutiliration, budget constraints or if they were not central to the core mission of the Commumty Corrections Department. Health Hennepin County Medical Center made major changes m its serMce offerings and staffing levels m 2003, and the reductions will continue m 2004 The number of full-time-equivaleni staff was reduced by I8d 7 in 2003. the number was reduced by 51 more for 2004 Funding for HealthConnection. the after-hours nursing service, was disci>ntinued A new admission and treatment policy to screen patients based on new state public program guidelines is under development for introduction in 2004 A final decision on $1 million in clinical program reductions will be made by the end of 2003. Libraries Hours will be reduced (by one full day a week) at SLX community libraries, and, due to inflation, a reduction in the buying power will limit the ability to add to the collection and expand the number of subscription databases Substitutes will no longer be readily available, which will result in a decrease in service. Participation in community collaborations and partnerships wtU decrease Human Servkts The Human Services Department budget was reduced by more than $37 million, in addition to $10 million in reductions that occurred in 2003 As result, there will be significant changes in services to clients: • The wait time for mental health clinic appointments at the county^ mental health centers will increase Fewer mental health counseling sessions will be provided by community agencies Fewer “working poor” families will receive child care assistance. The waiting time for slidmg-fee child care asststance will increase. The wait time for the adoption of children into permanent homes wall increase Deterniinaiion of eligibility for public health care programs will increase. Consequently, clients will either delay low-cost preventative services or access more expensive eniergencv' or intensive medical serv ices, the cost of which must be paid for with county pro[vrty tax dollars 1 Fewer non-Unglish-speaking families will be contacted about getting their children immunized. Less affordable and supportive housing will be developed. Fewer low-income senior citizens will receive services that would allow them to stay in their homes. People with disabilities who receive ser\’ices that help them stay in their homes will g.n only 90 to 180 days of serv'ice, instead of 12 months. longer wait times from the IT help desk and data center staff. The information desk on the Public Service Level will not be staffed at certain times. There will be an increased risk of situations which could result in financial loss or some human consequence. Due to a reduction m capacity, requests for information and analysis will be delayed or declined, and, over the long term, will dimmish the integnty of our financial, human resources and information technology systems. GcfMralGovimiiMiit Cuts were made in many administrative support functions, which will result in reduced property maintenance ser\’ices such as vacuuming, landscaping and elimination of window washing. Thermostats in facilities will be lower in winter and higher in summer. There will be Capital Improvements The scope of the capital budget was reduced, and one-time monies were used to replace some pro|K*rty ta.\es Changes in budget/staffing by major program• I' 2004 Approved loifct (inmiHioiis) Change froM 2003 2004 Approved Staffing Change from 2003 -I Public VVorks 99.9 4.1% I 391.5 -0 5% Public Safety/Judiciarv'197.3 -12.0%2,175.6 -13.3% liealih 546.f)1 8% 1 3.9162 -3.4% Libraries 35.6 -3.1%! 474,5 -1.2% Human Ser\ices 516.8 -7.7%I 2,830 5 -6 5% General Government 154.0 -5 0%974.8 -7.2% Capital 90.9 -15.0%0.0% Total $1,641.1 -4.7%; 10.763.1 i -6.5% i ■f !J 4 Workforce reductions The 2004 approved staffing complemenl of 10,7(?3 county employees is 6.5 percent less, or 753 fewer employees, than the number of emplo)'ccs ai the start of 2003. (See table p.3.) County Administrations 2004 budget proposal, presented m September, called for up to 350 layoffs in 2004, in addition to the 392 employees who left county employment through the early retiretnent/resignation program. The layoff estimate has been revised downward a number of times since then. For instance, in mid-October, the number of impacted employees was estimated to be 283, with 110 earmarked for layoffs, 138 for reassignments or reduced hours, and 35 to end temporary assignments because of elimination of grants. Liyoff estimates have been significantly reduced as Human Resources and department management worked closely to place employees identified for potential layoff. In early December, the number of employees slated for layoffs had been reduced to 44, with another 25 jobs lost because of the elimination of grants. During amendments to the budget the board restored 77 full-time equivalents (FTF.s\ e.xcluding HCMC, which reduced the number of layoffs necessary. In mid-December, Human Resources s.iid the 2004 layoff number would probably decrease even more, to approximately 30, although that number could change. Levy limits In late November 2003, the Department of Revenue notilieil 1 lennepin County that a s|X‘cial levy approved for 2003 would Ih* denied in 2004 Hennepin’s limited levy base was increased SI 4 million as a result o! negotiations regarding the revers.il of this prior ruling Out of a total lev) of $495 7 million (excluding the new County Program Aid), Hennepin claimed its maximum of $409.7 million under the limited len- category and S8o million in special le\ies \ More informatioit To learn more about thi Hennepin County budget and property tax. •. heck out the county w’eh page: www.hennepin.us Click on the departm :nt button and then on budget and Finance. Call the Office of Budget and Finance at (612) 348-5125. Mrnnepin Hennepin County Board of Commissioners ► Mike Opat. isr District ► Mark Stenglein 2nd Distfut ► Gail Doriman. 3rd District ► Peter McLaughlin. 4th District ► Randy Johnson. 5th Distnct ► Linda Kublick. t?th Distrut ► Pennv Steele, 7th District ---------- - ,iriirtiiiMnilfiiiliiiMltirri J Transportation Department Acti \h ies in 2004 Hopkins • Complete the reconstruction of Excelsior Boulevard (CSAH 3) between Highway 169 and Blake Road (CSAll 20). Minnetonka . Reconstruct and improve the capacity of the Baker Road (CSAM 60)/Excelsior Boulevard (CSAH 3) intersection before 1-494 goes under construction by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT). The city will take bids for this project. • Reconstruct C’S.AH 101 between Highway 7 and Minnetonka Boulevard (CS.Ml 5). The county will take bids for this project in the fourth quarter of the year. • The county and city have organized a Citizen Advisory Committee to work on the design of the Shady Oak Road (CSAH 61) reconstruction between Bren Road and Excelsior Boulevard (CSAH 3). This project will not go to construction until late 2006 because we do not want CSAH 101,1-494 and Shady Oak Road all under construction in 2(M)5 and 2(K)6. Hopkips/Miaaetonkn • Reconstruct and improve the capacity of the Minnetonka Boulevard (CSAH 5)/Hopkins Cross Road (CSAH 73) intersection. The county will take bids for the project in tlic third quarter of 2004. The county is working with the City of Minnetonka (taking the lead) on the de\ clopmcnt of a trail along the south side of Minnetonka Boulevard cast of the Minnetonka Boulevard/Hopkins Cross Road intersection. The desired construction start is 2004. The county has .selected a consultant to work with the cities on the development of an improvement concept for Shady Oak Road (CSAH 61) in tlie vicinity of Hopkins ’ Main Street. The conceptual design work will begin in the first quarter of 2004. Eden Prairie • The city and county are working on the redesign of the Valley View/Eden Prairie Road (CSAH 4) intersection. The desired schedule calls for construction to begin after school lets out in June. • The county and city will begin discussion on the reconstruction of Pioneer Trail (CS.AH 1) between Eden Prairie Road (CSAH 4) end Highway 212 in the second halfof2004. Construction will not occur until 2007. Mianetopk«/Eden Prairie • Ti.c cities and county arc working with .Mn/DOT on the widening of 1-494 between Highway 212 and Highway 55. C'onstruction will occur in 2004, 2005 and 2006 and will include: Reconstruction of the Crosstown interchange - Reconstruction of Baker Road (CSAH 60) under 1-494 Replacement of the Excelsior Boulevard (CSAH 3) bridge over 1-494 Shorewood/Tonka Bav • The county is working with the cities on the reconstruction of the CSAH 19.'Smithtown Road! intersection. A second quarter bid letting is scheduled. Long l.ake/Orono • The county and cities wilt be organizing a task force to discuss the transfer of “old” Highway 12 from .Mn/T)OT to the county in 2008. The task force will be asked to develop a vision for the highw ay corridor. Work Traiup Dq>i Activities m 2004 doc 2/2/2004 lj