The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-12-2004 Council PacketI AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JULY 12, 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 ayemla. Memos reijarding eacli of the Agenda items are available in the Public I’aeket - located on tlie counter near the sign in sheet. ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA I. Approve/Amend CA mhoi, “rcjifgQ 'JUL 1 2 2004 CITY OF ORONO APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Council Meeting of June 28. 2004 7:00 P.M. - INFORMATIONAL MEE IING 3. Birch Lane Drainage Improvement Project PARK COMMISSION C OMMEN TS Pat Wolfe. Representative PLANNING COM.MISSION COMMENTS Dave Rahn. Representative PUBLIC CO.MMEM S - (Limit 5 iVlinutes Per Person) /.ONINC; ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 4. «()4-301() Henry l.a/niar/ of Way/ata Design and Deveiopnieiit. 120 Brown Road South PRD Subdivision Prehininary Plat Resolution 5. W04-3024 C'ity of Orono. Zoning Amendment Large Vehicle Storage 6. 1/04-3027 Brenshell Development on behalf of Thomas James Properlics, L1.C\ SW ('oriier of Old ('rystal Bay Road and Highway 12 Sketch Plan MAYOR/COUNCII. REPORT PUBLIC SERVIC E DIRECTOR’S REPOR T 7. Aw ard Contract for County Road 0 Baseball Field 1 rail 9 8. NPDF.S Stonnwaler Fducalion Program with Metro Watershed Partners CI TY AD.MINISTRA TOR'S REPORT 0. Schedule Park Comnnssion Candidate Interv iew s ‘I H t fL. si O'r'irt't city ai IORNEV'S report • 10. LICENSES Special Lvent • II. BILLS 2004, 7:00 P.M. t^OMINC ISSUES AND EVENTS ’ ’2004 07/06 07/12 07/19 07/26 08/02 08/04 08/05 08/09 08/16 08/23 Council Mcning. 7,Oo'P ™- ImIso,, - un .\lc»ui,„) clrnS;:r7tr'^ -Council Work Scssio.., ’^^Op-n,. Council Meeting. 7:00 p.m. ’ - Planning Commission Mectinij 6 00 n m ■ Council Meeting. 7:00 p m, ’ ^ (Cottnal Liaison - Mi Ifiiife) r Public A ttendance Mkrtinc ; Hate (A \ ^ ^ ()0 C ouncil □ Planninc ; C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Othlr Please eii.i.oii i the isfokmation keqtes i ed BELOW FOR OIIR CITY RECORDS. NAMK (please print)ADDKKSS PRESEM EOK (from agenda) NAIVIE OR NUIVIBER M (T^aI H / 'CT J - ^ .r\ -X^c\- I \ . ifi iU Li Ic> A/<s v>/ 34'i i Hv J j 3‘;/ yVA/ v>^y, ^yy;; k'iih^ /li't_____Oo TT j S.J'^liuCf 'I k ^ 9. /■/ > •> :5 5/ G 6> <..>1 d iLK.ui . ^ C'^ 3i'/o /to Wt JOi/ /1 V13.__ !)• 14.__ 15. f Aj tSi^\0^nr^ S»:ic aJ /;A • ^/ // V*’ 4 «< ’ ■» . • W:>A#tmHf<ii.tiitt intnwitil waud^tiMit AttfiMw «H i B- MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o ’clock p.m. COUMrii mcptinG JUL 1 2 2004 ROLL CITY OF ORONO The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson; Council members Jim White, Lili McMillan, and Bob Sansevere; Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, Planning Director Mike Gaffron, City Engineer lom Kellogg, Public Service Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Knsti Anderson. Council member Jim Murphy and City Attorney Thomas Barrett were absent. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:03 P.M CONSENT AGENDA 1. A pprove/Amend Items />10A, 1 1, 12, and 16 were added to the Consent Agenda. Items #13 and 14 were removed. White moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Aves 4, Navs 0. RECOGNITION 2. I’uuline Bouchaid - Parks, Open Space and T rails Commission. Mayor Peterson presented Bouchard with a Resolution rccogni/ing her for her many years of dedication to the City Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission. 1 ‘ark C ommissioii C hair McDermott and members Halv’orson and Wolfe echoed the Mayor's comments adding that Bouchard will be greatly missed. PRESENTATION 3. Representative Barb Sykora - House District 33B Sykoia thanked the City Council for allowing her the opportunity to speak. She asked the City for a status report on the Highway 12 progress, recognizing the City’s good will and fortitude in this endeavor. In addition, she asked for more insight into the Big Island Vet Camp decision, and what the City's view of what should happen there might be. While she recognized that no one would like the island to be sold to private development, and would prefer it remain in the public realm, she |H)inted out that they have 2 years to determine how to proceed. She asked to hear what both sides of the Camp sale have to say. .Sansevere asked whether the other side stated its reasons to sell were cost related Sykora stated that ski had been told that the camp was not getting enough use nor making enough money tti keep it going. PAGE 1 of 19 r w MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (X Representative Barb Sykora - House District 3iB, Continued) Sanseverc stated that he found it difftcult to accept a decision based strictly on the bottom line, given a new generation of vets was being created as we speak and the cump provides a nice amenity for those usei s. Senator Gen Olson, also in atter.dance, stated that she had been receiving numerous phone calls speculating over the motives of the sale. She stated that, in reality, the commissioners and appointees voted unanimously to sell the property at a recent board meeting and filed the paperwork May 24"' to allow the sale to proceed. Olson explained that the land used to belong to the Slate, and was deeded to the vets for their use. if sold the money would go into a trust for the veterans. Olson stated that, though valuable, she knew of many vets from all over the metro area who spend time at the camp and have expressed a great deal of concern if it were closed. She IHiinted out that the Governor’s office knew virtually nothing of the controversy nor decision and the Senate Chair of Vets Committee has been hearing a number of different stories. Although some type of action might be taken later, until research can be done to deleiminc the process. Olson asked the City Council what their opinion of w ho would be responsible for the camp over the next two years might be. She asked w hat Orono’s concerns might be Sanseverc voiced his concern that anyone would consider saying no to the vets by closing their sanctuary on Big Island. He felt that any politician who failed to support the vets' rights to keep the camp would he making an unpopular decision. Olson agreed that the Big Island Camp was a beautiful rate tesouice which the government ought to know whether it makes sense to retain in perpetuity; however, she pointed out that the veterans’ OW'D representatives voted to close the camp and put it up for sale. .Sansevere maintained that the use that goes on at Big Island is worth it. and pointed to many members of the public in attendance w ho w ould concur. Sykora asked what the status of the Highway 12 project was Sanseverc stated that he would defer to committee representatives Gabriel Jabbour and Council member Murphy, absent this evening, to advise Sykora of the status. Jabbour interjceted that settlement of the Carlson pro|K*rty acquisition by Mn/DOT from the City was m ongoing negotiations currently, and other eoncems include the timing of various bridge closings with school commencing in September. McMillan asked il a special session would be scheduled and whether the bonding issue would be uddic.s.scd. Sykora stated that scheduling of a special session was yet to be determined and bonding w ould not be discussed without a special session. Bonding would likely be discussed in the next session come January. PAGE 2 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28,2004 7:00 o’clock p.ni. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *4. Regular Council Meeting of June 14,2004 White moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the Minutes of June 14, 2004, as presented. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Chair .McDermott Chair McDermott invited the Council members to join the Park Commission on its annual park tour on July 6, 2004, at 5:15 P.M. followed by a brief work session. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMEM S - Roland Jurgens, Representative Commissioner Jurgens was absent. LMCD REPORT - Debora llalvorson Halvorson reported that the LMCD proposed budget changes for 2005 would result in a net increase for Orono’s share of S3.282.00. She pointed out that this constitutes the first increase since 2001 and should help offset administrative costs and an increased zebra mussel awareness campaign. Halvorson stated that each City has until July 1.2004 to voice their objections to the proposed budget increase. McMillan stated that she was pleased to see that the LMCD would be dipping into their ov\ n reserves to increase funding for their clTorts. With regard to the latest legislation regarding the jurisdiction of the LMCD, llalvorson stated that, since the LMCD does not have jurisdiction over tributaries and creeks leading to Lake Minnetonka, the MCWD has proposed a partnership between affected communities, like Minnetrista, the LMCD, MCWD, 'Ilircc Rivers Park District, and the DNR to protect the 6 Mile Creek Corridor and water quality of Lake Minnetonka. On a final note, Halvorson encouraged the Council to give thought to heanng a short educational presentation on the I MCD’s zebra mussel program in the coming months. McMillan pointed out that the Star Tribune ran a recent e.xtensivc article on invasives coming to the Great Lakes region and suggested that everyone try to lead this interesting piece. PUBLIC COM.MEM S Mayor Peterson read a letter into the record from Congressman Jim Ramstad to Governor Pawlenty e.xpressing his, and veterans ’, grave concern about the closing and sale of the Big Island Veterans Campon l ake Minnetonka. Gabriel Jabbour, past Mayor and Orono resident, staled that, as a first generation immigrant to the U.S, he felt it was his duty to help the veterans and voiced his surprise that the board believed the camp was not well used. Upon visiting and hosting various picnics at the camp himself, Jabbour PAGE 3 of 19 M MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.ni. (PUBLIC COMMENTS, Continued) pointed out that camp records indicate that 5,000-6,000 veterans and their families visited the situ last year. While he concurred that security over the next two years is of concern, he staled that the camp continues to be under control by the same vets who’ve volunteered to stay out at the camp to maintain order. While lOO's of vets wished to attend the Council meeting this evening, Jabbour stated that a handful of representatives were chosen to speak on their behalf. Based on his experience as a past Mayor, Jabbour stated that the Orono Comp Plan identifies its vision for the Camp to remain a Vets Camp in perpetuity. He expressed his amazement that the Governors office had to do a great deal cf research to obtain information, since all they would have to do is contact those that ran the camp, the individuals present this evening. William Anderson, .^877 Park Lane, Spring Park. Representative of the Big Island Veterans Community and Commander of the Mound VFW for the past 6 years, removed rather suddenly recently, stated that Senator Olson’s statement that the wis voted to close the camp is not a totally accurate statement. He maintained that the Board, not made up of vets who use or iiave even visited the camp, voted to close the Big island Vet Camp. Anderson lead a letter on behalf of the Big Island Veterans Community into the record. The letter pointed out that the vets have operated and maintained the camp for o\ cr 80 years as a unique place open to veterans and their families. While they rccogni/e the pio|x;rty could be put to other use. the vets believe they have created a balance between land pre.servation and accessibility. The letter went on to ask the Mayor and Council to join the veterans in recognizing the unique nature of The Big Island Veterans Camp and support the continued operation of this histone and worthwhile facility. The letter asked the Council to consider rez.oning the property to reflect the use it has been put to over the past 100 years, a conunercially zoned, seasonal camp for use by veterans, their families, and guests. Anderson’s letter concluded by pointing out that 85 years ago the stale legislature dedicated the Big Island V’eterans Camp as a one-of-a-kind living memorial, a place where vets who answered their country's call could escape, and/or rcllcct on their expcncnccs and losses. A memorial befitting today’s sons and daughters w ho continue to answer their country’s call to scr\icc, and for generations of veterans to come. Anderson stated that having recently attended a Stale VFW Convention in RcKhester with 291 other VFW posts in Minnesota, he spoke to approximately 178 other posts who volunteered to w rite letters in support ol the Camp. Of those he spoke to, Anderson stated that 99% of them w ere surpnsed to hear of the Camp’s closing. Sansevere asked if it would be helpful to the Governor’s office if lie obtained those letters. Olson stated that it w ould be extremely helpful if Anderson could supply her w ith copies of those letters to pass along to the Governor’s office. If the group assembled, the Governor’s office could consider exercising some authority, or perhaps rescind the decision, but this needs to be determined w ithin the two year timeframe. Sansevere encouraged Olson to show the Governor both Ramstad and Anderson’s letters. PAGE 4 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. (PUBLIC COMMENTS, Continued) Olher vcicrans and Vets Camp supporters in attendance included: Jeff Hof fman. 225‘> Lilac Road. Spring Park, Spring Park City Council member Keith Kask, 19750 Manor Road, Deephaven, Mike Flanagan, 20560 Summemlic, Deephaven. Ex-Board of Governors Representative Ed Callahan, Orono Woods Apartments, Past Orono Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Orono resident and Past Mayor Bret Cirecnwald, 411 Lake Street, Excelsior Tnnua Johnson. 2400 Intcriachen Road. Spring Paik Mike Hanagan staled that in the I920’s the camp was established as a rest camp, or place for vets to recover with their families. Legislation of that ‘ime stated that the litsl priority of this camp would be Its disabled vets, a pnority which continues at the camp today. He urged the Council to make a recommendation to support the camp, noting what a bi/aiTc notion it seemed to him to close the camp when the country is at war. Managan acknowledged that, if no other alternatives remained, he could sup|K»rl selling a small portion of the camp to create an endowment for the remainder of the camp for generations of veterans to come. Keith Kask stated that the camp operated at a mere $3,100 deficit last year, which to him seemed a minimal expense, since the camp was not meant to Ire a profitable entity. With gornl utih/alion and increasing numbers visiting annually, he argued that the vets continue to do a great job matnUiining the camp at minimal expense for well over 5,000 users per season. Kask stated that, since he personally writes the insurance on the camp, he can attest to the fact that it continues to be covered. Sanscvcrc qucstionec? where the doll.irs would go if the camp w ere sold. Flanagan staled that the liiiuls w ould go into a trust fiind for benefit of veterans at the di.scretion of the Board of Commanders. Jabbour tntcijcctcd that develojK-rs are alieady eager to gel their hands t>n Big Island, w iih one such devclopei telling him the past week that Orono w ill jump at the opportunity to make money off develo|K‘rs on Big Island.r \mlerson staled that the vets have begun approaching private entities to fund the camp and gam financial commitments to keep it open. } (>lson i|ucstioncii what drove the decision to sell the camp and was curious to hear what the vets tell ihe motivalion was. Although admittedly conjecture on his part, Aiulerson stated that after State ('ommission ot V'clcrans* Aliairs Jell Olson collected reporting data and mission statements trom him on several occasions, and attended srvne meetings, suddenly Anderson received a letter on April 16'** which removed him from the Board and prohihited him from attending the ne.\l meeting. Kask added dial two other board i members seals were i>pen at the time and during the vote in April, two regular board members abstain d from the sole. PAGE 5 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (PUBLIC COMMENTS, Continued) Jabbour noted that the newly appointed board members, who've not ever visited the camp, voted to dissolve the camp and have nut met since handing down their decision. Olson asked how many board members were replaced. Anderson stated that three new members w'ere at that meeting and two of the other five abstained from the vote, though he had not been given a set of the minutes from the meeting as requested. White .stated that he felt that it was clear that money was the motivation. .Someone thinks there is a great deal of money to be made from the sale. White agreed that one option might be to rezone the camp for commercial camp use, while the other might be to zone it for cemetery use. Jabbour noted that no discussions had gone on with the American Indians either. He used an analogy that someone has decided to butcher this milk cow for a one time beefsteak, versus keeping the milk cow indefinitely. Ed Callahan stated that it is obvious to ever>une in the room the City of Orono should and does strongly support the continuation of the vet’s camp on Big island, lie agreed that it would be a got)d idea for the Council to adopt a rc.solution supporting this |K>sition and this as the best use of this piece of real estate. As a symbol of our City, Callahan pointed out that Orono is not alone in believing this to be a good use of Big Island, all of the other lakes communities agree, as do 178 other VFW posts, lie found it interesting to hear what was to be done with the money if the camp wcie sold, and pointed out that vast numbers of vets would be vying for this money if the camp were .sold as well if the camp is not .saved in |K*rpetuity. Callahan maintained that the camp continues to be a unique and vital parcel to the City and community as a whole which present problems and joys. Me urged the ('ouncil to give careful consideration to what w ill become of this parcel if it is not saved for future generations. I le pointed out that soon the City w ould have to deal w ith legislation, commercial interests, and strongly urged the Council to assign a group of liaisons to talk to other communities and gauge their positions, develop a con.sensus around the lake, and prepare to lake action. Olson pointed out that if the veterans or another public entity come up with the money w ithin two years they could proceed. She staled that, legislatively, they will do what they can to achieve the veterans and City’s ends, but urged supporters to go beyond the lakes communities in this endeavor. Olson encouraged the vets to lead and be the voice at the forefront of any action taken, w ith the ('ity’s support as the responsible party for use of this land. Sanscvcrc reiterated the need to obtain letters of support tluoughout the state. Wliitc asked w hat the operational e.xpenses of the camp w ere annually. Kask stated that operational costs of the camp were SI 8.000 annually. Jabbour slated that the issue over expenditures is irrelevant, since the vets currently have a donor in hand who has stcpjied up to cover expenses for the next 10 years. PAGE 6 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (PUBLIC COMMESTS, Continued) Mayor Peterson stated that she was confident the vets had the strong support of the City Council behind their effort. Sansevere asked former Mayors Callahan and Jabbour to consider leading a task force to investigate and present the vets position to the neighboring communities. He suggested that the vets use the full force of the media to back them on their endeavor, as well as. Congressman Kamstad in his media addresses. He commented that it is hard to believe that other vets have turned on this group of vets, especially now that the US is at war. He repeated the need to get other VFW po.'.ts involved to condemn the decision and to continue to pursue corporate help. McMillan agreed, stating that the vet's camp is a very special place which belongs to the vets. She stated that she would be 100% behind keeping it in its current state, as a virtual sacred use of the land. White thanked the many representatives for attending the Council meeting this evening. Mayor Peterson asked how to proceed and promising 150% sup|H)rt. Kask thanked the Council for their time and supixirt in their cause as it sends a great message to the community regarding the legitimacy of the vote. Sansevere suggested Anderson send copies of the 178 VI W post letters to the media as well as Olson in a display of how the rank and file feel about the camp. PUBLIC COMMENTS - CONTINUF.O Betsy and Bruce Nusbaum. 3480 North Shore Dnve, stated that they wished to provide the City Council with an update on their situation with the water issues on Birch I ane, what wasn’t hapiicning to date, and their glow ing list of concerns. Mr. Nusbaum distributed a list of 7 concerns ranging from excessive run off from Birch I ane on to their property causing them undue hardship, construction of the lot to the west which allowed excessive till and incomplete grade plans, potential luture changes to the lot to the cast, a concrete plan for the reconstruction of Birch Lane and resolution of the drainage issues, e.\|.Kditing a process and .sciting a time table for completion, lack of communication from the City with the neighborhood, to a request for a special meeting to resolve these issues. While Mrs. Nusbaum indicated that she had been part of several discussions with Moorse and (iappa. the same problems continue and increase. She explained that due to a |x>or resurfacing job 10 years earlier, cnonnous amounts of water flowed across their piojKily, a situation which was exacerbated by new construction to the west which was allowed to build higher than their construction 4 yeais earlier, thus disrupting the natural flow ol the run off and causing it to pool on their property. Mrs. Nusbaum passed around pictures of their home and yard today and 10 years earlier. May or Peterson asked the status of the temporary berm that was installed. PAGE 7 of 19 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (PVBUC COMMENTS, Continued) Mr. Nusbauni stated that he wished to provide the C'ouneil with an update of what's been going on, since he liclievcd they were unaware that little has been done and stones diller Since the old natural How was changed 10 years earlier with the resurfacing project, the then new How ran past their property to the west. This natural lluw of water to the west worked adequately until the new construction to the west was allowed to bring in enormous amounts of fill, which stopped the flow entirely. Mrs. Nusbaum pointed out that, just four years earlier, they were forced to follow the rules laid out by the City for their construction project, and now this new project has hailed the How. She maintained that her projicrly cannot accommodate theenliie runoff for the whole neighborhood. As nothing has changed in 10 years, Mr. Nusbaum voiced his concern that once again their concerns will be put off, tall will come, and noUung will be done once again. While slated that he wished he could come up with a solution, but indicated he must rely on what the engineers tell him. He indicated that |K*rhaps City staff has been working on some solutions the Council and Nushaums were unawate of. Sanscvcrc questioned what the lluw will be after construction. Mrs. Nusbaum staled that the final grade is anticipated to be complete this week. Moorse asked < iappa to explain their design solutions to the Council and issues regarding casements. (iappa slated that there are several drainage pr»»blems. Water comes rushing down Biich I ane and onto their pro|>erly since the asphalt iH-rm is smushed He has ilex eloped a set of options for diverting the water to the corner via a pipe. Having sent letters to some of the neighbors regarding one ol the options, (iappa stated that txx o of the ncighbois liaxe xoiccd their op|H).sitiun to the proposal. With regard to the option of con.strucling a parallel pijK* down Baldur I’k. Kd , (iappa staled that this i.s another viable option, (iajrpa stated that much of the problem centers on the fact that It IS very Hal at Birch and Baldur, which makes it difficult to handle heavy xolunies ol Water. McMillan pointed out that the asphalt bcmi was not meant to be a pennanent solution. (iappa stated that il the easements don't work they may consider taking the water out Baldur Pk. Kd. to ilireci it to North Shore Ibive. Sanseveie staled that tins has been going on for years already and questioned xvhether the City should consider condemnation to run the pi(K‘ underground. While asked if the City could help w ith a solution for bigger capacity. Kellogg siaicil that althougli they would like to take the water out two ways at Biich and Baldur Pk, Kd,, they would need to crown the load to run the water ilown both sides of the road and thru two pipes in two dilfercnt diiection.s. page: 8 of 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (PUBLIC COMMENTS, Continued) Gappa stated that the culvert under County Road 51 should be able to accommodate the water at that point. Mayor Peterson asked when the crown and cement curb and gutter would be put in. Sansevere reiterated asking for a time table for this process to be complete. Gappa stated that, if they could get a decision on which option to construct they could get price quotes, and get it built by fall. Mrs. Nusbaum questioned how they would fit the new roadway and gutters in the 1 4’7” roadway. Kellogg stated that they would construct it within the current right-of-way. White asked if the new construction w ould impact the Nusbaums. Gappa stated that the neighbor’s swale in the final grade should help direct water to the edge of the property. .Mrs. Nusbaum stated that they complied with all City requests and suggestions for the construction of their home. She indicated that the neighbors should not have been given additional variances to add more fill than initially proposed. McMillan encouraged Gappa to hold a neighborhood meeting to get some of the neighbors to come together and hear what the issues w ith Birch Lane are. She believed that it generally helps to get everyone together to talk about the problems facing them. McMillan stated that she spoke to a neighbor with the new construction who said that the C ity had not sent a letter or established a meeting. Mrs. Nusbaum agreed that a personal meeting would likely provide a better outcome than a letter. McMillan voiced her frustration for the residents, stating that she believed these issues would ha\^ been resolved by now. Mayor Peterson agreed, stating that the process has been ongoing for 10 years with the infant in the picture now sitting in the audience, and she did not w ish to sec that boy turn to a man by the time the problem is resolved. She urged staff to ensure that the new construction to the west's final grade remedy the situation. Mr%. Nusbaum asked what timetable .she could rely on and whether a .special session could be scheduled w ith the Council to finally resolve these issues once and for all. Mayor Peterson stated that Moorse would be contacting .Mrs. Nusbaum to schedule a neighborhood meeting and urged her to contact her after the meeting and relay to the .Mayor the results of the face to face meeung. Mayor Peterson commented that these water runoff problems seemed to be coming up more often these days. PAGE 9 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (PUBLIC COMMENTS, Cominued) Although there is no one easy solution to this problem, McMillan stated that the City needs to come up with something to resolve this for these people. Sansevere asked why staff couldn't just host a face to face meeting to explain to these residents how simple running the pijic across the back of their properties would be. Mayor Paterson asked if the Council and staff could all agree Uiat this is something that w ill be resolved yet this fall. Gappa agreed. The Council unanimously concurred. Mrs. Nusbaum thanked the Council for their time. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *5. #04-2%9 TERRY AND GRETCHEN BLOUNT, 1390 CHERRY PLACE - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL i:SE PERMIT - RESOLITION NO. 5200 White moved, Sansevere seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5200, a Resolution amending Resolution it5l27 granting a hardcover variance and a building*to-building setback variance for 1390 Cherry Place to allow construction of a covered entry with the remodel project. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 6. «04-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANT, LLP, WTLLO\V/l2 (STONEBAY Ol TLOT A) - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN/FINAL PLAT - RESOl.UTION NO. 5201, ORDINANf E NO. 14,3"" SERIES Gaffron c.xplained that the Applicants have requested General Development Plan Approval and Final Plat Approval, as well as. Ordinance Re/oning subject to its not becoming effective ntil all required documents have Inren executed to the satisfaction of staff and the City Attorney. Gaffron pointed out that the applicants had provided mylars for final plat approval and final building materials boards rcllccting the darker brick as directed, lie questioned whether the Council wished to include evergreens along the 400-500’ Highway 12 frontage. Gaffron indicated that the applicant’s attorney has suggested a number of minor changes to the Preliminary Plat Resolution and the ( icneral Concept Plan Approval Resolution adopted on June 14. While most of the changes arc inconsequential and under review by the Attorney and staff. Gaffron stated that Reliance Development Company LLC is assigning their interests to a replacement entity, Slonebay Commercial LLC. for legal purposes, and diKuments w ill be revised to reflect those changes In addition, the applicant's attorney has requested that the rezoning ordinance add to the list of allow ed uses a final line item. "«3‘* other non-food retail uses". Gaffron pointed out that staff has rejected this requested change giv en the amount of time devoted by the Planning Commission in establishing this list of allowed uses. He stated that if an unlisted use is requested, staff would rejeet it and the applicant could appeal staff s interpretation and request PAGE 10 of 19 r MINUTES OF THE ORONOCITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o ’clock p.m. (6, m4-2974 RELIANCE DEV ELOPMENT COMPANY, LLP, WILLOW/I2 (STONEBA Y OUTLOT A) - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN/FINAL PLAT, Continued) Planning Commission or City Council action to determine whether the proposed use is similar enough to one of the listed uses to be allowable, or request to amend the PUD. Finally, Gaffron stated that the City Engineer has provided a final letter establishing the required amount for the letter of credit at S750.000. Since the applicant has complied with the conditions established by the City in the Comp Plan Amendment for this site, and has revised plans to be in conformance with the recommendations of the City Engineer and the City’s Planning Consultant, it would be staffs recommendation to adopt the documents for: 1) Ilie General Development Plan Approval and I iiial Plat Approval Resolution 2) Rezoning Ordinance 3) Acceptance ot the PUD 4A Agreement and authorize Mayor and staff to execute said agreement upon City Attorney acceptance of final language Vickie Vandel. representative of Reliance Development Corporation, stated that they wish to avoid coming back for repeated amendments to the permitted uses list; therefore, suggest adding line item 29 other non-food retail uses. She questioned whether staff has some ability in accepting similar uses. Gaffron slated that there is an appeal process in place for determining permitted and non-permitted u.ses which can be brought before Council for review. White suggested that staff amend their position to state if an unlisted use is requested, staff rot/W reject it and the applicant at that time could appeal staffs interpretation and request PC/Council action to determine whether the pro|X)sed use is similar enough to one of the listed uses as to be allowable, or would have to request to amend the PUD. Moorsc concurred, stating that if a substantially similar use is presented to staff, they could determine at staff level to accept or reject the use. Gaffron indicated that language could be added to item 29 allowing staff to make some detenninalions regarding similar use. He asked w hether Council wished to sec evergreens along the Highway 12 expanse. White stated that the evergreens would be a nice addition to bieak up the expanse during the winter months and give the property some landscaping apix'al. Vamicl stated that she would w ork w ith staff to determine w here to place the evergreens. While moved, Sansevere seconded, adopting RESOUTION .NO. 5201, a Kesolution granting General Development Plan Approval for Planned I'nit Development No. 4A for Stonebay ('ommercial LI.C and Approving the Plat of Stonebay Commercial - File No. 04-2974 subject to the landscape additions of Evergreens discussed. >'OTE: Aves 4, Navs 0. PAGE II of 19 r MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (6. M4-2974 RELIANCE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLP, WILLOW/12 (STONEBA Y OVTLO^ A) - GENERAL DEVELOPMENTPLAN/HNAL PLAT, Continued) Sansevere moved. White seconded, adopting ORDINANCE NO. 14, SERIES, an Ordinance Amending the Municipal Code of Orono and Amending the Official Zoning Map by Rezoning Properly within Ouliot A, Stonebay from PUD/B>6 Highway Commercial District and adding Section 78-1010 Regarding Pianned Unit Deveiopment No. 4A - Fiie #04- 2974 adding Item #29 with language indicating that staff could accept or reject a proposed subslanlialiy similar use to the permitted use section of the Code. VOTE: Ayes 4, .Nays 0. White moved, McMilian seconded, to accept the PUD 4A Agreement and authorize Mayor and staff to execute said agreement upon City Attorney aeceptance of final language. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *7. #04-3009 JAMES AND DARCY LOFFLER, 1690 SlIADY^VOOD ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 5202 White moved, Sanseverc seconded, to adopt RESOLUTIO.N NO. 5202, a Resolution granting lot area and hardcover variances in the 75-250’ setback zone to allow construction of a new residence on the property located at 1690 Shadywood Road subject to all existing structures being removed, the new house meets average setback and 75* setbacks, as well as other required setbacks, and the City Engineer's approval of the grading and drainage plans prior to issuance of a building permit. VOTE: ayes 4, .Nays 0. 8. #04-3016 HENRY LAZNIARZ OF WAYZATA DESION AND DEVELOP.MENT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - PRD SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT Gaffron reported that this item was tabled at the June 14 meeting to allow the developer to preside additional detail regarding proposed house locations, relationships to lot lines, setbacks, etc. While Council indicated support for the concept of creating an ouliot for the areas to be preserved, they were concerned about the clustering, building separation, and intensity of development in the portion of the property being developed. Gaffron indicated that staff would recommend approval of the proposed preliminary I’RD, subject to the 9 general and specific conditions noted w ithin the staff memo dated June 24, 2004, and direction to draft a resolution for preliminary plat approval. Gaffron pointed out that staff feels development of this site as PRD is an appropriate zoning and win-win situation for the C'lty and the developer, since otherwise the 14 dry buildable acres might put one of the homesites south of the creek ne.xt to the Luce Line. In addition, the FRD allow s the City to impose a higher standard to mitigate any negative impacts of the clustering w hile prescn ing substantial areas of wooded ‘dry buildable ’ land as open space that might otherw ise have become hoiiKsites. He pointed out that in all 7 lots, it would be reasonable to require any new con.struction to meet a 30’ setback from the other. With regard to accessory buildings, Gaffron suggested the Council determine a standard that could be put in place for this development concerning setbacks, buffers, etc. In addition. Gaffron slated that stalf would recommend that no structures, no fences, no non-domestic animals (horses, sheep, chickens, etc..) no tree or vegetation removal except by specific permit for maintenance, no excavating or earth movement, be allow ed; except for the maintenance of w alking paths. P.‘\GE 12 of 19 J MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (8. #04-3016 HESRY LAZSIARZ OF If'/i YZA TA DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, 120 BROU N ROAD SOUTH - PRD SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT, Continued) maintenance but not expansion of a small pedestrian bridge across the creek, and that only one trail access point to the Luce Line trail be allowed. In conclusion, Gaffron staled that staff would recommend approval of the proposed subdiv ision as a PRD. subject to the following general and specific conditions; I) Acceptance of the proposed 7-lot plat on 14 dry buildabic acres and acceptance of the proposed lot sizes, configurations and setbacks; except that the areas shown on the prehminar>’ plat drawing as “Proposed Conservation Easements ” shall be platted as an Open Space Oullot for ownership by a homeowners association. Rear setbacks shall be re-established for the affected individual lots and depicted on a revised preliminary plat drawing to be provided by the applicant. 2) Applicant shall submit for Council review and acceptance a draft “Conservation Easement ’ specifying the proposed conditions and limitations to be placed on the Open Space Outlot. Such easement may include provisions for the existing wood creek crossing bridge to remain on the property and address potential liability issues for use. maintenance or replacement of such bridge. Su.h easement may include provisions for the construction of a private trail w ith no more than one connecting point to the Luce Line Trail, subject to approval of the MnDNR. 3) All areas shown as wetlands on the preliminary plat draw ing shall be subject to the standard Elowage and Conservatnin Easement. 4) The I’RD is subject to the standard Park Dedication Pec requirement. 5) Approval is subject to the standard Stomiwater and Drainage Trunk Fee. 6) The portion of pnvate road to be created on the property shall be within a platted outlot as shown on the preliminary plat draw ing. fhe portion of private road to be created w ithin easements extending to Brown Road South need not be platted as an outlot. Approval is subject to provision of the standard Road. Drainage and Utility Easements to be granted to the ('ity over the new road outlot as well as over the 40' ea.sement access to Brown Road Applicant shall demonstri.tc to the satisfaction of the City Attorney that the 40 ’ casement over the Dunn property and the adjoining 10 ’ casement over Lot 1, Block 1, Kallcstad Acres, arc sufficient to provide the City- with the intended underlying public ingress, egress, and access easements to ensure legal access of the public to all properties served by the private road. The developer shall establish the necessary road maintenance agreements, etc. to ensure that the private road will be maintained to reasonable standards at all times by the homeow ner ’s asstK-iation. and that failure of that pnvate group to maintain their private road will he cause for the City to accomplish needed maintenance and to assess the benefited properties for the direct cost of such maintenance. 7) The private road shall be 28 ’ paved width, not 24 ’ as shown on preliminary plat drawing, and if feasible shall be centered on the 50 ’ corridor established via outlot or casements for such use. PAGE 13 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (H. n04-30!6 HENR Y LAZNIARZ OF WA YZA TA DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - PRD SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLA T, Continued) 8) Approval is subject to iccommcndation of City Engineer as noted in his comments dated SniQA, except that the 40’ access comdor need not be platted as long as it is covered via the required casements. 9) Approval is subject to MCWD approval and permits as required. McMillan inquired whether there would be curb and gutter proposed for the roadway and driveways to direct stormwater runoff and whether it could begin 15-20' inside the development. Goodrum, Engineer, stated that they arc proposing curb and gutter along the street to direct runoff towards the pond. White questioned whether streetlights were being proposed. Lazniarz, of Wayzata Design and Development, stated that they did not intend to install lights, which might disrupt the rural character of the area. McMillan pointed out that, having visited the site, the grades were not as steep as she had originally thought and now believed the sites to be conducive to walk-outs. She asked whether a 50' setback from the creek could be established on Lot 3. I a/niar/. felt this was acceptable. GalTron asked if the Council would support the recommendation that no accessory structures fall within 50’ of the rear lot line for lots 1,2, or 3. The Council agreed, w ith Mayor I’eteison suggesting that 30’ side setbacks be the set standard as well. CioiHlrum agreed, but pointed out that 20' would be more desirable, Doug I'ranchot, 2010 Colin, located opposite the development on Brown Road, complimented the City and developer on this newly proposed subdivision as compareil to those seen in the past. He asked whether the homesites would lie buffered from the road. I azniarz pointed out that the only home likely to be seen from Brown Road would be that on Lot 6. I raiichot felt nice attention had been gisen to avoid unnecessary disruption and encouraged the City to be wary of elevations of finished homesites. Lazniarz stated tliat it was their intent to leave the rear 50’ untouched and jneserv ed m a conservation easement. Ciaflion encouraged the Council to direct .staff to dratl a resolution for preliminary plan approval if they could support the revised proposal. PAGE 14 of 19 I MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (8. 804-3016 HENRY LAZStARZ OF WAYZATA DESIGN AND DEYELOPMENT, 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH - PRD SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLA T, Continued! While moved lo direct MafT to draft a resolution to for preliminary plat approval as a PRD, subject to the general and specific conditions noted above as 1-9. David McCuskey, 130 Brown Road South, voiced concern about the width of the roadway entering the development and how runoff would be directed away from his property. Lazniar/ reiterated that curb and gutter w'ould be used to direct runoff towards the pond. McCuskey felt a 24’ wide roadway would suffice, as well as preserve trees on site. He was un.sure whether curb and gutter would be the best answer for runoff in the future. McCuskey pointed out that a serpentine design might obscure views of Lot 6 altogether. Gaffron suggested the developer create a design of how the road might serpentine thru the development, depleting the trees to be preserved. While the City standard for new roadways is 28*, Gaffron pointed out that the City has approved smaller roads in the past. While she liked the idea of a narrower roadw'ay, McMillan stated that she did not wish to cause additional problems with regard to parking, safety, or plowing. Moorse pointed out that most all new subdivision roads are 28’ wide. Goodrum suggested a compromise, by creating a 24’ w ide entry to the subdivision which then is widened near the homesites to allow for ample parking. .Sansevere slated that this .sounded like a good compromise. Sanscvcrc seconded. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *9. #04-3019 WENDY SULLIVAN. 325 C’RESTVIEW AVENUE - VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. 5203 While moved, Sansevere seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5203, a Resolution granting lot area/width and front and side yard setback variances for 325 Crestview Avenue. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 10. #04-3024 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING AMENDMENTS *a) A( CESSORY STRUCTURES ON THROUGH LOTS - ORDINANCE NO. 15,3"" SERIES White moved, Sansevere seconded, lo adopt ORDINANCE NO. 15,3*“’ SERIES, amending /.oning Code Section 78-1431 regarding conditional use permits on through lots. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PAGE 15 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (to. 004-3024 CITY OF ORONO, ZONtSGAMESDMENTS, Continued) b) LARGE VEHICLE STORAGE Gafiron explained that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on whether it might be appropriate to amend the Ordinance regarding storage of large vehicles, with regards to lots of area 2 - 4.99 acres with pre-existing large vehicle storage situations. Mrs. Timm was present at the hearing and spoke regarding her plight. Gaffron stated that staff concurs with the Planning Commission's unanimous recommendation that the ordinance remain as is and not be amended, nor ‘grand-fathenng’ allowed, since impacts of large vehicles on 2 acre lots can be more than just visual. Sansevere questioned if the Timms had determined whether they might be able to move their driveway to the other side of their property. Gaffron stated that they have concluded that moving the driveway to the other side would not work; however, the Timms arc considering putting in a parallel driveway on their property ’ next to the existing one. Although he did believe many others were impacted by this new ordinance, Sansevere stated that he w ould prefer to grandfather some of these situations or consider them on a casc-by-casc basis. He was uncomfortable forcing these people with a pre-existing condition out of business with the new ordinance. He feared that the City was going out of its way to eliminate its working class people with this hasty ordinance. Gaffron pointed out that other concerns exist. White agreed that he w'as compelled to look at these situations on a casc-by-case basis, since the City would be virtually eliminating this resident's way of living. While the neighbor has expressed his desire to pave the existing shared driveway, Sansevere noted that he had been hesitant to do so with the large vehicle traversing it. 1 le reiterated that the Timm’s situation and similar cases should be examined on a casc-by-case basis and repeated the need for them to obtain driveway access on their own property. In order to be considerate neighbors, Sansevere recognized the need for the Timms to park their truck on the other side of their pro|K*ny. Gaffron .stated that the City could give consideration to w hether to make this a conditional use on properties under 5 acres. Moorsc stated that this would have to be a condition afforded only pre-existing uses He pointed out that, beyond visual, the noi.se and odors were the key issues. (iaffron pointed out that he could not support grandfathering, nor policing these exceptions. McMillan slated that she could see where each party was coming from with this situation and asked if this was a common ordinance. She obsers ’ed that, as the rural character clashes wath the newly suburban mix in Orono, the City will continue to struggle with these types of issues. PAGE 16 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monda June 28, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (10. M4-3024 CITY OF ORONO, ZOMSG AMENDMENTS, Continued b) LARGE VEHICLE STORAGE) Moorse pointed out that, if the City amended the acreage requirement, the Timms would be in compliance if they could relocate the driveway to their property. Sansevere reiterated his position that the Ordinance was too hastily put into place without adequate consideration of the impacts. He stated that whether other communities have these ordinances in place or not is inconsequential, since Orono is different than most other developed communities due to Its rural character. White felt that allowing a conditional use permit to be granted on lots smaller than 2-S acres for pre-existing conditions made more sense to him than grandfathering the business. Gaffron stated that the 1 imms would have to file for a conditional use permit, pay the fees, and begin the process over in earnest with a new public hearing. Sansevere questioned how, in the meantime, the City could allow the Timms to continue. Moxirse stated that, while they initiated the Conditional Use process, the City would need to amend the code to put in place standards to base a decision of whether a CUP was possible. Sansevere noted that the City has found itself in the middle of a neighborhood dispute. Mayor Peterson questioned whether mediation might be appropriate. She suggested the Council table the Code Amendment in order to allow the City time to come up with a solution. Mayor Peterson moved, Sansevere seconded, to table the Proposed Zoning Code Amendment regarding large vehicle storage to allow staff additional time to investigate alternatives. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. MAYOR/CITY COUNCIL REPORT Sansevere informed staff and the Council that a mini terrorist alert has been issued regarding lakes and rivers over the 4"’ of July Holiday Weekend. Mayor Peterson encouraged members to participate in the Park Surv'ey distributed by Council member White. She also pointed out that the League of Minnesota Cities has instituted a membership fee increase. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT *11. PURCHASE OF BACKUP DIALER FOR SCiVDA SYSTEM White moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the purchase of a backup dialer for the SCADA system from Automatic Systems Company, Roseville, .Minnesota, in the amount of $7,798, to be funded from the 2004 Sew er Fund Budget, W'itb approval of a budget adjustment to reflect this expenditure, VOTE: Ayes 4, .Nays 0 PAGE 17 of 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETLNG Monday, June 28, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. *12. REQUEST FOR FINAL PAYMENT - BROWN ROAD NORTH/IIOMESTEAD SEWER PROJECT White moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve Request for Final Payment North Brown Road (Homestead) Sanitary Sewer Project to Red Pederson Utilities Inc. in the amount of S.^,160.78. VOTE: Ayes 4, nays 0. (Item 813 Removed-Request for Final Payment County Road 19 Sidewalk Improvements) CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (Item 814 Removed-Approval of Purchase of Software Licenses) 15. APPOINT PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR McMillan moved. Mayor Peterson seconded, to appoint David Rahn as Planning Commission Chair and Cynthia Bremer as Vice-Chair to the Planning Commbsion.VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *16. NAVARRE FIRE STATION APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT NO. 8 White moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the Application and Certificate for Payment No. 8, in the amount of $28,722.00, to be paid from the Navarre Fire Station Construction Fund. VO I'E: Ayes 4, Nays 0 17. WEST METRO DRUG TASK FORCE AGREE.MEN 1 AND BUDGET ADJUST.MENTS Administrator .Moorse indicated that minor modifications to the language were necessary and requested Council table the item. Mayor Peterson moved, Sansevere seconded, to table discussion of the W'est Metro Drug task Force Agreement and Budget Adjustment until modiHcations to the language can be made. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT As Attorney Harrett was absent, there was no report, 18.LICENSES ONE DAY GAMBLING 1. Minnetonka Center lor the .Arts Rat tle w'lth Arts of the Garden four July 10. 2004.9:00 a m. 3:00 p.m. White moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve all licenses. VO I E: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PAGE 18 of 19 \ MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 28,2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. *19. BILLS White HMved, Santevere seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Peterson moved, Sansevere seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council Meeting of June 28,2004 at 10:45 P.M. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vec, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor PAGE 19 of 19 HioiitiAi&isamauuflniai r REQUEST FOR COUNCIL AC HON COliMr^ti »^rpjj|sjQ JUL 1 2 2C04 DATE: July 1 2, 20(^1^^ O'" ORONO ITEM NO.: 3 Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: At’cnda Section: Public Services Director ’s Report7 Item Description: Birch Lane Drainage Neighborliood Informational Meeting The purpose of this informational meeting is discuss the proposed project options which have been developed by City stalf, obtain feedback from the residents regarding the various options, address questions and concerns regarding the project, and for the Council to provide direction regarding the option to be constructed. i'rujcct Biickgroiiiid Storm water currently flows down Birch Lane towards the Baldur Park Road intersection, where tlterc is a catch basin in the southeast corner of the intersection and an c.xisting 8” pipe along the eastern edge of Baldur Park Road that drains into an c.\isting 15" culvert under North Shore Drive which outlets to Crystal Bay. An improvement project is necessary to address storm water drainage problems, particularly for those properties on the south side of Birch Lane. Currently, .storm water on Btrch Lane flows to the south side of the street and into the yards of the adjacent properties, where it tends to pond because the land is very Hat. 'I he first solution discussed with neighborhood residents, early in the project, was to install curb and gutter along the south side of the street to prevent the water from Birch Lane from Bowing into the adjacent properties. This solution would require less street rc-gradmg. as the water already Bows to the south side of the street. The residents were concerned about the equity of this solution, since all of the water from Birch Liine would be draining along only the south side ol the road. CMty staff also had concerns about the capacity of the gutter on one side of the street to carry all of the water from the street, and the capacity of the pipe and catch basin at the corner of Birch Lane and Baldur Park Road, to carry all of the water from the street. A proposed variation of this first solution was to install an additional pipe between the houses on the south side of the street to drain the water towards North Shore Drive, as this would alleviate the concerns regarding the existing pipe and gutter capacity. The residents h.id concerns that this would drain additional water into their front yards. Page I of 4 1 \ The installation of curb and gutter along both the north and south sides of fiirch Lane, and re grading the street to include a crown in the center, was discussed. The consensus was that this solution was the most equitable and would increase the gutter capacity to convey water down to the naldur Park Road intersection. Proposed Project I he proposed project is to install surmountable concrete curb (curb that can be easily driven over) along the first 250 feet of Birch Lane to prevent the water in the street from Bowing towards the hou.ses and garages. The road will be re graded and crowned, so the water flow's into the curb and gutter along both sides of the street. There will be new, more efficient catch basins installed on both the north and south sides of Birch l.ane at the Ihildur Park Road intersection. The existing storm sewer pipe along Baldur Park Road will continue to convey the flow from the catch basin on the south side of Birch Lane, and a new pipe will be installed to convey the flow from the catch basin on the north side of Birch Lane. This will pn)vide for additional flow capacity from the intersection area Project Options 1 here arc several options for the installation of the storm sewer pipe neces.sary to convey the flow from the catch basins on each side of Birch Lane at the Baldur Park Road intersection. Itach provides a similar increase in storm water flow capacity. Lach option also has its own set of advantages and disadvantages. 1 he option ol connecting both catch basins to the existing 8" storm sew'cr pipe that runs to the south along Baldur I’ark Rt»ad was dropped from consideration because of the limited capacity of this pipe New Pipe it) Baldur Park Road One viable option would be to install a new 12" pipe in Baldur I’ark Road to ct>nvcy the drainage from the north side of Birch I.anc. This new pipe would be parallel to the existing 8" pipe that is located along the eastern edge of Baldur I’ark Road. These two pipes would then both drain into an existing 15" culvert under North Slu>ie Drive which outlets to Crystal Bay. The advantages of this option are that it does not require any easements or removal of existing landscaping, and it provides increased capacity Ihe disadvantages are that it increases the amount of storm water flow directly into Crystal Bay. requires the excavation and restoration of a pin tion of lialdur Park Road for the installation of the storm sewer pipe under the road, and increased street maintenance caused by the pipe under the load moving up and down with the free/e and thaw cvclc. Pace 2 of 4 New Pipe in Baldur Park Road Right of Wav A refinement of this option is to replace the current 8” pipe along Baldur Park Road with a new pipe with a capacity equivalent to the existing 8" pipe plus the proposed 12” pipe. The advantage is that this can be done without excavating the roadway, which is less expensive, both in terms of the initial repair of the road, and in terms of on-going repairs caused by the pipe under the road moving up and down with the freeze and thaw cycle. The disadvantage of this option is that it would require the removal of several shrubs that have been planted by the adjacent property owner in the City right-of-way above the existing 8" pipe. The City discourages the planting of landscaping on the City right-of-way, particularly on top of utility lines. The roots of the plantings can damage the utility lines. Also, if excavation of the line is ever required for repairs, the plantings would have to be removed. The plantings along Baldur Park Road could be replaced off of the right-of-way, or, could be replaced with plantings that would be less prone to damage the pipe. However, careful consideration should be given to the legitimacy of City funds being used to replacing landscaping that has been planted on street right of way. New Pine to Maxwell Bay Another option is to install a 12” pipe from the new catch drain on the north side of Birch lane. This pipe would run from the intersection north along Baldur Park Road and then in a westerly direction through the rear portion of the back yards of several houses on North Shore Drive. This pipe would outlet into a wetland area adjacent to Maxwell Bay. The positive aspect of this option is that the wetland area would provide for treatment of the storm water before it flows into the lake. The negative aspects of this option include the need to obtain easements for the construction and maintenance of this pipe and also the need for possible watershed district approval of this pipe. Letters have been sent to the property owners regarding the possibility of obtaining easements for this pipe, and these property owners were not interested in providing easements. Copies of letters that were received from two of the three property owners are attached for you information. Staff Recommendation As indicated above, each of the options equally addresses the need to increase storm water flow capacity. The option that best addresses water quality as well as water quantity is the option that outlets the water into the wetland area adjacent to Maxwell Bay. However, this option may not be do-able, particularly within the necessary timeframe, because of the easement issues. Therefore, staff is recommending the selection of one of the options that carry all of the storm water flows to the south along Baldur Park Road, with the preferred option being replacement of the existing pipe with a larger capacity pipe Page 3 of 4 j h Caution It is important to caution the neighborhood residents that, although the proposed project will provide substantial drainage improvements that will be effective for smaller rain events, they will be less effective for large rain events. Because of the flat topography and low level of this area in relation to Lake Miiuietonka, and especially when there is a high lake level, temporary ponding of water in the street and in the yards in this area may still occur during large rain events. Funding Because all of the improvements to be made as part of this project are directly related to solving drainage problems, it is recommended that this project be fully funded from the City ’s Storm Water Fund. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Conduct neighborhood informational meeting to obtain resident input on this project and then provide a recommendation for the preferred alterative and authorize staff to develop final plans and obtain quotations for this project. Page 4 of 4 F m ,7- -... -..if' . ,- «' V- 'V. ^ m w'fe'i. ', :* te-,;* /■ :t " - '■ ' V 3530 •i-i/ , > JLA ’ 5533t-33C0 ^‘TyOPn- °'<%0 /7/i- ’ /6^Ae \ yiJv<-/<./y ^^ uyufy yC^' 4:v*'y'sO^JL ■yiQ^ie.r'U^^/. -?<'0^ c'^ii..^ r7^ 44yc‘6' V^/^Ax- T^Aydx^'tt^T^-- \lAAc*iJP /QyicyAyAt<<777**- c-C ^ tS"Ar*^^^j /(^oliX£t'^y'>/ /I/dy I f-yd>^ ~t(L £*^7^/i'xTydAdi^, ' ’AAA a ^A ux £1/ i/xl''tu.^c'k{t£^Ay^c ‘">iC'^A ^ 3 7/OjZc a^< i73^ i Ax>yi«.AA3x^ yc^ Ayyi-a^ . ^yiZf^yy t^gKt'^yd'KyAAxZ^ . ^ dTAy*^*^ ^<^*4 Au!^f.Q ^OyAoi^y^ A/ii? /fyAc*V7/ .7 'Vt'XCC'Uyytiy^ t' I '2>S'^o wo'a-■^\^ sv'f ’ii-’t PUI/E fteCElV'ED 2 fl 2Q04 CITY OF OR oa /0 Cj<.c'iyi ^5^^.0Cy'j fXALHJUJtS^ .zVu 'A4> 'AX. (A^\. il^KA'xoAii/e^. iOjt ^^ctlLKiL_ C6^^'J:\,uctt^-y\X /,cn 6t a.yxrtA. (S-oJ\ -P'diy)\A^ [^D j> cU<jHyuL. Ad Cj^Ci^xit t^Cx .ax A i O'jJUki^ r ataua^M J 3 HI CIA LMst S'\0\iyv\ 5 V. Mcltctmantv >A' <T/u) U‘,i^)i. (>Jia yyi/o, JI.A' 55a:)J-ojav .4c/^y^7rr/ ^ y "-y A-uccyi-y^ 7^c, yy^.j ^l/frfM-C- ■'U.'‘i« yy> fip' ^J/^)y '',/■ /, / ^ / /^Ufi ^'1^- Unt/yl^ty/ ycfc y^Zi? '^/(yfyttc^ 'feyi'ty £ycJ/y </y^^y^ ^ Uc'~4> 'f^i (yy^*^ tiiy^ C^ ■:,,m7: / iL AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JULY 12, 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 Counc under the Consent Item* on the agenda Memos regarding each of the Agenda items arc available in the PubI Packet • located on the counter near the sign in sheet ROLL CALL CONSENT AGENDA I Approve/Ajnend APPROVAL OF MINUTES • 2. Regular Council Meeting of June 2S. 2004 7:00 P.M. - INFORMATIONAL MEETING 3. Birch Lane Drainage Impiovcmcnt Piojccl PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Pal Wolfe. ReprcscntaUve PLANNING COMMISSION COM.MLNTS - Dave Rahn. Rcp.csenlaiivc PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR S REPORT 4. #04-3016 Henry Lazniarz of Wayzala Design and Development, 120 Biown Road South - PRE Subdivision Picliminai-y Plat - Rcsoluhon 5. #04-3024 City of Orono, Zoning Amendment - Large Vehicle Storage 6. #04-3027 Brcnshcil Development on behalf of Thomas James Piopcitics. LLC, SW Corner of Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12 - Sketch Plan MAYOICCOU.NCIL REPORT PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR’S REPORT 7. Award Contract for County Road 6/Baseball Field Trail S. KPDES StoiTinvatcr Education Program with Metro Watershed Partners CITY ADMlMSTRyVTOR ’S REPORT 9 Schedule Park Commission Candidate Interviews CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT • 10. LICENSES Special Event * 11. BILLS AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, JULY 12, 2004, 7:00 P..M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO. MINNESOTA UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 2004 07/06 - Park Tour ano Council Work Session, ntesday, 5:30 p m (Counctl Ltatson - Lilt McS(illan) 07/12 - Council Meeting, 7;00 p m 07/19 - Planning Commission Meeting. 6 00 p m. (Council Liaison - Bob Sansevere) 07/26 - Council Meeting, 7 00 p m 03/02 - Park Coimmssion Mce mg. 7 15 pm. (Conncil Liaison • Jim Mmphy) 0S/C4 - Planning Commission v. ork Session, li'ednesday. 5:30 p in OS/05 - Council W'oik Session, Tlitnsdai\ 5 30 p m. OS/09 - Council Meeting, 7.00 p m OS/16 - Planning Commission Mccling, 6 00 p m (Council Liaison - Jim IHufe) OS/23 - Council Meeting, 7 00 p ni. Date Application Received: 4*21-04 Dale Application Coniidered at Complete: 4-21-04 120-Day Review Period Expires: 0-20-04 mpptiNG JUL 1 2 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO Dale: June 30, 2004 Item No.: tj. Department Approval: Adminitirator Approval: Name: Michael P. Gaffron^ Title: Planning Director Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: t/04-3016 Henry Lazniarz/Way-zata Design & Development -120 Brown Road S. - Prclitninary Plat - Planned Residential Development (PRD) - RESOLUTION Zoning District: Lot Area: RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential, 2-acrc min. 20 acres Total, 14 Acres +. Dry Buildablc I Jst of Exhibits A - Notice of Council Action 6-30-04 B - Preliminary Plat Approval Resolution for Adoption Application Summary: On June 28 Council voted 4-0 to direct staff to draft a resolution for Preliminary Plat Approval, incoiixii atingcondilioiis asdiscussetl in the stanTuemoofJime 24 in addition to conditions discussed by Council on June 2S. The attached resolution has been drafted incorporating conditions of preliminary plot approval. Please review the resolution to ensure it accomplishes your goals for this property. Staff Recommendation Staff recomineiuls adoption of the attached resolution. COUNC IL ACnON REQI'ESTED Motion to amend or adopt the attached resolution for preliminary plat approval CITY OF ORONO 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 (952) 249-4600 ZONING FILE #04-3016 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION DATE OF NOTICE: June 30. 2004 TO; Henry Lazniarz COPIES: Charles & Sue VanEeckhout Wayzata Design & Development 1117 Marquette Avc. South, Suite 2509 Minneapolis, MN 55403 120 Brown Road South Long Lake. MN 55356 Tom Goodnun Schoell & Madson, Inc. 10580 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 1 Minneapolis, MN 55305 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Preliminary Subdivision / PRD DATE OF MEETING; June 28. 2004 Motion: Motion was to approve with a variety of conditions to be documented in a Resolution for Preliminary Plat Approval to be drafted by staff and considcicd/adopted on July 12. Vote: 4 In Favor 0 Against Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council - Monday, July 12, 2004; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder aRcr review and approval by the Council. If you have questions, please contact Planning Director Mike Gaffron at 952-249-4600. jmHUti Draft ffl 7-6-04 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH FILE NO. 04-3016 WHEREAS, Wayzata Design and Development LLC (hereinafter the "Developer") has an interest in the property within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City") located at 120 Brown Road South and legally described as follows: Tract II, Registered Land Survey No. 352, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "Property"); and WHEREAS, on April 21,2004 the Developer filed a fonnal subdivision application with the City for preliminary approval of a seven lot residential plat of the Property in conjunction with a request for Orono Planned Residential Development (PRD) approval for development of the Property; and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 17,2004, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at its regular meetings of June 14 and June 28, 2004, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the developer; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby makes the following findings in regard to this application: FINDINGS 1. 2. Tliis application was reviewed as Zoning File #04-3016. llic property is zoned RR-1B Single Family Rural Residential District, which normally requires a minimum lot area of 2.0 acres and minimum lot width of 200' 1 he Property is 20.0 acres in area, of which 6.0 acres is wetland and 14.0 acres is non wetland area. Page 1 of 13 rr 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. w Tlic propcity is guided in the 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan (CMP) for single family residential use at a density of I unit per 2 acres. The proposed layout contains 7 lots on 14.0 non-wetland acres. Based on the City ordinances that exclude road right-of-way from a calculable area, the only way the code density requirement can be met for 7 lots is via a Planned Residential Development (PRD). The Property is located within the MUSA and is intended to be developed using municipal sewer. The proposed use for residential purposes would be in confonnity with the CMP as long as density standards arc met. The nature of the Property is such that a relatively small portion of the 20-acre total is suitable for actual construction, due to the existence within the boundaries of the site of wetlands, drainage ways, Long Lake Creek, steep slopes, and discontinuous areas of dry buildablc land that would have to be linked via long driveways across wetlands or the creek in order to be developed. The Council finds that the property is appropriate for development as a PRD, specifically to allow for clustering of development to allow for preservation of a laige portion of the site. The proposed plat creates 7 individual lots that are proposed to be developed with homes clustered within an area approximately 300 feet by 500 feet, on the high knoll in the westerly quadrant of the property. Individual lot sizes exclusive of proposed road and consci-vation outlot areas and stonnwater ponding areas, will range in gross area from approximately 3/4 acre to just over 2 acres. Lot widths measured at the street setback line range from approximately 90' to over 200'. hi order to create the degree of open space and building separation that characterizes Orono's 2-acre zones, the Developer has agreed to maintain 30' side setbacks for all lots, regardless of the size of the lot. Proposed Lot 3 contains an existing residence which will be only 15' from its northerly side lot line; this residence will be recognized as having a legal nonconforming setback, and if the house is replaced, all new construction would have to meet the 30' setback requirement. Additionally, to retain a bufter betivcen the proposed homes and the two existing homes directly west in the Kallcstad Acres subdivision, the westerly 50' of proposed Lots 1 and 2 will be subject to a conserv'ation casement that disallows tree or vegetation removal or any accessory structures Page 2 of 13 8. 9. All 7 lotc will be served via a private road to be constructed by the Developer in approximately the same location as the existing driveway. Because the private road will also sei*ve the adjacent Lot 1, Block 1, Kallestad Acres, the total number of homes to be served by the driveway is 8, for which City Code would normally require a minimum paved road width of 28*. However, in order minimize the impact on existing trees and vegetation within the roadway area between the property and Brown Road, and to maximize retention of existing vegetative screening, it would be appropriate to allow a reduced width to 24' in this area where on-street parking and driveway approaches will likely be minimal. The private road will be subject to homeowner association ownership and maintenance, and subject to an underlying Road. Diainage and Utility Easement to be granted to the City. The private road as proposed docs not meet City standards for horizontal curve radius for a 30 mph roadway. However, the approximately 80' horizontal curve radius proposed is acceptable because this is not a tlvough road, the curve is near the cul-de-sac, and the curve will have a traffic calming effect as vehicles approach the homesites. Due to the proximity to Long Lake Creek and the steep slopes surrounding the portion of the Property to be developed, it is critical that as much stormwater and snowmelt runoff from the development as is feasible be discharged to the stormwater quality pond to be located w'ithin proposed Lot 7. This can be accomplished by use of curb and gutter and stomi sewers to collect road runoff; by grading dn\ ew ays to drain toward the road storm sew-cr system; by finish grading individual yard areas to drain wherever possible toward the road storm sew cr system; and by establishing roof gutter systems to discharge as much roof runoff as possible to the road stonn sewer system. Tlie City has no current plans for trails or parks that specifically require dedication of land from this property. Because the southerly part of the property abuts the Luce Line Trail, a private walking path access to the Luce Line over the area proposed to be preserved as an outlet, would provide an appropriate pnvate amenity for homeowners within the development. Because dedication of land for park purposes is not required at this location, a Park Dedication Fee in lieu of land per City Ordinance would be appropriate. Page 3 of 13 i 11.The Developer has determined that it is feasible to obtain municipal sewer and water service to the development from the City of Long Lake. The developer has indicated an intent to provide sewer and water services to the adjacent property at 20 Brown Road South which is likewise in the MUSA and wliich abuts the northwesterly line of Lot 7 adjacent to the proposed utility lines sen ing the development. 12.All proposed lots will contain suitable area meeting all established setback, hardcover and lot coverage requirements to allow the construction of single family residences. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby grants Preliminary Plat Approval for Wayzata Design and Development LLC for a 7-lot plat per the Preliminary Plat sun ey/drawing designated as Sheet 4 of 8 by Kenneth E. Adolf dated 4/21/04 and attached hereto as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions; 1.Required Revisions. The following revisions to the preliminary plat shall be shown on a ‘record preliminary plat drawing’ to be submitted by the applicant for City reference puiposes, and such revisions shall be incorporated into the final plat drawings where noted: The areas designated on tlie above referenced Preliminary Plat survey/drawing dated 4/21/04 as “Proposed Conservation Easements” shall be shown as a single Outlot rather than as portions of the individual lots, on both the ‘record preliminary plat drawing’ and on the final plat drawings. The ‘record preliminary plat drawing’ shall show the westerly 50 feet of proposed Lots 1 and 2 as a “Conservation Easement” within the individual lots. C) The required principal stmeture setbacks depicted on the referenced Preliminary Plat survey/drawing dated 4/21/04, shall be revised and shown on the ‘record preliminary plat drawing’ as follows: Page 4 of 13 L. Lot 1: The required side setback to Lot 2 shall be changed to 30’. The rear setback may remain as 50 ’ to the west lot line, i.e. the rear setback line is coincident with the Consci-vation Easement boundary. Lot 2: Tlie required side setback to Lots 1 and 3 shall be changed to 30'. The rear (west) setback may remain as 50' to the west lot line, i.e. the rear setback line is coincident witli the westerly Conservation Easement boundary. The location of the required 75 ’ setback from the bank of the creek shall be shown. The bank of the creek shall be established as the 936.5 ’ contour line for administrative purposes. Lot 3: The required side setback to Lots 2 and 4 shall be changed to 30'. The existing house setback to Lot 3 ’s northeasterly boundary shall be recognized as a legal nonconfonnity. The rear (south) setback shall be shown as 50 ’ from the southerly and southeasterly lot lines. The location of the required 75 ’ setback from the bank of the creek shall also be depicted. The bank of the creek shall be established as the 936.5' contour line for administrative purposes. Lot 4: The required side setback to Lots 3 and 5 shall be changed to 30'. The rear (southeasterly) setback shall be shown as 50' from the southeasterly lot line. Lot 5: The required side setback to Lots 4 and 6 shall he changed to 30'. The rear (easterly) setback shall be shown as 50 ’ from the easterly lot line. Lot 6: The required side setback to Lots 5 and 7 shall be changed to 30'. The rear (easterly) setback shall be shown as 50 ’ from the easterly lot line. Lot 7: The required side setback to Lot 6 shall be changed to 30’. The rear (easterly) setback shall be shown as 50' from the easterly lot line. The northwesterly setback shall remain as 30’, coincident with the 30* proposed drainage and utility easement. Pages of 13 5. 8. no fences, no domestic animals (i.c. no horses, sheep, chickens, etc.), no tree or vegetation removal except by special pemiit for maintenance, no excavating or earth movement; creation and maintenance of non-hardcover walking paths may be allowed. Accessory structures: Accessory structures may be placed on lots according to City standards, with the following exceptions: A.For Lots 1,2 and 3, no accessory structures shall be placed within 50* of the defined rear lot line, nor within 75' of the creek. B. For Lot 7, no accessory structures shall be placed within 30' of the northwesterly side lot line. C. Tlic lot size for administering accessory strucnire ordinances shall be the actual lot area and shall not credit any of the Consci'vation Outlet area. 6. Development Fees A.Park Dedication Fee. The PRD is subject to the standard Park Dedication Fee requirement. Because the value of each newly created lot will be in excess of the threshold value of $69,375.00 the 8% park fee cap of $5,550 per lot will be applied to all lots except Lot 3 which contains an existing residence. Park dedication fee will be 6 lots x $5,550 ® $33,300. B. Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee. The PRD is subject to the standard Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee of $2,700 per acre x 20.0 gross acres « $54,000. Wetlands. All areas delineated as wetlands as shown on the preliminary plat drawing shall be subject to the standaid Flowage and Conservation Easement. Private Road. Developer shall create a private road on the Property and within the adjacent easement corridor providing access to Brown Road (County Road 146). The portion of private road to be created on the property shall be within a platted outlet as shown on the preliminary plat drawing. The portion of private road to be created within easements extending to Brown Road South need not be platted as an outlot. Page 7 of 13 IL 9. Approval is subject to provision of the standard Road, Drainage and Utility Easements to be granted to the City over the new road outlet as well as over the 40' easement access to Brown Road. Applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Attorney that the 40' easement over the Dunn property and the adjoining 10' easement over Lot 1, Block 1, Kallestad Acres, are sufficient to provide the City with the intended underlying public ingress, egress, and access easements to ensure legal access of the public to all properties scr\ ed by the private road. Tlic developer shall establish the necessary road maintenance agreements, etc. to ensure that the private road will be maintained to reasonable standards at all times by the homeowner's association, and that failure of that private group to so maintain their private road will be cause for the City to accomplish needed maintenance and to assess the benefitted properties for the direct cost of such maintenance. The private road shall be constructed to a 28' paved width within the Property, but may be constructed at a width of 24' within the access easements to Brown Road. The private road may be designed to preserve e.xisting vegetation, subject to approval of the City Engineer. Grading and Drainage Requirements. General site grading, storm sewer design and individual house site grading shall be designed and completed so as to direct as much stomiwatcr and snowmelt runoff front the development as is feasible to the stormwater quality pond to be located within proposed Lot 7. Curb & gutter and stonn sew ers shall be established to collect road runoff Wherever feasible, individual driveways shall be graded to dram toward the road stonn sew'cr system. Wlierever feasible, individual yard areas shall be graded to drain toward the road storm sewer system. Wherever feasible, roof gutter systems shall installed to discharge roof runoff so that it w ill drain tow ard the road stonn sewer s>'stem. Additionally, grading and drainage shall adhere to the recommendations of the City Engineer in his letter dated May 7, 2004. City Engineer Approval. Approval is subject to recommendations of City Engineer Thomas Kellogg as noted in his comments dated May 7, 2004, except as modified by this Resolution. 11 . Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Approval. Approval is subject to MC WD approval and permits as required. Final plat approval shall not be granted until the Developer has provided ev'idcncc tliat all required MCWD pcmiits have been obtained. Page 8 of 13 t- i 12.Plans and Specifications. The following plans and specifications shall be submitted for review and approval by the City and other appropriate jurisdictions, to ensure that the proposed plat will accomplish the intended purposes: Final plans and specifications for all proposed utility lines and ser\’ices, including proposed revisions, if any, to existing serv ice facilities. Final grading, drainage and erosion control plan showing existing and proposed contours, building locations, elevations, stormwater facilities and calculations, utilities and erosion control measures to be used during construction. Final Plat Approval will not be granted imtil the Minnehalia Creek Watershed District has approved the stormwater management plans. c) d) Engineering details and design for any proposed retaining walls. Final boulevard landscaping design plan with planting schedules including numbers and species, in accordance with the boulevard landscaping requirements of the subdivision ordinance. Road construction plans including proposed plan and profile views, typical street section, gcoteclmical report, R-valuc recommendation and pavement design. Hemiepin County approval of access to County Road 146 shall be required. Sufficient detail to meet the rcconuncndations of the City Engineer in his letter of May 7, 2004. 13. Easements. Drainage and Utility Easements shall be granted to the City of Orono over all public utility lines and riglits of way. Drainage and Utility Easements shall be dedicated to the public on the final plat 10' along all extenor property lines, and 5 ’ either side of interior property lines, except such casements shall be increased to acconunodate drainage where required, or decreased where individual lot lines abut an adjacent residential lot outside the Property, subject to City staff approval. i Page 9 of 13 c) A Conservation and Flowagc Easement shall be granted to the City of Orono over all delineated wetlands on the property. d) A Road. Drainage and Utility Easement shall be granieil to the City of Orono over the private road Outlet as well as over Mtc 40' private road easement eoiridor within Tract D, RI.S No. 352. 14, Developers Agreement. Developer shall execute a Developer's Agreement for con.stniction of improvements on the Property to ensure all site impiDvements arc installed to the City's specifications atul satisfaction. Said Developers Agreement may contain additional conditions not noted in this Preliminary Plat Approval resolution. No land alterations can take place until erosi«)n control is established and the City is in receipt of a final grading and road plan. No improvements can begin until the City Engineer has appiovcd all improvement plans. A Letter of Credit must accompany a fully executed Developer's Agreement written to 1 50% of the cost of the proposed site improvements, including any retiuired landscaping. No building pennits will be i.ssued until all dramuge facilities and improvements have been installed and satisfactory road base has been installed FINAL SUBAUTIALS The lollowing list ot linal submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. These submittals are as follows: 1.Record plat diawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies (one copy for the City’s records and one for filing with 1 lennepin County) aiul one (I) copy reduced to I" “ 200'. Drawing to include: A. Lot lines pl.ittetl per preliminaty plat sur\ cy/drawing by I iovvanl W. Rogers as depicted on the Preliminary PI it Sheet C5.1 dated May 7. 2004 atUiched hereto as Exhibit A, c.xcept as modified in Condition 1 above. B. Dedication of "drainage and utility casements" 10' along exteiior property lines and 5' along the interior property line. Page 10 ofl 3 f c.Dedication of “drainage and utility easements” over all proposed sanitary sewer, municipal water and stonn sewer lines that will become public; i.e. over all portions of the sewer & water and stomi sewer systems not defined as individual services. D. Dedication of “Drainage Easements” over all drainageways E. Naming of plat. 2. Legal documents required: A. B. C. Title opinion addressed to the City or a title insurance policy in favor of the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded casements currently affecting the property. Signed and executed Road. Drainage and Utility Easement and Declaration of Pri\ate Covenants for Maintenance of Same over the private road outlot as well as over the 40* private road easement corridor within Tract D, RLS No. 352 and within the northerly 10' of Lot 1, Block 1, Kallcstad Acres. D. Signed Conservation and Flowage Easement to be granted over all delineated wetlands on the plat. E. Signed Conserv'ation Easement to be granted over the Conservation Outlot and the westerly 50' of Lots 1 and 2. F. Signed Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit for construction of improvements. The City Engineer shall establish the amount to be provided in the Letter of Credit. Page 11 of 13 1 it’iifiriri # 3. Plat approval fees to be paid: Total due: $87,830.(/u Final plat fee $280.00 B. Legal review & filing fees for subilivision and associated doc.:ineiits; $250.00 C. Park Dedication Fee: $33,300.00 D. E. Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee: $54,000.00 Sewer and Water Coimcction Charges: None (Developer shall be responsible for any charges to the City of Orono from the City of Long Lake in relation to the provision of municipal sewer and water from Long Lake) Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 12th day of July, 2004. ATTEST; Linda S. Vcc, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor Page 12 of 13 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this___day 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 in.stnimcnt was acknowledged before me on this___day of 2004 by Linda S. Vee, City Clerk of the City of Orono. u Miimesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 13 of 13 1 1 2«'^iOOO I • 0 tot 9*0 OC }*4 c Si* 905 9i r M is 1 1 M »f» DATE: July 9,2004 IIKMNO: ^> ' UEQIIESi FOR COlINC II, ACTION CniiM/'ii iirPTING JUL 1 2 2004 CITY OF ORONO Department Approval: Name Kunald J. Ntoui^e T'ult? C‘ily Ailininistiator Adinini-Strator Reviewed: .Agenda Section: Zonim; Ailminisiiator’s Rcptiit //) Item Description: l.arge Vehicle Storage On Residential IVoperly The Council, at its June 28 meeting, diseusseil llic o|tlinn ofameiuling the l.aige Vehicle Storage ordinance to reduce the minimum alloweil lot size iVom live .leies to two acres. T he Council tabled this item to allow stall't»* investigate other options Attached is a menm piep.ued by Mike Gali'ion. I'lanning Director, reviewing a number ol'possible options. The difficult issue related to the large vehicle storage ordinance is that the ordinance could cause a hard.ship for lho.se win) have been storing a huge vehicle rm their propelty. In some eases, in the two-acre /one, it may be possible t»> pl.iee c»>tulilions on the existing vehicle storage use to aderpiately mitigate the impacts on adiacent pro|>eilies In these ca.ses, it may be lea.sonable to allow some of the existing uses to continue. I htwever, it is sl.iffs recommendation that the I'ity should not allow any new instances of large vehicle storage on residential lots ol less than live acies. An ojition that lit.s within lire framewoik of the above paiagraph is tr» alKtw tinly existing, u.ses the opportunity to apply liu a c»»iuhlional use permit to continue the use as a legally non-conlormitig u.se, subject to meeting a set ol staiulanls. 1 he standaids wdu KI be focused on protecting adjacent properties from the impacts of the vehicle storage. |).uticulaily noise and odors. They would be similar to the standards in the cunent rrrdinance, but could be expanded. Some ol the existing uses may not be .tbie to meet the standards, in which case they vsould not be .illowed to continue. Hie standards w ould he set as part of the j’locess of amending the current ordinance. baiforcement 1 he process ofamciuling the ordinance to enable a fUl’ .ipphcation, and the pr cess of icviewing the (’liP application ihiough the I'lanning ('ommission and Council wouKI t.ike a mitumum of three months. In the meantime, there is an existing use that is cuncnily illegal uiulei the existing onlin.iiice, .iiid ag.imst which the City has l>een reipie.sled to t.ike enimeement action. Stalf has initiated enforcement action regarding this use ll the Council decides to puisne the ('I 'I* option, staff is rei|uesling khrection as tk) whether to C4>ntiiiue the enfkMcement action. CtlCNC II. ACI ION Rl (Jl<F.S IT.D Motion regarding whether the large vehicle .storage ordinance .should remain as-is or whethei an anirnkhiient to the oiklmaiice lekiteil to a CMP process fk»r existing uses should be referred to the Plaiuiing Commission. F MEMORANDUM To: From: Date: Subject: Ron Moorse Mike Gaffron, Planning Director July 7, 2004 W04-3024B Large Vehicle Storage Zoning Ameiulinent On June 28 Council tabled tlic Large Vehicle Storage amendment to allow staff additional time to investigate alternatives. Under the City ordinances existing prior to December 2003, staffinterpreted the code to mean that one large vehicle was allowed to be stored outside on a property with few restrictions. Under the cun cut code adopted in December 2003, the ability to have a large vehicle stored on a property is not a guaranteed right, nor is it an ‘existing use’ that can be "grandfathered” or recognized as a legal non-conforming use. The new ordinance established performance standards for storage of large vehicles, and to date that ordinance docs not contain any language that allows pre-ex isi ing storage situations to continue in a manner that is not conforming. While ‘grandfathering’ provisions could be added to the code, staff is generally against such an action because it requires inventoiying ;uid recordkeeping, and does not solve pre-existing problem situations which the new perfomiance standards were attempting to resolve. There may be a small variety of options for allowing large vehicles to be stt>red under coiulitions that tlo not meet the cunently established |ki fonnance standaids. Each option has pro's and con ’s. These opti^ins may include 1) revising the performance standards, or 2) granting of a variance to a performance standard where the Council finds that an “undue hardship” is present; or 3) establishing large \ chicle storage .is a conditional use with required perfomiance standards; it could be written such that the performance standards might be relaxed if the negative impacts of such relaxation can be mitigated or are found to be minimal or inconsequential. O To dale. Council has not revised the performance staiulards, as there has not been a majority of Councihnembers who believe the code should he changed. n With regards to variances, the Council may allow a property to be used in a manner otherwise prohibited by the ordinance by varying one or more of the perfomiance stand:uds of the ordinance, iftheCouiicildetenmiiestlut the test of ‘‘undiie hardship” has been met. The stauitorv definition of Undue Hardship is: "Undue hardship"... means the property in question eannot be put to a reasonable use if used under the eonditions alloteed by the official controls, the plight of the \ Ron Moorsc July 7,2004 Page 2 < 5 landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance if granted will not alter the essential character of the locality. The Council has broad discretion to grant variances, but may not grant a variance for any use not pennitted in the zoning district. In this case, the “Use" is a private garage or parking space, which is a listed accessory use in the R districts. Use of a private garage or parking space to store a large veliicle on residential property is allowed subject to meeting the perfonnance standards established for that use in the code. □ Witli regards to conditional uses, a conditional use is, by definition, a use that is permitted in a zoning district if certain established conditions or ‘perfonnance standards’ are met. If the performance standards established by code arc met, the Council generally must grant the CUP. Tliercfore, to ensure that the possible negative impacts of a given conditional use are addressed and accounted for, the performance standards must be carefully crafied. Also note that CUP’s arc issued for a particular use. not for a particular person. If a property owner is granted a CUP, that CUP goes with the property and the new owner can continue the use if all the original conditions are met. If Council chooses to proceed toward an amendment of the code to allow large vehicle storage as an allowed conditional use in the 2-acrc and 5-acre zones, we would be sending the message that such storage is generally acceptable in those zones, subject to meeting the perfonnance standards. But if the perfonnance standards then provide limitations so strict that few properties can qualify for the CUP, we shouldn ’t be allowing the use via CUP (or we should be ready for more vari.nice requests). For example, we probably should not allow storage of large vehicles in the 2-acre zone via CUP if one of the perfonnance standards is lO have a 5-acre lot, since a majority of 2-acre zone properties won ’t meet the 5-acrc standard. However, if the CUP would be made available to only existing uses, then >ve w ould not be opening this up any wider than necessary to deal w ith existing situations. Please let me know how you think w e should proceed, and w hclhcr this item should be placed on the council ’s July 12 agenda. Dale Application Received: 1-24-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 5-21-04 s^cpjifgQ JUL 1 2 2004 CITY OF ORONO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Dale: July 7,2004 Item No.: (p Department Approval:Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: Zoning Name: Janice GundlachP' Title: Citv Planner Item Description: #04-3027, Brenshell Development c/o Bill Cot tman on behalf of Thomas James Properties, LLC c/o Charlie James, S\V corner of HWY 12 and Old Crystal Bay Road, Sketch ”’an Review Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR - IB. One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre minimum) Includes 2 separate parcels: Parcel 1 - PID 3311823240002; 15.004 acres. No address assigned Parcel 2 - PID 3311823240003: 1.811 acres. 425 Old Crystal Bay RD (lot areas according to Hennepin County Records) Approximately 875’ at Old Crystal Bay Road Approximately 450’ at Highway 12 List of Exhibits A - Draft Minutes from the June 21,2004 Planning Commission Meeting B - PC Report and Exhibits of June 16. 2004 Application Summary: This is a sketch plan for a 50-lot residential plat of property abutting the southwest corner of Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12. The proposal includes development of a horse-shoe shaped roadway system with access off of Old Crystal Bay Road. The property is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area and will be served with public sanitary sewer and water. The site is extremely flat and open w ith a wetland comprising approximately 4.00 acres of the total area of the plat. An existing single family residence exists on the 1.811 acre piece, which is proposed to be lemovcd. The other existing single family residence at the corner, 595 Old Crystal Bay Road, is not part of the plat _________________________________________________ Staff Recommendation: While no formal action is required, this memo will provide a number of issues for discussion or to be addressed when the formal application is I submitted._______________________________________________________________ Staff Recommendation The goal of this review is to provide the developer with an overview of the pertinent City ordinances and how they afl'ect the proposed plat, and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal. liV-'1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMM.* jION MEETING MONDAY, JUNE 2 i. 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. per acre or more, the proposed project is being allowed to undergo sketch plan review. He described a brief site history and explained their view of the site and how it would meet a housing market segment not served in Orono. Ben Kelson distributed materials to the Planning Conunission and staff illustrating the site plan, cioss-scctions, perspectives and house type:,, lie conveyed their goal was to create a neighborhood village feel, blending old and new architectural features with low rooflincs to break the scale. Mr. Nelson stated the exterior house finishes would have stone ana color varieties with no “taupe- town" colors. Mr. Johnston explained that due to site constraints and design purposes there is some need for small lots and closeness. The sketch plan proposes 4 units per acre density with 45’ building widths and 6’ side setbacks on the garage side and 10’ side setbacks on the house side for a combined 16’ side setbacr. Mr. Johnston stated the appearance of these houses/sidc setbacks would be better than those in the recent Stonebay development. He indicated there were no plamied impacts to the large wetland on the site, though a small wetland would be mitigated. It was emphasized the proposed density is pcmiitied by the Community Management Plan (CMP) and is not at townhouse density levels. Chair Mabusth asked for infomiation about the house plans. It was explained that the house pads would be ISOO s.f with a 600 s.f. garage for 2 or 3 vehicles. Chair Mabusth asked about the structural covemge calculations. Gundlach advised that there would be about 28% structural coverage assuming an average building pad and not including the wniand acreage. Gaffron pointed out the proposed sketch plan does not fit into the average 2 5 acres house lot guided by the CMP. He recommended the Planning Commission should view the entire 50-60 acre area, which would include the Dumas ’ property, instead of evaluating the properties separately. Gundlach concurred, indicating that the proposed 4 unils/acre on the subject propeny may restrict what eventually could be done on the remainder property. Chair Mabu.sth commented that the proposed exterio' house elevations appeared attractive and there was general consensus to her comment. Page 23 of 31 ■uai MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. JUNE 21. 2004 6:00 o’clock p m. Rahn questioned how average units for density calculations could be determined without penaliziiig the remainder property. Mr. Jolmston acknowledged the CMP guides for 2-4 units density range with a 2.5-acre average preferred. He emphasized the proposed sketch plan is in the 2--» unit raitge. Wlien asked by Chair Mabusth for her opinion regarding real estate market issues, Berg indicated she could not respond as she may have a potential for a conflict of interest with the subject property. Jurgens requested the applicant’s representatives provide the Planning Commission with locations of housing developments with similar densities for the members to view. Mr. Jolmstcn and Mr. Coffman suggested two locations in Eden Prairie and Mound. Chair Mabusth refened to the existing high water table known on this subject property. Mr. Joluiston explained the proposed site plan would require fill from the Hwy 12 construction project or the houses would need to be built at slab/gr^de. Jurgens emphasized it was important for the Planning Commission to be provided with site examples in order to gain more understanding of the project. Mr. Coffman affirmed that examples would be provided to the Planning Commission. Also, he advised that about 6-S fill would be required for the proposed project and would result in the road being higher than the existing grade. Gaffron commented that views from Hwy 12 could be problematic, similar to the experience at Stonebay. Jurgens requested the applicant provide on elevation from outside of the development to illustrate the back of the buildings. Chair Mabusth initiated discussion of the Issues for Discussion included in the staff report- 1. Althougli the plan proposes 4.0 units per acre, are the goals established unaer the CMP addressed? It was a consensus that the sketch plan did not address the CMP goals. 2. Could the City benefit from a development such as this? If so. should the eruire property be developed in tliis manner, or should this 13 acres incorporate more than one style of house? Page 24 of 31 ! I 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. JUNE 21, 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. Chair Mabusth asked why the proposal did not include townhomes on Hwy 12. Mr. Johnston explained townhomes on this site were not viable as a community. Rahn suggested the site include twin-home doubles, as an option. Kempf added that he was familiar with a site in Savage that included views, walkout style houses .and had adjacent less expensive housing styles sharing amenities. Chair Mabusth concurred with their comments regarding the benefits of mixed residential uses. 3. Is the issue of mixed use of single family residences and townhouses addressed? Should this property develop under one single use? Chair Mabusth indicated this issue had been addressed 4. Should the City allow the property to be developed without developing at least a ‘Vision’’ of how the Dumas piece to tl.', west might be included? It was a consensus there should be some kind of connection between the properties, that it should be evaluated as to how the fill elevation would impact the Dumas property and existing uses to the west, such as the orchard, and w'hat souvid baniers and buffers would be needed for the development. Leslie and Jurgens stated they assumed there would need to be cyclone fence adjacent to tlic Hwy 12 right-of-way. 5. If the Dumas property develops a townhouse use, arc there possibilities for negative transitions through this proposed development? Gundlach noted the applicant ’s intention with the dead ends at the western boundary of the plat is to provide access for tlic future developniCnt of the Dumas property. There is some risk in allowing this property to develop, specifically the roadway system, without at least thinking how' the Dumas property might develop bearing in mind the intentions with the CMP. The CMP has guided both properties for the same mixed use at an ideal overall density of 2.5 units/acre. She advised there is a need to consider transitions and access issues. Page 25 of 31 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, JUNE 21, 2004 6;00 o’clock p.m. Leslie wondered if the developer was concerned with their proposed project’s street becoming a thoroughfare for the Dumas property. Chairs Mabusth requested Mr. Jolmston prepare a sketch plan for the Dumas property. 6. Are the setbacks proposed reasonable? Can the site support 50 single-family lots? Chair Mabusth stated that with standard setbacks and buffer areas, the site probably would not support 50 single-family lots. Ralui commented that the CMP guides for 2-4 units per acre, but with using the maximum of 4 units per acre instead of aiming for the 2.5 average units per acre, he questioned if it is what is wanted in Orono. Gaffron remarked that to achieve 2.5 units per acre, it probably would result in a mix of single and townliou.se units. Jurgens added th-’f the single-family homes could become part of the townhouse association. Mr. Jolmston remarked that there were differences, such as exterior maintenance, garbage collection service, lawn mowing, between single family homes and townliouscs that would negatively affect association management. Also, he noted that the expectation that backyards were private spaces was a significant difference. Gaffron pointed out the public area could abut some of the wetland atca. Fritzlcr added that without the proposed fail, there appears to be no access to the wetland, nc outlet for emergency vehicles or other public vehicles, except across private land. FritZicr asked about the exterior finish proposed for the houses’ sides and rear. Mr. Johnston replied those sides would be sided with ‘hardy planks’. Gaffron remarked that with the moratorium, minimum standards could be developed. 7. Should the developer be encouraged to develop a plan that includes townhouses along the adjacent riglit-of-ways and develop single family lots in the interior? Chair Mabusth stated this issue had already been addressed. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, JUNE 21. 2004 6:00 o’clock p.m. S. Should the wetland be treated as an amenity to be shared with the entire development? Chair Mabusth stated this issue had already been addressed. 9. With development at a density somewhat new to the City, to protect the aesthetics of the existing rural development, and also to protect future owner’s of these properties, would specific exterior finishes for the buildings help lessen the density impacts? There was a consensus that specific exterior finishes for the buildings would lessen the density impacts. 10. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Gundlach pointed out tlic cunent plan shows approximately a 13’ front yard setback when measured from the edge of the right-of-way. Under this setback a large vehicle has the potential to overlap into the right-of-way by 8’. Staff would recommend that a revised plan incorporate a 30 ’ front yard setback measured from tlic edg-i of right-of-way and/or sidewalk casement. Mr. Jolmston responded that a 30 ’ front yard setback, larger rear yard setbacks, wetland buffers, a public right-of-way plus a 50’ driveway would render the site unbuildable. F As part of the moratorium, there was a consensus that a standard should be included to not allow vehicle parked in driveways to extend over the sidewalks, as well developing other appropriate standards. Rahn questioned the driveway cncroaclunents. Mr. Johnston explained their decision to not use ‘zipper’ lot lines and that by turning the house pads, it resulted in the encroachment. Chair Mabusth questioned the proposed stmetures’ rear setback, especially adjacent to Hwy 12. Mr. Johnston and Gundlach confirmed the proposed rear setbacks would be 50’ on existing Hwy 12, 30 ’ on the bypass and 35 ’ on Old Crystal Bay Road, all are typical of 5 acre .ear yard setback Page 27 of 31 L MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY. JUNE 21. 2004 6;00 o’clock p.m. standards. Gundlach pointed out the subject property is adjacent to major roadways and encouraged the Planning Commission to consider if the cuircnt minimum standards were appropriate. Gundlach suggested a buffer yard be dedicated to alleviate problems on high traffic areas, such as arterials and collector streets. Chair Mabusth stated her position th.il the proposed sketch plan needs to reduce building p.id si/cs, to provide areas for the future deck.s or outside play areas, and asked if the thiec-stall garage was a necessity in this density neighborhood. Mr. Johnston leplied that often the third garage stall reduces potential outside storage problems. Chair Mabusth requested the applicants to show proposed house decks on the sketch plan. There was cuii.sens.is to not permit any outside storage at all at this density. Fiiztler added that theic should be no anlciuas allowed. Cdiuir Mabusth suiiiniari/cd that the Phuining Commission b.id serious conccins about the pioposed ilciisity for the sk» .eh plan. I .eslic obsci ved that ibcie appears to be an uiideilying contbet of iiitcicst between indic.Uing the City dcsiics to have higliei density ooiising dcvclopiiicut and a discussion tliat is indicating anything but describing lower density neighborhoods, liyiiig to cst.il>lish pai.imctcis without cuntc.xi for appropriate standards, what is marketable or viable could result in a developer agreeing to standards th.it result in a failetl netghboihood. lie suggested Hut a planning consultant should be hiretl to advise the City in 'he development of a|ipiopiutc guidelines and standaids. I e.slic summari/cd that he thought ihe dialogue was moic .ibout iu)t knowing what is not wanted, not about what is a vi.ible |)I.U1 GaJfron added that stall supports the hiring of a plamung consultant to assist in the process. Mr Johnston mentioned that alre.idy two months have elapsed out of the si.\-month moratorium and a.sked what was its status. G.ilTion c.xplamed the City Council and ri.mnmg Commission need to set a date for a visioning session, hopefully w ith a planning consultant He indicated that it is unlikely the pu'cess would be eoinplctcd by the end of the ongiiul o months timclmc. Page 2S of 3 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, JUNE 21.2004 6:00 o’clock p in Jurgens coniincnted (hat the Irousing styles, expanded cxteiior color range, landscaping and public gathering spaces were all positives. However, he also was unsure about accepting the proposed density and did not support the shorter driveways with vehicles extending over the sidewalk Chair Malnr.th and Rahn concurred with Jurgens ’ comments. Chair Mabusth concluded the discussion by repeating the request for a concept design for the Dumas property when the matter returns to the Planning Commission. NIN(; COMMISSION COMMENTS 10. loimm^r planning commission rf .pui seni atives a COilNCIL MFmNGS M,\Y 24, 2004 AND JCNE 14. 2UU4. DING Cl rv l•■|i(/Ic•l irpuilctl on tlic M^^^^)04 City Council meeting irdic.HjPTthat all Planning Commission ni.iltcis went on the C'onscnl Cliaii Mahnstli repoit^^^^he Reliance Development (Stonehay Conimeicial PUD) and ifi^fcljiliauglincssy icstor.ition with hoaidwalk apphe.itions was considered at the Juncl^^lUM (.htu^PCncil meeting Council Mcnibei 1 iaison lull McMillan explained her position on the Sl®®Tpiopo.sal alunit opposing tiie traffic layout heiwcrii Walgreens and the neighboring rct^^mul^^^hc had conceins about paikcil vehicles backing out of parking stalls into the tijyj^^iic, ctniser^fc^- blocking and shewing tlir traffic lane. Also. McMillan siiiiimari/cd h|^^ilion on the 0 ’SI’.aiighncssy'!S^||fattou to allow the boardwalk over the shoichnc icstoratu^^gelalion as a valid li.inlship to access'l^fcLikcshcre over the restored area. 11. U I1I]0^SI'ES I’OU DISCUSSION >» t:.lining session he recently attended at which a participant qucstio:icd^||^hcra iitiotul use permit for height is legal or docs it have to be rcvicvsed .md .ippun cd as a \ anance Page 2*) of 31 #04-3027 June 21.2004 Page 1 of 7 Date Application Received: 1-24-04 Date Application Considered as Complete: 5-21-04 To:Chair Mabusth and Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Janice Gundlach, City Planner Date:June 16,2004 Subject:04-3027, Brenshcll Development do Bill Coffman on behalf of Thomas James Properties, LLC c/o Charlie James, SW corner of HWY 12 and Old Crystal Bay Road, Sketch Plan Review Zoning District: Lot Area: Lot Width: RR - IB, One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre minimum) Includes 2 separate parcels: Parcel 1 -- PID 3311823240002: 15.004 acres, Ko address assigned Parcel 2 - PID 3311823240003: 1.811 acres. 425 Old Crystal Bay RD (lot areas according to Hennepin County Records) Approximately 875’ at Old Crystal Bay Road Approximately 450’ at Highway 12 Application Summary: This is a sketch plan for a 50-lot residential plat of property abutting the southwest corner of Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12. The proposal includes development of a horse-shoe shaped roadway system with access off of Old Crystal Bay Road. The property is located within the .Metropolitan Urban Service Area and w'ill be served with public sanitary sewer and water. The site is extremely flat and open with a wetland comprising approximately 4,00 acres of the total area of the plat. An existing single family residence exists on the 1.811 acre piece, which is proposed to be removed. The other existing single family residence at the corner, 595 Old Crystal Bay Road, is not part of the plat._________________________________________________ Staff Recommendation: While no formal action is required, this memo will provide a number of issues for discussion or to be addressed when the formal application is submitted. __________________ List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Survey Illustrating Proposed Subdivision Layout Exhibit C - 5 Proposed Individual Site Plans & Illustration of Proposed Gathering Spaces Exhibit D - Proposed Preliminary Plat (50 Lots on 4 Blocks) Exhibit E - Community Management Plan RE: Subject Property Exhibit F - Aerial Photo Exhibit G - Photo of Similar Development in Plymouth (The Reserve) E.xhibit H - 2004 Fee Schedule 'I «04.3027 June 21,2004 Page 2 of 7 Background The City currently is under a moratorium for any development of 2 units per acre or more. This project <s being allowed to undergo the sketch plan process only. No formal application will be accepted until the moratorium has lifted. The Council has indicated that allowing this sketch plan to proceed through the process may help the City better understand what changes need to be made to the Zoning Ordinance to be prepared for this type of development. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Conformity with 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan The property is guided for a mi.xture of urban single and multi-family residential uses at a density of 2-4 units per acre. This plan proposes the ma.\imum 4.0 units per acie. The property is located within the MUSA and is intended to be served with public sanitary .sewer and water. The CMP notes that the “Preferred Development Option” would be a mix of '/i unit per acre single family residential including 4 unit per acre townhousc development. The applicant's plan proposes all single family lots ranging from 5,855 to 14,922 square feet in size, where the average lot size is approximately 8,500 square feet or less than 1/5 of an acre. The plan as proposed does not meet the preferred development option noted in the CMP. It should be noted that tlie recommendation in the CMP regarding development of this "ite assumed eoncurrent development with the Dumas Apple Orchard property to iIk /est. Relationship to Surrounding Development This property abuts Highway 12 to the north and Old Crystal Bay Road to the east. An existing single family lesidencc is located to the northeast corner of the proposed plat boundary. Right-of-way owned by the Miimcsota Department of Transportation exists to the direct south which consists of the Highway 12 Bypass currently under construction. Abutting the subject property to the west is the Dumas Apple Orchard property comprising over 50 acres with approximately 1/3 of it consisting of wetland. This property is also guided for a mixture of urban single and multi-family residential uses at a density of 2-4 units per acre. Coiifoniiily with Zoning Di.strict Lot Requirements I he property is in the RR - 1B, One I'amily Rural Residential District, which allows for single family residential uses with a minimum lot size of two dry buildabie acres. The applicant has proposed a plan tollowing CMP recommendations at 4 units per acre, which would require that the property be rezoned. It is preferred that the property develop under a Planned Unit Development (PUD). Lot Layout and Lot Standards Currently, there are two base lots, both in common ownership, which would be expected to be combined with the plat. The individual lot lay out is shown in Exhibit D. The applicant iias proposed 5 different building types illustrating how the lots would be developed, llic building footprints range in size frrim 1,744 square feet to 1,964 square ^^04-3027 June 21,2004 Page 3 of 7 feet, all showing 3 stall garages located in front of the home. Staff has noted below several issues to be considered with this proposed layout: Setbacks The plan indicates that the setbacks will be as follow's: • Front: 25 ’ (measure from curb not edge of ROW) • Side (at garage): 6 ’ • Side (at house): 10 ’ • Rear: o Abutting Hwy 12: 50 ’ o Abutting Hwy 12 Bypass: 30 ’ o Abutting Old Crystal Bay Road: 35 ’ o Abutting Wetland: 0 + measuring from 35 ’ buffer Staff finds that these setbacks arc minimal. For c.xamplc, the front yard setback should be measured from the edge of the right-of-way (or front property line) not the curb, and in cases where a sidewalk is proposed from the edge of the casement (if not included in the ROW). This ensures visibility along the road should large vehicles be parked in the driveway. It also ensures that vehicles will not overlap into area used for snow storage. The current plan is showing appro.ximately a 13' front yard setback when measured from the edge of the ‘ight-of-way. Under this setback a large vehicle has the potential to overlap into the right-of-way by 8’. Staff would recommend that a revised plan incorporate a 30 ’ front yard setback measured from the edge of right-of-way and/or sidewalk easement. Also, the side setbacks proposed differ between the garage and the house. The garages arc proposed to be in front of the house at a setback of 6 ’ to the side property line. In some cases there will only be 12 ’ between neighboring garages. The reduced setback for the garages may interfere with the property’s ability to maintain its own drainage. A 10 ’ side yard setback (proposed for the houses) is considered minimal for the construction of drainage swales. Staff would recommend tha» a mininuim of a 10 ’ setback for both the garage and house be incorporated into any revised plan. The applicant should also consider tuck-under style garages in an attempt to increase setbacks and create a more usable yard. The rear yard setback proposed may also not be sufficient. For example, the rear yard setback to Old Crystal Bay Road is 35 ’ where to the Highway 12 Bypass setback is only 30'. Realizing there is a significant grade change between Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12 Bypass, the noise factor may cause similar problems due to the speed at which cars will be traveling. Staff would suggest that an increased setback to the Highway 12 Bypass be considered due to the unknown negative effects that may occur once the bypass has finished construction. The Planning Commission may also want to consider implementation of buffer yards on all lots abutting right-of ways. This would require additional feet for rear yard setback to allow for construction of a berm and still provide room for a usable rear yard. ^#04-3027 June 21, 2004 Paj*e 4 of 7 Lastly, many of the lots propose a building pad that almost maxes out the buildable area of the lot (For example, lots 6 and 7 of block 1, lots 4-8 of block 2, lots 1-5 of block 3 and lots 12, 16, 18 and 24 of block 4). More importantly, many of the lots abutting the wetland in the rear would have virtually no back yard as the building pad bumps up to the edge of the wetland buffer. A result of the.se two factors is the future owner’s inability to construct an addition or even a deck in some cases, as well as providing no rear yards for outdoor enjoyment. Overall Site Functionality and I'isual Appeal Because of the nature of the setbacks proposed, the largest gap between houses would be 16 ’. This would be the distance from the corner of the garage to the corner of the adjacent home. In some ca.scs, this di.sta^ce is 12’ if the garages are back-to-hack (For example, between lots 12 and 13 and 21 and 22 of block 4). Coupled with a 25 ’ setback proposed to the edge of the traveled road creates a type of development not currently existing in Orono. I he Planning C’ommission should discuss this issue and determine what impacts result with the close setbacks, both visually and functionally. The applicant has propi:sed 3-stall garage on all lots except lot 4 of block 2. Scune garages are side-load where others are front-load. The lots that show a side-load garage show driveways that overlap onto the neighboring property. The applicant should deterniinc if all the lots, in this particidar layout, car. .support n three stall garage. The Planning Commission should also discuss tlic site functionality and any visual appeal issues with the garages bei.ig propt)sed in front of the hou.se. Overall, staff feels the lot layout may be too intense. The a|>plicants are proposing to maximi/.e the 4.0 unit/aere density with single family lots. .Staff feels the concept of providing this type of housing product in Orono is positive, however, maybe not throughout the entire site. The Planning Commission should di.scuss the CMP recommendation for mixed housing types and a 2.5 unit/acre density and determine if this proposal meets the intent of the re-guiding. Uoad Layout and Standard.s The proposed road layout consists of a horse-shoe system with access onto Old Crystal Bay Road, a minor arterial, where the two ends terminate at the western boundary of the property. 'The proposed road is 26 ’ in paved w'ldth located within a 50 ’ platted corritlor It can be assumed to be public due to the large number of units that potentially would be served by this access and a future access at Highway 12 once the Dumas property develops. The applicant’s intention with the dead ends at the western boundary of the plat is to provide access for the future tlevelopment of the Dumas property. Staff feels there is some risk in allowing this property to develop, specifically the roadway sy stem, without at least thinking how the Dumas property might develop bearing in mind the intentions with the CMP. The CMP has guided both properties for the same mixed use at an idea! overall density ol 2 5 units.^acre. The Planning Cornu ission may want the applicant to demonstrate how the Dumas property might develop illustrate that the roadway system proposed makes sense. ;i04.3027 June 21. 2004 Pjil^c S of 7 Tlic applicants have also proposed gathering spaces within the roadway system. Staff will discuss these gathering spaces in more detail later in this report, however the locations of these spaces within the public right-of-way is not ideal from a maintenance aiul safety standpoint. Parkfl'rail Easement or Dedication Needed The CMP does not indicate any future trails along Old Crystal Bay Road or Highway 12 where the subject property abuts. A trail is proposed to be constructed within the applicant’s property connecting to the soiithwest comer of Highway 12 and Old Crystal Bay Road, where the trail on the east side of Old C'rystal Bay Road can be easily accessed, 'fhcrc is also a trail access point at the development’s Old ('rystal Bay Road access. The applicants have proposed an interior sidewalk system on the east side of the propo.sed horse-shoe roadway system with connections to the gathering spaces located within the right-of-way. fhe Plannin*.- Commission should discuss what kind of trail system they’d like to see within the property and connections to the trails existing outside the property boundaries. A wetland, comprising approximately 4.00 acres exists in the west half of the property. The current design of the lots gives half of the homes the visual amenity of the wetland. The Planning Commission may w ant to discu.ss if this is the best use of the wetland or if a trail, or some common space, could be included nc.xt to tlic 35 ’ wetland buffer in an effort to create a more u.ser-friendly common gathering space. fhe applicants have propo.sed two gathering sp ices located within the right-of-way. Within the gathering spaces the applicants have pi()|)osctl sand boxes, benches and connection.s to the trails proposed. .Staff feels the site should provide some type of common space, however the proposed gathering spaces are .somewhat isolated due to their location within the right-of-way. .Staff would suggest that the applicant consider implemeiitation of u smal’. neighborhood park with playground equipment that possible abuts tlie wetland. The Planning Commission .should speak more specifically to what tspe of commop space 'hey’d like to see within the development, bearing in mind the number of units it would serve. Koatl luipiovciiirnts aii«I/or Euscnieiils Needed Due to the density proposed, staff would conclude that the roadway system would be publicly owned and maintained. The City would also require standard perimeter and drainage easements around all property boundaries as well as conservation and llowage casements over the delineated wetland. SlorinwsUer and Drainage Inipruvements Developmeiit of the propert;, will require creation of NHRP ponds to collect stormwater generated from the development of the property, fhe pioposed plan shows the cie.ition ol tw«> ponds adjacent to the wetland fhe property will also be subject to the Stonuw.iter and Drain.ige flunk fee. Based on the proposed density, this fee wnuld be $4,800 acre uiuler the 2004 fee Schedule «04-3027 June 21, 2004 Page 6 of 7 Utility Locations and Availability Tlic property would be served by public sewer and water. It is assumed that all other utilities will be underground and located within the right-of-way. Lakcshorc Proximity and Conformity with Shorcland Regulations This property is not located within the Shorcland Overlay District and is therefore not subject to hardcover or lake setbacks. It shoul 1 be noted however that the Dumas property to the west is located withi.n the Shorcland Overlay District and hardcover standards will have to be reviewed at the time of development. This may have an indirect ef fect on how tlic applicant proposes to dc\ elop this pr' ;>crty. Wetlands on Site and/or Impacted As mentioned earlier in this report, the City will require a l-'lowage and Conservation Easement over the wetland designated on the site. 1 he applicant is advised to avoid any impacts to wetlands which can be avoided by proper site layout. The Minnehaha Creek Watershcci District (MCWD) is the City’s LGIJ for administration of the Wetland Conservation Act rules. Tree and/or Woodland Impacts The site is extremely flat and open however, the developer would be encouraged to preserve as much existing vegetation as possible, especially along existing Highway 12. the Highway 12 Bypass and Old Cry.stal Hay Road. The Planning Commission slunild di.scuss berm-buildin_, and further veget.ition requirements along the north, south, and ca.stcrn lots lines in an ci»ort to reduce any negative impacts, such as noise, th:a result from heavy levels of traffic. IsMie.s f<ir Discussion 1. Mthouyli the plan proposes *1.0 units per acre, arc the goals established under the Community .Management Plan addressed? 2.Could th? City benefit from a development, such as this? If so. should the entire property be developed in this manner, or should this 13 acres incorporate more than one style of lu>uscs? Is the issue of mixed use of single family residences and townhouscs addressed? .Should this property development under one .single use? 4.SlV’ild t!ic City allow the property to be developed without deveh'ping at least a ‘Ms,-on" of how the Dumas piece to tlx west might be included? 5.If the Dum.is property develops a townhouse use, arc tlierc possibilities for negative transitions through this propo.scd development? u. Are the setbacks proposed reasonable? Can the site support 50 single family lilts'^ Should the developer be encouraged to develop a plan tnat includes town^->u^es ? EXHIBIT A CITY OF ORONO • GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION Application# 7 Date Received i C V Amount Paid ^ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Ot-D iHJf) }\-\(:iUoA^i 12. Type of Application to be Filed 5i:e-rt-// Properly Identification Number (P.l.D.) 3 3 APPLICANT or*o3 Name S^tA^’r>HtrLL. Dc L/cce ra// Phone (home) C/o \:>iuc. Phone(work)2.0Ot^lO Address Sr City 5>r Koc-. i~^a^Z\D S^~3/"p OWNE^if different than applicant). , , Name P.^LA~^-/7rS. C'ft^lZUr Phono (home). Address z./j~oo i Date Propg^ Acquired_______ 1 (do) (dojn^also own the adjacent parcels of land. Phono (work) ^2- ^o/ oo _ City c^CccSfViZ._____Zip ■> ^ __(month/year) FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - $600,00 Residential Accessory Use $600,00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) $600.00 Guest Housc/Guest Apartments $600.00 Duplex Crcdit/Bldg $000.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $600.00 Land Alteration + Permit ____ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain - Grading and filling - 501 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 ’ of lakeshorc PRD/PID - see Fee Schedu’e $250.00 Renewal Fee (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee OTHER APPLICATIONS ______ $600.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _______$600.00 Vacation ______$600,00 Easement Vacation ______$100,00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ______$600.00 RezonIng (PUD - refer to fee schedule) $600.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment ..^$100.00 Appeals Other - see Fee Schedule* S Si'O fcAfJ 5 !I f: * ‘ V V esH nm:n est-i mnnni^ i- MCio io =-8J-n t REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1 Completed Application Form. 4. 2. A/A Describe request in detail. 3. J./A Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' of the subject property. labels and plat map. List, labels and map may be obtained from Hcnnepiii County Department of Finance, Government Center, A-603 300 South 6*^ j// Minneapolis, telephone 612-348-6910). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) - refer to handout for survey information. —^Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. —Topographic survey (existing and prepe sed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). P/Zrc'/c^'^ufr S^^/n/rrc/O /IlA.. List of the legal narnes (include marital status) of all persons with an Interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current 5. 6. 7. , ■ ■■ Construction plan, If applicable (see staff for requirements). 5 9- As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. TOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 3 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR COPY FOR REPRODUCTION (11" X17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. (Staff will require scaled drawings of all documents, plans, etc. to be submitted.) The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above Information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Cierical Staff;^___________________________Date APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee l^ymenl) and/or unusual expenses Incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied Is trwe^cnocrect to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant’s signature Date OWNER’S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of Investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature_________ Appnwnt must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Comrrissbn Meetino. Planning Commliston Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month Aonnonntc h* apaca !!*-11 - u ^ .. Monday of each month. Applicants must be present meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an appScant is unable to tlM 326/139 4 t»‘l t. y. > • I // • iimrjzs}^CWJIO « «i8!r3 f «ir- I G c**t BUILDING TYPE A I LOT 0 BUILDING TYPE B >uot$0 BUILDING type C »L0T5 0 BUILDING TYPE D 7 LOTS 0 BUILQINgf TYPE E }9 LOT» EXHIBIT C OHhVJOtYtient BRENSHELL DEVELOPMENT. LL r 40m OAKLAND smcrr ST BOMPAnUS MN S&375 m mr CA^SWetMKX tit ►»MnrA«i 0 gNLA»jgD GATME^ING space «kVI5«0NHI»T0tV 0 ENLAI?C jED CiATMERiNGt S^ACE 0 ___^0 rLTu SCALE IN mr ftOffCt MANAdC* tfWW OfTmCATION SKLETCM F^L-^KI REVIEW AfTIL22,2(X)4 rtfijccT OLD CRYSTAL BAY FJ PARCEL onoNO. itiL landform I HlMNfA^OtIS PHOCk .rra^s. rnrnmmm^m rifKAMC aotnQ>’ ftajKrm no* WHUMCrl flA C2.: EXHIBIT D OMNCX^OMLOfft BRENSHELL DEVELOPMENT. LLC OAKLAND mUXT ST BOKiFACIUSMNafijrS Tnai«7«rrr CMtdMtCt NPU t • V<» »,* ,'T» H*> • • WifcW >• KCVW0NM5'0t'f ^OJCCt MAM aOCK CCVICW ;*rnfiCA«-CN ©KETCH P*L^KI REVIEW APRIL 22.2004 «ojtn. OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD PARCEL ORONO. IS/IN CrSSTANDARO EASEMEN13< - w»v *4i ♦«»••• ».V» IL.1 ItMC » H v'ilJ? #«%»*■» i .*• i«a* •>r- M»*.' a* *«•> «>«rtf mth »tM M' trxta*; *v-'“%}•*••• *3 ft » f • *<> 9^^ • u?» J M*< t afttl « wC^m Mp <Cjt^4C V>§ M IJM T.« A*t C^AREA SUMMARY! «A4 i.** »«<r *««• .v ’«r» » ftrff* kvn^t » ft4tft 5» •• V> >a *•7* !► •ftftOft ft» ft*« *%' ft.: j :3 ftc 4 :a ft.' >• •««*> c eift» AP ft* ' f-V '4 ft * C «*.*» rrfti- »* *4 3 4 tfft. ft.: «>: ft*: f *ft »i'»K ftC «4IC! 1 •n*oi •>««< A..! W Av» vt'1 X/T'** * >tr«(« > ».-t* •..aiN* <• tV^PI v3i tei •tiA4^ft«r tdi w ♦ >« »P»ft u. fit ♦ ftV» ft» Bsa NOTES ssrzsa t fjcic«.\aft »ftiM *«43< *.Vf • ft/« t.rtV*jaw. ft> •« • rftt.MUC •* ft ic . K« i«S.ftf|9 li uwC*0»'\ HMAX'lft MK *i f%ft«Mftift CCM4 vftIttMr Mttft't LANDFORM MIMMCA^OL >S »M0e«IA caonftoffiw 'VAjCaNO. fREUMMARY nA C5.1 ,4-: ■ EXHIBIT E 6TH AV. N. Lake Classen WAYZATA BLVO Qce z $o q:0 Site D ™r-h:r----?I- — ■ — 1 IN0*JST«!AL • PROpnisED HIGHWAY 12 Parcel Group 3 ^ 'M City of f j Long Lake WATERTOWN RO w\X V ...M. Parcel Grpup 1; fi'Stt'vj *>»4e »'.m MM.'B S-nq**! ** n»%-»«r^e' 7 *^9 w .n#o>v/'n # ***A e ^e tMlwi'tnl '* mki P*m XTv:-T.rr,-:rr;i.tr,;:r;.’r:r/r r-r-.:r;v;:;r.:;% •.:'." r-; ■:•■;■;. •;:; m f’ •n'n-S m * .j» I *» #o4* )t» r ParcqKjfOujiJI^ r ..Hf«n *M w**^ : .V... f/p»fi #« I « '»I-Oif ‘ ' 'V« r • •' 4 l►'•% •# •> • ’ •* 'ju»«w f»‘u- V.r j*e «j» e^ • i•o^J-e ♦'*«! ' •-* # ** r»<r. r * l^•'^ *i -* ♦* 4 ^ x »• Parcel GroupJI_l • «#«le ***^ ' »^a >*•••,-, 4* 1 v , i* ' *»m ^ Commercial Area Between Willow Dr and Brown Rd.; f 0 %• **!H •» Pt-D* •♦.c**w4* Or^-WF-v !>»•* 1 H • <<•«> Se4- B .*4'V%» "C* * e-e'^tiq •rr ‘ O^H Au»r^**^« A* « ve%*-nQ *• <T^*n ^ #-e u *e^r ueJ “v** X-e**-"A • ’H ’- .V .• • ** •> 4 •• * KCrS* •»» H • Sin‘ %f0 *iAi» * n j’»-’.4 ’M’ •»,■• Highway 12 Areas Proposed for Change City of Orono Minnesota MAP 3&o o t;v 175*'k#et -'r. CMP Part 3B. Land Use Plan Tabic 3B-5b: Areas Proposed for Higher Density Residential Development - Site B Site Description: SITE B (Parcel Group 2« Map 3B-7) 55 acres located between Highway 12 and the Burlington Northern Railroad propert}', abutting and just west of Old Crystal Bay Road. Property includes 5 separate tax parcels with 5 existing residences plus outbuildings, and is currently zoned for single family rural development at a density of I unit per 2 acres. The new Highway 12 route is planned to abut the south side of this property, paralleling the railroad track. Site Charactcristica: Gross site area east of major wetland: Area of additional wetlands in east half of site: Area to be lost due to Hwy 12 bypass: Net dry buildablc for development: 55 acres ± - 4 acres l ■ 2 acres ;t 49 acres -► Easterly 25 acres is relatively flat with high-watcrtablc soils and interspersed wetland pockets. Not easily developable with septic systems Mostly open fields that have been farmed previously. Westerly 30 acres has 5*/o-l5% slopes, eventually dropping a total of 50' down to major wetland basin. Soils arc better suited for use of septic systems, but slopes may be a factor for individual sites This area is more wooded and contains apple orchard. This site has a number of factors which make it unattractive for 2-acre rural residential development as currently zoned, including: - Location helwren two highway corridors is not conducive to rural development. - Location across from [ndu.strial Park is not conducive to rural development. - Sue abuts one of the busiest intersections in Orono. - Bast half of site is poorly suited for development with septic systems. Municipal sewer and water are relatively available as compared to most other areas of the City; the site is adjacent to existing MUSA and is a logical MUSA expansion point. This site has du’cct access to arterial and collector road system, and is relatively near urban services as compared to most other areas of the City. Furthermore, this site is separated fiuin existing rural neighborhoods by the Orono Schools, by existing wetlands, by the existing railroad, and by existing and future road/railroad corridors. Because of these separations, development at higlier densities will have little impact on adjacent rural character neighborhoods. Site B Residential Development Options; Density pa ra nir tjy; Dwell i ngj]n i f % D_e n si tv Current 2-acrc zoning 16-18 Units (septic systems) 2-acrc zoning 20-22 Units (sewered, standard plat) 2-acrc zoning 24 Units (sewered, PRD) l-acrc zoning 42-44 Units (sewered, standard plat) l-.Tcrc zoning 47-48 Units (sewered, PRD) |/2-acrc zoning 80-85 Units (sewered, standard plat) 1/2-acre zoning 95-100 Units (sewered. PRID) 3 uniCacre PRD 140 Units 0.3 units/ac. 0.4 units/ac. 0.5 units/ac 0.8 units/ac 0.9 units/ac. 1.5 unils/ac 1.8 units/ac 3.0 units/ac. Preferred Development Option; MU of 0.5 units/ac SFR St 4 units/ac townhoines 120 Units 2.5 units/ac. City of Orono Community Management Plan Scptcinber 2000 Ptge 3B-35 * < »\ *»:• . 'C 'A 1^ •' ■ t'.-V >?;;. ■- ' *'S i ■-W.-.::. :m- . 'y- f? v?M - ■? Wm < • VJ V*v <//• ^ >.• \W • # •?• ***>\* • '. y ‘•V'J ‘•f.- ^ «V4?'* • ..’i >t •'. V ••«. * " > /: ,v \ • " ' ^ ' \ ORONO SCHOOL^■i CITY'ijAli/lfOUCE; - •* JL \ mx Zx ^ • k • • V » ■« 0» SUBJECT PROPERTY L ■ ■------r V «' ‘i ♦ I » I y. : i* f r i: B-6 OFFICE >/ *< Highway 12 "It’' « . H K ^ *^^.1 <T Ip^'.''f "V' •r.V .f '* • . . % * H ^r>.rv. I ’ H .1 •- -r '. • t ' f ’ M . ., L-, j -. -P®*1 iU» WW'"' f- \ • !• ' •* J- Vi ' ,;v, I'cRV V. t-^:., •4 !•■ . ':^^ - - -^ •••*■•- - •--4.^ — 1 x-r « .. *^'‘o-r, cw«m;- r •* • (rt 4 o. • , ^ , ,m ■*• • • .. •.•, v;.............. _ . •• :-..v4, :.r^? - •• 5v.^;‘- a.;.i;vvi ■ ' '■ . ^ - •> r»1 • • ■ ♦ i • ‘ ♦ • 1 ‘ • .. • » - ■♦I *1^ ■’" '-^f y.ONlNG APPLICATIONS (CONT.)Anniicahte Code Section N See. 14-281 thru 14-287STORM WATER AND DRAINAGE TRUNK FEES Storm water trunk fees apply to new development and redevelopment oferisllnB properties and provide funding for the storm water infrastructure necessary to serve the Cllv The trunk fee is based on the land use and acreage of the property being developed. An equivalency factor multiplier is assigned to each land use type, with a 2-acre residential lot considered as the standard in the City with an equivalency factor of 1.0. The table below lists the storm water trunk fees per acre for the various romng districts and land uses In the City, with a base fee of $2,700 per acre. 2003 Storm > New Ilcvelo|imcitl Land INr Trunk Fee/ Acre Single Family Residential 5 Acre Zone (I)S2.I60 Single Family Residential 2 Acte Zone S2.700 Single Family Residential 1 Acic Zone S3.5IO Single Fimily Residential Vi Acre Zone S4.050 Multi Family Residential 4 Unils/Acrc oi Less 54.860 Multi Family Residential Gteatcr than 4 Units/Acro 55.670 Coiiuneiual iii liidusliial J6.4KO (I) niifffr f jsem en t Rrciu clmn f or fhc 5-acfc zoning (li%iricl. u icducliufi ul up to 30% of Itic iiuiik fee fof the tot will be atlowfil for llic pcfcrnlagc of Ihe lul prolcclcd by pciiinclcf aiid/ur draiiugc way buffcf Tliesc bullet cascfTicnt aicas shall fciiiam lo a natural condtlion (2) Maninrtim I ce I i>r the Vacic zoning districl. any lot cacccding 7 0 giosj acres mcludmg wetland, shall be charged a mammum trunk tec rfpial Ui Ihc liuiik fee for a 7 0 4CU puitJ .Stull hit dull ftnuiii cligihlc fm Ilic up lo M)% leductuNi noted to (I) above, such rcductiufi based on the pen rntage of 7 0 acres that is placed in boiler casements. (1) Mjkitnitm Fee T. * ihc 2-acrc znning distrtcis. any hil ctcctfdiiig 4 U gniM ttcics including wcltiuul. iliall be charged a niakimunt trunk fee equal to llic trunk Icc lot a 4 0 acre paitel ’* ReilcvcIopiiienI pi ujecis will be dcfiiicd as any project to eilliei re ..... uiid replace enisling slniciiiies or lo enlarge esislliig siruiliii es. I liesc projects will be charged a portion «f the base trunk fee adjusted for the area of cipansion of Impervious surface above the enisling condilioiis. The tabic below lists the base trunk fee based on l> area of Impervious surface enpaiision ami adjusled for Ihc type of laud use. I hc Iniiik fee shall be dclcriiiiiicd hy miilllplyiiig Ihc appropriate fee by the acreage of ti. devciopmrni site. Area of Impervious Surface Eipanslon Residential Kedevrlopment or Fipansion of K«i«tiiig ncvrlopnirnl Trunk Fcc/Acic Commercial or Industrial Redcvciopmcnl or Lipansion of EkUIiiig Development Trunk Fec/Acre O KNNI .S<|mirc I'cel $';.so $2,270 1000 2000 Square Fret 5I.R90 $4,S]S Mure than 2000 Square Peel 52.700 S6.4K0 X X S H X 2004 Fee Schedule-Page 7 ■< REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COHWrti »»cptiNG JUL \ 2 2004 CITY OF ORONO DATE: July 12,2004 ITEM NO.^ 7 Department Approval: Name Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Admioistrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Report Item Description: Award Contract for CR6/ Baseball Field Trail Project We have advertised and received bids for this project which is to construct an 8 ’ wide bituminous pedestrian and bicycle trail along the south side of County Road 6 across the Lee Carlson Baseball Fields property to complete the trail link between Old Crystal Bay Road and Willow Drive. This trail follows the northern side of the baseball fields access road and then parallels County Road 6 on the north side of the Helds. Trail plans and a bid tabulation arc attached for your information This trail will be financed using 50% Municipal State Aid Funds and 50% Hennepin County funding. The trail costs will be financed through the Municipal State Aid Fund and then reimbursement of 50% of the costs will be received from Hennepin County upon project completion. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to award the contract for construction of the CR6/ Baseball Field Trail to DMJ Corporation, Medina Minnesota in the amount $59,802.70 to be funded from the 2004 Municipal State Aid Fund Budget with approval of a budget adjustment to reflect this expeuditurc. PLAN? SYyilOl4 . rnmrf im •-* —— * — UlMHf* IM -- - - - - --- - - -- MrtllMtM -- ■ ■ . . . . . . — iwvin MMi ar «•* — -- - MC*«f 4V Mf oMtMa IV !•« — wwwirrt tmt% iMMMo rt urn t tjcxj MHII — ^ .....' — CIHUMM 0« HAMIMC - —— — - tmraNMrr lAMMiMt iMi . ...................4i. lAMMiM IM ............. -.................. *«l O ^ VAM O • MkiniItT 0 M0MM •• UfHJIfL? ra>ca/>'i«nT mi 0 MH Miw mm «i«n iBMi u HMJHUI tl tuMK imn *• tkAlfH «M« o iftfmiM iMiMir a 0M«t0IV m MtMM ««ta MMMUU 0 TAtlM 0M0 <• Utfl MI0 M wuia iM ---------------------- — uwa ~— I *—»■— I — VUMM IIMN --M-------M—— »• — 0 Mi 0 I IK INK. ----I—~C— » — 0Mn OAft - -•-------ft------ft - IftMO tlllMaWI —I--------I— I — 0AWq Ciflll W —Cl*----------Cl*-------- Vkt iimi ------------•—---------------- fMMMlMt IlUINK — M9 mm- 0JMO I1NII Cfftc * --------*•--------!• — N MINNrSOTA DI PAKIMI Nr Or irMNSPORIAFlON Of^ONO. MINNFSOIA C0N5TRIH Tinw R ANS inR nrrAVATlO»l CMADNG. A(,CRf(.Alt RAGf. riANT UlVtn iimMitNfAiS PAVLuiNf. cuNCPtir rijPti anu giiuim. lAtlUGCAlMNG. ANU RfLAllO APFIJNII NAMCI S MlR ffiy^ Aiffio^ fcX fill IASI » lU Aiff«>« UiLUf OlU OAI ACM) MVIAM0M) siAir A41 inuj i r Nil Qi cAnc iiM.m ■HiV.f IIM.IH I w |i*r«iK« il*K.rM MCI UJA.IH •^s bWs ____mill_____jLitKtf OfOSAI’ I'j2 090 01 SI A n*‘i0 0 MAI’ iirtLM 0MI &«a «mih mrnrn rnm-nm^rn > m NiN.% orv f;# OKONU MfNMRN CtKiNlY. MN Mn/OOl DISTRICT Ml IRO - • tAiiiM «niM iHMnMi A* «jf I** tMMivot* I# ftiM(’Xill*rx#« \lM«UWiU V^fAKiftON l(« C<MHN Ml tSMli •la*'*** M«*l% A jAI WMC cnmoiiw *1 •*« ••• !»•■►*, 1*1 MlO llR ItAflA UJMlMi t>f0 •.•laul'A DL:^n (MJ»iWfiAiKJ|i lUNClUMai ri A*.1RITAlMm Vllin i«*r PAVi rvAft MI‘M IX XM lU'id >M M'rfMM. *x>«t IkMAM't •4X.MI (• I I« • M n NIKMI (J CMJU > 0% N SHtET INDEX W«s » >««• lit III IIMI W4*l MM «AMkNt<llCtM«lli0tft i}iii itrvM lawnMXuivnrmi fiMti iMt Cftii njMiAMnmtjfci rirrifti cum^wcnnwc r««rCI>. AM r • VXI It I MCfttnr rfftiKt IMAI MS At Ml vra^ Mf*«irrv ur. CM UMHi *♦ •■■III 'AjrlN^NMM AAO iMAl I A* A (Ail* lilMVO (•■•ir.XMAI |■WM■I■ 1J0CA l*€ IA.«^ C» lift sure «• MMMVllA ANMUftiMMl __________ ftaif Ml |»ail Ift dll i* MCmm U30»f* t m mo aMawTiuic' a «i i«x«i* '•^■oai■ • ■» MM »i«i| »ot •MiA/^OLK* iP. ^ C . ^ a AAMMD *<M »M0m ClaaT «M |»imi« - i//“ Twrrm n iA • W • • “i?5j 5=ai# nii,O o r 14 • 0« 4 4 r G1.01 4 »r. r < vw \v< Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Sontiiroo. not«r»t. And«rli(c jind Aisoci^idi. Inc. it «n Affirttmtiv* Action, Equ«l Opportunity imp\oy9r ^nd Emptoyte Owntd f*nnc»p^i|. 0!to 0. Boi'cinoo l 5orv**M, ns • Git«*n r Coo*. PC • Pot)tn 0 Scnwnicr.i P£ • jKff/ A B ok'iIU ’I PC • A H/inj ^n P£ Engineers & Architects July 01, 2004 Senior Consultants UoOtfii V/ Poifoe P6 • JOiCpn C Arci.:rl*i.. PC • PtCt\trCf £ Turner J»£ • Su:i<n M Eocilnr CPA AlSOCiAte Pr.ncipAll K^iih A GOKlon PS * PofiMft P Plcffv'Mi PP • Pir.n.i,ct »A/ PoJHr P£ • O.iviC O LOS*;et.i P£ • #. cn.id T C^utr.«,nf> P£ • TcJ I’ P (.Id P£ • • P -.vne'Son **£ • M'»». P£ • 0.»-'id A SoiV:(roo. VS A S'CJney P V.M'Mtf.ion ®£ LS • AQr*el M P.n^ l>: 5 ,4 • A'vn ” c* Srnnjidl PC • Tro-ii/j; v/ PcUricn P£ • ng • /viifci £ jffv.eiv P£ • l Piti’iip C»»j <nr i’£ • 0,'*r.tof i Ed^caon rf • ii-t'>c» M.vr-i‘ei P6 • TrtO'n^S A jy(» Ci PS • S.neidO'^ J joi'ni*>n • c ’-w; n Orovc PC • Tnc^'*; A PS • j PI Oilicci St P u*i St Cicii.i rocf ‘*v'.t ■ .tiid \v • Mf! • cv V. i • C mic ‘90 IL WePiiie ‘AW%. nci*C!!ron co'i* Honorable Mayor an(d City Council City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Re: Lee Car’son Ballfield Trail Project File No. 139-03-126 Recommendation of Contract Award y . - ^ V-^ ‘ Bids were opened for the Project stated above on Wednesday, June 30. 2004,11:00 A M.. C.D.S.T. Transmitted herewith are ten (10) copies of the Bid Tabulation for your infonnation and file. Copies will also be distnbuted to each Bidder. There were a total of seven (7) Bids. The following summarizes the results of the Bids received: Coniractor Bid Amount Low DMJ Corporation 559,802.70 #2 Sunram Construction Inc 562,940.40 #3 Buffalo Bituminous, Inc 567.837.15 #4 Bituminous Roadways Inc.571.256.80 #5 Barber Construction Company. Inc $71,228.00 #6 Midwest Asphalt Corp $74,423.15 #7 Magnum Company LLC 579.219.74 The low Bidder on the Project was DMJ Corporation with a Base Bid of 559,802.70. These Bids have been reviewed and found to be in order. If the City Council wishes to award the Project to the low Bidder, then DMJ Corporation should be awarded the Project on the Base Bid Amount of $59,802.70. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (651) 604-4S63 Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENS, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. y'. Thomas P. Kellogg, P.E. Enclosures 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, MN 55113 • 651*636-4600 • Fax. 651-636-13I1 »» ■ I ii;.: 'r ' ' ’IM' '-■r -iV - V' ^ : ■f-i ' J/lBoncstroo ^gRosene Andcrtik & |\|| Associates tngineef s 4 Arcfiitri U Project Name Lee Carlson nallfielrl Trail fVojecI No.:_________________„f ile No: I.J'I O.'Ml'e / hntrby carhfy Hint this is an vxact wpfoductinn of bids rccnivvd HmJ Ofienirifj Wi*dnevi«iy. June 30,2004 at 11 00 A M C D S T. Owner: Ctty of Orono______ BID TABUIJ^TION Bidder No. 1 DMJ Cfjrporaliuri Bidder No. 2 Sunram Construction Inc Ihomas P KellOgij Hegistrntion No 769 f Bidder No. 3 Bidder No. 4 Buffalo Bituminous. Inc Bituminous Roadways, fne Item Num tiom Units Oly 8 9 10 PARTI-BASEOtO: MOBILIZATION SAWING BITUMINOUS PAVEMI NT (FULL DEPTH) COMMON EXCAVATION (P) TOPSOIL BORROW ^ AGGRE GAT C BASE CLASS 5 MODIFIC D 6 TYPE LV 4 WEARING COURSF MIX!URL (») BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 15 INCH CS PIPE APRON 15 INCH eSPIPE SI WER CONNECT INIO EXISTING STORM SEWER CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTURE DESIGN Sf*EC. 1 RANDOM RIPRAP CLASS III CONCRETE CURB A GUTTER DESIGN BfilO INSTALL WOOD RAIL FENCE 4 INCH SOLID LINE WHITE - EPOXY SILT FENCE - TYPE MACHINI SLICED SEEDING SEED MIXTURE GOB SODDING TYPE I AWN MULCH MATERIAL TYPE 1 DISK ANCHORING EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS CAT 3 COMMERCIAL FERIIIIZCR ANALYSIS 27 5 10 TOTAL PART 1 • BASE BID LF CU YD CUYD TN 307 175 G40 7RS GAL EA LL 75 2 12 13 EA CU YD 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 IF LF LF LF AC POUND SO YD TN AC SC fD 315 575 57G 143f 07 35 1555 1 4 0 7 000 POUND Conlrador Name and Address Phone Fa* Signed By Tille Bid Secunly Addcrida Ackr>oM4edged Unit Price $7,700 00 S6 00 $11.00 $13 50 $21 00 $45 55 $300 $700 00 $45 00 $800 00 $3,200 00 $100 00 $1300 $5 00 $4 75 $1 85 $1.000 00 S7 35 $2 45 $60 00 $110 00 $1U) $0 55 DMJ CorporaGon P 0 Bo» 799 763)478-6878 763)470 3295 Shannon Kiloran Vice President Jid Hor>d None Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Total $2,200 or $2.99/ 16 $2.99/. iei $3,200.00 $3,200 $1.500 00 $1,500 00 $%0C S20 00 $320 orI $5 00 $80 0 $3 00 $4800 $3,322 0 $9 21 $2,781.42» $1320 $3,986 4 $2500 $7,550 00 $2,302 liC $17 29 $3,025 /5► $2200 $3,850 0 $12.00 $2,100 fK) $13,440 on $18.46 $11,814 4C $21 00 $13,4400 $1830 $11.71200 S12.M81 /5. S*i0 77 $14.469 45 $43 00 $12.255 00 $4365 $12.44025 $225 fX $1 10 582 50 $1 25 $93 75 $2 00 $150 00 $400 00 S/8/.50 $1,575.00 $1/5 00 $350 00 $12500 $250 00 $1.3500 $49.35 $1,480 ^»0 $27 00 $660 or $30 00 $‘X)o no $1.600 00 $724.50 $1.449 00 $200 00 $400 00 5300 00 $600 00 $3.200 00 $.3,397 50 $3,397 50 $4,600 00 $4.600 00 $3,500 00 $3,500 00 $600 00 $99 75 $598 50 $90 00 $540 00 $120 00 $/?0 00 $4.095 00 $13 23 $4.167 45 $18 50 $5.827 50 $21 00 $6.615 00 $2,02500 $10.35 $5,433 /5 $1000 $5,250 00 $1260 $6.615 00 $2,498 50 $0 8/$45/ 62 $4 50 S2.367 00 $5 40 $2.84040 $2,658.45 $2 05 $2,945 85 $2 75 $3,951 75 $2 45 $3,520 65! $700 00 $9/5 00 $682 50 $1.000 00 $/(X)00 $450 00 $315 00 $82 25 $2 26 $79 10 $2 50 $87 50 $325 $113 75 $3,809 75 $2 36 $3.G69 80 $2 75 $4.2/6 25 $4 75 $7.386 25 $84 00 S57 75 $80 85 $80 00 $11200 $450 00 $630 00 $77 00 $150 00 $105 00 $150 00 $105 00 $450 00 $315 00 $1,280 00 $1 52 $1.216 00 $2 00 $1,600 rx)$1 65 $1.320 00 $115 50 $0 53 $111 30 $0 50 __$105 00 $0 55 $11550 SS9.802 70 $62.94040 $67,837.15 $71,256 80 Sunram Construrlion Irn:Buffalo Bituminous. Inc tituminmis Roadways loc. 20010 75lh Avc Norlti P.O Box 337 S898 Cast Highway 101 0290 Hamel. MN 55340 Buffalo, MN 55313 Shakopm*. MN 55379 ] 763)420 2140 1[763) 682 1271 (952) 233 1660 /63) 494 3951 1[763) 687 6522 952) 233 0686 Lee W. Sunram (Gregory D. Hicks ofin KilUeson President \/ice President & General Mgr)/ice President 3id Bond 13»d Bond »d Bond Nlone f4onc tone \ iiii) TAliuLAiiuN Hmn Nuui_Hem 3 4 5 0 6 9 10 PART t • BASE BIO; MOlilllMIION SAWING IJITUMINOUS PAVI Ml NT (Ril I DEinil) (X)MMON rXCAVATION (P) lOPSOIL HOUKOW AG(iH( GAin UA5iE CLASS 5 MODIHID I YPr I.V4 WrAKING C:OUMSI- MIXIIIKT <H) III IUMINOUS MAII KIAI I OM IACK c:oAr ISINCHCSPIPL APKON IS INCH CS PlPt srwi l< CONNECT INTO EXISTING SVOMM Si Wl l< 11 CONSIMUCT DUAINAGi: STRUCTURI 12 13 14 15 Hi 1/ 1H 19 2(1 21 22 23 OLSKiN Sl»l C 1 RANI H)M RIPRAP Cl ASS III CONCRLIE CLIRII A CiUI IT R 1)1 SH .N imiH INSTALL WOODRAIl ILNCU 4 INCH SOI ID I INK WHIIE • EPOXY !ilU R NCI lYPL MACHINF SLICID SIT DING Si I DMIXTUKI (>011 S013DING lYPI: I AWN MDICMMA1I RIAl lYPE 1 DISK ANCHORING I ROSIONCONIROl IIIANKI ISCAT 3 COMMt RCIAl I LRTILI2LR ANALYSIS 22 5 U) TOTAL PART I • BASE DIO Units LS Lr CD YD CU YD TN GAl I A LT I A CU YD IF IF LF ir AC POUND »0 YD IN AC SO YD POUND Diddttf Nu 5 Utirhcr Cunslrticllon Company Inc Bidder No ft Midwent Asptinll Cnrp. Bitlder No 7 Mafimim Company Lt C Qlj^r___I Unit Price Tola!____Uni! Pftce Total 1 $:i.:i0()00 la.Toooo $io.2f»ooo sin.2'»oi)o 1G :u)2 17S 640 $4 00 $0 00 $14 00 $16 00 SG4 00 S2.71HOO $2,450 00 S10.240 00 $1 00 $10 60 $1580 $2475 $16 00 $4.im:u)o $?./G5 0 $15,840 0( 285 $62 00 $1/.670 00 $46 00 $13.110 00 75 $2 00 s:i20 CM) SJOOO $1fi0 00 SMOOO $900 00 $0 25 $835 00 $5225 $18 /?) $1.6/0 (H $1.5G7.5 j 0 $495 00 $900 00 $765 00 $1.530 00 $3,500 CM) 595 00 $3.f»00 00 $3.2/5 00 $5/0 00 $105 00 $3.2/5 00 $630 00 315 52fi 526 143/ 0 / 35 1555 1 4 0 / 81KJ $1800 $12 00 $!) (K) $3 00 $2,200 (KJ $4 50 S 3 50 $150 00 $1(M) 00 $2 00 $5.6/000 $ti.300 00 $2.t»JU (K) $4,311 00 $l.f>4() (KJ $15/50 $5,442 50 $210 (M) $/() 00 $1,(>(H) 00 $1/50 $5 25 $2 10 $2 15 $1,050 (M) $240 $2 W) $6500 $160 00 $1 60 $5.51? fjO $2./5Mi25 $1,104 U) $3,089 55 $/35 (K $84 00 $3.88/ f»0 $91 00 $112(K) $1.280 00 210 $0 frf)$105 (M) '$71.228?0U $0 55 $115 M) $ 74.423 15 ("!iNitfu(.lor Naiiiu and AikLnss IlLiiber (.onstiuc iion Company. Inc PO ikwUXM lloplunb. MN 55a43 Phone (952) 938 WM)/ Taj» (952) 930 0532 SiyniHl liy James M Hartief Title iPfesitleiil H«ii Seninty I Mid Bond AdiKNHia A(JifHwi4e(1ged iNune Midwesl A&pliall Cup PO Mm 54// Hopkins. MN 55345 Unit Prlco Total $/.(KH)00 $/.00()00 $5 00 $80 00 $21 00 $r,.342 00 $20 55 $4.G4G 25 $22 35 $14,304 00 $46 65 $13.295 25 $1 50 $(i(>5 00 $7400 $112 50 $1.3301 $2,220.0 $778 00 $I.55G0( $4.(X)J 00 $122 00 $4,001 (H $73200 $16 65 $121.5 $2 09 $2 45 $445(>() $3 34 12 75 $44500 $445 00 $1 6/ $5,244 75 $r.(e11 25 $1,099 34 $3 520 (.5 $311 ?K) S116 9( $4.2/6 25 $623 00 $311 50 $1.336 00 $0 56 _$11/U) $79,219/4 (952) 93/ 80 13 (952)93/6010 Mlatf H Miiry Viu! Piesidtint Hid Bond None M^iynum Cunpany LLC 73091 ake LXrve I mo 1 tikes. MN 55014 (651)255 2(i26 (C51)255 2G2G RnnaUI A Hall Piesident HhI Bond Nuie Ml • \ » *1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JUL \ 2 200A CITY OF ORONO DATE: July 12. 2004 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Nume Gregory A. Gappa Title Director of Public Services Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section: Public Services Director's Repotl Item Description: NPDES Stormwater Education Program with Metro Watershed Partners This program is a cooperative effort between governmental agencies that have an NPDES Phase 11 Stormwater Permit and the Metro Watershed Partners for a media education campaign to provide education on stormwater issues for the metropolitan area. This cooperative effort will provide for more efficient utilization of funds and will provide a consistent message on the need lo control and treat and stormwater runoff in order to reduce pollution cased by this tiinoff. This education program is one item that cun be used to fulfill the educational requirements in the City’s NPDES Phase II Stormwater Permit. We arc recommending participation in this program at a 2004 annual cost of .$500. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to participate in the NPDES Storaiwatcr Education Program with Metro Watershed Partners in the 2004 annual amount of $500 to be funded from the 2004 Stormwater Utility Fund Budget with uppt uval of a biulgct adjustment to rellcct this expenditure. \ $ 4 Minnesota Water - Let’s Keep it Clean! A Twin Cities stormwater education collaboration Over 150 Minnesota cities and other MS4s are required to implement Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans. Each plan requires a strong educational component, with target audiences ami educational goals identified for each six Minimum Control Measures. Metro Watershed Partners, a collaboration of water resource educators in the Twin Cities, saw an opportunity to assist cities in delivering quality stormwater education and established “Minnesota Water - I.el's Keep it Clean”, a program that does three things; 1) ("ullaboiatc with putting clean water messages m mass media, something out of financial reach for individual cities, 2) Make ready-to-adapi stormwater educational materials available to cities and neighborhood organizations, and 3) Achieve a consistency ot message across the '1 win Cites Metro. A regional commumcatioahnarketing firm. Periscope, has been conliacted for placing messages in the media and website design. Hy the end of July 2004, the program will have completed a spring and fall mass media c*impaign. and established a resource laden educational website *ii w\vw ^ Hie website is to serve bolli city-based stormwater educators and the general public. I he Pall 2003 campaign consisted of live print ads 111 daily newspapers, whicli resulteil in d'V and radio ‘‘earned” media The Spring 2004 campaign consisted of print ads in eleven weekly community |U|)crs for two weeks in a row, 274 radio ads and a iniminum of 90 PSAs. I'hc radio coverage reached 30% of the target audience 6 times. A free ad in the 2004 Minnesota lushing Regulation booklet was also made, along willi stmng and fall media releases. Current $110,000 funding is fioin slate and regional governmental grants Of the total grant amount, S7(),00() was spent on creative services and ad placement Continuation funding is sought tioiii subscriptions from cities and coiporatc sponsorships. To date, evaluation has consisted ot ineasui ing website visits. During October of the fall media campaign, 4,300 visits were made, and during May olTlic spring campaign, 2,400 visits were made. Piojecl Contact: C'reative Contact: Ron SlMiss, University of Minnesota E.xlciisum Service 651-215-1950 I sliussfii^uinn cdu 1 aura Mylan. Periscope Inc. \ 612-399-597 lmylan(u’penscope com \ M I N N i s o r A w A r t R IKES KIW IT Cl !• AN Products: »*» • MW rt Cm*s Website - www.clcanwatcrmn.org mi‘l MKCNfeuiMOiiM • ■«««».• »« U»« *•.*.: l^l« ■>,, • ,1* m W * >M «CMI < ■»-. *<, «« M*« M., •> MMi • M *. *4^ ■ WMO-t »■%»»* •• <MM » **«<>»«•>••• l»W *<<••« Mr*,* '« « M M .nr ,*,« ,«**•«•• -• «»*«n ,*I*M^* * r «««>* t ,»*i^>«*n*«M***MII«* MMMMW.S Wm »«»*•** * M» wn » wI*** WW»*W* «kw *»•*•*>•«■•••«»«.,*■» mm** M*«»r M .■»».« MW «« W*>»w»w * *«*•••** *<lMM*n*««» w* *WM*«M*«MWM *M*W« *•* •* . w*i» * M ■ ■*«■ Wn •WWAWvw**’ •*«*•*** ^^ *****>*^* •**«■•••>« W*W «»n»MW»W nnwn m * »W atwanMtMtWM'M* ««*•*»« «M «M> •MMM tWrtMf «<•*•« »• *•*«*<» — . MM >4 «.*•*.»•• • M ,*M» »,***«-».* M»n*4 • **t«.« .*M*. »**« M«> *M*n M.W ,*»«•—*■ «rW* **« 4* W»MM-* *n M• «* (••«»«« _____ ___________________ C’oic pioju.mi piodiici lo .SCI VC .is an un-going rcsimuT ccnlci foi ci!ik .iUi)ii.i1 m.ilciials ih.it city and neighbothood. based stormwater educators can readily access and adapt to their needs. Rite also provides content for the general public. General public pages are completed; stonnwatcr educator pages arc scheduled to be completed bv July 2004. OVKR > r L ObVtv^Fall 2003 Print Ad Quirky lake obituary ad ran five times total in Twin Cities’ two daily papers, Pioneer Press and Star Tribune. Story picked up by TV and radio news. Ad placement cost = $1.500 sr-iS.-4,300 website visits occurred during the time the ad ran and TV and radio coverage took place. spring 2004 DNR Fishing Regs Ad Clean water message and website address given in 1.3 million copies of 2004 Minnesota Fishing Regulations. Donated ad space. 414« w mum rM*** •o»n ovra riirmtfi* *"«• irowi wumt. ftnrlhT 4164* O n mow 10 «M|UaU Spring 2004 Radio Ad Paid radio ads and PSAs went out on the theme of “Algae World", a high energy product that indicated that “globs of green gooey slimc arc coni'iig to a lake near you" if we don’t take steps to protect water quality. More sedate paid sponsorship also placed on Minnesota Public Radio. A total of 274 paid ads and a minimum of 90 PSAs were made, reaching 30% of the target audience 6 times. Ad placement cost ■ $16,000. Mok^ fishirvg fcir yco|> ^0 comeu. < Iv-orrv* <!»»<c. --i V-.' Spring 2004 Print Ad Color green crayon ad placed in eleven Twin Cities weekly community papers. Ran twice in each paper over two consecutive weeks. Ad placement cost ^ $;V000 2,400 website visits occurred during May 2004 when the spring pnnt and radio (sec below) ads took place. 1 Request for Program Participation and Support June 24, 2004 Greg Gappa MS4 Stormwater Permit Contact City of Orono. Minnesota Dear Greg. MINNESOTA WATER LET'S KEEP IT CLEAN ;Tr-. L/ Utilizing grant funding. Metro Watershed Partners launched x\\c Minnesota Water - Let's Keep tt Clean program last fall. The program’s mission is to improve water quality by assisting cities and other MS4's in their stormwater education efforts. Our accomplishments to date include: • Creation of the Minnesota Water - Let‘s Keep it Clean slogan and logo • Fall 2003 "Lake Patricia" print ad and the Pioneer Press and Star Tnbune • Additional coverage of "Lake Patricia" ad in message on I V 5 and Public Radio • Spring 2004 ad in the DKR’s Fishing Regulation booklet • Spring 2004 "Green Crayon" ad in 11 metro area community papers • Spring 2004 "Algae World" radio ad Full ad played 274 limes, P.SA played 90 times. • Creation of www cleanwatcrmn oru website: a stormwater education resource center for MS4s, students, teachers, and citi/ens. Over 4,000 website visits have been recorded. Cunently we are expanding the resources offered to cities and other MS4s on the www eleanwalcnr.n.org website. When completed in July, the website will provide a repository for ready to use or adapt articles, photographs, presentations, posters and print ads. Our grant funding from the Metropolitan Council. Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is coming to an end, and we arc seeking funding to continue the work that we have started. I o that end, we are asking cities and other .MS4s to contnbutc to the program w iih existing stormwater funds, o-- to include support for the program in their 2005 budget. Depending on the funding raised, Metro Watershed Partners will provide the following services in this order of priority; 1 . Maintain and grow the w'w'xv.cleanw atermn org website with updated and new materials 2. Create ready-to-use print and radio ads for MS4 use 3. Place pnnt and radio ads in the Twin Cities metro media market Page I of 2 % . The corxcpt behind the Minnesota Water - Let‘s Keep it Clean program is that by working rollaboratively and pooling resources. MS4s can provide better and more consistent stormwater messages at lower cost. recommend the following schedule of annual program support based on community size: City Population Annual Support Level 0-10.000 $500 10,000-20,000 $1,500 20.000 - 40,000 $2,500 - S3.500 40,000 - up $3,500-$5,000 Payment can be made to "Watershed Partners / Hamline University" and mailed to: Center for Global Environmental Education Hamline University 1536 Hewitt Avenue St. Paul MN 55104 The Center for Global Environmental Education at Hamlinc University serves as fiscal agent for Metro Watershed Partners. Metro ^Vatc^Shcd Partners is a collaboration of 40 water resource education agencies and organizations in the Twin Cities metro area. Learn about us at; cgee.hamline.edu/watershed/p.irtrn^«L Participants in the Minnesota Water - Let's Keep it Clean program will receive an agreement outlining services provided and an annual report of program activity. They will also be able to cite the program as stonnwatcr education activity on their annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan report. Please contact me with your questions. Thank you! Yours, Ron Struss Chair, Shnnesota Water — Let's Keep it Clean Progiam Team Tel; 651-215-1950 E-mail: rstruss@umn.edu University of Minnesota Extension Service 1 West Water Street, Suite 200 St. Paul Minnesota Page 2 of 2 > DATE: July 9,2004 ITEM NO: C| REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION fjOjiMni ^•'^cTING JUL 1 2 2004 CITY OF ORONO Department Approval: Name Ronald J. Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Scheduling Parks Ctmmission Candidate Interviews Agenda Section: City Administrator ’s Report The Council has received six applications for the vacant position on the Parks. Open Space, and 1 rails Commission. The next step is to schedule interviews with the candidates. The interviews could be scheduled prior to a regular Council meeting, or on a separate evening. The interviews generally take IS minutes each. The Council could complete the six inteniews prior to the July 26 Council meeting if the Council met at 5:30 p.m. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Motion to select a date and time for the Parks Commission candidate interviews. ^ • KRgilRST FOR COUNCIL ACTION HATE: 7/8/04 ITEM NO: Diepartment Approval:Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Name: Stephany C«ood Title: Chief of Police Item Description: Equipment Purchase and Budget Adjustment DISCUSSION: I he police deportment proposes to purchase the following equipment which is needed for an Orono officer on u special assignment: Vehicle: $6,640 Laptop and software: $ 3,100 Firearm: $520 Radi«»: $4,000 < gUNC IL AC’ riON REQUESTED: Motion to expend forfeiture funds for equipn^ent expenditures including a vehicle, computer, iircarm, and other necessar> equipment for a special assignment, totaling $14,260. Motion for a budget adjustment. 1 5 t f f COI'M<^n McpTiigQ JUL 1 2 2004 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO DATE: July 8,2004 ITEM NO: / 0 Department Approval: Name Lin Vee Title City Clerk Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Cgfuncil Approval ■> CITY OF ORONO SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT Dale luucd: Dale of Event: July 12. 2004 Sunday, July 18, 2004 Type of Event: Time: location of Event: Yard Parly with Music (Approxjmatcly 50 guests) 3:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. 1453 Hark Drive 4!? Name of Person(s) And/or Organi/alion Spunsorin}* this Event: Tim Riviere 1453 Park Drive Orono,MN 55364 Phone: 952-472-8962 'I he following documents arc required and on file at the City Administrative Offices: • Approval from Orono Police Dcpartnient • Approval from Orono Riiilding and Zoning Department The following conditions have been placed on this event: • Dy acceptance of this special event pei niit, the permit holder, on behalf of any and all organi/ations and private persons, grants authority to operate under the special event permit, and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Orono from all claims arising from said event. I he permit holder, all organizations and private persons exercising authority under this permit, do waive and release all claims against the City of Orono. its olTicers or employees for any damage to person or property arising from ihe exercise of privileges granicil by this permii and agrees to hold harmless the City of Orono. its employees and olficers Iri'm any such claim. • 1 he Orono Police Department and its olTicers arc einpoweicd to revoke this .special event permit at any lime for any safely concents that are not immediately resolved by the pennit holder or a representative of the permit holder. This revocation shall cause the immediate eancellation of the event originally aulhori/eu by this permit. • Parking .should be limited to one side ol Park Drive. Applicant has indicated many of the guests will Ik aniving via l>oat. The Orono Police Department has notit'ied llenneptn County Water Patrol of the event. • Live music to be allowed from 3:00 p.m. 9:30 p.m. Police rcserxc the right to end the music if the sound iKcoines unmanageable and or creates tiH> many complaints m the opinion of the on tluiy police sujKrvisor. • Notilication to be provided to the neighborhood icgarding the c\ent activities, hours, and a contact name and phone iiumlKr for any questions or concerns regarding this event • If liquor IS available, it is not to be provided to persons under the age of 21 . • Police may issue citations for any city or state ordinance or statute vuilations. Approved at City Council meeting on: July 12.2004 (City Seal) Ronald J. .Moorsc, Ci' Adnumstrator 2750 Kelley Parkway. P.O Box 06. Crystal B..^. MN 55323 •’bone: 952-249-4600 / Fax: 952-249-4616 / wwav ci orono mn us CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register© 07/00/04 a 50 AM MrrTING Page 1 JULY 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment JUL 1 2 2004 Cl IV OF OROHO dD 10100 Primary Cash PeiKi Chk« 2/9/2004 UNIVERSITY Of MINNESOTA E 013 49030^43) Training & Development Total UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA ($95 00) feleffffihagen voi<J/7004 spring turf conf ($0500) PiiMlChk# O/ROO0 3/22/2004 KOFHNFN'S AMOCO E 101 42110 221 Cguipmenl Parts & Accessories Total KOEHNEN*S AMOCO ($29 90) 46427 ($29 90) void/wiper blades PaidChk# 070/16 ti/30/2004 GOVT FINANCE OITICERS ASSN F 101 41500 301 Auditmy and Accl’g ServH^s Total GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSN $350 00 2003 Cert $350 00 2003 Ccitificate >aid Chk« 070727 7/I7/2004' A 1 RENTAL 1613 40B30 415 Other Equipmonl Rentals Total A1 RENTAL $40 4/ 062004 $40 4/ gas weed culler PuidChkf 070720 7/12/2004 E 613-45030 404 Repairn/Maint-MIdgs/Oroiinds lot.ll A ABCOM GARAGE DOOR COMPANY A ABCOM GARAGE DOOR COMPANY $80 00 455759 $00 00 fepaif Cables on garage door Paid Chkf 070729 7/12/2004 ANDERSON. KRISTI E 101-45200-319 Other Professional Services r 101 41300 319 ITIher Professional .Services Total ANDERSON. KRISTI $165 00 0/0504 $265 00 0/0504 $430 00 pafk recorder fees rounril recorder fees P.iidChka 0/0/30 //12/2(K)4 ARAMARK REERESHMENT SERVICES I 602-4U450-201 Office supplies $57 00 6013 400r»‘k3 E 101*42110-201 Office supplies L 101 41900 201 Office supplies Total ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SERVICES $115 56 6013-40069/ $58 40 6013 400698 $230 96 coffee siipfilres coffee supplies coffee supplies Pa dChkf 0/0/31 /M2/2004 ARROV^OOD RESORT 1 101 41500 437 Training & Dcvctopnwn!$210 87 Kuohn GEOA Conf - Kuohn 1 101 41500 437 Training A pevelopment $210 87 Olson GF OA Conf • Olson Total ARROWWOOD RESORT $421 74 I’jhJCIiK# O/a/37 7/12/2004 AUOILS MOBILE CHET 1 f» 13 49900 093 Concessions For Resale I whl $/4 82 3/90 hut dogAhamb fesalc lolal AUOIES MOBILE CHEF $/4 82 PaidChKJ 0/0733 7/12/7004 BUDGET PRINTING 1! 101 47110 701 Office supplies $121 90 31014 businesi cards/500 1 101 47110 177 Postage $17f.8 310130 ups Charges C 101 47110 701 Office supplies $31 95 31061 business carrts/'T White Tout BUDGET PRINTING $1/1 53 I'UHlChkA 0/H7J4 7/12/7004 CENTERPOINT rNERQY E 602 49450 3fl1 Gas A Electric $37 50 0C2504 gas service E C01 49400 381 Gas A Electric $623 26 062504 gas service E 101 47110 3(11 Gas A Electric $63 06 062504 gas service E 101 4IU00 381 Gas A Elecino $75 12 062504 ga§ service C 101 47700 381 Gas A Electric $103 15 062504 gas service C 602 4(M!>0-:81 Gas A Electric $12 29 062504 gas service E 601 40400 381 Gat A Electric $12 52 062504 gas service E 101 41900 381 Oat A Electric $77 08 062504 gas service CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register© 07/09/04 0 00 AM Page 2 JULY 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment E 613^9830 381 Gas & Electric Total CENTERPOINT ENERGY $30 43 $1,234 47 062504 gas service Paid Chk# 070735 7/12/2004 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO E 101*42110 402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip F 101-42110 402 Repairs/Mainf.Auto Equip F 101 *42110 402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip L 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Aulo Equip E 101-42110*402 Repairs/Maint Auto Equip E 101-42110-402 Repairs/MainFAuto Equip E 101-42110*402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip Total CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO $79 18 $264 86 $491 23 $44 19 $61 37 $7643 $3292 $1,050 18 25545 25574 25576 25614 25617 25623 25634 Oil change 8196 oil & repairs #193 brakes & rotors #188 oil #201 oil & tire repair #198 check wire siren, ciean radiat oil change #200 Paid Chk# 076736 * 7/12/2004 CLASSIFIEDS n E 101*42110*340 General Advertising r. 231-45650' 340 General Advertising Total CLASSIFIEDS $46 80 $165 20 $212 00 060504 060504 vehicle ad for bid vehicle ad for bid ■^aid Chk# 078737 7/12/2004 COLE INFORMATION SERVICES 1:101 42110 433 Membfftships A Subscriptions $799 95 0356445-IN 2004lpnse/mpls Cole Directory Total COLE INFORMATION SERVtCES $299 95 Paid Chk# 078738 7/12/2004 CONNELLY INDUSTRIAL ELEC. E 602*49450-406 Mepairs/Maint-Swr lines/lifts Total CONNELLY INDUSTRIAL ELEC. $545 15 $545 15 7902 LS#7 repairs Paid Chk# 070739 >/12/2004 CORCORAN. CITY OF R 101-33490 State Grant-other Total CORCORAN. CITY OF $806 16 $806 16 061004 safe & sober for May04 Paid Chk# 078740 7/17/2004 COVERALL OF THF TWIN CITIES E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds $1.574 40 E 101 42110*404 Repairs/Maint-DIdgs/Crounds $1.070 00 E 101 42260-407 Janitorial Services Total COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES S18G38 $2,830 78 86960 86960 86961 janitorial service f/July04 janitorial service f/Juiy04 Navarrc/Janitorial 7/04 >aidChk# 0/8741 7/12/2004 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. E 613 49900 091 Doer For Resale E 613 4t)uoo 093 Concettiont For Resale-Tubi Total DAY DISTRIBUTING CO $24 40 $52 10 $76 50 270853 270853 beer f/fesa?c snacks f/fesa»e Paid Chk# 078742 “ >/12/2064 DCA * WIRE ONLY O 10121719 DCA/Spending Accounts Total DCA-WIRE ONLY $1 019 83 $1 01903 070707 Pen spending 7/7/04 Pd*d ChkJ 07P743 * 7/12/2004 DEPT OF ADM - INTERTECH GROUP F 101-42110 311 Data Processing Communication t IOt-42110-321 Telephone Total DCPT OF ADM • INTERTECH GROUP $37 00 $163 56 $200 56 DV04050303 rretvrork service 5/04 W04050604 phone service 5/04 Paid Chk# 078744 7/12/2004 DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY L 101-42110 311 Data Processing Communication ToUl DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY $510 00 $510 00 P07 MN02715 CJDN qtrty- 2nd qtr 2004 Paid Chk# 078745 7/12/2004 DEW CORPORATION O 425-20600 Contracts Payable $28.722 00 RFPi8 RFP#8-Navane Fire station j CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 07/09/04 8 90 AM 3 JULY 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment Paid Chk# 078746 Total DfcW CORPORATION $28 72? 00 7/12/2004 ELECTRIC RESOURCE CONTRACTORS r 101 41900-404 Ropnirn/Maml nidgs/Cifoundn Total tLECTRIC RESOURCE CONTRACTORS $198 00 042306 $198 00 fepair limef paiKIng lo! lilea $340 00 002804 $209 00 062804 $949 00 t'aldChk# 0/8/4/ //1?/?004 ELLIS,JOANC r 101 42400 310 Other Pfofenfiional Servicen I: 101-41300 319 Other Piofennion/il Sorvices Total ELLIS. JOAN £ hold Chk« 078/48 //12/2004 ENOINEERINO REPRO SYSTEMS L 101-41900 201 Office nuppliea $40 98 72090 Total ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS $40 98 Paid Chk# 078749 7/12/2004 EXCELSIOR EIRE DISTRICT plonniriQ rcCurdcr counci! mig copten, hluepnni L 101 42260-318 I ire ServK',#»!i Total EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT $34.379 00 060304 $34.379 00 3rd qtr confrncl Paid Chktl 0/8/90 7/12/2004 EXCELSIOR. CITY OF E 101 41900-437 I taininu A Deveinfmmrit E 101 41300 437 Training & Doveio|)rnenl Total EXCELSIOR. CITY or $2/00 MClOA $54 00 MCFOA $81 UO Megton IV MCFOA Mty/SP Region IV MCFOA Mtg/RI) I V IMidChkm 078791 7/12/2004 EXPRESS Ml SSENGER E 101 41900-322 Poitage Total EXPRESS MESSENGER $9148 8-3354Q $51 48 delivery !u«rvire PaidChkH 0/8752 7/12/2004 GERRING'S CAR WASH E 101 42110-403 Rcpaii5/Maif4 Miac Equip Total GERRING S CAR WASH $8 00 062404 $8 00 C4ir washes Paid ChkH 078793 7/12/2004 GRA in GFR F: 601 49400-227 Utility Systent Main! Supplies Total GRAINGER $15 80 495 014375 6 v belt $15 86 PdHiChk# 078/94 7/12/2004 HENNEPIN COUNIY INI OR TECH DPT T: 101 42110414 f L)P/Comnu .IlcatiniH Equip Rrr\! $1.54189 24008076 I 602 49490 321 lelephnne $26 29 ?40680Ft3 1 60149400 321 lelephone $26 30 240680(i3 total HI NNI PINCOUNIY INI OR TECH OPT $1 994 48 ladid lease chaige radio adm fee radio adm leo Paid CriKII 078/99 7/12/2004 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREAS • ASSESS E 101 41990 302 Ansesning Setvnm $93 625 55 CA2424 Total HENNEPIN COUNTY TRI AS • ASSESS $93 629 99 assessing 2/04 7/04 i PaidChkI/ 0/H/f.fl //l.’/.>(X)4 INIKHNAL REVENUE SERVICE U lUt 71 /O.t I u ;a I «■ Wilhlinklmg lout IN I LRNAl REVENUE SERVICE $8 M 061704 $8 14 ;’nd qti 041 ifiin Paid C8k# 0/8/5/ //17/7004 KOEHNEN'S AMOCO I t01-42t10 221 Equipment Parti A Aa.easofi«si Paid Chka 078758 Total KOEHNEN'S AMOCO 7/12/2004 Take business supply $29 90 46427 $29 90 replace rk#78008 I 813-49830 201 OffKe tiipphei Total LAKE BUSINESS SUPPLY $54 27 76791 $54 2 7 register rolls, bulletin b0<3rd ( mm CITY OF ORONO Q7f09f0A 8 50 AM Page 4 Check Detail Register© JULY 2004 Check Amt tnvolce Comment PakIChk# 070759 7/12/2004 LOFFLER COMPANIES. INC L 101-42110-401 Repairs/Malnt-Offlce Equip Total LOFFLER COMPANIES. INC $15 66 070704 $15 66 digital labor charge PaldChk# 070760 7/12/2004 MATRX n 101 42110-726 Clolhing & personal equipment Total MATRX $84 07 056052 $84 87 glove supply Paid Chkrb70761 7/i2/2004* MCLEOD USA -PHONE BILLS E 602-49450-321 Telephone E 601-49400-321 Telephone E 601-49400 321 Telephone E 101-41900-321 Telephone r 101-47110 321 Telephone I GO? 49450 321 Telephone Total MCLEOD USA • PHONE BILLS $53 38 5490545 $22 80 5490545 $42 95 5490545 $480 41 5490545 $205 89 5490545 L‘'9 4 5 5490545 $844 96 phone service phone service phone service phone service phone service phone service Paw ChK» 078762 7712/2004 MEDIA COM 1: G13-4903O-415 Other Equipment Rentals Total MEDIA COM $5 58 060604 $5 58 cabin nl GC $1.306 41 061004 $1 38641 PaldChki 070/63 7/12/2004 MEDINA. CITY OF K 101-33490 State Grant-other Total MEDINA. CITY OF T3aldl:hTa'678764“ ■ 7/12/2004 " MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO *' El 6t3-40900 092 Sofl Onnks Por Reaak] $169 25 95538018 Total MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING CO $169 25 VaWChka 078765 7/12/2004 MlNNEf6NKA“BEACH^^^^ .......... E G02-494S0-381 Gas & Lloctric $96 00 063004 Total MINNETONKA BEACH. Cm OF $96 00 PnidChk# O/07G6 7/12/2004 ‘ MN CO u VtY AffORNEYS^A^^ safe A sober for M.iy04 soda (or res.ile 2090 Shoreline Swr/7nd qtr E 101-42110-201 Office supplies Total MN COUNTY ATTORNEYS ASSOC. $24 50 062504 $2450 inventory forms I’aKlChk# 0/8767 )7i2/2004' MN DEPT OF HEALTH G G01 2060? Due to govts State Total MN DEPT OF HEALTH $1.174 00 0401-063004 $1.174 00 2nd qtr ¥^r connections PaidChK# 0767G8 7/12/2004 MTIDIST CO. E 013 49830-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip E 613-49830 221 Equipment Parts A Accessories Total MTI DIST CO $188 82 413539 00 $58 60 417138 00 $247 42 mower parts A sharpening mower parts PaW Ctik« d7e76§ 7/V2/2d64 MURRELL,'BRIAN E 101 42110 489 Other Miscellaneous Charges Tout MURRELL. BRIAN PaW ChK# 078776 ?/T2/206J "n ATKMML WAT e^ E 001 49400 221 Equipment Part* & Acce»*ones E 601 49400 405 Repairt/Maii I Watermams/plant $30 00 60604 $30 00 Tobacco buyer Total NATIGE AL WATERWDRKS NEGPOST ($4 80) 1310627 $4.240 54 1417741 $4 235 74 cr hydrant part Navarrp/Hydrant & vHv« Paw Chhf 078771 7/12/2004 E 10141900 401 RepairartUlaintOffice Equv $16900 41701538 rataprottctlofl 7/2004 2005 CITY OF ORONO Check Detail Register© 07/09/04 8 50 AM Page 5 JULY 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment Paid Chk# 078772 ‘ *7/12/2004 Total NEOPOST S16900 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS........... E 101*42110-321 Telephone Total NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS $719 43 506573311-03 cellphones $71943 ^afd Chk# 078773 7/12/2004 NOVA COMMUNICATIONS E 425-48945-560 Other Equipment $6,37866 3288 FD/CTX100-S/n!L018966 Total NOVA COMMUNICATIONS 7/12/2004 OFFICE DErcr * $6.37866 Paid Chk# 078774 E 101-42110-201 Office supplies E 101-41900-201 Office supplies E 101-41900-201 Office supplies E 101-42110-201 Office supplies Total OFFICE DEPOT $97 22 $97 23 $15339 $153 39 $501 23 2478867238-0 supplies 2478867238-0 supplies 249563230-00 office supplies 249563230-00 office supplies Paid Chk# 078775 7/12/2004 OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resate-Txbl E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Txbl Total OLD DUTCH FOODS INC. $1344 $1680 $3024 102746 102873 chips for resale chips resale ¥aid Chk# 078776 7/12/2004 OWENS COMPANIES, INC E 601 -49400-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total OWENS COMPANIES. INC $340 00 $340 00 77003 repair dehumidifer/water plant Paid Chii# *078777 7/12/2004 PHOENIX TECHNOLOGY SOLUflONS. ir E 101-42260-437 Training & Development Total PHOENIX TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS. $150 00 1641 Fire station-computer support $150 00 Paid Chk# 078778 7/12/2004 PIRTEK E 101-43000-403 Repairs/Maint-Misc Equip Total PIRTEK $133 04 $133 04 PL24093 hydrant hose Paid Chk#*078779' ‘ 7/12/2004 "PLUNKETT’S E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bidgs/Grounds Total PLUNKETTS $207 68 319172 Insect control for June $207.68 Paid Chk# 078780 7/12/2004 PRAIRIE OFFSET E 101 -41900-201 Office supplies ToUl PRAIRIE OFFSET $43909 $439 09 120251 envelope supply Paid Chk# 078781 7/12/2004 E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC. $280_39 $280 39 92234 French Crk-spray f/weeds Paid Chk#''078782^... liwiOM PROLAWNS E 101-45200-404 Kepairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds ToUl PROLAWNS $1 640J0 $1.640 10 6560 weed control /parks&City Hall Paid Chk# 078783 7/12/2004 QWEST E 613-49830-321 Telephone Total QW^ST $6JI 28 $61 28 061904 phone service } Paid Chk# 078784 7/12/2004 REED VENDING E 613-49900-093 Concessions For Resale-Txbl ToUl REED VENDING $184 70 4488 candy for resale $184 70 fl. CITY OF ORONO 07/09/04 8 50 AM Page 6 Check Detail Register® JULY 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment PaidChk# 078785 7/12/2004 SAMARITAN TIRE CO INC E 101-42110-402 Repairs/Maint-Auto Equip Total SAMARITAN TIRE CO INC $206 00 063004 $20600 PD/4 tires Paid Chk# 078786 7/1 ^2004 ' SCHMIDT CURB COMPANY, INC E 402 48030 530 Other Improvements G 402-20600 Contracts Payable Total SCHMIDT CURB COMPANY. INC $5.168 74 062204 $1.612 73 062204 RFP#2Final-CR19 RFP#2Final-CR19 $6,781 47 PaidChk# 078787 7/12/2004 SHAUGHNESSY, COLIN E 101-45200-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds E 101-42260-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds Total SHAUGHNESSY. COUN $2.000 00 063004 $100 00 063004 lawn maint 6/04 Navarre fire lawn maint $2.100 00 Paid Chk# 078786 7/12/2004 STREICHERS E 101-42260-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260-226 Clothing & personal equipment E 101-42260-226 Clothing & personal equipment Total STREICHERS $5.400 72 439215 1 $4.736 02 440310 1 $5.702 32 444602 1 $15.839 06 squad#200 equip install squad#201 equip install squad# 199equip install ? ^ Paid Chk# 078789 7/12/2004 THORPE DIST CO. E 613-49900-091 Beer For Resale Total THORPE DIST CO. $123 30 339318 $123 30 beer f/resale ! Paid Chk# 078790 m 2/2004 TREE TOP SERVICE E 101-43000-408 Contracted Street Maint Total TREE TOP SERVICE $575 10 1603 $575'10 tree trimming @4156 Highwood Paid Chk# 078791 7/12/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED E 101 -42110-226 Clothing & personal equipment ToUl UNIFORMS UNLIMITED S122J1 227319 $122 11 pants & shirts/J Schoenhoff PaidChk# 078792 7/12/2004 VALLEY-RICH CO E 601*49400-405 Repairs/Maint-Watermams/plant Total VALLEY-RICH CO $6665 19 8324 S6.665 19 Hydrant repair A gate valves PaidChk# 0/8/93 //12/2004 VERIZON WIRELESS E 101-41900-321 Telephone Total VERIZON VIHRELESS $202 67 3544573759 $'20267 ceii phones Paid Chk# 078794 7/12/2004 VESSCO INC. E 601-49400-227 Utility System Maint Supplies ToUl VESSCO INC. $565 52 31523 $56552 pump metering PaidChk# 078795 7/12/2004 VOGT HEATING & AIR E 101-41900-404 Repairs/Maint-Bldgs/Grounds ToUl VOGT HEATINGS AIR SL666 00 19625 $1.666 00 repair AC City hall PaidChk# 078796 7/12/2004 WATERSHED PARTNERS/HAMUN UNIV E 651-49910-433 Memberships & Subscriptions $500 00 7/12/04 $500 00 annual stormwtr program ToUl WATERSHED PARTNERSMUiLIN UNIV P^dlChk#^678797 ' * ^7/12/2004 WAYZATA. CITY OF E 101 42260-318 Fire Services ToUl WAYZATA. CITY OF $6.47^00 012704 $6,477 00 ~ fire protection 1st 2004 Paid Chk# 078798 7/12/2004 XCEL ENERGY CITY OF ORONO *Check Detail Register® 07/09/04 8 50 AM Page 7 JULY 2004 Check Amt Invoice Commeivt E10M2260-381 Gat & Electric ToUl XCEL ENERGY $370 97 072704 $370.97 3770 shoreiine/electric 10100 Primary Cash $191.513 08 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 231 DRUO/FELONY FORFEITURE FUND 402 MUNICIPAL ST AID ST CONSTUCT 425 NAVARRE FIRE STATION PROJ FUND 801 WATER OPERATING FUND 602 SEWER OPERATING FUND 613 GOLF COURSE 651 STORM WATER UTILITY OP FUND 10100 Primary Cash $133,091.15 $165.20 $6,781.47 $35,100.66 $13,924.22 $867.12 $1.083 26 $^00^_ $191,513.08 i CITY OF ORONO check register 07/0&04 1 S8 PM Page 1 Check Pay Number Employee Name Period 0M245 CODGE. RACHEL M 14 054246 LESKINEN. DENISE M 14 054247 ANDERSON. BRUCE L 14 054246 BOBZIEN. SUE A 14 054249 BORIS, SCOTT W 14 054250 DEMBOUSKI. JAY C 14 054251 ERICKSON, KURT R 14 054252 FARNIOK, CORREY L 14 054253 FISCHENICH, DAN T 14 054254 MADSON, ADRIENNE M 14 054265 MCNICHOLS, DAVID L 14 054256 MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES 14 054257 PERSr a. WII LIAM R 14 054258 TOM-HECK, LAWRENCE F 14 054259 TOMCZYK MARKW 14 054260 WHITE, ANTHONY J 14 054261 WITTKE, ANTHONY A 14 054262 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P 14 054203 MEYER WILLIAM C 14 054264 OMAN, LYLE E 14 054265 VANG, BRUCE L 14 054266 GREGORY, JAMES D 14 054267 HANSEN, STEVEN 14 054268 OBRIEN RANDY L 14 054269 PALMER, GREGORY A 14 064270 RATHOUN, BARRY J 14 054271 SKREEN, DALES 14 054272 AORAHAMSON, ( RED W 14 054273 HAMBRO, MARSHALL J 14 0542/4 JENSEN, RODNEY W 14 054275 MARSELLA DANG 14 054276 MCINTYRE, WILLIAM E 14 054277 OAS DANIEL O 14 0542/8 I’EICKERT, GARY J 14 0*>42/9 I’Ol LEY. MIKF A 14 054280 ROSS JOHN A 1 054281 SMYTH, KATHERINE R 1 054282 STEr i ENHAGr N, RONALD 1 054283 STORK JOHN T 1 003510 MOORSF, RONALD J 1 003511 SITUS, BARBARA O 1 003512 VEE, LINDAS 1 003513 KUCHN, THOMAS M 1 003514 OLSON RONALD J 1 003515 PETTIT, S,'J4DRAK 1 003516 ANDERSON, BHUCr L 1 0035*7 BOBZIEN, SUE A 1 003518 BORIS SCOTT W 1 003519 BUDIG. STACIE M 1 003520 CORNICK JAMES L 1 003521 DAY. SUSAN J 1 003522 FISCHER, CHRISTOPHER K 1 003523 CtOOO STEPHANY R 1 003524 JOHNSON. JEFFREY 1 003525 MCNICHOLS. DAVID L 1 003526 RUSSETH. KYLE M 1 00352/ SCHOENHOFF, JOHNS 1 003528 TOMCHECK, LAWRENCE F 1 003529 LEE. JOSEPH P. I Check Chock Amount Date Check Status $1.042 63 7/7/2004 Outstanding $887 98 7/7/2004 Outstanding $773 29 7///2004 Outstanding $47 02 7/7/2004 Outstanding $ 1,590 18 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,678 96 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,679 66 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $1 .721 69 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $ 1,592 49 7/7/2004 Outstanding $718 11 7/7/2004 Outstanding $ 1,107 04 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,800 88 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $779 35 7/7/2004 Outstanding $379 25 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $1,451 41 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $982 0? 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $ 1,3 74 21 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,428 50 7/7/2004 Outstanding $512 42 7/7/2004 Outstanding $64 72 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,276 81 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,007 52 7/7/2004 Outstanding $366 44 7/7/2004 Outstanding $481 91 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $745 18 7/7/2004 Outstanding $ 1 120 71 7/7/2004 Outstanding $562 86 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $76 29 7/7/2004 Outstanding $99 19 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $260 33 7/7/2004 Outstanding $208 87 7/7/2004 Outstanding $251 79 7/7/2004 Outstanding $127 07 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $4t 1 44 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $86 26 7/7/2004 Oulstanding $121 39 7/7/2004 Outstanding $ 178 64 7/7/2004 Outstanding $ 1 296 78 7/7/2004 Outstanding $270 87 7/7/2004 Outstanding $2,336 49 7/7/2004 Outstanding $478 02 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,038 54 7/7/2004 Outstanding $ 1.328 20 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,161 81 7/7/2004 Outslanding $1,061 30 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1 .135 00 7/7/2004 Outstanding $630 00 7/7/2004 Outstanding $20 00 7/7/2004 Outstanding $906 29 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,966 15 7/7/2004 Outslanding $1,075 19 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,372 51 7/7/2004 Outslanding $ 1.994 94 7/7/2004 Outstanding $ 1.532 12 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,100 00 7/7/2004 Outstanding $1,550 75 7/7/2004 OuUtanding $ 1,589 43 7/7/2004 Outstanding $900 00 7/7/2004 Outstanding $413 36 7/7/2004 Outslanding CITY OF ORONO check register 07/06/04 1 58 PM Page 2 Chack Pay Ctwcfc Check Number Employee Name Period Amount Date Check Status 003530 PHARO, CHRISTOPHER M 14 S84S01 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003531 BOLTERMAN. MATTHEW A.14 S63912 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003532 CURTIS. MELANIE 14 $1.259 05 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003533 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P 14 $125 00 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003534 GAPPA. GREGORY A 14 $1.810 50 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003535 GUNDLACH. JANICE J 14 $1,631 86 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003536 OMAN. LYLE E 14 $1.400 00 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003537 DEBAERE. DONALD L 14 $1.184 25 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003538 HANSEN. STEVEN 14 $775 00 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003539 OBERAIONER. SCOTT G 14 $1.45957 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003540 OBRIEN. RANDY L.14 $500 00 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003541 PALMER. GREGORY A.14 $350 00 7/7/2004 Outstanding 003542 RATHBUN. BARRY J.14 $200 00 $66,631 82 7/7/2004 Outstanding CITY OF ORONO check register 07/07/04 7:15 AM Pagel Chock Pay Check Check Numbtr Employoo Namo Partod Amount Date Check Status 054284 PETERSON. BARBARA 7 $323 22 7/12/2004 Outstanding 054285 MCMILLAN. ELIZABETH T.7 $269 36 7/12/2004 Outstanding 054286 MOORSE. RONALD J 7 $369 40 7/12/2004 Outstanding 054287 SANSEVERE. ROBERT K.7 $269 36 7/12/2004 Outstanding 054288 MURPHY. JAMES L 7 $269 36 7/12/2004 Outstanding 054289 WHITE. JAMES M 7 $269 36 $1,770.06 7/12/2004 Outstanding • • « CITY OF ORONO 07/07/04 7 06 AM Page 1 *Check Detail Register® JULY 2004 Check Amt Invoice Comment 10100 Prima^Caeh _ „ _ Paid Chk# 078717 7/7/2004 >7rST NATION LAKES G 101-21701 Federal Withholding G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding G 101-21703 FICA Tax Withholding Tout FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES $9.509 09 $4.45971 $4.45971 FEDERAL W/H FICA & MEDICARE W/H FICA & MEDCR CITY SHARE Paid Chki 078718 7/7/2004 G 101 -21705 Other Retirement Tout ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST • 457 $18,428 51 ICMA RETIR^ENT TRUSTV^457^ $951 62 DEFERRED COMP-302030 $951.62 Paid Chk# 078719 7/7/2004 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE G 101-21707 Union Dues _____$0 00 Total LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE UNION DUES $0 00 Paid Chk# 078720 7/7/2004 MN DEPT OF REVENUE G 101-21702 State Withholding Total MN DEPT OF REVENUE $4,003 02 STATE TAX W/H 7/7/2004Paid Chk# 078721 0 101-21718 Post Employment Health Total MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM $4,00302 MN StAfE REfTREMfeNt SYSTEM $247.89 $24789 NATIONi^DE^^^ $1,902.00 post retirement Paid Chk# 078722 7/7/2004 G 101-2:705 Other Retirement G 101-21705 Other Retirement $167 86 ToUl NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION $2,069 86 >aid ibhk# 0'74723 7/7/2004 ^ORCMAROTOUS^^^ fRU'siiBCUST G 101-21705 Other Retirement $3,562.68 Total ORCHARD TRUST CO. TRUSTEE/CUST $3,562 68 Paid Chk# 678“t24 USCM - ENTITY 2339 OBRA#2343 MN STATE RETIREMENT 7/7/2004 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT G 101-21704 PERA G 101-21704 PERA Total PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT $7.230 08 $5,589 1 5 $12,81923 PERA CITY SHARE PERA EMPLOYEE W/H Paid Chk# 0/8725 7/7/2004 UNITED WAY 0 101-21708 United Way $70 00 CHARITY DONATIONS ToUl UNITED WAY $7000 'SidIChk# *078726 7/7/2004 WISCONSIN SCTF G 101-21712 Other Deductions Tout WISCONSIN SCTF $184 62 JOHNSON # 0002756898 $184 62 10100 Primary Cash $42 337 43 Fund Summary 101 GENERAL FUND 10100 Primary Cash $42,337 43 $42 337 43 .Jk INFORMATION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING JUL 1 2 2004 OF CITY OF ORONO Iw